[Senate Report 106-292]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]



                                                       Calendar No. 543
106th Congress                                                   Report
                                  SENATE                               
 2d Session                                                     106-292
_______________________________________________________________________

                                     



 
        NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2001

                                 REPORT

                         [to accompany s. 2549]

                                   on

AUTHORIZING APPROPRIATIONS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2001 FOR MILITARY ACTIVITIES 
  OF THE DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE, FOR MILITARY CONSTRUCTION, AND FOR 
  DEFENSE ACTIVITIES OF THE DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY, TO PRESCRIBE PERSONNEL 
  STRENGTHS FOR SUCH FISCAL YEAR FOR THE ARMED FORCES, AND FOR OTHER 
  PURPOSES

                             together with

                     ADDITIONAL AND MINORITY VIEWS

                               ----------                              

                      COMMITTEE ON ARMED SERVICES
                          UNITED STATES SENATE

                                     


                                     

                  May 12, 2000.--Ordered to be printed
    Filed under authority of the order of the Senate of May 11, 2000


                                                       Calendar No. 543
106th Congress                                                   Report
                                  SENATE                               
 2d Session                                                     106-292
_______________________________________________________________________

                                     



                     NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION

                        ACT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2001

                                 REPORT

                         [to accompany s. 2549]

                                   on

AUTHORIZING APPROPRIATIONS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2001 FOR MILITARY ACTIVITIES 
  OF THE DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE, FOR MILITARY CONSTRUCTION, AND FOR 
  DEFENSE ACTIVITIES OF THE DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY, TO PRESCRIBE PERSONNEL 
  STRENGTHS FOR SUCH FISCAL YEAR FOR THE ARMED FORCES, AND FOR OTHER 
  PURPOSES

                             together with

                     ADDITIONAL AND MINORITY VIEWS

                               __________

                      COMMITTEE ON ARMED SERVICES

                          UNITED STATES SENATE

                                     


                                     

                  May 12, 2000.--Ordered to be printed
    Filed under authority of the order of the Senate of May 11, 2000

                               __________

                    U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
64-303                     WASHINGTON : 2000



                      COMMITTEE ON ARMED SERVICES

                      (106th Congress, 2d Session)

                    JOHN WARNER, Virginia, Chairman
STROM THURMOND, South Carolina,      CARL LEVIN, Michigan
    Chairman Emeritus                EDWARD M. KENNEDY, Massachusetts
JOHN McCAIN, Arizona                 JEFF BINGAMAN, New Mexico
BOB SMITH, New Hampshire             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                  MARY L. LANDRIEU, Louisiana
WAYNE ALLARD, Colorado               JACK REED, Rhode Island
TIM HUTCHINSON, Arkansas
JEFF SESSIONS, Alabama
                      Les Brownlee, Staff Director
            David S. Lyles, Staff Director for the Minority

                                  (II)

  
                            C O N T E N T S

                              ----------                              
Purpose of the Bill..............................................     1
Committee Overview and Recommendations...........................     2
Explanation of Funding Summary...................................    14
Division A--Department of Defense Authorizations.................    21
Title I--Procurement.............................................    21
    Explanation of tables........................................    21
    Subtitle A--Authorization of Appropriations..................    22
        Chemical demilitarization program (sec. 107).............    24
    Subtitle B--Army Programs....................................    25
        Multiyear procurement authority for certain Army and Navy 
          programs (sec. 111)....................................    45
        Army transformation (sec. 112)...........................    45
    Other Army Programs..........................................    49
        Army Aircraft............................................    49
            Utility aircraft.....................................    49
            UH-60 Blackhawk......................................    50
            Longbow..............................................    50
            Kiowa Warrior........................................    51
            Avionics support equipment...........................    51
            Aircrew integrated systems...........................    51
        Army Missile.............................................    51
            Army tactical missile system--system summary.........    51
            Stinger modifications................................    51
        Weapons and Tracked Combat Vehicles......................    52
            Carrier modifications................................    52
            Breacher system modification.........................    52
            Heavy assault bridge system modifications............    52
            Machine gun, squad automatic weapon..................    53
            Mark-19 grenade launcher.............................    53
            M4 carbine modifications.............................    53
        Army Ammunition..........................................    53
            Procurement of ammunition, Army......................    53
            Armament retooling and manufacturing support 
              initiative.........................................    53
        Other Army Procurement...................................    54
            Family of medium tactical vehicles...................    54
            Weapons of Mass Destruction Civil Support Teams......    54
            Secure mobile anti-jam reliable tactical terminal....    55
            Army data distribution system........................    56
            Area common user system modification program.........    56
            Forward area air defense ground based sensor.........    56
            Night vision.........................................    56
            Forward area air defense command and control.........    57
            Striker-command and control system...................    57
            Standard integrated command post system..............    57
            Lightweight maintenance enclosure....................    57
            Roller, vibratory, self-propelled....................    57
            Deployable universal combat earth mover..............    58
    Subtitle C--Navy Programs....................................    59
        CVNX-1 nuclear aircraft carrier program (sec. 121).......    83
        Arleigh Burke-class destroyer program (sec. 122).........    83
        Virginia-class submarine program (sec. 123)..............    84
        ADC(X) ship program (sec. 124)...........................    85
        Refueling and Complex Overhaul Program of the CVN-69 
          nuclear aircraft carrier (sec. 125)....................    85
    Other Navy Programs..........................................    86
        Navy Aircraft............................................    86
            Airborne low frequency sonar.........................    86
            SH-60 helicopters....................................    86
            CH-60 helicopters....................................    86
            UC-35 aircraft.......................................    86
            C-40A aircraft.......................................    86
            T-45 aircraft........................................    87
            Joint primary air training system....................    87
            KC-130J..............................................    87
            EA-6B aircraft automatic flight control system.......    87
            AV-8B precision targeting pod........................    88
            F-18 modifications...................................    88
        AH-1W series.............................................    88
            H-1 series...........................................    88
            P-3 aircraft modifications...........................    89
            Tactical aircraft moving map capability..............    89
        Navy Weapons.............................................    90
            Joint standoff weapon................................    90
            Weapons industrial facilities........................    90
            Mark 48 advanced capability torpedo modifications....    90
        Navy and Marine Corps Ammunition.........................    90
            Procurement of ammunition, Navy and Marine Corps.....    90
            Laser-guided bomb components.........................    90
            Training ordnance....................................    90
        Navy Shipbuilding and Conversion.........................    90
            Shipbuilding overview................................    90
            LHD-8 advance procurement............................    93
        Other Navy Procurement...................................    94
            AN/WSN-7 inertial navigation system..................    94
            Surveillance and security for military sealift ships.    94
            Integrated condition assessment system...............    95
            AN/SPS-73(V) surface search radar....................    95
            Side-scanning sonar for forward deployed minesweepers    95
            Joint Engineering Data Management and Information 
              Control System.....................................    95
            Aviation life support................................    96
            Gun fire control radar performance improvements......    96
            Cruiser smart ship...................................    96
            NULKA anti-ship missile decoy system.................    97
            Civil engineering support equipment..................    97
        Marine Corps Procurement.................................    97
            Night vision.........................................    97
            Radio systems........................................    97
    Subtitle D--Air Force Programs...............................    98
        Repeal of requirement for annual report on B-2 bomber 
          aircraft program (sec. 131)............................   114
    Other Air Force Programs.....................................   114
        Air Force Aircraft.......................................   114
            EC-130J..............................................   114
            Joint primary aircraft training system...............   114
            Joint surveillance and target attack radar system....   114
            B-52H aircraft modifications.........................   115
            A-10 aircraft integrated flight and fire control 
              computer...........................................   115
            F-15 aircraft modifications..........................   115
            F-16 aircraft modifications..........................   115
            C-17 simulator.......................................   116
            Defense airborne reconnaissance program aircraft 
              modifications......................................   116
            ALE-50 towed decoys..................................   116
            Compass Call.........................................   117
            Defense airborne reconnaissance program..............   117
        Air Force Missile........................................   117
            Global Positioning System............................   117
            Titan space boosters.................................   117
            Medium launch vehicle................................   118
        Air Force Ammunition.....................................   118
            Procurement of ammunition, Air Force.................   118
        Other Air Force Procurement..............................   118
            Combat training ranges...............................   118
            Night vision goggles.................................   118
        Defense-Wide Programs....................................   119
            Advanced SEAL delivery system design enhancements....   124
            Special operations forces small arms and support 
              equipment..........................................   124
            Nuclear, Biological and Chemical Defense Enhancement 
              Kits...............................................   125
            Communications assistance for law enforcement act....   125
    Subtitle E--Other Matters....................................   125
        Pueblo Chemical Depot chemical agent destruction 
          technologies (sec. 141)................................   125
    Other Items of Interest......................................   126
        Acquisition programs at the National Security Agency.....   126
        Army aviation............................................   126
        C-5 aircraft upgrades....................................   127
        Electronic digital compass system........................   127
        Single channel ground and airborne radio system..........   128
        Soldier's portable on-system repair tool.................   128
Title II--Research, Development, Test, and Evaluation............   129
    Explanation of tables........................................   129
    Subtitle A--Authorization of Appropriations..................   130
    Subtitle B--Program Requirements, Restrictions, And 
      Limitations................................................   131
        Fiscal year 2002 joint field experiment (sec. 211).......   131
        Nuclear aircraft carrier design and production modeling 
          (sec. 212).............................................   132
        DD-21 class destroyer program (sec. 213).................   133
        F-22 aircraft program (sec. 214).........................   136
        Joint strike fighter (sec. 215)..........................   137
        Global Hawk high altitude endurance unmanned aerial 
          vehicle (sec. 216).....................................   139
        Unmanned advanced capability aircraft and ground combat 
          vehicles (sec. 217)....................................   141
        Army space control technology (sec. 218).................   142
        Russian American Observation Satellites program (sec. 
          219)...................................................   143
        Joint Biological Defense Program (sec. 220)..............   143
        Report on biological warfare defense vaccine research and 
          development programs (sec. 221)........................   144
    Subtitle C--Other Matters....................................   145
        Mobile offshore base (sec. 241)..........................   145
        Air Force science and technology planning (sec. 242).....   145
    Additional Matters of Interest...............................   147
        Army.....................................................   147
            Counter-terrorism basic research.....................   156
            Composite materials..................................   156
            Advanced missile composite components................   156
            Smart truck initiative...............................   156
            Portable hybrid electric power system................   156
            Thermoelectric power generation......................   156
            Operational support..................................   157
            Equipment readiness..................................   157
            Fuel cell auxiliary power units......................   157
            Big Crow program office..............................   157
            Army Space and Missile Defense Command Simulations...   158
            Aero-acoustics instrumentation.......................   158
            Acoustic technology research.........................   158
            Missile defense flight experiment....................   158
            Radar power technology...............................   158
            Scramjet acoustic combustion enhancement.............   158
            Space and missile defense battle lab.................   158
            Supercluster distributed memory technology...........   159
            Tactical High Energy Laser...........................   159
            Anti-malarial research...............................   159
            Electronic warfare development.......................   159
            Threat simulator development.........................   159
            Multiple launch rocket system product improvement 
              program............................................   159
            Joint Land Attack Cruise Missile Defense Elevated 
              Netted Sensor......................................   160
            Communications and networking technologies...........   160
        Navy.....................................................   161
            Free electron laser..................................   171
            Biodegradable polymers...............................   171
            Bioenvironmental hazards research....................   171
            Nontraditional warfare initiatives...................   171
            Communications, command, and control, intelligence, 
              surveillance, and reconnaissance...................   171
            Cognitive research...................................   172
            Ceramic and carbon based composites..................   172
            Nanoscale sensor research............................   172
            Littoral area acoustic demonstrations................   172
            Computational engineering design.....................   172
            Advanced water-jet technology........................   173
            Composite helicopter hangar door.....................   173
            Composite modules for ship hull construction.........   173
            Laser welding and cutting............................   173
            Supply chain best practices..........................   174
            Virtual test bed for reconfigurable ship.............   174
            Ocean modeling for mine and submarine warfare........   174
            Marine Corps advanced technology transition..........   175
            Integrated combat weapons system for mine 
              countermeasures ships..............................   175
            Trident SSGN design..................................   175
            Enhanced performance electric motor brush technology.   176
            Submarine composite sail.............................   176
            Joint command and control ship.......................   176
            Shipboard simulators for Marine Corps operations.....   177
            Navy common command and decision system..............   177
            Advanced amphibious assault vehicle..................   178
            Marine Corps ground combat/support system............   178
            Extended range guided munition.......................   178
            Nonlethal research and technology development........   179
            Navy collaborative integrated information technology 
              initiative.........................................   179
            Parametric airborne dipping sonar....................   179
            Multi-mission helicopter upgrade development.........   180
            Power node control centers...........................   180
            Ship manpower reduction initiative...................   180
            SPY-3 and volume search radars.......................   181
            Acoustic rapid commercial-off-the-shelf insertion of 
              multi-purpose processor............................   181
            Submarine antenna technology improvement.............   181
            Submarine common architecture........................   182
            Advanced tactical software for submarines............   182
            NULKA anti-ship missile decoy system.................   182
            Navy single integrated human resources strategy......   182
            Marine Corps research university.....................   183
            Reentry system applications program..................   183
            Joint tactical combat training system................   183
            F-14 tactical reconnaissance.........................   183
            Software interoperability process tools..............   184
            Satellite communications systems integration 
              initiative.........................................   184
            Distributed engineering plant........................   184
        Air Force................................................   186
            Laser processing tools...............................   196
            Resin systems for Air Force applications.............   196
            Thermal protection systems...........................   196
            Aeronautical research................................   196
            Polyphenylene benzobisoxozole membrane fuel cell.....   196
            Variable displacement vane pump......................   197
            High frequency active auroral research...............   197
            Space survivability..................................   197
            Aluminum aerostructures..............................   197
            Hyperspectral research...............................   197
            Fiber optical control technology.....................   197
            Low cost launch technology...........................   197
            Micro-satellite technology...........................   198
            Miniature satellite threat reporting system..........   198
            Next generation composite launch vehicle payload 
              fairings and shrouds...............................   198
            Solar orbital transfer vehicle.......................   198
            Space maneuver vehicle...............................   198
            Upper stage flight experiment........................   198
            Space Based Laser program............................   199
            Airborne laser program...............................   199
            Rocket systems launch program........................   200
            Wideband gapfiller military satellite communications.   200
            B-2 advanced technology bomber.......................   200
            Milstar satellite communications.....................   200
            F-15E squadrons......................................   200
            Hyperspectral system development.....................   200
            Extended range cruise missile........................   200
            Joint surveillance and target attack radar system....   201
            Lighthouse cyber security............................   201
            Dragon U-2...........................................   201
        Defense-Wide.............................................   202
            Advanced photonic composites research................   211
            Infrasound detection capability basic research.......   211
            Personnel research initiative........................   211
            Defense experimental program to stimulate competitive 
              research...........................................   211
            Chemical and biological defense basic research.......   211
            Ballistic Missile Defense Organization funding and 
              programmatic guidance..............................   212
            Bio-defense research.................................   214
            Hybrid sensor suite..................................   214
            High definition systems..............................   214
            Three dimensional structures research................   215
            Biological agent sensor technologies.................   215
            Blast mitigation testing.............................   215
            Facial recognition access control technology.........   215
            Chemical and Biological Incident Response Force 
              detector technologies..............................   215
            Consequence Management Information System............   216
            Reactive materials...................................   216
            Complex systems design...............................   216
            Competitive sustainment initiative...................   216
            Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD) Attack-Effects-
              Response Assessment capability at U.S. Joint Forces 
              Command (USJFCOM)..................................   217
            Integrated data environment technology...............   217
            Demonstration/validation of technology for the 
              remediation of unexploded ordnance at active, 
              inactive, closing, transferred, and transferring 
              ranges.............................................   217
            Next generation anthrax vaccine......................   218
            Remote Ordnance Neutralization System................   218
            Cyber attack sensing and warning.....................   218
            Information Operations Technology Center.............   218
            Trusted RUBIX........................................   218
            Virtual worlds initiative............................   218
            Intelligent spatial technologies for smart mapping 
              systems............................................   219
            Joint Mapping Tool Kit...............................   219
            Information assurance testbed........................   219
            Joint course of action analysis and targeting support 
              for information operations.........................   219
            Advanced lightweight grenade launcher................   219
            Management reform for Department of Defense test and 
              evaluation centers.................................   220
            Augmented reality fire-fighting training.............   221
    Other Items of Interest......................................   221
        Aircraft carrier modernization...........................   221
        Advanced ship hull demonstrators.........................   221
        Crusader.................................................   222
        Future ship technology research and development..........   222
        Joint training and experimentation.......................   223
        Joint operational test bed system........................   224
        Maritime patrol aircraft.................................   224
        Patriot theater missile defense..........................   224
        Prophylactic pharmaceuticals.............................   225
        Radiation hardened electronics investment strategy.......   225
        Small arms fire control system...........................   226
        Transition of successful research projects into the 
          acquisition system.....................................   226
Title III--Operation And Maintenance.............................   227
    Explanation of tables........................................   227
    Subtitle A--Authorization of Appropriations..................   228
        Armed Forces Retirement Home (sec. 303)..................   261
    Subtitle B--Program Requirements, Restrictions, and 
      Limitations................................................   261
        Impact aid for children with disabilities (sec. 311).....   261
        Joint Warfighting Capabilities Assessment Teams (sec. 
          312)...................................................   261
    Subtitle C--Humanitarian and Civic Assistance................   261
        Increased authority to provide health care services as 
          humanitarian and civic assistance (sec. 321)...........   261
        Use of humanitarian and civic assistance funding for pay 
          and allowances of special operations command reserves 
          furnishing demining training and related assistance as 
          humanitarian assistance (sec. 322).....................   262
    Subtitle D--Department of Defense Industrial Facilities......   262
        Codification and improvement of armament retooling and 
          manufacturing support programs (sec. 331)..............   263
        Centers of industrial and technical excellence (sec. 332)   263
        Effects of outsourcing on overhead costs of centers of 
          industrial and technical excellence and ammunition 
          plants (sec. 333)......................................   264
        Revision of authority to waive limitation on performance 
          of depot-level maintenance (sec. 334)..................   264
    Subtitle E--Environmental Provisions.........................   265
        Environmental restoration accounts (sec. 341)............   265
        Payments of fines and penalties for environmental 
          compliance violations (sec. 342).......................   265
        Annual reports under Strategic Environmental Research and 
          Development Program (sec. 343).........................   267
        Modification of authority for indemnification of 
          transferees of closing defense property (sec. 344).....   267
        Payment of fines or penalties imposed for environmental 
          compliance violations at certain Department of Defense 
          facilities (sec. 345)..................................   267
        Reimbursement for certain costs in connection with the 
          former Nansemond Ordnance Depot Site, Suffolk, Virginia 
          (sec. 346).............................................   268
        Environmental restoration activities (sec. 347)..........   268
        Ship disposal project (sec. 348).........................   269
        Report on the Defense Environmental Security Corporate 
          Information Management Program (sec. 349)..............   269
        Report on Plasma Energy Pyrolysis System (sec. 350)......   269
    Subtitle F--Other Matters....................................   269
        Effects of worldwide contingency operations on readiness 
          of certain military aircraft and equipment (sec. 361)..   269
        Realistic budgeting for readiness requirements of the 
          Army (sec. 362)........................................   270
        Additions to plan for ensuring visibility over all in-
          transit end items and secondary items (sec. 363).......   270
        Performance of emergency response functions at chemical 
          weapons storage installations (sec. 364)...............   271
        Congressional notification of use of radio frequency 
          spectrum by a system entering engineering and 
          manufacturing development (sec. 365)...................   271
        Monitoring of value of performance of Department of 
          Defense functions by workforces selected from between 
          public and private workforces (sec. 366)...............   272
        Suspension of reorganization of naval audit service (sec. 
          367)...................................................   272
        Investment of commissary trust revolving fund (sec. 368).   272
        Economic procurement of distilled spirits (sec. 369).....   272
        Resale of armor piercing ammunition disposed of by the 
          Army (sec. 370)........................................   273
        Damage to aviation facilities caused by alkali silica 
          reactivity (sec. 371)..................................   273
        Reauthorization of pilot program for acceptance and use 
          of landing fees charged for use of domestic military 
          airfields by civil aircraft (sec. 372).................   273
        Reimbursement by civil air carriers for support provided 
          at Johnston Atoll (sec. 373)...........................   273
        Review of costs of maintaining historical properties 
          (sec. 374).............................................   273
        Extension of authority to sell certain aircraft for use 
          in wildfire suppression (sec. 375).....................   274
        Overseas airlift service on Civil Reserve Air Fleet 
          aircraft (sec. 376)....................................   274
    Additional Matters of Interest...............................   275
        Army.....................................................   275
            Real property maintenance............................   275
            Excess carryover-defense working capital fund 
              activities.........................................   275
            Foreign currency fluctuation.........................   276
            Civilian personnel pay in excess of requirements.....   276
            Army equipment maintenance...........................   277
            Battlefield mobility enhancement system..............   277
            Army aviation spares.................................   277
            Adjustments to Junior Reserve Officers Training Corps   277
        Navy.....................................................   277
            Navy spares..........................................   277
            Ship depot maintenance...............................   278
            Oceanography.........................................   278
            Training range upgrades..............................   278
            Adjustments to Junior Reserve Officers Training Corps   278
            Navy information technology center...................   278
            US Navy Call Center..................................   279
        Marine Corps.............................................   279
            USMC initial issue...................................   279
            USMC equipment maintenance...........................   279
            Adjustments to Junior Reserve Officers Training Corps   279
        Air Force................................................   280
            Air Force base operations............................   280
            Adjustments to Junior Reserve Officers Training Corps   280
            Air Force readiness spares packages..................   280
            Air Force nuclear, biological and chemical defense...   280
        Defense-Wide.............................................   281
            Mobility enhancements................................   281
            Mechanization of Contract Administration Service 
              (MOCAS)............................................   281
            Partnership for Peace Program (Warsaw Initiative)....   281
            Defense Environmental Security Corporate Information 
              Management Program.................................   282
            Domestic preparedness center.........................   282
            Cultural and historic activities.....................   282
            Defense Travel System................................   283
            Command information superiority architecture program.   283
        Guard and Reserve Components.............................   284
            Air Force Reserve equipment maintenance..............   284
            National Guard initial issue.........................   284
            Distributed mission trainer..........................   284
        Miscellaneous............................................   284
            Overseas humanitarian, disaster, and civic affairs...   284
    Other Items of Interest......................................   285
        Charlestown Naval Auxiliary Landing Field, Charlestown, 
          Rhode Island...........................................   285
        Commander-in-Chiefs Initiative Fund......................   286
        Inventory of financial management and feeder systems.....   286
        Joint computer-aided acquisition and logistics support 
          (JCALS) program........................................   287
        Mechanization of Contract Administration Service.........   287
        National Defense Center for Environmental Excellence.....   287
        Pesticide contamination at the former Fort Devens, 
          Devens, Massachusetts, and other closed and active 
          military installations.................................   288
        Revised requirements for report on Defense use of smart 
          card as PKI authentication device carrier..............   289
Title IV--Military Personnel Authorizations......................   291
    Subtitle A--Active Forces....................................   291
        End strengths for active forces (sec. 401)...............   291
    Subtitle B--Reserve Forces...................................   291
        End strengths for Selected Reserve (sec. 411)............   291
        End strengths for reserves on active duty in support of 
          the reserves (sec. 412)................................   292
        End strengths for military technicians (dual status) 
          (sec. 413).............................................   292
        Fiscal year 2001 limitation on non-dual status 
          technicians (sec. 414).................................   292
        Increase in number of members in certain grades 
          authorized to be on active duty in support of the 
          reserves (sec. 415)....................................   293
    Subtitle C--Other Matters Relating to Personnel..............
        Strengths................................................   293
        Suspension of strength limitations during war or national 
          emergency (sec. 421)...................................   293
        Exclusion of certain reserve component members on active 
          duty for more than 180 days from active component end 
          strengths (sec. 422)...................................   293
        Exclusion of Army and Air Force medical and dental 
          officers from limitations on strengths of reserve 
          commissioned officers in grades below brigadier general 
          (sec. 423).............................................   293
        Authority for temporary increases in number of reserve 
          personnel serving on active duty or full-time National 
          Guard duty in certain grades (sec. 424)................   293
        Temporary exemption of Director of the National Security 
          Agency from limitations on number of Air Force officers 
          above major general (sec. 425).........................   293
    Subtitle D--Authorization of Appropriations..................   294
        Authorization of appropriations for military personnel 
          (sec. 431).............................................   294
Title V--Military Personnel Policy...............................   295
    Subtitle A--Officer Personnel Policy.........................   295
        Eligibility of Army Reserve colonels and brigadier 
          generals for position vacancy promotions (sec. 501)....   295
        Promotion Zones for Coast Guard Reserve Officers (sec. 
          502)...................................................   295
        Time for release of officer promotion selection board 
          reports (sec. 503).....................................   295
        Clarification of authority for posthumous commissions and 
          warrants (sec. 504)....................................   295
        Inapplicability of active-duty list promotion, 
          separation, and involuntary retirement authorities to 
          reserve general and flag officers serving in certain 
          positions designated by the Chairman of the Joint 
          Chiefs of Staff (sec. 505).............................   295
        Review of actions of selection boards (sec. 506).........   296
        Extension to all Air Force biomedical sciences officers 
          of authority to retain until specified age (sec. 507)..   297
        Termination of application requirement for consideration 
          of officers for continuation on the Reserve Active-
          Status List (sec. 508).................................   297
        Technical corrections relating to retired grade of 
          reserve commissioned officers (sec. 509)...............   297
        Grade of chiefs of reserve components and directors of 
          National Guard components (sec. 510)...................   297
    Subtitle B--Joint Officer Management.........................   298
        Joint officer management (sec. 521--528).................   298
    Subtitle C--Education and Training...........................   298
        Eligibility of children of reserves for Presidential 
          appointment to service academies (sec. 541)............   298
        Selection of foreign students to receive instruction at 
          service academies (sec. 542)...........................   298
        Repeal of contingent funding increase for Junior Reserve 
          Officers Training Corps (sec. 543).....................   298
        Revision of authority for Marine Corps platoon leader 
          class tuition assistance program (sec. 544)............   298
    Subtitle D--Matters Relating to Recruiting...................   299
        Army recruiting pilot programs (sec. 551)................   299
        Enhancement of the joint and service recruitment market 
          research and advertising programs (sec. 552)...........   299
        Access to secondary schools for military recruiting 
          purposes (sec. 553)....................................   299
    Subtitle E--Other Matters....................................   300
        Authority for award of Medal of Honor to certain 
          specified persons (sec. 561)...........................   300
        Waiver of time limitations for award of certain 
          decorations to certain persons (sec. 562)..............   300
        Ineligibility for involuntary separation pay upon 
          declination of selection for continuation on active 
          duty (sec. 563)........................................   300
        Recognition by states of military testamentary 
          instruments (sec. 564).................................   300
        Sense of Congress on the court-martial conviction of 
          Captain Charles Butler McVay, Commander of the USS 
          Indianapolis, and the courageous service of its crew 
          (sec. 565).............................................   301
    Other Items of Interest......................................   301
        Automated in- and out-processing of military personnel...   301
        Funeral honors for members of the uniformed services.....   302
        Information related to alternatives to the Survivor 
          Benefit Plan...........................................   302
        Prevention of alcohol-related incidents..................   302
        Study on the use of peyote by military personnel.........   303
Title VI--Compensation and Other Personnel Benefits..............   305
    Subtitle A--Pay and Allowances...............................   305
        Increase in basic pay for Fiscal Year 2001 (sec. 601)....   305
        Corrections for basic pay tables (sec. 602)..............   305
        Pay in lieu of allowance for funeral honors duty (sec. 
          603)...................................................   305
        Clarification of service excluded in computation of 
          creditable service as a Marine Corps officer (sec. 604)   305
        Calculation of Basic Allowance for Housing (sec. 605)....   305
        Eligibility of members in grade E-4 to receive basic 
          allowance for housing while on sea duty (sec. 606).....   306
        Personal money allowance for the senior enlisted members 
          of the armed forces (sec. 607).........................   306
        Increased uniform allowances for officers (sec. 608).....   306
        Cabinet-level authority to prescribe requirements and 
          allowance for clothing of enlisted members (sec. 609)..   306
    Subtitle B--Bonuses and Special Incentive Pays...............   306
        Extension of certain bonuses and special pay authorities 
          for reserve forces (sec. 611)..........................   306
        Extension of certain bonuses and special pay authorities 
          for nurse officer candidates, registered nurses, and 
          nurse anesthetists (sec. 612)..........................   307
        Extension of authorities relating to payment of other 
          bonuses and special pays (sec. 613)....................   307
        Consistency of authorities for special pay for reserve 
          medical and dental officers (sec. 614).................   307
        Special pay for physician assistants of the Coast Guard 
          (sec. 615).............................................   307
        Authorization of special pay and accession bonus for 
          pharmacy officers (sec. 616)...........................   307
        Corrections of references to Air Force veterinarians 
          (sec. 617).............................................   307
        Entitlement of active duty officers of the Public Health 
          Service Corps to special pays and bonuses of health 
          professional officers of the armed forces (sec. 618)...   308
        Career sea pay (sec. 619)................................   308
        Increased maximum rate of special duty pay assignment pay 
          (sec. 620).............................................   308
        Expansion of applicability of authority for critical 
          skills enlistment bonus to include all armed forces 
          (sec. 621).............................................   308
    Subtitle C--Travel and Transportation Allowances.............   308
        Advance payments for temporary lodging of members and 
          dependents (sec. 631)..................................   308
        Incentive for shipping and storing household goods in 
          less than average weights (sec. 632)...................   309
        Expansion of funded student travel (sec. 633)............   309
        Benefits for members not transporting personal motor 
          vehicles overseas (sec. 634)...........................   309
    Subtitle D--Retirement Benefits..............................   309
        Exception to high-36 month retired pay computation for 
          members retired following a disciplinary reduction in 
          grade (sec. 641).......................................   309
        Automatic participation in Reserve Component Survivor 
          Benefit Plan unless declined with spouses' consent 
          (sec. 642).............................................   309
        Participation in thrift savings plan (sec. 643)..........   310
        Retirement from active reserve service after regular 
          retirement (sec. 644)..................................   310
        Same treatment for federal judges as for other federal 
          officials regarding payment of military retired pay 
          (sec. 645).............................................   310
    Subtitle E--Other Matters....................................   310
        Reimbursement of recruiting and ROTC personnel for 
          parking expenses (sec. 651)............................   310
        Extension of deadline for filing claims associated with 
          capture and internment of certain persons by North 
          Vietnam (sec. 652).....................................   311
        Settlement of claims for payments for unused accrued 
          leave and for retired pay (sec. 653)...................   311
        Eligibility of certain members of the Individual Ready 
          Reserve for Servicemembers' Group Life Insurance (sec. 
          654)...................................................   311
        Authority to pay gratuity to certain veterans of Bataan 
          and Corregidor (sec. 655)..............................   311
    Other Items of Interest......................................   311
        Adjustments to the Basic Allowance for Housing...........   311
Title VII--Health Care...........................................   313
    Subtitle A--Senior Health Care...............................   313
        Extension of TRICARE senior supplement demonstration 
          program (sec. 701).....................................   313
        TRICARE senior prime demonstration program (sec. 702)....   313
        Extension and expansion of demonstration project for 
          participation of uniformed services personnel in the 
          Federal Employee Health Benefit program (sec. 703).....   313
        Implementation of redesigned pharmacy system (sec. 704)..   314
    Subtitle B--TRICARE Program..................................   314
        Additional beneficiaries under TRICARE prime remote 
          program in CONUS (sec. 711)............................   314
        Elimination of copayments for immediate family (sec. 712)   314
        Improvement in business practices in the administration 
          of the TRICARE program (sec. 713)......................   314
    Subtitle C--joint Initiatives With Department of Veterans 
      Affairs....................................................   315
        Tracking patient safety in military and veterans health 
          care systems (sec. 721)................................   315
        Pharmaceutical identification technology (sec. 722)......   315
        Medical informatics (sec. 723)...........................   315
    Subtitle D--other Matters....................................   315
        Permanent authority for certain pharmaceutical benefits 
          (sec. 731).............................................   315
        Provision of domiciliary and custodial care for CHAMPUS 
          beneficiaries (sec. 732)...............................   316
        Medical and dental care for medal of honor recipients and 
          their dependents (sec. 733)............................   316
        School-required physical examinations for certain minor 
          dependents (sec. 734)..................................   316
        Two-year extension of dental and medical benefits for 
          surviving dependents of certain deceased members (sec. 
          735)...................................................   316
        Extension of authority for contracts for medical services 
          at locations outside medical treatment facilities (sec. 
          736)...................................................   317
        Transition of chiropractic health care demonstration 
          program to permanent status (sec. 737).................   317
        Use of information technology for enhancement of delivery 
          of administrative services under the Defense Health 
          Program (sec. 738).....................................   317
        Patient care reporting and management system (sec. 739)..   318
        Health care management demonstration program (sec. 740)..   318
        Studies of accrual financing for health care for military 
          retirees (sec. 741)....................................   318
        Augmentation of Army Medical Department by reserve 
          officers of the Public Health Service Corps (sec. 742).   318
    Other Items of Interest......................................   319
        Consultation with schools of pharmacy and nursing........   319
        Financial assistance for those beneficiaries requiring 
          animal assistance......................................   319
        Health care benefits for retirees living overseas........   319
        Implementation of Department of Defense and Veterans 
          Affairs Department sharing initiatives.................   319
        Notification of persons affected by unanticipated adverse 
          outcomes of medical care...............................   320
        Special pays for military health care professionals......   320
Title VIII--Acquisition Policy, Acquisition Management, and 
  Related Matters................................................   321
        Improvements in procurements of services (sec. 801)......   321
        Addition of threshold value requirement for applicability 
          of a reporting requirement relating to multiyear 
          contract (sec. 802)....................................   322
        Planning for the acquisition of information systems (sec. 
          803)...................................................   322
        Tracking of information technology purchases (sec. 804)..   322
        Repeal of requirement for contractor assurances regarding 
          the completeness, accuracy, and contractual sufficiency 
          of technical data provided by contractor (sec. 805)....   323
        Extension of authority for Department of Defense 
          acquisition pilot programs (sec. 806)..................   324
        Clarification and extension of authority to carry out 
          certain prototype projects (sec. 807)..................   324
        Clarification of authority of Comptroller General to 
          review records of participants in certain prototype 
          projects (sec. 808)....................................   325
        Eligibility of small business concerns owned and 
          controlled by women for assistance under the mentor-
          protege program (sec. 809).............................   325
        Navy-Marine Corps Intranet (sec. 810)....................   325
        Qualifications required for employment and assignment in 
          contracting positions (sec. 811).......................   326
        Defense acquisition workforce (sec. 812).................   327
        Financial analysis of use of dual rate for quantifying 
          overhead costs at army industrial facilities (sec. 813)   328
    Other Items of Interest......................................   328
        Application of Cost Accounting Standards to universities.   328
        Appropriate use of the government purchase card..........   329
        Availability of contractor past performance information..   329
        Contracts for ancillary commercial services..............   330
        Online auctioning........................................   330
        Performance goals and measures for quality of equipment 
          and other products.....................................   330
        Polyacrylonitrile carbon fibers..........................   331
        Procurements from the small arms production industrial 
          base...................................................   332
        Risk management in the acquisition of major systems......   332
        Technical data rights for items developed exclusively at 
          private expense........................................   333
Title IX--Department of Defense Organization and Management......   335
        Repeal of limitation on major Department of Defense 
          headquarters activities personnel (sec. 901)...........   335
        Overall supervision of Department of Defense activities 
          for combating terrorism (sec. 902).....................   335
        National Defense Panel 2001 (sec. 903)...................   336
        Quadrennial National Defense Panel (sec. 904)............   337
        Inspector General investigations of prohibited personnel 
          actions (sec. 905).....................................   337
        Network centric warfare (sec. 906).......................   338
        Additional duties for the Commission to Assess United 
          States National Security Space Management and 
          Organization (sec. 907)................................   340
        Special authority for administration of Navy Fisher 
          Houses (sec. 908)......................................   340
        Organization and management of the Civil Air Patrol (sec. 
          909)...................................................   340
        Responsibility for the National Guard Challenge Program 
          (sec. 910).............................................   340
        Supervisory control of Armed Forces Retirement Home Board 
          by Secretary of Defense (sec. 911).....................   340
        Consolidation of certain Navy gift funds (sec. 912)......   341
        Temporary authority to dispose of a gift previously 
          accepted for the Naval Academy (sec. 913)..............   341
Title X--General Provisions......................................   343
    Subtitle A--Financial Matters................................   343
        Authorization of prior emergency supplemental 
          appropriations for fiscal year 2000 (sec. 1002)........   343
        United States contributions to NATO common-funded budgets 
          (sec. 1003)............................................   343
        Annual OMB/CBO joint report on scoring budget outlays 
          (sec. 1004)............................................   343
        Prompt payment of contractor vouchers (sec. 1005)........   343
        The repeal of certain requirements relating to timing of 
          contract payments (sec. 1006)..........................   344
        Plan for prompt posting of contractual obligations (sec. 
          1007)..................................................   344
        Plan for the electronic submission of documentation 
          supporting claims for contract payments (sec. 1008)....   344
        Administrative offsets for overpayment of transportation 
          costs (sec. 1009)......................................   344
    Subtitle B--Counter-Drug Activities..........................   344
        Extension and increase of authority to provide additional 
          support for counter-drug activities (sec. 1011)........   345
        Recommendations on expansion of support for counter-drug 
          activities (sec. 1012).................................   345
        Review of riverine counter-drug program (sec. 1013)......   346
    Subtitle C--Strategic Forces.................................   347
        Revised nuclear posture review (sec. 1015)...............   347
        Plan for the long-term sustainment and modernization of 
          United States strategic nuclear forces (sec. 1016).....   348
        Correction of scope of waiver authority for limitation on 
          retirement or dismantlement of strategic nuclear 
          delivery vehicles (sec. 1017)..........................   348
        Study and report on hardened and deeply buried targets 
          (sec. 1018)............................................   348
    Subtitle D--Miscellaneous Reporting Requirements.............   349
        Annual report of the chairman of the joint chiefs of 
          staff on combatant command requirements (sec. 1021)....   349
        Joint Requirements Oversight Council (sec. 1022).........   349
        Preparedness of military installation first responders 
          for incidents involving weapons of mass destruction 
          (sec. 1023)............................................   350
        Date of submittal of reports on shortfalls in equipment 
          procurement and military construction for reserve 
          components in future years defense programs (sec. 1024)   351
        Management review of defense logistics agency (sec. 1025)   351
        Management review of defense information systems agency 
          (sec. 1026)............................................   352
    Subtitle E--Information Security.............................   352
        Institute for defense computer security and information 
          protection (sec. 1041).................................   352
        Information security scholarship program (sec. 1042).....   353
        Process for prioritizing background investigations for 
          security clearances for Department of Defense personnel 
          (sec. 1043)............................................   354
        Authority to withhold certain sensitive information from 
          public disclosure (sec. 1044)..........................   355
        Protection of operational files of the Defense 
          Intelligence Agency (sec. 1045)........................   356
    Subtitle F--Other Matters....................................   356
        Commemoration of the fiftieth anniversary of the Uniform 
          Code of Military Justice (sec. 1051)...................   356
        Eligibility of dependents of American Red Cross employees 
          for enrollment in Department of Defense Domestic 
          Dependent Schools in Puerto Rico (sec. 1053)...........   356
        Grants to American Red Cross for Armed Services Emergency 
          Services (sec. 1054)...................................   356
        Transit pass program for certain Department of Defense 
          personnel (sec. 1055)..................................   356
        Fees for providing historical information to the public 
          (sec. 1056)............................................   357
        Access to criminal history record information for 
          national security purposes (sec. 1057).................   357
        Sense of Congress on the naming of the CVN-77 aircraft 
          carrier (sec. 1058)....................................   357
        Donation of civil war cannon (sec. 1059).................   358
        Maximum size of parcel posts transported overseas for 
          Armed Forces Post Offices (sec. 1060)..................   358
    Other Items of Interest......................................   358
        Department of Defense export control procedures..........   358
        Firefighting equipment...................................   358
        Peacekeeper intercontinental ballistic missile...........   359
Title XI--Department of Defense Civilian Personnel Policy........   361
        Computer/electronic accommodations program (sec. 1101)...   361
        Additional special pay for foreign language proficiency 
          beneficial for United States national security 
          interests (sec. 1102)..................................   361
        Increased number of positions authorized for the defense 
          intelligence senior executive service (sec. 1103)......   361
        Extension of authority for tuition reimbursement and 
          training for acquisition personnel in shortage 
          categories (sec. 1104).................................   361
        Work safety demonstration program (sec. 1105)............   361
        Employment and compensation of employees for temporary 
          organizations established by law or executive order 
          (sec. 1106)............................................   362
        Extension of authority for voluntary separations in 
          reductions in force (sec. 1107)........................   362
        Electronic maintenance of performance appraisal systems 
          (sec. 1108)............................................   362
        Approval authority for cash awards in excess of $10,000 
          (sec. 1109)............................................   362
        Leave for crews of certain vessels (sec. 1110)...........   362
        Life insurance for emergency essential Department of 
          Defense employees (sec. 1111)..........................   363
        Civilian personnel services public-private competition 
          pilot program (sec. 1112)..............................   363
        Extension, expansion, and revision of authority for 
          experimental personnel program for scientific and 
          technical personnel (sec. 1113)........................   363
Title XII--Matters Relating to Other Nations.....................   365
        Transfers of naval vessels to foreign countries (sec. 
          1201)..................................................   365
        Support of United Nations-sponsored efforts to inspect 
          and monitor Iraqi weapons activities (sec. 1202).......   365
        Repeal of restriction preventing cooperative airlift 
          support through acquisition and cross servicing 
          agreements (sec.1203)..................................   366
        Western Hemisphere Institute for Professional Education 
          and Training (sec. 1204)...............................   366
        Biannual report on Kosovo peacekeeping (sec. 1205).......   366
        Mutual assistance for monitoring test explosions of 
          nuclear devices (sec. 1206)............................   367
        Consolidated annual report on Cooperative Threat 
          Reduction assistance and activities (sec. 1207)........   368
        Limitation on use of funds for construction of a Russian 
          facility for the destruction of chemical weapons (sec. 
          1208)..................................................   368
        Limitation on the use of funds for the Elimination of 
          Weapons Grade Plutonium Program (sec. 1209)............   368
Title XIII--Navy Activities on the Island of Vieques, Puerto Rico   371
        Navy activities on the island of Vieques, Puerto Rico 
          (secs. 1301-1308)......................................   371
Division B--Military Construction Authorizations.................   373
Title XXI--Army..................................................   393
    Summary......................................................   393
        Authorized Army construction and land acquisition 
          projects (sec. 2101)...................................   393
        Family housing (sec. 2102)...............................   393
        Improvement to military family housing units (sec. 2103).   393
        Authorization of appropriations, Army (sec. 2104)........   393
        Modification of authority to carry out certain fiscal 
          year 2000 projects (sec. 2105).........................   394
        Modification of authority to carry out certain fiscal 
          year 1999 project (sec. 2106)..........................   394
        Modification of authority to carry out fiscal year 1998 
          project (sec. 2107)....................................   394
        Authority to accept funds for realignment of certain 
          military construction project, Fort Campbell, Kentucky 
          (sec. 2108)............................................   394
    Other Items of Interest......................................   395
        Presidio Housing, Golden Gate National Recreation Area, 
          San Francisco, California..............................   395
Title XXII--Navy.................................................   397
    Summary......................................................   397
        Authorized Navy construction and land acquisition 
          projects (sec. 2201)...................................   397
        Family housing (sec. 2202)...............................   397
        Improvements to military family housing units (sec. 2203)   397
        Authorization of appropriations, Navy (sec. 2204)........   397
        Correction in authorized use of funds, Marine Corps 
          Combat Development Command, Quantico, Virginia (sec. 
          2205)..................................................   397
Title XXIII--Air Force...........................................   399
    Summary......................................................   399
        Authorized Air Force construction and land acquisition 
          projects (sec. 2301)...................................   399
        Family housing (sec. 2302)...............................   399
        Improvements to military family housing units (sec. 2303)   399
        Authorization of appropriations, Air Force (sec. 2304)...   399
Title XXIV--Defense Agencies.....................................   401
    Summary......................................................   401
        Authorized Defense Agencies construction and land 
          acquisition projects (sec. 2401).......................   401
        Energy conservation projects (sec. 2402).................   401
        Authorization of appropriations, Defense Agencies (sec. 
          2403)..................................................   401
    Other Items of Interest......................................   401
        Certification of requirement for military construction 
          projects, Manta Air Base, Ecuador......................   401
        Planning and design, Defense Intelligence Agency.........   402
Title XXV--North Atlantic Treaty Organization Security...........   403
    Summary......................................................   403
        Authorized NATO construction and land acquisition 
          projects (sec. 2501)...................................   403
        Authorization of appropriations, NATO (sec. 2502)........   403
Title XXVI--Guard and Reserve Forces Facilities..................   405
    Summary......................................................   405
        Authorized Guard and Reserve construction and land 
          acquisition projects (sec. 2601).......................   405
    Other Items of Interest......................................   405
        Support for Weapons of Mass Destruction Civil Support 
          Teams..................................................   405
Title XXVII--Expiration and Extension of Authorizations..........   407
        Expiration of authorizations and amounts required to be 
          specified by law (sec. 2701)...........................   407
        Extensions of authorizations of certain fiscal year 1998 
          projects (sec. 2702)...................................   407
        Extensions of authorizations of certain fiscal year 1997 
          projects (sec. 2703)...................................   407
        Effective date (sec. 2704)...............................   407
Title XXVIII--General Provisions.................................   409
    Subtitle A--Military Construction Program and Military Family 
      Housing Changes............................................   409
        Joint use military construction projects (sec. 2801).....   409
        Exclusion of certain costs from determination of 
          applicability of limitation on use of funds for 
          improvement of family housing (sec. 2802)..............   409
        Replacement of limitations on space by pay grade of 
          military family housing with requirement for local 
          comparability of military family housing (sec. 2803)...   409
        Modification of lease authority for high-cost military 
          family housing (sec. 2804).............................   410
        Applicability of competitive policy to alternative 
          authority for acquisition and improvement of military 
          housing (sec. 2805)....................................   410
        Provisions of utilities and services under alternative 
          authority for acquisition and improvement of military 
          housing (sec. 2806)....................................   410
        Extension of alternative authority for acquisition and 
          improvement of military housing (sec. 2807)............   411
        Inclusion of readiness center in definition of armory for 
          purposes of construction of reserve components 
          facilities (sec. 2808).................................   411
    Subtitle B--Real Property and Facilities Administration......   411
        Increase in threshold for reports to Congress on real 
          property transactions (sec. 2811)......................   411
        Enhancements to military lease authority ( sec. 2812)....   411
        Expansion of procedures for selection of conveyees under 
          authority to convey utility systems (sec. 2813)........   412
    Subtitle C--Defense Base Closure and Realignment.............   413
        Scope of agreements to transfer property to redevelopment 
          authorities without consideration under the base 
          closure laws (sec. 2821)...............................   413
    Subtitle D--Land Conveyances.................................   413
        Part I--Army Conveyances.................................   413
            Land conveyance, Charles Melvin Price Support Center, 
              Illinois (sec. 2831)...............................   413
            Land conveyance, Lieutenant General Malcolm Hay, Army 
              Reserve Center, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania (sec. 
              2832)..............................................   414
            Land conveyance, Colonel Harold E. Steele, Army 
              Reserve Center and Maintenance Shop, Pittsburgh, 
              Pennsylvania (sec. 2833)...........................   414
            Land conveyance, Fort Lawton, Washington (sec. 2834).   414
            Land conveyance, Vancouver Barracks, Washington (sec. 
              2835)..............................................   414
        Part II--Navy Conveyances................................   415
            Modification of land conveyance, Marine Corps Air 
              Station, El Toro, California (sec. 2851)...........   415
            Modification of land conveyance, Defense Fuel Supply 
              Point, Casco Bay, Maine (sec. 2852)................   415
            Modification of land conveyance authority, former 
              Navy Training Center, Bainbridge, Cecil County, 
              Maryland (sec. 2853)...............................   415
            Land conveyance, Naval Computer and 
              Telecommunications Station, Cutler, Maine (sec. 
              2854)..............................................   415
        Part III--Defense Agencies Conveyance....................   415
            Land conveyance, Army and Air Force Exchange Service 
              property, Farmers Branch, Texas (sec. 2871)........   415
    Subtitle E--Other Matters....................................   416
        Naming of the Army missile testing range at Kwajalein 
          Atoll as the Ronald Reagan Ballistic Missile Defense 
          Test Site at Kwajalein Atoll (sec. 2881)...............   416
    Other Items of Interest......................................   416
        Report on Naval Foundry and Propeller Center, 
          Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.............................   416
        Report on requirement for Education Center at Fort 
          Stewart, Georgia.......................................   417
        Study on commercial leases...............................   417
        Study regarding the location of the National Museum of 
          the United States Army.................................   417
Division C--Department of Energy National Security Authorizations 
  and Other Authorizations.......................................   419
Title XXXI--Department of Energy National Security Programs......   419
        Atomic energy defense activities.........................   419
    Subtitle A--National Security Programs Authorizations........   421
        National Nuclear Security Administration (sec. 3101).....   434
        Defense environmental restoration and waste management 
          (sec. 3102)............................................   438
        Other defense activities (sec. 3103).....................   441
        Defense environmental management privatization (sec. 
          3104)..................................................   443
        Energy employees compensation initiative (sec. 3105).....   443
        Defense nuclear waste disposal (sec. 3106)...............   443
    Subtitle B--Recurring General Provisions.....................   444
        Reprogramming (sec. 3121)................................   444
        Limits on general plant projects (sec. 3122).............   444
        Limits on construction projects (sec. 3123)..............   444
        Fund transfer authority (sec. 3124)......................   444
        Authority for conceptual and construction design (sec. 
          3125)..................................................   444
        Authority for emergency planning, design, and 
          construction activities (sec. 3126)....................   445
        Funds available for all national security programs of the 
          Department of Energy (sec. 3127).......................   445
        Availability of funds (sec. 3128)........................   445
        Transfer of defense environmental management funds (sec. 
          3129)..................................................   445
    Subtitle C--National Nuclear Security Administration.........   445
        Term of Office of person first appointed as Under 
          Secretary for Nuclear Security of the Department of 
          Energy (sec. 3031).....................................   445
        Membership of Under Secretary for Nuclear Security on the 
          Joint Nuclear Weapons Council (sec. 3132)..............   446
        Scope of authority of Secretary of Energy to modify 
          organization of National Nuclear Security 
          Administration (sec. 3133).............................   446
        Prohibition on pay of personnel engaged in concurrent 
          service or duties inside and outside National Nuclear 
          Security Administration (sec. 3134)....................   446
        Organization plan for field offices of the National 
          Nuclear Security Administration (sec. 3135)............   446
        Future-years nuclear security program (sec. 3136)........   447
        Cooperative research and development of the National 
          Nuclear Security Administration (sec. 3137)............   447
    Subtitle D--Program Authorizations, Restrictions, and 
      Limitations................................................   448
        Processing, treatment, and disposition of legacy nuclear 
          materials (sec. 3151)..................................   448
        Formerly Utilized Sites Remedial Action Program (sec. 
          3152)..................................................   448
        Department of Energy Defense Nuclear Nonproliferation 
          Program (sec. 3153)....................................   448
        Modification of counterintelligence polygraph program 
          (sec. 3154)............................................   453
        Employee incentives for employees at closure project 
          facilities (sec. 3155).................................   453
    Subtitle E--Other Matters....................................   454
        Extension of authority for appointment of certain 
          scientific, engineering, and technical personnel (sec. 
          3171)..................................................   454
        Updates of report on nuclear test readiness postures 
          (sec. 3172)............................................   454
        Frequency of reports on inadvertent releases of 
          restricted data and formerly restricted data (sec. 
          3173)..................................................   454
        Form of certifications regarding the safety or 
          reliability of the nuclear weapons stockpile (sec. 
          3174)..................................................   455
        Engineering and manufacturing research, development and 
          demonstration by plant managers of certain nuclear 
          weapons production plants (sec. 3175)..................   455
        Cooperative research and development agreements for 
          government-owned, government-operated laboratories 
          (sec. 3176)............................................   455
        Commendation of Department of Energy and contractor 
          employees for Exemplary Service in Stockpile 
          Stewardship and Security (sec. 3177)...................   456
    Other Items of Interest......................................   456
        Department of Energy participation in the Interstate 
          Technology Reciprocity Council.........................   456
        Laboratory directed research and development.............   456
        Report on Post-closure employee benefits at closure 
          project facilities.....................................   457
Title XXXII--Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board.............   459
        Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board (sec. 3201)......   459
Title XXXIII--Naval Petroleum Reserves...........................   461
        Minimum price of petroleum sold from the naval petroleum 
          reserves (sec. 3301)...................................   461
        Repeal of authority to contract for cooperative or unit 
          plans affecting Naval Petroleum Reserve Numbered 1 
          (sec. 3302)............................................   461
Title XXXIV--National Defense Stockpile..........................   463
        National defense stockpile (secs. 3401-3402).............   463
Legislative Requirements.........................................   463
Departmental Recommendations.....................................   463
Committee Action.................................................   463
Congressional Budget Office Cost Estimate........................   463
Regulatory Impact................................................   463
Changes in Existing Law..........................................   464
Additional Views of Senators Levin, Kennedy, Bingaman, Robb, 
  Landrieu and Reed..............................................   465
Additional Views of Senator Bingaman.............................   468
Minority Views of Senator McCain.................................   471
106th Congress                                                   Report
                                 SENATE
 2d Session                                                     106-292

======================================================================



AUTHORIZING APPROPRIATIONS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2001 FOR MILITARY ACTIVITIES 
  OF THE DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE, FOR MILITARY CONSTRUCTION, AND FOR 
  DEFENSE ACTIVITIES OF THE DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY, TO PRESCRIBE PERSONNEL 
  STRENGTHS FOR SUCH FISCAL YEAR FOR THE ARMED FORCES, AND FOR OTHER 
  PURPOSES

                                _______
                                

                  May 12, 2000.--Ordered to be printed

    Filed under authority of the order of the Senate of May 11, 2000

                                _______
                                

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

                              R E P O R T

                             together with

                     ADDITIONAL AND MINORITY VIEWS

                         [To accompany S. 2549]

    The Committee on Armed Services reports favorably an 
original bill to authorize appropriations during the fiscal 
year 2001 for military activities of the Department of Defense, 
for military construction, and for defense activities of the 
Department of Energy, to prescribe personnel strengths for such 
fiscal year for the armed forces, and for other purposes, and 
recommends that the bill do pass.

                          PURPOSE OF THE BILL

    This bill would:
          (1) authorize appropriations for (a) procurement, (b) 
        research, development, test and evaluation, (c) 
        operation and maintenance and the revolving and 
        management funds of the Department of Defense for 
        fiscal year 2001;
          (2) authorize the personnel end strengths for each 
        military active duty component of the armed forces for 
        fiscal year 2001;
          (3) authorize the personnel end strengths for the 
        Selected Reserve of each of the reserve components of 
        the armed forces for fiscal year 2001;
          (4) impose certain reporting requirements;
          (5) impose certain limitations with regard to 
        specific procurement and research, development, test 
        and evaluation actions and manpower strengths; provide 
        certain additional legislative authority, and make 
        certain changes to existing law;
          (6) authorize appropriations for military 
        construction programs of the Department of Defense for 
        fiscal year 2001; and
          (7) authorize appropriations for national security 
        programs of the Department of Energy for fiscal year 
        2001.

Committee overview and recommendations

    The national security challenges that the United States 
will face in the new millennium are many and diverse--new 
adversaries, new battlefields, and new weapons. It is important 
that we remain vigilant, forward thinking, and prepared to 
address these challenges.
    While the Department of Defense (DOD) must plan and 
allocate resources to meet future threats, ongoing military 
operations and deployments from the Balkans to Southwest Asia 
to East Timor continue to demand significant resources in the 
short term and the foreseeable future. The National Defense 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2001 provides funding 
guidelines and policy directives which will allocate some of 
the most critical readiness, modernization, and recruiting and 
retention problems facing our military, while addressing 
complex current and future challenges and threats to the 
nation's security.
    For over a decade, our defense budget has been based on 
constrained funding, not on the threats facing the nation or 
the military strategy necessary to meet those threats. The 
result of this is evident today in continuing recruiting and 
retention difficulties, declining readiness ratings, and aging 
equipment.
    Last year, the Congress reversed the downward trend in 
defense spending by approving a defense authorization bill 
which, for the first time in 14 years, included a real increase 
in the authorized level of defense spending. This year, the 
committee continued the momentum initiated last year by 
authorizing $309.8 billion for defense spending for fiscal year 
2001, an increase of $4.5 billion over the budget request, and 
a real increase of 4.4 percent.
    The committee's support for additional funding for defense 
is based on an in-depth analysis of the threats facing U.S. 
interests, and testimony from senior military leaders on the 
many shortfalls in the defense budget.
    It is evident that the world remains a complex and violent 
place. The greatest threat to our national security today is 
instability; instability fueled by ethnic, religious, and 
racial animosities that have existed for centuries, but are now 
resulting in conflicts fought with the weapons of modern 
warfare. Many have turned to the United States, as the sole 
remaining superpower, to resolve the many conflicts around the 
world and to ensure stability in the future. However, this 
military power does not ensure our security. As Director of 
Central Intelligence George Tenet told the committee in 
January, ``The fact that we are arguably the world's most 
powerful nation does not bestow invulnerability; in fact, it 
may make us a larger target for those who don't share our 
interest, values, or beliefs.''
    U.S. military forces are involved in overseas deployments 
at an unprecedented rate. Currently, our troops are involved in 
over 10 contingency operations around the globe. At an October 
1999 hearing of the Committee, the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs 
of Staff, General Hugh Shelton, stated that, ``Two factors that 
erode military readiness are the pace of operations and funding 
shortfalls. There is no doubt that the force is much smaller 
than it was a decade ago, and also much busier.'' Over the past 
decade, our active duty manpower has been reduced by nearly a 
third, active Army divisions have been reduced by almost 50 
percent, and the number of Navy ships has been reduced from 567 
to 316. During this same period, our troops have been involved 
in 50 military operations worldwide. By comparison, from the 
end of the Vietnam War in 1975 until 1989, U.S. military forces 
were engaged in only 20 such military deployments.
    The fiscal year 2001 defense budget submitted by the 
administration was a positive development. Encouraging elements 
of the plan included full funding of the pay raise as directed 
by Congress last year, achieving the procurement goal of $60.0 
billion a year, and initiatives to improve military health 
care. After careful examination, however, it was clear that 
many shortfalls remained that required action by the committee.
    The Joint Chiefs of Staff have testified that they have a 
remaining shortfall in funding of $9.0 billion for fiscal year 
2000, a requirement for an additional $15.5 billion above the 
budget request to meet shortfalls in readiness and 
modernization for fiscal year 2001, and a requirement for an 
additional $85.0 billion in the Future Years Defense Program 
(FYDP). The committee has provided additional funding to meet 
the most urgent requirements identified by the Joint Chiefs of 
Staff, but remains troubled by the negative impact of the large 
number of contingency operations on our smaller military 
force.Unfortunately, there appears to be no end in sight for many of 
these operations.
    The high operations tempo of our armed forces has a 
negative impact on recruiting and retention. Last year, the 
committee took action to provide a pay raise and a package of 
retirement reforms and retention incentives in an effort to 
recruit and retain highly qualified personnel. The committee 
also took action to require intense senior level management of 
the personnel tempo of the armed forces. The committee has 
received testimony that these changes are having a positive 
impact. This year the committee has focused on improving 
military health care for our active duty and retired personnel 
and their families.
    The Secretary of Defense, the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs, 
and the service chiefs have all highlighted the many problems 
associated with implementing a user-friendly health care 
program for active duty service members, military retirees, and 
their families. The committee strongly supported initiatives 
that ensure our active duty personnel and their families 
receive quality healthcare, and initiatives that begin to 
fulfill our commitment to military retirees. These initiatives 
include accelerating improvements in TRICARE, expanding TRICARE 
benefits to families of military personnel serving in the 
remote locations, increasing access to health care and 
providing pharmacy benefits for military retirees, and 
expanding the longstanding cooperative relationship between the 
DOD and the Department of Veterans' Affairs.
    Last year, NATO conducted its first large-scale, offensive 
military operation with the 78-day air war on behalf of Kosovo. 
The lessons learned from that operation, addressed during a 
series of committee hearings, highlighted not only shortfalls 
in weapon systems and intelligence programs, but also the 
complexities of engaging in coalition operations. As noted in 
the combined testimony of Operation Allied Force commanders, 
General Wesley Clark, Admiral James Ellis, and Lieutenant 
General Michael Short, the campaign ``. . . required (that) we 
adapt (U.S.) military doctrine and strategy to strike a balance 
between maintaining allied cohesion, striking key elements of 
the Yugoslav armed forces, minimizing losses of allied 
aircraft, and maintaining collateral damage.'' Of paramount 
concern to the committee was applying the lessons learned from 
the air campaign over Kosovo to ensure the future preparedness 
of the U.S. armed forces. The committee added funding above the 
amount requested to address some of the most essential lessons 
learned from Kosovo.
    Over 38,000 combat sorties were conducted during the Kosovo 
air campaign with no combat casualties. While the committee 
understands that no military operation is without risk, 
limiting the risk to military personnel is clearly an important 
goal. Every day, advances in technologies such as computing and 
telecommunications are being integrated into warfighting 
equipment.
    The committee believes that the Defense Department must 
further pursue these technological advances in an effort to 
provide advanced warfighting capabilities, while at the same 
time limiting the risk to military personnel. To this end, the 
committee directed the DOD to aggressively develop and field 
unmanned combat systems in the air and on the ground so that 
within 10 years, one-third of our operational deep strike 
aircraft would be unmanned, and within 15 years, one-third of 
our ground combat vehicles would be unmanned. The committee has 
provided an additional $200.0 million for this initiative.

Personnel

    This year the Personnel Subcommittee focused on some of the 
most pressing issues facing the DOD and the military services. 
Recruiting and retention, pay and compensation, personnel 
tempo, and health care are identified in every survey, poll and 
informal gathering of soldiers, sailors, airmen and Marines as 
the areas that affect decisions on joining or continuing to 
serve in the armed forces. The committee prioritized its 
efforts to address each of these issues.
    When the Cold War ended and the nation began to reduce the 
active forces, it became clear that the pressures caused by the 
reduction in the number of medical personnel and facilities and 
the increase in medical costs made it almost impossible for the 
military health care system to meet its wartime missions, as 
well as fulfill its mission to provide health care to the 
families of active duty personnel and retired personnel and 
their families. As a result, in 1993 Congress directed the DOD 
to take the bold step of implementing a nationwide managed care 
system in which the DOD partnered with the private sector to 
deliver health care. This system, known as TRICARE, is 
struggling with implementation problems. The committee devoted 
a significant amount of time and effort to examining TRICARE 
and determining how that system might be improved and made more 
efficient and effective.
    On February 23, 2000, a bipartisan group of Senators 
introduced S. 2087, the Military Health Care Improvement Act of 
2000, to address the most urgent medical needs of our active 
duty and retired personnel and their families. In addition to 
providing for improvements in the TRICARE program, this bill 
would provide, for the first time, an entitlement to military 
health care for Medicare-eligible military retirees and their 
families. The most significant benefit of this bill is a 
pharmacy benefit for Medicare-eligible military retirees. The 
committee has determined that access to prescription drugs is 
the single most critical unmet need of Medicare-eligible 
military retirees.
    The committee has incorporated the provisions of S. 2087 
and additional initiatives in this bill. The committee views 
this as only the first step toward providing a comprehensive 
health care benefit to all military health care system 
beneficiaries, including those who are Medicare-eligible.
    The Personnel Subcommittee has made recruiting and 
retention a priority for each of the past three years. Despite 
efforts on behalf of recruiters, military leaders, the Office 
of the Secretary of Defense and the Congress, the disturbing 
trends of declining numbers and missed goals in both recruiting 
and retention continue.
    While last year's legislative initiatives have slowed the 
decline, more needs to be done if we are to recruit and retain 
quality personnel to defend the nation's vital interests around 
the world. Once these young men and women have been trained in 
their military skills, it is essential that the services retain 
these developing military leaders so that we can benefit from 
their experience and use their abilities to train those 
recruits who will follow.
    The committee recognizes that if the services cannot man 
the force with qualified, well-trained personnel, readiness 
will continue to suffer. The committee believes that the 
proposals, resources and policies recommended in this bill will 
assist the military services in recruiting and retaining the 
numbers of quality personnel required to meet the national 
military strategy.

Readiness and Management Support

    Aging equipment, spare parts shortfalls, manning and 
experience gaps continue to manifest themselves in terms of 
declining mission capable rates and decreasing unit readiness 
ratings. According to the DOD Quarterly Readiness Report to the 
Congress, October through December 1999, ``. . . the pace of 
contingency operations continues to stress the readiness of 
certain segments of the force.'' Most troubling are indications 
that problems are emerging in the readiness of forward deployed 
and first-to-fight units.
    During the past year, the committee focused on the 
readiness of the armed forces to meet the challenges of today 
while preparing for those of tomorrow. Maintaining a ready 
force is particularly difficult if military personnel are not 
provided with sufficient opportunities to receive the training 
necessary to perform their difficult missions. The committee 
notes the prohibition of live-fire training by Atlantic fleet 
units at Vieques is resulting in significant degradation of 
unitreadiness. Ensuring that our armed forces receive the 
necessary training to make certain they have safe and successful 
deployments continues to be one of the committee's highest priorities.
    The committee is also concerned with continuing reports of 
readiness problem as a result of the declining materiel 
condition of military equipment, primarily due to shortfalls in 
spare parts and increasing equipment age. The committee added 
significant resources to the defense budget in previous fiscal 
years to ensure that the current inventory of equipment was 
adequately maintained until the modernization programs could 
provide sufficient replacements. Unfortunately, with the pace 
of operations continuing to place strains on both maintenance 
personnel and supply availability, the increased funding has 
not prevented declines in materiel condition.

Military construction

    Although the overall DOD request for fiscal year 2001 is 
more than $11.0 billion higher than the previous year, neither 
military construction nor family housing construction 
benefitted from this increase. In fact, the military 
construction and family housing Request is $400.0 million less 
than the administration's fiscal year 2000 incrementally funded 
military construction program, and $500.0 million less than the 
amount authorized in fiscal year 2000.
    One noteworthy shortfall is that the budget request for 
fiscal year 2001 did not include construction contingency funds 
which are critical to correct design flaws or unforseen 
construction problems. In testimony before the Subcommittee on 
Readiness and Management Support, service officials stated that 
the elimination of the $128.0 million for contingency 
construction will cause significant difficulty in executing 
construction programs.
    The committee is deeply disturbed that for two consecutive 
years the Department has used budgetary gimmicks in funding the 
military construction program. The committee urges the 
Department to refrain from such practices in future years.
    To correct the deficiencies in the budget request, the 
committee recommends an increase of $430.0 million for military 
construction. The focus of the additional funding is on quality 
of life projects and on critical projects for the reserve 
components, whose construction programs continue to be 
underfunded. In addition, the committee did include contingency 
construction funding for each project the committee added.

Emerging Threats and Capabilities

    The Subcommittee on Emerging Threats and Capabilities 
continued to provide an effective forum for highlighting such 
issues as the threat posed by the proliferation of nuclear, 
chemical and biological weapons, the ever increasing danger of 
terrorist attacks both in the United States and overseas, the 
impact of narco-trafficking on U.S. national security and 
regional stability, and the growing threat cyber-attacks on the 
military's critical information infrastructure. The committee 
continued its review and assessment of the Department's ability 
to respond to these threats. The committee believes it is of 
the utmost importance that the Department prepare for these and 
other emerging threats through robust investments in technology 
and exploration of new warfighting concepts.
    Unfortunately, the terrorist threat to our citizens and 
service members--both at home and abroad--shows no signs of 
diminishing. During the weeks leading up to the millennium 
celebrations, numerous individuals suspected of planning 
terrorist attacks directed against U.S. citizens were arrested 
in the United States and abroad. With the proliferation of 
weapons of mass destruction, the threat of a terrorist attack 
with a chemical, biological or nuclear weapon is increasing at 
an alarming rate. We, as a nation, must be prepared.
    This committee will continue to play a leading role in 
ensuring that the DOD is adequately funded and structured to 
perform its critical role in the overall U.S. government's 
efforts to combat terrorism. Last year, the committee conducted 
a comprehensive review of the Defense Department's activities 
to combat terrorism, with the goal of making the Department's 
efforts in this critical area more visible and better 
organized; and of increasing the capabilities of DOD assets to 
assist in the event of a terrorist attack on U.S. soil 
involving the use of a weapon of mass destruction.
    This year, the committee has taken action to build on last 
year's efforts by assigning overall policy and budgeting 
oversight of the DOD activities for combating terrorism to the 
assistant secretary of defense for special operations and low-
intensity conflict; and by adding funding for the establishment 
of five new Weapons of Mass Destruction Civil Support Teams to 
bring the total number of such teams to 32 by the end of fiscal 
year 2001.
    During the post-Cold War decade, the U.S. government has 
spent over $4.7 billion in the former Soviet Union to reduce 
the threat posed by the possible proliferation of weapons of 
mass destruction, weapons-usable nuclear materials, and 
scientific expertise. After nearly a decade of working in 
Russia and the other states of the former Soviet Union on this 
effort, the committee believes it is important to review what 
these programs have achieved. The committee is concerned that 
for the significant investment made in some areas, the return 
in terms of reducing the threat has been relatively small. For 
example, the General Accounting Office (GAO) found that $481.2 
million has been spent since fiscal year 1993 on a program 
designed to secure weapons-usable nuclear material in Russia 
and the states of the former Soviet Union, but only seven 
percent of the total nuclear material identified as being at 
risk has been secured. The committee is troubled by the 
progress achieved in light of this significant investment.
    In March 2000, the GAO testified that the costs associated 
with achieving threat reduction will continue to remain high 
due to Russia's inability to pay its share of the costs of 
these programs, Russia's reluctance to provide the United 
States with needed access to its sensitive facilities, and 
expanding program budget requirements. The committee recommends 
several initiatives to obtain greater Russian commitment and 
necessary access so that the programs will have a greater 
chance of attaining their intended threat reduction objectives.
    In the area of chemical and biological warfare defense, the 
committee notes that the Department has continued to maintain 
steady increases in funding since fiscal year 1996. The 
committee is concerned, however, that the Department's efforts 
to focus on the acquisition of the anthrax vaccine may be 
taking an inordinate amount of personnel and financial 
resources from other critical elements of the chem-bio defense 
program. While the Department's fiscal year 2001 request 
represents a nearly 20 percent increase for procurement of 
chemical and biological defense equipment and programs, a 
significant portion of this increase is to address issues 
associated with the anthrax vaccine acquisition program. The 
committee is concerned with the risks associated with 
continuing to support the current Anthrax acquisition strategy, 
and believes that the Department should develop an alternative 
plan to ensure that a vaccine will be available to meet ongoing 
and future requirements.
    In the year since the Subcommittee on Emerging Threats and 
Capabilities was created, cyber threats to the United States, 
including the DOD, have increased dramatically. During the 
subcommittee's March 1, 2000 hearing on cyber-security, the DOD 
reported that computer attacks on Defense Department systems 
increased from under 6,000 in 1998 to over 22,000 in 1999. 
There is every indication that this trend will continue.
    The committee remains concerned that many important 
information assurance programs designed to protect against such 
cyber-attacks, remain underfunded by the DOD. At the March 1, 
2000, subcommittee hearing, witnesses from the Department once 
again confirmed that such funding shortfalls remain 
significant, and presented a list of almost $500.0 million in 
unfunded requirements in this area.
    Due to the expanding nature of the cyber threat, the 
committee recommends increased funding for important 
information assurance initiatives. In particular, the committee 
recommends initiatives in the area of information assurance 
training and education. The committee agrees with the 
conclusion contained in the National Plan for Information 
Systems Protection, which was released by the White House in 
January, that ``. . . within the Federal Government, the lack 
of skilled information systems security personnel amounts to a 
crisis.'' The committee also recommends funding increases to 
support information assurance research and development, and 
procurement of critical information assurance tools and 
detection devices.
    The committee continued its examination of joint 
experimentation and the prudent transformation of our armed 
forces to defend against current and future threats to our 
national security. While encouraged by the progress made by 
U.S. Joint Forces Command in the area of joint experimentation 
since its activation with an expanded charter on October 1, 
1999, the committee is concerned with the slow pace of robust 
experimentation, noting that the first true joint field 
experiment is not scheduled until 2004. Additionally, the 
committee is concerned that there is not yet an 
institutionalized process to rapidly integrate lessons learned 
into the overall service and defense-wide requirements process. 
During a hearing before the subcommittee on April 4, 2000, the 
Vice Chairman, Joint Chiefs of Staff, indicated that a review 
was underway to revise and strengthen this joint requirements 
process. At that same hearing, the Commander-in-Chief, U.S. 
Joint Forces Command expressed interest in accelerating the 
pace of joint experimentation. These are welcome developments 
which the committee will follow closely.
    It is a priority of the committee to maintain a strong, 
stable investment in science and technology in order to develop 
superior technology that will permit the United States to 
maintain its current military advantages, provide flexible 
options to future warfighters, and hedge against technological 
surprise. The military dimensions of the next century are 
likely to be so different from those on which the current force 
was built that an evolutionary approach--based on correcting 
near-term deficiencies--will not be sufficient to meet the need 
for change. We must ensure that our ongoing efforts to maintain 
current advantages in capability are complemented with bold 
action that can effect the true transformation required for the 
21st Century force. For that reason, the committee has added 
approximately $200.0 million to the defense science and 
technology (S&T) program.
    It has been an on-going concern that the current S&T 
planning process appears to focus on the ``micro'' issue of 
ensuring that individual projects address legitimate 
warfighting needs, rather than on the ``macro'' issue of 
prioritizing those needs and ensuring that sufficient S&T 
funding is made available to meet them. Both the Army and the 
Navy took ambitious steps this year to address that shortcoming 
in the S&T planning process by prioritizing their own needs on 
a ``macro'' basis, and realigning S&T funding to match new 
priorities.
    The Air Force does not appear to have undertaken any 
comparable planning effort. The committee remains concerned 
with the serious decline in the Air Force technology investment 
and the lack of support for science and technology within the 
Air Force leadership. Critical investment decisions are being 
made based on numbers rather than need. Therefore, the 
committee recommends a provision which requires the Secretary 
of the Air Force to conduct a thorough review of the S&T 
program and to certify to Congress that the plans provided and 
the investments planned will meet their objectives for air and 
space superiority in the 21st Century and beyond.

Airland

    The Airland Subcommittee focused on the impact of 
inadequate modernization accounts, testing and evaluation 
activities associated with developmental efforts, the Army 
transformation initiative and the status of tactical aviation 
programs.
    The committee has conducted an in-depth analysis of the 
Army transformation initiative that was announced last fall. 
The committee advocates transformation and recognizes that 
heavy forces within the Army are difficult to deploy in support 
of the National Military Strategy. The Army Chief of Staff has 
challenged the status quo within the Army and initiated a 
process to transform the Army into a more lethal, lightweight, 
strategically relevant and deployable force that will be better 
suited to meet future defense challenges. While the committee 
has expressed support for the transformation initiative, the 
committee is concerned about the Army's ability to develop the 
objective force and field an interim force capability. The 
committee has particular concerns about the operational 
capabilities of the interim force and the Army's acquisition 
strategy.
    Given no significant change in projected Army modernization 
resources from the DOD, the committee is concerned that the 
Army will not have adequate resources to recapitalize the 
existing legacy force to maintain operational readiness, field 
an interim force capability, and conduct a robust research and 
development effort designed to lead to the objective force in 
fiscal year 2012. The committee believes the Army vision should 
more heavily focus on efforts for the objective force. Near-
term interim forces can provide an operational capability 
available to respond to contingency operations while at the 
same time provide insights into future force requirements. The 
committee believes that least cost alternatives, including 
light, armored vehicles currently available within the Army, 
should be primarily considered in efforts to fill an interim 
force.
    In response to last year's congressional direction, the 
Army issued revised aviation and armor system modernization 
plans in which significant steps have been taken to address 
long standing deficiencies in service modernization programs. 
While the committee remains concerned about the ability of 
future budgets to support these revised plans, the Army is 
commended for ensuring that these plans more adequately reflect 
the broad range of requirements that exist across the force.
    The committee also focused on a range of tactical aviation 
issues. The budget request included almost $8.0 billion for 
continued development and procurement of the three new tactical 
fighter aircraft: the F/A-18E/F Super Hornet, the F-22 Raptor, 
and the Joint Strike Fighter (JSF). The committee remains 
concerned about the overall affordability of these systems 
against the backdrop of increasing average aircraft age, 
required modifications of legacy aircraft, and precision guided 
weapon inventory shortages. Particular tactical aviation issues 
examined by the committee included: F/A-18E/F upgrade funding; 
F-22 flight test hours and the adequacy of test content; and, 
JSF validation, program cost growth, and technical challenges.
    The lessons learned from the Kosovo conflict presented 
additional concerns that the committee addressed. In Kosovo 
after-action reviews, the committee repeatedly heard concerns 
expressed about low-density, high-demand weapon systems and 
platforms. Commanders reported having to conserve certain 
precision weapon systems to prevent depletion. Tactical 
electronic attack assets were seriously overtasked, as were 
intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance (ISR) assets. The 
committee added over $700.0 million for programs supporting 
aircraft precision strike capability, aircraft survivability, 
and ISR assets.
    The committee continues to be concerned about the impact 
that inadequate modernization funding will have on our ability 
to modernize our forces. Significant levels of unfunded 
requirements, as identified by the service chiefs, suggest that 
significant modernization shortfalls are likely to continue.

Seapower

    The committee continued its focus on reviewing the adequacy 
of Navy and Marine Corps force structure and strategic lift to 
carry out the National Security Strategy, and the ability 
ofNavy and Marine Corps programs to support new operational concepts to 
influence events ashore, and from the sea.
    Operational commanders presented compelling testimony to 
the subcommittee that indicated that their commands do not have 
enough ships and aircraft to shape the international 
environment and respond to crises within the required time 
frame. As stated by the Commander, U.S. Second Fleet, even with 
the current level of 316 ships, there ``. . . are not enough 
resources to meet demands, and the cost of doing business is 
being borne increasingly by our sailors.'' The commanding 
general of the 2nd Marine Expeditionary Force and the director 
of operations and logistics of the U.S. Transportation Command 
described similar impacts on the Marines and airmen in their 
command.
    Operational commanders also pointed out that aging 
equipment translates into both operational and fiscal costs. 
Maintenance personnel routinely work long hours on shifts and 
into the weekends to keep equipment operational. This testimony 
was consistent with information gathered by the committee 
during visits to fleet units.
    The Congressional Research Service testified before the 
subcommittee that the Navy requires a $12.0 billion annual ship 
construction budget, commencing in fiscal year 2001, to build 
an average of 8.6 ships per year to maintain a Navy force 
structure of at least 300 ships. While the Navy acquisition and 
requirements witnesses agreed with this assessment, the ship 
construction budget for fiscal year 2001 is only $11.7 billion 
and is projected to decrease in the outyears. In an effort to 
provide a long-term look at shipbuilding requirements and 
plans, the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 
2000 directed the Secretary of Defense to deliver a long-range 
shipbuilding report to the Congress no later than February 1, 
2000. Unfortunately, that report has yet to be provided.
    The Transportation Command testified before the 
subcommittee that C-17 strategic lift aircraft procurement and 
C-5 strategic lift aircraft reliability were the two highest 
Transportation Command priorities, and that the Transportation 
Command has been unable to respond to all of the requests for 
strategic airlift support.
    In addition to these findings, information obtained by the 
committee during the course of its deliberations revealed the 
following:
    (1) the present Navy force structure of 316 ships is not 
sufficient to carry out the National Security Strategy, and the 
shipbuilding plan of 39 ships planned in the Future Years 
Defense Program is insufficient to recapitalize the fleet;
    (2) changing the DDG-51 acquisition strategy from three to 
two ships per year is inconsistent with the Navy's previous 
industrial base studies, and counter to the emphasis on 
procurement efficiency and smart business decisions that save 
taxpayer dollars;
    (3) the DD-21 destroyer is the key enabler to providing the 
Marine Corps fire support from the sea, and DD-21 will 
accomplish that mission at lower acquisition and operating 
costs compared to other destroyers;
    (4) the Joint Chiefs of Staff study on attack submarine 
force structure states that the requirement for submarines may 
be significantly more than the 1997 Quadrenniel Defense Review 
level of 50 submarines;
    (5) Marine Corps operational concepts require the 
capabilities included in new platforms, such as the LPD-17, 
LHD, and DD-21 ship classes and the performance of new 
equipment, such as the Advanced Amphibious Assault 
Vehicle(AAAV), the Landing Craft Air Cushion (LCAC), the V-22 
Tiltrotor aircraft, and night vision and thermal imaging 
devices; and
    (6) within ten years there will be insufficient helicopters 
to support the operational requirements of destroyers, aircraft 
carriers, mine warfare, and replenishment ships.
    Versatility continues to be the hallmark of the Navy and 
Marine Corps. This year, maritime forces were moved rapidly 
between the Mediterranean Sea and the Persian Gulf for 
operations that ranged from war and peacekeeping in Kosovo to 
humanitarian relief for earthquake victims in Turkey.
    The committee concluded that our Navy and Marine Corps 
forces are an inherently forward-deployed, combat credible, 
expeditionary force engaged in daily, round-the-clock 
operations to influence the world's security environment and 
support world-wide U.S. national security interests. The 
committee notes that in the 84 months that ended in September 
1999, the Navy participated in 80 contingency operations around 
the world.
    While there are insufficient funds to address all of the 
fiscal year 2001 unfunded requirements identified by the 
service chiefs, the committee will continue to support efforts 
to identify, prioritize and take action within the constraints 
of the budget to fund the deficiencies identified by the Navy 
and Marine Corps. The committee will continue to highlight the 
risks associated with the budget constraints, and the resulting 
impact on the ability of our men and women of the armed forces 
to carry out their duties.

Strategic

    The Strategic Subcommittee continued to review the adequacy 
of programs and policies in the following areas: (1) ballistic 
and cruise missile defense; (2) national security space; (3) 
strategic nuclear delivery systems; (4) military intelligence; 
and (5) Department of Energy (DOE) activities regarding the 
nuclear weapons stockpile, nuclear waste cleanup, and other 
defense activities.
    On February 28, 2000, the Strategic Subcommittee held a 
hearing on national and theater missile defense programs. Based 
on this hearing, the committee concluded that the DOD continues 
to pursue a funding-constrained ballistic missile defense (BMD) 
program. Although the committee is pleased by Department's 
decision to substantially increase funding for the National 
Missile Defense (NMD) program, the Strategic Subcommittee found 
that all of the Ballistic Missile Defense Organization's major 
defense acquisition programs remain underfunded. The committee 
recommends substantial increases in funding for ballistic 
missile defense programs and technologies, including the NMD 
program for risk reduction.
    On March 8, 2000, the Strategic Subcommittee held a hearing 
on national security space issues. The committee identified a 
number of areas in which budget constraints have caused DOD to 
insufficiently fund key space programs and technologies. The 
committee also identified key areas of space technology 
development that require additional support, as addressed in 
detail elsewhere in this report.
    One of the key findings of the Kosovo after-action reviews 
was that intelligence processing and dissemination does not 
always meet the requirements of warfighting forces. The 
committee has initiated efforts to provide funding and other 
assistance to ensure that relevant intelligence products are 
provided to military forces in a timely manner. In particular, 
the committee recommends funding increases for the National 
Imagery and Mapping Agency to improve the imagery tasking, 
processing, exploitation and dissemination process.

Department of Energy National Security Programs

    The committee has responsibility for oversight and 
authorization of over two-thirds of the Department of Energy's 
budget, including the National Nuclear Security Administration; 
weapons activities; defense environmental management; other 
defense activities; and defense nuclear waste disposal. The 
committee also authorizes funds for the Defense Nuclear 
Facility Safety Board, an independent agency responsible for 
external oversight of safety at DOE defense nuclear facilities.
    The committee held the first congressional hearing to 
assess the programs of the newly-established National Nuclear 
Security Administration (NNSA). The committee identified a 
number of critical issues that must be addressed by the 
Congress, the Secretary of Energy, and the new NNSA 
administrator. The committee notes that the Secretary of Energy 
has failed to fully comply with the National Nuclear Security 
Administration Act,which was signed into law by the President 
as part of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2000 
(Pubic Law 106-65).
    In the area of weapons activities, the committee remains 
concerned that the Department has not prepared the long-term 
program or funding plan for the stockpile stewardship and 
management program, as directed last year by Congress. The 
committee notes that the DOD provides a FYDP plan to Congress 
each year with the annual budget request. The committee 
believes that DOE should provide comparable budgetary 
information to Congress.
    The committee is concerned with the speculative nature of 
the science-based stockpile stewardship program. The committee 
received testimony from the three weapons laboratory directors 
that it may be as long as 15 years before the DOE stockpile 
stewardship program can be evaluated as an acceptable 
substitute for underground nuclear testing.
    The committee remains concerned that the Department is 
moving too slowly in re-establishing pit manufacturing and 
tritium production capabilities. The committee further notes 
that the Department has not established any long-term 
requirements or plans for modernization of its aging weapon 
production plants.
    In the area of environmental management, the DOE continues 
to make progress in focusing its resources on closure of a 
limited number of sites and facilities. However, the committee 
remains concerned that the request for science and technology 
development continues to decline, despite the Department's 
increased reliance on the application of innovative 
technologies at cleanup sites. The committee notes that the 
fiscal year 2001 request for technology development is the 
lowest in over eight years. The committee believes that a 
vigorous research and development program must be maintained if 
the Department is to meet its accelerated cleanup and closure 
goals.
    The committee remains deeply concerned with proposals to 
establish a new, external regulation regime for DOE defense 
nuclear facilities. The committee does not support such 
efforts. The committee notes that the only DOE defense facility 
to be placed under regulation by the Nuclear Regulatory 
Commission (NRC) required almost $500.0 million and three years 
to establish a new licencing process. The committee believes 
that placing additional DOE facilities under NRC regulation 
would not be beneficial or cost-effective. Such moves would 
waste scarce cleanup funds and jeopardize the pace of cleanup 
at DOE facilities. The committee believes that the Defense 
Nuclear Facilities Safety Board (DNFSB) continues to provide 
comparable, independent safety oversight for all DOE defense 
nuclear facilities with an annual budget of less than $20.0 
million a year.

Explanation of funding summary

    The administration's budget request for the national 
defense function of the federal budget for fiscal year 2001 was 
$305.3 billion, of which $305.3 billion was for programs that 
require specific funding authorization.
    The following table summarizes both the direct 
authorizations and equivalent budget authority levels for 
fiscal year 2001 defense programs. The columns relating to the 
authorization request do not include funding for the following 
items: military personnel funding; military construction 
authorizations provided in prior years; and other small 
portions of the defense budget that are not within the 
jurisdiction of this committee or that do not require an annual 
authorization. As explained above, funding for military 
personnel is included in the amounts authorized by the 
committee, but not in the total funding requested for 
authorization.
    Funding for all programs in the national defense function 
is reflected in the columns related to the budget authority 
request and the total budget authority implication of the 
authorizations in this bill. The committee recommends funding 
for national defense programs totaling $309.8 billion in budget 
authority, which is consistent with the fiscal year 2001 budget 
resolution.


            DIVISION A--DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE AUTHORIZATIONS

                          TITLE I--PROCUREMENT

Explanation of tables
    The tables in this title display items requested by the 
administration for fiscal year 2001 for which the committee 
either increased or decreased the requested amounts. As in the 
past, the administration may not exceed the amounts approved by 
the committee (as set forth in the tables or, if unchanged from 
the administration request, as set forth in the Department of 
Defense's budget justification documents) without a 
reprogramming action in accordance with established procedures. 
Unless noted explicitly in the report, all changes are made 
without prejudice.


Chemical demilitarization program (sec. 107)
    The committee recommends a provision that would provide 
funding for chemical demilitarization in a Department of 
Defense (DOD) budget line. The budget request for the Army 
included $1.0 billion for the Chemical Agents and Munitions 
Destruction (CAMD) Program: $607.2 million for operations and 
maintenance; $121.9 million for procurement; and $274.4 million 
for research and development.
    Section 1521(f) of title 50, United States Code, states 
that funds for this program shall not be included in the budget 
accounts for any military department, but shall be set forth in 
the budget of the DOD as a separate account. The committee is 
concerned that funds for this program continue to be included 
in the Army budget accounts, despite the clear and direct 
statutory requirement to the contrary. Funding for this program 
should not be balanced against Army modernization plans or 
funding of continued military operations in the Balkans.


Multiyear procurement authority for certain Army and Navy programs 
        (sec. 111)

    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
the Army to enter into multiyear procurement contracts for the 
Bradley A3 Infantry Fighting Vehicle, the UH-60L Blackhawk 
helicopter, and the CH-60S Seahawk helicopter. For the Bradley 
A3 Infantry Fighting Vehicle, the multiyear procurement 
authority is for a period not to exceed three years, beginning 
in fiscal year 2001. The committee notes the Army is scheduled 
to complete the initial operational test and evaluation (IOT&E) 
of the Bradley A3, and a subsequent milestone III review in the 
fourth quarter of fiscal year 2000. The committee expects the 
Secretary of the Army to ensure that the Army successfully 
completes the IOT&E and milestone III review prior to awarding 
the multiyear contract.

Army transformation (sec. 112)

    The committee recommends a provision that would require the 
Secretary of the Army to provide a report on the objective 
force process, that describes the following:
          (1) operational environments envisioned for the 
        objective force;
          (2) threat assumptions for objective force research 
        and development efforts;
          (3) potential operational and organizational concepts 
        for the objective force;
          (4) anticipated Key Performance Parameters (KPPs) and 
        emerging requirements that will ultimately be reflected 
        in a future operational requirements document (ORD) for 
        the objective force;
          (5) program schedule and projected research and 
        development and procurement funding required to support 
        proposed transformation activities through fiscal year 
        2012, and identification of specific adjustments made 
        to Army programs in both the Future Years Defense 
        Program (FYDP) and extended planning program to fund 
        the transformation initiative and summarize anticipated 
        investments by the Defense Advanced Research Projects 
        Agency in programs designed to lead to the fielding of 
        a future combat system;
          (6) joint warfighting requirements that will be 
        supported by the fielding of the objective force, 
        including a description of planned adjustments to war 
        plans of the regional commanders in chief;
          (7) changes to current strategic and tactical lift 
        requirements resulting from the creation and fielding 
        of objective forces; and
          (8) the evaluation process that will support future 
        decisions on the course of the transformation 
        initiative leading to the objective force, including a 
        description of operational evaluations and 
        experimentation that will be used to validate the KPPs 
        and ORD requirements associated with objective forces.
In addition, the committee has recommended additional funding, 
described elsewhere in this report, to support near-term 
acceleration of the future combat system research and 
development effort.
    The Army has begun an effort to transform itself to meet 
the new security challenges that the nation faces today. The 
committee agrees that the Army needs to transform into a 
lighter, more lethal, survivable and tactically mobile force. 
The committee believes that the Army must begin the 
transformation process and applauds the recognition that the 
force must be better positioned to meet the significant defense 
challenges in an uncertain and troubling future. It is clear 
that these challenges will require our armed services to think 
and act differently than in the past. The committee recognizes 
that the Army must be able to provide a mix of light, medium, 
and heavy forces. Future intervention scenarios will call for 
different capabilities, requiring that the Army be able to 
respond to a variety of national security missions, including 
mechanized warfare, defense of humanitarian sanctuaries, and 
peace enforcement.
    The committee has a long history of supporting Army efforts 
to transform itself through the advanced warfighting experiment 
(AWE) process, the Army after next (AAN) activity, and the 
digitization initiative. The committee has also supported Army 
modernization activities that the Army later decided to 
terminate, including the armored gun system (AGS), liquid 
propellant technology for Crusader, Wolverine, Grizzly, Command 
and Control Vehicle, Prophet Air, Stinger Block II, and Army 
Tactical Missile System Block IIA.
    The committee realizes that the Army has had several false 
starts and traveled up several ``blind alleys'' in pursuit of 
reforms since the end of the Cold War. The Chief of Staff of 
the Army also realizes that many previous ``reforms'' have only 
lasted as long as the tenure of the proponent Army Chief of 
Staff. He has said that he wants to achieve ``irreversible 
momentum for change'' so that the Army will continue on a path 
to the new objective force even after his tenure as Chief of 
Staff.
    The committee commends the Chief of Staff for the actions 
he has taken to begin to transform the Army into a force more 
relevant to the diverse defense challenges of the new 
millennium. To achieve these reforms, the Army will have to 
implement innovative changes to force structure, modernization 
plans, and spending priorities.
    The committee wants to support the Army's current efforts 
to achieve ``irreversible momentum for change,'' but the 
committee wants to ensure this momentum is along the proper 
path, not another ``blind alley.'' The best way to ensure that 
a transformation process will be reversed by future Army 
leadership is to start down the wrong path.
    The committee strongly agrees with recommendations from a 
fiscal year 1999 Army Science Board Summer Study report on 
Enabling Rapid and Decisive Strategic Maneuver for The Army 
Beyond 2010, which included the following recommendations that:
          (1) Training and Doctrine Command (TRADOC) experiment 
        with alternative, available equipment and recommend, 
        within 12 months, needed procurements;
          (2) TRADOC and XVIII Airborne Corps develop split-
        based support options, to include necessary 
        organizational redesign;
          (3) The Army conduct an expeditionary experiment 
        (possibly Joint Contingency Force AWE) and examine 
        within 24 months improvements in early entry deployment 
        and capability; and
          (4) TRADOC examine both traditional platform centric 
        solutions as well as non traditional ``ensemble'' 
        solutions for future combat systems. Army concept 
        experimentation is needed.
    The committee finds the recommendations of the Army Science 
Board compelling.
    The committee believes that the Army's transformation 
process must focus on the objective force, first and foremost. 
However, the committee notes that the current Army plans do not 
adequately address how, or if, the Army Science Board 
recommendations will be implemented.
    The committee, therefore, directs the Army to establish a 
process of operational analysis, experimentation, and platform 
demonstrations that will serve to determine optimum 
organizational structures, equipment types and numbers, and 
operational concepts for the objective force. The committee 
directs that the Army fully integrate this process with the 
joint experimentation activities conducted by the Commander in 
Chief, U.S. Joint Forces Command.
    Consistent with the committee's view that the objective 
force must be preeminent in the planning process, the committee 
believes that the interim capability adjustments that the Army 
is intending to pursue must not displace the attention and 
resources appropriate for the objective force. Army forces 
continue to age precipitously because the Army has not been 
able to afford sufficient modernization to support even the 
current force structure. Absent significant additional 
investment, the situation will only grow worse. The committee 
recognizes that the Army modernization program has not competed 
well for resources within the Department of Defense budget 
process. This fact alone makes it clear that the Army can ill 
afford a major misstep in pursuing the goal of transformation.
    While pursuing the objective force capability, the Army 
must also focus on how it reforms in the mean time. The 
committee notes that there is great merit in Army plans to 
transform one heavy and one light brigade into a medium brigade 
configuration. The Army effort involves fielding interim 
brigade combat teams (IBCT) designed to bridge a perceived 
near-term capability gap. Actions designed to field IBCT's are 
focused on requirements for medium weight forces that are 
strategically deployable with a combat capability that exceeds 
those capabilities provided by existing light forces. The 
committee agrees that such a reconfiguration is necessary to 
provide insights into force structure, equipment, and tactics 
alternatives for full-spectrum operations while optimizing 
these forces for the challenges of peacekeeping.
    In context of very limited resources, however, the 
committee believes that Army cannot afford to establish an 
interim medium force capability when the primary aim is to 
serve as a rotational peacekeeping force. The committee 
believes that an effective evaluation of alternatives and 
review of equipment evaluation data are critical to making 
informed funding decisions. The Army must further define and 
validate interim force operational concepts, force structure, 
equipment requirements, and funding alternatives before making 
acquisition commitments beyond the two brigades described in 
the Chief of Staff's transformation implementation letter. As 
the IBCT effort is clearly designed to provide an interim 
capability, the committee believes that life cycle cost factors 
should be a primary consideration in determining equipment 
solutions for IBCT requirements.
    While the committee understands the established Army goal 
to achieve commonality among medium combat vehicle types and 
the perceived need for momentum, these should not be the 
primary objectives. Principal objectives should include: (1) 
focusing on fielding the objective force; and (2) ensuring that 
interim medium forces are formed based on least-cost 
alternatives that lead to the most combat ready and cost 
effective solution that ensures successful operations in a 
broad range of environments. The committee believes it is 
possible that the Army may already have equipment in the 
inventory that could meet the requirements established for the 
interim force and allow the service to focus more of its 
resources on developing the objective force.
    Current acquisition policy requires the services to first 
explore the potential for existing equipment to meet emerging 
mission requirements. The use of existing equipment could allow 
the Army to avoid expensive new equipment acquisition costs, as 
well as a requirement to establish a new logistical support 
system that would result from the fielding of new equipment. 
The committee recognizes that the Army does not own a mobile 
gun system (MGS) that could meet IBCT requirements. 
Fortunately, the requirement for a MGS is relatively small. The 
committee is concerned, however, that the Army appears to be 
preparing to select a mobile gun system without conducting a 
performance and reliability evaluation of candidate systems.
    Therefore, the committee believes it essential that the 
Army conduct an operational evaluation of alternative systems 
that explores, at a minimum, measures of operational and cost 
effectiveness between medium armored vehicles already in the 
Army inventory compared with any new system selected to meet 
IBCT requirements. The committee recognizes that this 
evaluation will be in addition to actions the Army has already 
identified in the acquisition strategy report for interim 
armored vehicles.
    The committee's recommended provision would also support, 
on a track parallel to the objective force development 
activity, the fielding of three interim brigades through fiscal 
year 2003. This provision would provide guidance on analysis 
required to support the fielding of IBCTs and establish two 
additional reporting requirements for the results of that 
analysis. Moreover, the committee has supported the full budget 
request for the Army's plan to field a new armored vehicle 
family in the IBCTs.
    The first report would be required to describe the Army's 
plans for conducting the side-by-side comparison of existing 
versus new hardware implementations. The provision would 
require that the Secretary of the Army:
          (1) provide a report, no later than February 1, 2001, 
        on plans to conduct an operational analysis of medium 
        armored combat vehicles that will be selected later in 
        fiscal year 2000 to meet IBCT infantry battalion 
        requirements compared with medium armored vehicles 
        currently found in the Army inventory. The assessment 
        will determine cost and operational effectiveness 
        differences between new and existing medium armored 
        combat vehicles, and will be made on a comparative 
        basis with at least one infantry battalion fielded with 
        existing medium armored vehicles similarly structured 
        to IBCT infantry battalions;
          (2) submit the plan to the Director, Operational Test 
        and Evaluation, Office of the Secretary of Defense, for 
        review and comment;
          (3) include the comments of the Director, Operational 
        Test and Evaluation as an attachment to the Army 
        report;
          (4) describe how the results of the operational 
        evaluation will guide future acquisition decisions for 
        additional interim brigade combat team equipment; and
          (5) identify specific adjustments made to Army 
        programs in both the FYDP and extended planning program 
        to fund interim force fielding requirements. The second 
        report would include the Army's analysis of the results 
        of the side-by-side comparisons. This would require that 
        the Secretary of the Army provide the results of the 
        comparative operational analysis to the congressional 
        defense committees no later than March 1, 2002. Additionally, 
        the provision would require that the Secretary of Defense 
        certify that the conclusions of the operational analysis 
        contained in the second report support the Army's proposed
        acquisitions for additional IBCT equipment in fiscal year 
        2003 and beyond.
    The provision would limit obligations of the fiscal year 
2001 funds to 60 percent of the total amount authorized and 
appropriated for the new armored vehicle family until 30 days 
after the date on which the Secretary of the Army submits the 
first report to the congressional defense committees. The 
provision would also limit obligations of the funds for fiscal 
year 2002 funds provided for the fielding of a second IBCT to 
60 percent of the amount authorized and appropriated for the 
new armored vehicle family until 30 days after the date in 
which the Secretary of the Army submits the second report on 
the conclusions of the operational analysis.
    The committee does not intend to impede current Army IBCT 
fielding plans, but believes that the comparative operational 
analysis will serve to strengthen the transformation process 
and might ultimately accelerate the fielding of future brigades 
at lower costs. The Army cannot be confident that what it is 
buying is what it needs, absent normally required testing and 
evaluation. The Army transformation process cannot afford more 
false starts.

                          OTHER ARMY PROGRAMS


                             Army Aircraft


Utility aircraft

    The Army budget request included no funding for fixed-wing, 
medium range, utility aircraft, but these aircraft were 
included on the Army's unfunded priorities list. This aircraft 
is used for small unit movements to remote airfields, and is 
necessary to replace an aging system. The committee recommends 
an increase of $24.3 million for the procurement of three UC-35 
aircraft.

UH-60 Blackhawk

    The budget request included $81.2 million to procure six 
UH-60 Blackhawk helicopters. The committee has watched with 
great interest actions taken to revise an inadequate Army 
aviation modernization plan. While the committee still has 
several outstanding concerns about the overall viability of the 
Army plan, it is pleased to note decisions taken by the Army to 
retire both AH-1 Cobra and UH-1 Huey helicopters as soon as 
practicable. This action will ultimately result in a pure fleet 
of UH-60L Blackhawk helicopters for both active and reserve 
component utility helicopter requirements. These aircraft will 
provide a more capable fleet and support crew rotation 
requirements associated with military operations across the 
spectrum of conflict. The committee understands that the 
difficult decisions taken to address utility helicopter 
requirements have resulted in an increased requirement for UH-
60L Blackhawk aircraft. The committee, therefore, recommends an 
increase of $196.3 million to procure 20 UH-60L aircraft, a 
total authorization of $277.5 million. The committee does not 
support the acquisition of UH-60Q medical evacuation 
helicopters in fiscal year 2001. Current Army plans call for 
the acquisition of these aircraft beginning in fiscal year 
2002. The committee expects the Army to address outstanding UH-
60L Blackhawk requirements in future budget requests.

Longbow

    The budget request included $744.8 million for the 
acquisition of AH-64D Apache Longbow helicopters. The committee 
recognizes the AH-64 Apache helicopter as the most advanced and 
lethal attack helicopter in the world. The committee notes with 
concern that there is a range of known problems associated with 
the AH-64 Apache attack helicopter that have existed for the 
last several years. Program delays in providing for required 
improvements to correct system component deficiencies has, in 
part, resulted in aircraft groundings and serious questions 
about the long-term reliability of these critical aircraft. The 
committee applauds actions taken by the Vice Chief of Staff of 
the Army to thoroughly review and consolidate outstanding 
issues associated with the Apache program and address these 
deficiencies in a corrective action program. The committee 
recognizes that the Army had already identified a significant 
unfunded requirement to provide upgrades to existing critical 
components for fielded aircraft. In light of lessons learned 
from the operation in Kosovo and critical warfighting 
requirements that depend on the future viability of AH-64 
aircraft, the committee believes it is essential to pursue 
immediate action designed to ensure the viability of these 
aircraft. Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of 
$158.0 million to support critical component upgrades, as 
identified in the Army's unfunded requirements list, a total 
authorization of $902.8 million for the Apache Longbow program. 
The committee expects the Army to budget for any additional 
upgrades that may be required after the ongoing program review 
is completed.

Kiowa Warrior

    The budget request included $41.8 million for Kiowa Warrior 
upgrade requirements. The committee strongly supports actions 
intended to improve the nature and scope of training currently 
provided for Army aviators. The committee notes the significant 
action taken by the Army in the recently revised aviation 
modernization plan to address deficiencies in the training base 
associated with the Army aviation center at Fort Rucker, 
Alabama. New Army training plans will provide more flight 
training for new aviators and a corresponding need for 
additional TH-67 training aircraft. These aircraft have been 
identified as a near-term unfunded requirement for the Army. 
The committee supports this effort and recommends an increase 
of $35.0 million to procure 19 TH-67 aircraft, a total 
authorization of $76.8 million for the Kiowa Warrior line.

Avionics support equipment

    The budget request included no funding for avionics support 
equipment. The committee notes an outstanding requirement for 
AN/AVS-6 (ANVIS) helmet mounted night vision devices. The 
committee has consistently supported the capability of the 
armed forces to operate effectively at night and during periods 
of reduced visibility. The committee recommends an increase of 
$13.9 million to procure 1,603 ANVIS devices to meet 
outstanding Army aviation requirements.

Aircrew integrated systems

    The budget request included $3.5 million for aircrew 
integrated system equipment requirements. The committee was 
pleased to note the development of advanced laser eye 
protection (ALEP) visors produced through a Joint Service 
program designed to address battlefield eye protection 
requirements for military aviators. The committee supports this 
effort and believes these visors should be fielded to Army 
aviators as soon as practicable. The committee recommends an 
increase of $5.9 million for aircrew integrated systems, to 
procure 12,640 ALEP visors, a total authorization of $9.4 
million.

                              Army Missile


Army tactical missile system-system summary

    The budget request included $15.0 million for Army tactical 
missile system (ATACMS) fielding and production line shutdown. 
The committee notes a critical unfunded requirement for 
additional ATACMS block IA missiles necessary to meet the 
Armyacquisition objective. Additionally, the Chairman of the Joint 
Chiefs of Staff has identified a requirement for additional ATACMS 
block IA missiles on the unfunded requirements list. Therefore, the 
committee recommends an increase of $77.4 million to procure 100 ATACMS 
block IA missiles necessary to meet war reserve, a total authorization 
of $92.4 million.

Stinger modifications

    The budget request included $21.8 million for Stinger 
missile modifications. The committee notes an outstanding 
requirement for additional Stinger block I missile 
modifications necessary to meet Force Package 3 and 4 fielding 
requirements. These block I missiles have improved performance 
against advanced countermeasures and improved the accuracy of 
the Stinger system. The committee recommends an increase of 
$15.2 million to procure 651 Stinger block I missiles, a total 
authorization of $37.0 million.

                  Weapons and Tracked Combat Vehicles


Carrier modifications

    The budget request included $45.1 million for M113 armored 
personnel carrier modifications. The committee notes the Army 
has over 17,000 M113 armored personnel carriers in the 
inventory today. The M113 has been in Army combat units for 
decades and requires upgrades necessary to improve mobility, 
reliability, and survivability. As these vehicles represent 
almost one-half of the tracked combat vehicle fleet, it is 
critical that they be upgraded as soon as practicable. The 
committee recommends an increase of $50.0 million to modify 227 
vehicles, a total authorization of $95.1 million.

Breacher system modification

    The budget request included no funding for the Grizzly (M1 
Breacher) system. The committee believes that critical mobility 
systems like the Grizzly armored engineer vehicle must be 
continued to correct critical operational shortfalls for 
deployed forces. Operations in Iraq, Somalia, and Bosnia 
continue to highlight the critical need for combat engineer 
equipment necessary to clear obstacles and support maneuver 
forces. The ability of our fast-moving M-1 Abrams tanks and M-2 
Bradley fighting vehicles to operate successfully on the 
battlefield is dependant on the ability of these vehicles to 
maintain their momentum and speed of maneuver. Finally, the 
committee notes that a request for funds necessary to restore 
this program was one of the top Army unfunded requirements for 
fiscal year 2001. Therefore, the committee recommends an 
increase of $108.0 million to restore the Grizzly program. The 
committee expects the Army to ensure that this program is 
funded in future budget requests.

Heavy assault bridge system modifications

    The budget request included no funding for the heavy 
assault bridge system modifications. The committee has noted 
with great concern decisions that terminated the effort to 
field the Wolverine heavy assault bridge. One of the major 
tenets of combat for our forces is movement at a rapid pace to 
ensure a decisive engagement that will result in the defeat of 
enemy forces. The Wolverine heavy assault bridge is a critical 
element on the battlefield to ensure the mobility of our 
forces. The committee believes that this program should be 
restored and that the armored vehicle launch bridge (AVLB) 
service life extension program (SLEP) effort should be 
terminated. Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of 
$77.0 million to restore the Wolverine heavy assault bridge 
program and a corresponding decrease of $15.2 million to the 
AVLB SLEP program. The committee expects the Army to ensure 
that this program is funded in future budget requests.

Machine gun, squad automatic weapon

    The budget request included no funding for the squad 
automatic weapon (SAW). The committee notes an outstanding 
requirement for an additional 4,280 weapons necessary to meet 
the Army procurement objective. Therefore, the committee 
recommends an increase of $18.3 million to procure 4,280 
weapons and complete the acquisition of the SAW system, a total 
authorization of $18.3 million.

Mark-19 grenade launcher

    The budget request included $11.8 million for Mark-19 
grenade launchers. The committee notes an outstanding 
requirement for additional Mark-19 systems necessary to avoid a 
break in production prior to acquiring the total number of 
systems necessary to meet the acquisition objective. The 
committee recommends an increase of $8.1 million to procure 386 
Mark-19 systems and avoid a break in production, a total 
authorization of $19.9 million.

M4 carbine modifications

    The budget request included $2.5 million for M4 carbine 
modifications. The committee notes an outstanding requirement 
for additional modular weapon systems (MWS) for the M4 
carbinenecessary to mount the weapons optical systems. The committee 
recommends an increase of $1.3 million to procure 7,201 MWS for the M4 
carbine, a total authorization of $3.8 million.

                            Army Ammunition


Procurement of ammunition, Army

    The committee is concerned with continued reports of 
inadequate supplies of ammunition for training and war 
reserves. The Chief of Staff of the Army identified a 
requirement of $242.9 million for ammunition programs that were 
not included in the fiscal year 2001 budget request. For the 
past several years, field commanders have expressed concern 
regarding the inadequate stocks of ammunition to support their 
training and war reserve requirements. The committee recommends 
the following adjustments to the budget request for Army 
ammunition procurement:

        Item                                                    Millions
    30 mm.........................................................  $6.0
    60 mm.........................................................   5.0
    105 mm M915................................................... .15.0
    120 mm M934...................................................   6.0
    155 mm M107...................................................  10.0
    MACS..........................................................  20.0
    Wide Area Munition............................................  16.0
                                                                  ______
      Subtotal....................................................  78.0

Armament retooling and manufacturing support initiative

    The budget request included $4.7 million for the 
continuation of the Armament Retooling and Manufacturing 
Support (ARMS) program. The committee is aware this does not 
satisfy all proposals that would reduce the operating costs of 
Army Ammunition plants. This program has had great success, 
saving the Army $37.0 million each year in program and 
operating costs, while preserving hundreds of jobs for skilled 
workers. Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of 
$20.0 million for this program. The committee expects these 
funds to be utilized in the most effective manner to ensure 
preservation of those facilities most likely to be required to 
fulfill the military's needs to support the national military 
strategy.

                         Other Army Procurement


Family of medium tactical vehicles

    The budget request included $438.3 million to procure 
family of medium tactical vehicle (FMTV) trucks to replace an 
aging fleet of medium trucks found in the Army today. The Army 
has identified an unfunded requirement for additional FMTV 
trucks necessary to meet Force Package 2 fielding requirements. 
The committee recommends an increase of $77.9 million, to 
procure additional FMTV trucks necessary to accelerate the 
fielding of these trucks to reserve component units, a total 
authorization of $516.2 million.

Weapons of Mass Destruction Civil Support Teams

    The committee recommends an increase of $25.0 million for 
the Weapons of Mass Destruction Civil Support Team (WMD-CST) 
program. This funding will establish five additional WMD-CSTs 
and provide additional equipment for the WMD-CST program. The 
$25.0 million is authorized as follows: $3.2 million in 
military personnel; $7.5 million in Operations and Maintenance, 
Army; $1.8 million in Contamination Avoidance, Chemical 
Biological Defense Program, Procurement, Defense-Wide; and 
$12.5 million in Special Purpose Vehicles, Other Procurement, 
Army.
    The WMD-CSTs, formerly know as Rapid Assessment and Initial 
Detection (RAID) teams, are comprised of 22 full-time National 
Guard personnel who are specially trained and equipped to 
deploy and assess suspected nuclear, biological, chemical, or 
radiological events in support of local first responders. The 
committee recommends an increase of $21.0 million, included in 
the categories listed above, for the addition of five WMD-CSTs 
which will result in a total of 32 WMD-CSTs by the end of 
fiscal year 2001. The committee reaffirms the commitment it 
made last year to ultimately provide funding for the 
establishment of a WMD-CST in every state and U.S. territory.
    The committee recommends an increase of $3.5 million, 
included above in Special Purpose Vehicles, Other Procurement, 
Army, for the purchase of two additional Unified Command Suites 
(UCS) and Mobile Analytical Labs (MALS) in order to provide the 
WMD-CST program with needed spare equipment. The committee is 
concerned that, under the Department of Defense's current plan 
for WMD-CSTs, no provision has been made to provide spare 
equipment for the teams. The committee understands that the 
spare UCSs and MALs that had been available for the initial 10 
teams are being used to outfit the 17 teams authorized last 
year. Provision should be made for spare equipment to support a 
military capability that must respond rapidly to a crisis. The 
committee also recommends an increase of $500,000, included 
above in Special Purpose Vehicles, Other Procurement, Army, for 
the purchase of 35 tactical mobility systems for use by the 
WMD-CSTs to improve survey operations of potentially 
contaminated areas by rapidly moving Reconnaissance and Survey 
teams. This system would also facilitate the expeditious 
recovery of WMD-CST response force personnel who may become 
casualties.
    The committee also expresses some concerns with the WMD-CST 
program. First, the committee is concerned with the 
Department's failure to formulate a plan and provide funding to 
rapidly deploy WMD-CSTs to each state and U.S. territory as 
recommended in the January 1998 DOD report entitled 
``Department of Defense Plan for Integrating National Guard and 
Reserve Component Support for Response to Attacks Using Weapons 
of Mass Destruction''. Second, the committee is concerned with 
the Department's delay in submitting the reprogramming request 
necessary to stand up the 17 WMD-CSTs authorized in fiscal year 
2000. As a result of this delay, very little of the funding 
authorized and appropriated in fiscal year 2000 for the 17 
additional teams has been spent. Third, the committee is 
concerned with the Department's decision to locate a second 
WMD-CST in California, while many states do not have a WMD-CST. 
The committee believes that each state and territory should be 
provided with a WMD-CST before additional capabilities are 
provided to a single state.
    The result of this behavior by the Department is that vast 
areas of the United States are currently not covered by WMD-
CSTs. If the Department had acted swiftly to deploy the 27 
teams previously authorized and appropriated by Congress, the 
committee would have been in a position to provide funding for 
more than five additional teams in fiscal year 2001. Given the 
growing terrorist threat to the United States, the committee is 
troubled by the lack of urgency on the part of the Department 
to fund and field these teams.

Secure mobile anti-jam reliable tactical terminal

    The budget request included $48.6 million for the Secure 
Mobile Anti-jam Reliable Tactical Terminal (SMART-T), the 
Army's secure, multi-channel satellite terminal used with the 
Milstar satellite communications system. In its report on the 
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2000 (S. 
Rept. 106-50), the committee noted significant developmental 
problems associated with the SMART-T program and cited a review 
by the Department of Defense Director of Operational Test and 
Evaluation, which concluded that ``. . . the SMART-T is not 
operationally suitable,'' and which recommended temporary 
cessation of production while the Army and the contractor 
sought to solve the problems. Unfortunately, significant 
problems remain and the Army does not currently believe that 
these problems can be resolved in time to award the currently 
planned production option. SMART-T fielding has been stopped 
pending the launch of the next Milstar II satellite. Therefore, 
the committee recommends a reduction of $20.0 million in Army 
Other Procurement for SMART-T.

Army data distribution system

    The budget request included $32.7 million for Army data 
distribution system (ADDS) requirements. The committee 
recognizes the critical role that the enhanced position 
location reporting system (EPLRS) plays in supporting Army 
digitization efforts. Future military operations will continue 
to demand more data throughput to meet the demands of a dynamic 
and complex battlefield. The Army has identified an opportunity 
to improve existing EPLRS systems that will ultimately result 
in five times the communications throughput currently 
available. The committee, therefore, recommends an increase of 
$5.3 million to support EPLRS software development 
requirements. The committee also notes that requirements for 
EPLRS equipment continues to grow as the Army works to digitize 
the force. The committee also recommends an increase of $27.3 
million to procure 634 EPLRS systems and accelerate efforts to 
meet the Army acquisition objective for this system, a total 
authorization of $65.3 million for ADDS requirements.

Area common user system modification program

    The budget request included $114.0 million for area common 
user system (ACUS) modification program requirements. The 
committee recognizes and supports ongoing efforts by the Army 
to digitize the force and enhance the situational awareness and 
warfighting effectiveness of our land forces. The committee 
notes an outstanding requirement for warfighter information 
network down-sized communications switches, which are mounted 
on high mobility multipurpose wheeled vehicles instead of the 
larger five ton trucks that housed older TTC-39D switching 
equipment. Additionally, the Army has additional requirements 
for high mobility DGM assemblages (HMDA) to support 
communications requirements for reserve component signal 
battalions. The committee recommends an increase of $60.0 
million to procure 27 down-sized communications switches and 
229 HMDA devices. Additionally, the committee notes the 
successful use of TS-21 Blackjack facsimile machines throughout 
the force. The committee also recommends an increase of $14.0 
million to accelerate the fielding of 2,901 TS-21 Blackjack 
secure facsimile machines. The committee recommends a total 
authorization of $188.0 million for the ACUS modification 
program.

Forward area air defense ground based sensor

    The budget request included $24.2 million for forward area 
air defense (FAAD) ground based sensor (GBS) procurement. The 
committee recognizes an outstanding requirement for additional 
Sentinel systems necessary to meet operational requirements 
andto obtain a minimum economic order quantity. The committee 
recommends an increase of $7.3 million, for a total authorization of 
$31.5 million, to support Sentinel production requirements and 
modifications for these critical systems.

Night vision

    The budget request included $34.1 million for Army night 
vision devices. The committee has consistently supported night 
vision development and fielding efforts in recognition of 
service focus on night operations. The committee notes that the 
Army identified significant unfunded requirements for night 
vision devices in fiscal year 2001. Therefore, the committee 
recommends the following increases:
          (1) $18.1 million to procure 5,000 AN/PEQ-2A and 
        10,000 AN/PAC-4C target pointer/aiming lights;
          (2) $14.9 million to procure 18,600 AN/PVS-7 night 
        vision binoculars; and
          (3) $15.0 million for 25mm image intensification 
        tubes for AN/PVS-4 and AN/TVS-5 night vision weapon 
        scopes.
The committee recommends a total authorization of $82.1 million 
for night vision devices.

Forward area air defense command and control

    The budget request included $17.9 million for forward area 
air defense (FAAD) command and control (C2) requirements. The 
committee recognizes an outstanding requirement to upgrade 
existing FAAD hardware and software to meet evolving threat 
capabilities and operational requirements and to enable full 
materiel release of air defense brigade and higher headquarters 
prototype FAAD C2 systems. The committee recommends an increase 
of $14.3 million to support identified requirements for 
additional FAAD C2 hardware and software upgrades necessary to 
ensure the full materiel release of prototype systems, a total 
authorization of $32.2 million.

Striker-command and control system

    The budget request included $19.1 million for the Striker 
system. The committee notes the current budget request will 
only procure 33 Striker systems, which will result in an 
inefficient rate of production. The committee recommends an 
increase of $8.0 million to procure additional Striker systems 
and achieve an economic procurement level, a total 
authorization of 27.1 million.

Standard integrated command post system

    The budget request included $36.0 million to procure 
standard integrated command post systems (SICPS). The committee 
notes an opportunity to complete the fielding of these 
important systems to force package two units and support 
critical fielding requirements. The committee recommends an 
increase of $17.5 million to procure additional SICPS, a total 
authorization of $53.5 million.

Lightweight maintenance enclosure

    The budget request included $2.0 million to procure 
lightweight maintenance enclosure (LME) units. The committee 
notes an outstanding requirement for additional funding for LME 
units to maintain minimum sustaining rates (MSR) for 
production. The committee recommends an increase of $4.6 
million to procure 258 LME units and to meet MSR requirements, 
a total authorization of $6.6 million.

Roller, vibratory, self-propelled

    The budget request included $4.7 million for self-propelled 
vibratory roller systems. The committee recommends an increase 
of $5.0 million to procure 80 vehicles necessary to meet the 
requirements of Army engineer units, a total authorization of 
$9.7 million.

Deployable universal combat earth mover

    The budget request included $14.1 million for deployable 
universal combat earth movers (DEUCE). The committee recommends 
an increase of $7.0 million to procure 18 DEUCE vehicles, a 
total authorization of $21.1 million.


CVNX-1 nuclear aircraft carrier program (sec. 121)

    The budget request included $21.9 million for advance 
procurement and advance construction of long lead time 
components for CVNX-1. The committee recommends a provision 
that would authorize the Secretary of the Navy to procure the 
nuclear aircraft carrier designated CVNX-1, and enter into a 
contract for the advance procurement and advance construction 
of that ship.
    The Navy's long-term plan is to provide full funding for 
CVNX-1 in fiscal year 2006. There are a number of castings for 
the large machinery associated with an aircraft carrier 
propulsion plant that have a very long production lead time. To 
maintain the schedule for CVNX-1 and deliver these needed 
pieces of machinery as required by the construction sequence, 
the Navy needs to obligate funds for some of these components 
in fiscal year 2001.
    Therefore, the committee recommends an authorization of the 
$22.0 million in advance procurement included in the budget 
request.

Arleigh Burke-class destroyer program (sec. 122)

    The authorization request included a provision to extend 
the DDG-51 multiyear procurement authorization contained in the 
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1997 (Public 
Law 104-208). The committee recommends a provision that would: 
(1) authorize the Secretary of the Navy to extend the 1997 
multiyear contract to include the fiscal year 2004 and fiscal 
year 2005 DDG-51 procurements; (2) express that it is the sense 
of Congress that the most economical rate for procurement is 
three ships per year; and (3) direct the Secretary to update 
the Arleigh Burke (DDG-51) Class Industrial Base Study of 1993 
and the Comptroller General to review this update.
    The budget request included $356.8 million for advance 
procurement for DDG-51 ships. The committee received 
information that indicated that providing $500.0 million in 
advance procurement funds for DDG-51 would maximize savings to 
the taxpayers for procurement of six ships over a two year 
period: fiscal years 2002 and 2003.
    The Future Years Defense Program (FYDP) shows that the Navy 
plans to buy only two DDG-51 destroyers per year over a three 
year period (fiscal years 2002-2004) and two destroyers (one 
DDG-51 and one DD-21) in fiscal year 2005. The Navy's Arleigh 
Burke (DDG-51) Class Industrial Base Study of 1993 stated that 
procurement of three destroyers per year could only sustain the 
destroyer industrial base if some additional, non-DDG-51 work, 
were available to each shipbuilder. The study also stated that 
at a rate of two ships per year, a very substantial amount of 
non-DDG-51 work would be required for each shipbuilder and risk 
to survival of one or both shipyards could be high.
    The Navy testified that a proposal to build two DDG-51 
ships per year would result in potential reductions in shipyard 
workforces and the workforce skill mix, and that maintaining 
the industrial base would be perilous. The committee concurred 
with the Navy's assessment regarding the industrial base at the 
time of the original study, and does not believe that the 
assumptions in that study have changed enough to invalidate its 
conclusions for the situation the Navy faces today.
    It is clear to the committee that stretching out this 
procurement will cause reductions in workforce skill mix that 
will result in higher costs for not only the DDG-51 ships, but 
also for other Navy work in the shipyards that build DDG-51 
ships.
    In fact, the budget request shows a dramatic cost increase 
of between $60.0 million and $100.0 million per ship when a 
projected procurement rate of two DDG-51 ships per year is 
computed. Therefore, buying six ships at a rate of two ships 
per year for three years will cost the taxpayers between $360.0 
and $600.0 million more than buying the same ships over a two 
year period. The Navy appears to be willing to pay this premium 
in an attempt to partially accommodate the destroyer industrial 
base potential problems (as discussed above: three destroyers 
per year are required to maintain the industrial base) caused 
by delaying DD-21 one year.
    The destroyer industrial base, which will also be required 
to build DD-21, should be maintained while maximizing cost 
savings to taxpayers by buying required ships at proven 
economical rates.
    The Navy testified that the current shipbuilding budget is 
inadequate to recapitalize at the required rate to provide the 
number of ships needed to carry out the National Security 
Strategy. Therefore, the committee believes that every 
opportunity to save scarce ship construction funds should be 
considered. The Navy has documented over $1.4 billion in 
savings by buying three ships per year under the multiyear 
procurement authority provided by Congress. As discussed above, 
continuing the proven economical rate of three ships per year 
and use of multiyear authority would save additional taxpayer 
dollars on this program which the Navy intends to complete.
    Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $143.2 
million in advance procurement for DDG-51 to achieve the 
maximum savings for the taxpayer and to relieve some pressure 
on the underfunded shipbuilding account in future years.
    The additional advance procurement, coupled with the 
savings to the taxpayer of buying six ships in two years 
instead of three years, should result in procurement of six 
ships on a two year multiyear contract for the approximate cost 
of five ships procured at a lower rate.

Virginia-class submarine program (sec. 123)

    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
the Secretary of the Navy to enter into a contract for up to a 
total of five Virginia-class submarines between fiscal year 
2003 and fiscal year 2006. The provision would authorize the 
Secretary to continue the shipbuilder teaming arrangement 
authorized in the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal 
Year 1998 (Public Law 105-85). The provision would also 
authorize procurement of material in economic order quantity 
when cost savings to the taxpayers will result.
    The current acquisition and construction strategies for the 
procurement of the first four Virginia-class submarines appears 
to be yielding positive results to date. However, the two 
shipbuilders have not yet completed the critical test of 
joining sections constructed in two separate shipbuilder 
facilities. In addition, the subsystems being developed by a 
number of subcontractors require continued oversight regarding 
cost and schedule excursions.
    The committee notes the importance of the technology 
insertion approach of building submarines. This approach 
provides both the flexibility and opportunity to forward fit 
and refresh capabilities. Administration officials have 
supported this approach in testimonies before congressional 
committees.
    Therefore, the provision would require the Secretary of 
Defense to submit a report to the congressional defense 
committees with submission of the fiscal year 2002 President's 
budget to include the following:
          (1) a plan for maintaining at least 55 attack 
        submarines through 2015, and a plan for achieving a 
        force of 18 Virginia-class submarines by 2015;
          (2) assessments of savings to the program of 
        production rates of two submarines per year, if that 
        rate were to begin in fiscal year 2004 and construction 
        were to continue at that rate in fiscal year 2006 and 
        thereafter; and
          (3) an analysis of the advantages and disadvantages 
        of alternative contracting strategies including 
        multiyear procurement and block buy with economic order 
        quantity.

ADC(X) ship program (sec. 124)

    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
the Secretary of the Navy to procure ADC(X)-class ships using 
the contracting authority most advantageous to the taxpayer. 
This ship program is important because ADC(X)-class ships will 
replacethe auxiliary vessels that have the oldest average age 
in the active fleet.
    The Navy intends to require at least two shipyards to 
construct ADC(X) class ships. The committee is concerned that 
this could result in higher risk in building, which could lead 
to delays and higher costs. The committee encourages the Navy 
to minimize the risks associated with constructing the ADC(X)-
class ships.

Refueling and Complex Overhaul Program of the CVN-69 nuclear aircraft 
        carrier (sec. 125)

    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
the Secretary of the Navy to enter into a contract and commence 
overhaul of the CVN-69 nuclear aircraft carrier during fiscal 
year 2001. The provision would also authorize the budget 
request of $703.4 million to commence the overhaul of CVN-69. 
The committee concurs with the Navy's intention to budget for 
nuclear aircraft carrier overhauls over a two year period and 
to commence the overhauls during the first year of 
authorization and appropriation of funds for that purpose.

                          OTHER NAVY PROGRAMS


                             Navy Aircraft


Airborne low frequency sonar

    The budget request included $162.3 million for the 
procurement of four remanufactured SH-60R helicopters. The 
airborne low frequency sonar (ALFS) is a subsystem of the SH-
60R. ALFS is a helicopter borne low frequency dipping sonar 
system that can be rapidly deployed from aircraft carriers and 
surface combatants to detect and track submarines both in blue 
water and the littorals.
    The committee recommends an increase of $6.0 million for 
the procurement, installation, and spare parts for the ALFS 
resulting in a more efficient low rate initial production.

SH-60 helicopters

    The budget request included $162.3 million for the 
procurement of four remanufactured SH-60R helicopters. The SH-
60R remanufacturing scope includes the airframe, an avionics 
upgrade, service life extension and incorporation of 
engineering change proposals. It represents a significant 
improvement, providing the battle group with added protection 
in the coastal littorals and in regional conflicts. The Navy 
included the procurement of additional SH-60R helicopters on 
its unfunded requirements list. The committee recommends an 
increase of $90.0 million for the procurement of three SH-60R 
helicopters.

CH-60 helicopters

    The budget request included $238.5 million for the 
procurement of 15 CH-60S helicopters, less $73.4 million in 
advanced procurement from prior years. The primary roles of the 
CH-60S are to conduct vertical replenishment with external 
transfer of cargo and internal transfer of passengers ship-to-
ship, ship-to-shore, and shore-to-ship, and to conduct day and 
night search and rescue. The Navy has included the procurement 
of additional CH-60S helicopters on its unfunded requirements 
list. The committee recommends an increase of $63.0 million for 
the procurement of three CH-60S helicopters.

UC-35 aircraft

    The budget request included no funding for the procurement 
of UC-35 medium range operational support aircraft (OSA). The 
Navy and the Marine Corps intend to use this aircraft to 
modernize their OSA fleet. The Navy will purchase UC-35 
aircraft to restore a portion of the capability that was lost 
when the Navy retired CT-39 aircraft without replacement. Both 
the Navy and the Marine Corps have included the requirement for 
UC-35 aircraft on their unfunded priorities list. The committee 
recommends an increase of $48.6 million for the procurement of 
six UC-35 aircraft, three each for the Navy and the Marine 
Corps.

C-40A aircraft

    The budget request included no funding for the procurement 
of C-40A aircraft, although additional C-40A procurement is 
scheduled in the Future Years Defense Program, and is included 
on the Navy unfunded requirements list. The C-40A is being 
procured as a replacement for the aging C-9 to provide intra-
theater logistics essential to maintaining the readiness of 
forward-deployed naval forces. Funding has been provided for 
five C-40A aircraft to date, with deliveries scheduled to 
commence in fiscal year 2001. The committee recommends an 
increase of $128.4 million for the procurement of two C-40A 
aircraft, including $11.2 million for spare parts.

T-45 aircraft

    The budget request included $278.1 million for the 
procurement of 12 T-45 Goshawk aircraft, less advance 
procurement of $9.5 million from prior years. The T-45 Goshawk 
training system consists of aircraft, simulators, and academic 
materials required to train carrier-based naval aviators. 
Additional T-45 aircraft are included on the Navy unfunded 
requirements list.
    The committee is concerned that the current budget request 
indicates the Navy may shut down the production line for the T-
45 before the service acquires sufficient aircraft to offset 
attrition or accommodate any potential surge in pilot training 
rate. The committee recommends an increase of $49.2 million for 
the procurement of three T-45 aircraft, a total authorization 
of $327.3 million.

Joint primary air training system

    The budget request included $74.4 million for 21 joint 
primary air training system (JPATS) aircraft for the Navy. The 
Navy has included additional JPATS aircraft on its unfunded 
requirements list. The committee recommends an increase of $7.0 
million for the procurement of three JPATS aircraft for the 
Navy, a total authorization of $81.4 million.

KC-130J

    The budget request included $154.8 million for the 
procurement of two KC-130J aircraft. The Marine Corps is facing 
a shortfall of aerial refueling aircraft as it uses up the 
remaining fatigue life of its KC-130F and KC-130R fleet. The 
Marine Corps has included the procurement of additional KC-130J 
aircraft on its unfunded priorities list. The committee 
recommends an increase of $74.6 million for the procurement of 
one KC-130J aircraft, a total authorization of $229.4 million.

EA-6B aircraft automatic flight control system

    The budget request included $203.1 million for 
modifications for the EA-6B aircraft. Although the budget 
request included no funds for automatic flight control systems 
(AFCS), a new AFCS for the EA-6B was included on the Navy 
unfunded priorities list. A new AFCS is required to replace the 
obsolete air navigation computer, and will provide the pilot 
with axis stability and attitude, speed, and altitude control. 
The new system will also improve reliability and 
maintainability for the EA-6B, the only tactical electronic 
jammer in use by the services. Heavily used in Operation Allied 
Force, the EA-6B is a high demand, low density platform. The 
committee recommends an increase of $21.0 million for the 
procurement of EA-6B AFCS, a total authorization of $224.1 
million.

AV-8B precision targeting pod

    The budget request included $40.6 million for modifications 
to the AV-8B aircraft. The budget request included no funding 
for Litening II precision targeting pods, although they were 
included on the Marine Corps unfunded priorities list. The 
Litening II is a precision targeting system which allows the 
aircraft to acquire targets and deliver precision munitions. 
The Marine Corps currently has nine targeting pods on contract, 
funded through the Emergency Supplemental Appropriations Act 
for Fiscal Year 1999.
    Operation Allied Force demonstrated a continuing 
requirement for precision weapons and aircraft platforms 
capable of delivering them. The committee recommends an 
increase of $79.4 million to procure 47 Litening II precision 
targeting pods, a total authorization of $120.0 million in AV-
8B aircraft modifications.

F-18 modifications

    The budget request included $212.6 million for 
modifications to the F-18 aircraft, including $22.7 million for 
engineering change proposal 583 (ECP-583), which upgrades 
Marine Corps F/A-18A aircraft to a configuration with 
capabilities comparable to Lot 17 F/A-18C aircraft. This 
upgrade allows these F/A-18A aircraft to remain viable for use 
on the modern battlefield. Acceleration of this upgrade over 
what is currently included in the Future Years Defense Program 
is included in the Navy unfunded requirements list. The 
committee recommends an increase of $86.9 million to upgrade 20 
F/A-18A aircraft with ECP-583, a total authorization of $299.5 
million.

AH-1W series

    The budget request included $9.8 million for AH-1W series 
aircraft modifications. The committee notes an outstanding 
requirement for four additional night targeting systems (NTS) 
for reserve component AH-1W series aircraft. The committee 
recommends an increase of $4.0 million, necessary to complete 
the last four aircraft upgrades with NTS devices. The committee 
recommends a total authorization of $13.8 million for AH-1W 
series aircraft modifications.

H-1 series

    The budget request included $2.6 million for H-1 series 
aircraft modifications.
    The Marine Corps is fielding AN/AAQ-22 UH-1N navigation 
thermal imaging systems (NTIS) to support operational 
enhancements to fielded aircraft. The committee supports this 
effort and believes these modifications should be completed as 
soon as practicable. The committee recommends an increase of 
$10.0 million to procure an additional 28 NTIS upgrades for UH-
1N aircraft.
    The Marine Corps plans to begin the induction of existing 
UH-1N aircraft into the remanufacturing process which will 
convert older aircraft into the future four bladed ``November'' 
(4BN) configuration. Due to a shortage of existing aircraft in 
the operational fleet, the Marine Corps will have to use 
aircraft from operating squadrons to start the contractor 
conversion program. The committee would prefer to avoid such an 
effect on the operating squadrons. The Marine Corps has 
informed the committee that there are aircraft currently housed 
in the aerospace maintenance and regeneration center (AMARC) 
that could be used to begin the conversion process instead. The 
committee recommends another increase of $17.5 million to 
reclaim and convert 14 aircraft from AMARC necessary to 
initiate the remanufacturing process without impacting 
operational units. The committee, therefore, recommends a total 
authorization of $30.1 million for H-1 series modifications.

P-3 aircraft modifications

    The budget request included $60.7 million for modifications 
to the P-3 aircraft. The committee recommends an overall 
increase of $87.2 million in P-3 modifications for two 
modifications included on the Navy unfunded priorities list, a 
total authorization of $147.9 million.
    The budget request included $31.6 million for installation 
of previously procured anti-surface warfare improvement program 
(AIP) kits, along with associated support items, but did not 
include the procurement of any additional AIP kits. The AIP 
modification allows the P-3 to combat emerging third world, 
limited operations, surface, subsurface, and air threats with 
simultaneous multi-mission capabilities, a capability proven in 
Operation Allied Force. The committee recommends an increase of 
$44.1 million for the procurement of three P-3 AIP kits.
    The budget request included $17.7 million for the P-3C 
Update III common configuration program, also known as the 
block modification upgrade program (BMUP). This program 
provides modern processing systems for the mission computer and 
acoustics sensors to achieve a common P-3C configuration with 
improved performance. The committee recommends an increase of 
$43.1 million for the conversion of five aircraft with BMUP 
kits.

Tactical aircraft moving map capability

    The budget request included $71.6 million for common 
avionics changes, but included no funding for installation of 
the tactical aircraft moving map capability (TAMMAC) in the F/
A-18C/Daircraft. TAMMAC is a modular hardware and software base 
system that helps the aircrew maintain situational awareness by 
providing a graphical presentation of the aircraft position and 
relative positions of targets, threats, terrain features, planned 
mission flight path, no fly zones, safe bases, and other objects. 
Funding for TAMMAC is included for the F/A-18C/D in the Future Years 
Defense Program, and it is included on the Navy unfunded requirements 
list. The committee recommends an increase of $9.3 million to procure 
80 TAMMAC units, the maximum annual rate for F/A-18C/D installations, a 
total authorization of $80.9 million for common avionics changes.

                              Navy Weapons


Joint standoff weapon

    The budget request included $171.6 million for the 
procurement of 636 joint standoff weapons (JSOWs) for the Navy. 
The JSOW is a precision air-to-ground glide weapon capable of 
attacking a variety of fixed area targets in day, night, and 
adverse weather conditions. With the increased emphasis on the 
use of precision guided munitions demonstrated in Operation 
Allied Force, it is necessary to build up inventories of such 
weapons for use in contingencies. The committee recommends an 
increase of $36.0 million for the procurement of 180 JSOWs, a 
total authorization of $207.6 million.

Weapons industrial facilities

    The budget request included $21.3 million for various 
activities at government-owned and contractor-operated weapons 
industrial facilities. The committee recommends an increase of 
$7.7 million to accelerate the facilities restoration program 
at the Allegany Ballistics Laboratory.

Mark 48 advanced capability torpedo modifications

    The budget request included $16.4 million for Mark 48 
advanced capability (ADCAP) torpedo modifications. The Mark 48 
ADCAP torpedo is the primary anti-ship and anti-submarine 
weapon for the submarine fleet. However, torpedo modifications 
are required for effective operations in the littorals. 
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $2.0 million 
for Mark 48 ADCAP modifications to field this improved 
capability in the submarine fleet as soon as possible.

                    Navy and Marine Corps Ammunition


Procurement of ammunition, Navy and Marine Corps

    The committee is concerned with continued reports of 
inadequate supplies of ammunition for training and war 
reserves. The Commandant of the Marine Corps recently 
identified a requirement for $69.8 million for ammunition 
programs, and the Chief of Naval Operations identified a 
requirement for $5.0 million for air expendable 
countermeasures, that were not included in the fiscal year 2001 
budget request. Ammunition is an important contributor to 
military readiness--for training and in anticipation of 
conflict. The committee recommends the following adjustments to 
the budget request for Navy and Marine Corps ammunition 
procurement:
        Item:                                                   Millions
    20 mm.........................................................   3.0
    25 mm.........................................................   3.5
    2.75,, Rockets................................................   9.6
    MJU-52 Countermeasures........................................   5.0
                                                                  ______
      Subtotal.................................................... $21.1

Laser-guided bomb components

    The budget request included $63.2 million for the 
procurement of general purpose bombs, with $29.2 million for 
the procurement of laser-guided bomb components. Laser-guided 
bombs provide the ability to conduct precision attacks while 
minimizing collateral damage. Recent contingency operations 
have demonstrated the need for these weapons, and the Navy has 
included laser-guided bombs on its unfunded requirements list 
to augment critically low inventory levels. Operation Allied 
Force highlighted a dramatic increase in the percentage of 
precision guided munitions versus unguided munitions. The 
committee directs the Navy to create a separate line item for 
laser-guided bomb components in future budget submissions. The 
committee recommends an increase of $20.0 million for the 
competitive procurement of additional laser-guided bombs 
components, a total authorization of $83.2 million for general 
purpose bombs.

Training ordnance

    The budget request included $50.6 million for practice 
bombs. The Navy unfunded priorities list includes a requirement 
for additional laser-guided bombs and associated ordnance to 
meet critical readiness and training needs. Recent contingency 
operations have highlighted a dramatic increase in the use 
ofprecision weapons. The committee directs the Navy to establish a 
separate line item for laser-guided bomb training ordnance in future 
budget submissions. The committee recommends an increase of $26.0 
million for the procurement of additional laser guided bombs and 
associated ordnance to meet critical training and readiness 
requirements, a total authorization of $76.6 million for practice 
bombs.

                    Navy Shipbuilding and Conversion


Shipbuilding overview

    The Navy and Marine Corps are a forward deployed force 
carrying out the National Security Strategy of shaping the 
international environment, responding to crises, and preparing 
for an uncertain future. Seventy percent of the world's 
population lives within 200 miles of coastline. The normal 
operating areas of Navy and Marine Corps forces, referred to as 
the littorals, thus have the potential to include numerous 
future hot spots around the world.
    Navy and Marine Corps forces are an inherently forward 
deployed and combat credible expeditionary force engaged daily 
to influence the world's security environment and sustain our 
national security. Navy and Marine Corps forces do not rely on 
host country airfields, security, or lines of communication. 
Their capabilities range from humanitarian assistance and 
strengthening ties with other nations through international 
exercises to forcible entry and full scale war.
    As was demonstrated in the past year, once forward 
deployed, Navy and Marine Corps forces respond immediately 
without extensive preparation time to a wide range of national 
tasks.
    The committee has repeatedly received testimony that 
indicates the burden of inadequate force structure (ships and 
submarines) falls squarely on the shoulders of the men and 
women in uniform. The testimony indicates that even at the 
current fleet size of 316 ships, the Navy and Marine Corps have 
been ``. . . stretched too thin.'' Under these circumstances, 
it is the people who man the ships that are being asked to bear 
a heavier burden to respond to more contingencies than 
envisioned when the Quadrennial Defense Review decided that a 
force of about 300 ships would be adequate.
    In recognition of the long term view that must be taken for 
shipbuilding, section 1013 of the National Defense 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2000 (Public Law 106-65) 
required the Secretary of Defense to submit no later than 
February 1, 2000, a report on the long-range shipbuilding 
requirements of the Department of Defense. The report is 
required to include a statement of the ship types and the 
annual investment required through 2030.
    The Secretary did not submit the report on the date 
required by law. Although Congress still waits for the report, 
the committee received testimony from a representative of the 
Congressional Research Service (CRS) on the various analyses 
CRS has conducted on supporting Navy force levels. The CRS 
analyses concluded that an annual ship procurement investment 
of about $10.0 to $12.0 billion and a procurement rate of 8.7 
to 10.2 ships per year are required to maintain a fleet of 
about 300 ships. The CRS estimates did not consider the 
requirements of, or resources for, strategic sealift ships 
which have previously been funded in the National Defense 
Sealift Fund.
    Navy witnesses concurred with the CRS conclusions on the 
annual investment and annual procurement rates required to 
maintain the fleet. The committee also agrees with the CRS 
conclusions, but recognizes that a $10.0 to $12.0 billion 
annual investment alone will not ensure the nation has the 
ships required to carry out the National Security Strategy.
    The committee recognizes there are a number of different 
approaches to funding shipbuilding in the long-term. One 
approach would be to defer near-term investment, allow the 
average age of the force to increase, and permit a large 
backlog of ship purchases to accrue. This would match the 
pattern of recent years: we have been building ships at a much 
lower rate than 8.7 ships per year. However, the committee 
recognizes that, for every year that we invest less than $10.0 
to $12.0 billion and buy fewer than 8.7 ships, we will have to 
invest more than $10.0 to $12.0 billion and buy more than 8.7 
ships in a future year. Continuing at rates that are too low 
could result in unattainable ship procurement funding levels 
and will inevitably increase the burden on our men and women in 
uniform.
    The committee also recognizes that, in addition to 
attaining the required annual investment, the Department of 
Defense (DoD) should consider more innovative procedures to 
ensure shipbuilding procurement funds are leveraged to attain 
the most efficient and productive results. For example, the 
Navy was persuaded that initiating funding early for CVN-77 
would result in protecting the required worker skill base at 
the shipyard and result in savings. These savings were verified 
by a Rand Corporation analysis. Multiyear commitment of funding 
for the DDG-51 program also resulted in over $1.4 billion in 
savings compared to a normal annual procurement strategy.
    In addition, research and development for shipbuilding 
programs provides an opportunity to drastically lower the life-
cycle costs of building, maintaining, and operating ships. Ship 
research and development is an investment in not only the 
required war fighting characteristics and capabilities, but 
also the economic feasibility of operating multi-purpose 
complex ships.
    Therefore, the committee recommends that the DoD take the 
following actions to alter current budget practices to leverage 
scarce ship procurement funding when economic advantage or 
beneficial program stability can be achieved:
          (1) include total ownership costs as an explicit 
        independent variable when determining requirements for 
        all future ship classes;
          (2) maximize production efficiencies of economic 
        order quantities for block buy and multiyear contract 
        opportunities;
          (3) maximize use of advance procurement to retain 
        vendor base efficiencies and critical skill mix 
        learning curve progress; and
          (4) budget for auxiliary ships and strategic lift 
        ships in the National Defense Sealift Fund.
    The committee believes that the Navy should use specific 
criteria in evaluating the alternative budgeting approaches in 
items (2) through (4) above. These criteria are analogous to 
those specified for evaluating multiyear procurement programs 
in section 2306(b) of title 10, United States Code. These 
criteria include whether:
          (1) the use of such alternative budgeting will result 
        in savings in total contract costs;
          (2) there is reasonable certainty that the need for 
        the program will not change;
          (3) there is reasonable expectation that the Navy 
        will continue to budget for the program;
          (4) the ship design is stable, and the technical 
        risks are not excessive; and
          (5) cost estimates are realistic.
    The committee recommends action elsewhere in this report to 
increase the new ship procurement funding authorization to 
achieve potential savings of $1.1 billion in new ship 
construction and encourages the DoD to make the recommended 
budget process changes. The committee encourages the 
administration to submit legislative initiatives that would 
assist in leveraging shipbuilding research and development and 
procurement funding.

LHD-8 advance procurement

    The budget request included LHD-8 advance procurement in 
fiscal year 2004 and full funding in fiscal year 2005 as part 
of the Future Year Defense Program (FYDP).
    In the statement of managers accompanying the Strom 
Thurmond National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 
1999 (H. Rept. 105-736), Congress authorized $50.0 million for 
advance procurement of long lead materials for construction of 
LHD-8 in lieu of a future service life extension program for 
LHA-1. Inaddition, the National Defense Authorization Act for 
Fiscal Year 2000 (Public Law 106-65) authorized the procurement and 
advance construction of components and authorized $375.0 million for 
that purpose as a confirmation that building LHD-8 was preferred to 
extending the life of LHA-1.
    The Navy and Marine Corps included, as a priority, the $1.2 
billion remaining cost for LHD-8 on their fiscal year 2001 
unfunded requirements priorities list.
    The committee realizes that actual cost savings and price 
will depend on the final procurement funding profile.
    The committee continues to be concerned that the FYDP plan 
would cause an unnecessary interruption of learning curve 
efficiencies and the loss of long-term vendor pricing 
economies. However, fiscal year 2001 advance procurement of 
LHD-8 would accomplish the following:
          (1) save taxpayers between $500 and $630 million 
        dollars by leveraging skilled labor force and vendor 
        base efficiencies resulting from the continuous LHD 
        construction for the past 16 years;
          (2) provide the Marine Corps required warfighting 
        improvements including landing craft, air cushion 
        (LCAC) carrying capacity, improved ship stability, and 
        enhanced communications capability;
          (3) initiate life-cycle cost improvements for large 
        deck amphibious ships including gas turbine main 
        propulsion engines; and
          (4) take action to address the annual shipbuilding 
        investment required to maintain about 300 ships, 
        mentioned elsewhere in this report, by spreading out 
        the recapitalization of the five ships in the LHA-1 
        class which will turn 35 years old at a rate of one per 
        year beginning in fiscal year 2011.
    The committee reiterates its direction that the Navy 
structure any contract for LHD-8 to maximize these potential 
savings and to report same to the Congress. Therefore, the 
committee recommends an increase of $460.0 million to continue 
the advance procurement and advance construction of components 
for the LHD-8 amphibious ship.

                         Other Navy Procurement


AN/WSN-7 inertial navigation system

    The budget request included $7.3 million for procurement of 
AN/WSN-7 ring laser inertial navigation systems. The AN/WSN-7 
continuously and automatically determines and indicates a 
ship's position, attitude (heading, roll, and pitch), and 
velocity. This system replaces three legacy navigation systems 
and provides equipment commonality between surface combatants, 
submarines, and aircraft carriers. The annual operating cost of 
the AN/WSN-7 is projected to be only 10 percent of the cost of 
operating the legacy navigation systems it replaces. Therefore, 
accelerated procurement of the AN/WSN-7 could produce a 
substantial savings in maintenance costs.
    The committee recommends an increase of $7.0 million to the 
budget request for the procurement and installation of 
additional AN/WSN-7 navigation sets.

Surveillance and security for military sealift ships

    The budget request included no funding for thermal imaging 
surveillance and security for military sealift ships. Military 
sealift ships may operate independently in high threat areas. 
Thermal imaging capabilities could improve the ability of these 
ships to navigate and operate in reduced visibility while 
improving their overall self protection capabilities. The 
committee recommends an increase of $4.0 million for thermal 
imaging surveillance and security procurement and installation 
on Military Sealift Command (MSC) ships.

Integrated condition assessment system

    The budget request included $11.3 million for integrated 
condition assessment system (ICAS) for ships. The ICAS is a 
system that electronically monitors the operating parameters of 
machinery and electronic systems, thus reducing man-hours spent 
taking readings on equipment. The committee recommends an 
increase of $5.0 million for procurement and installation of 
ICAS equipment for surface ships.

AN/SPS-73(V) surface search radar

    The budget request included no funding for procurement and 
installation of AN/SPS-73(V) surface search radars which would 
replace a number of aging radars on surface ships with one 
radar. The AN/SPS-73(V) is a commercial off-the-shelf radar 
which provides surface ships with a reliable, lower maintenance 
and lower life-cycle cost surface search radar capability. To 
capture the reliability and life-cycle cost savings, the Navy 
is replacing aging surface ship radars with the AN/SPS-73(V). 
The committee recommends an increase of $8.0 million for the 
procurement and installation of AN/SPS-73(V) radars.

Side-scanning sonar for forward deployed minesweepers

    The budget request included no funding for side-scanning 
sonar for forward deployed minesweepers. Commercial off-the-
shelf high resolution side-scanning sonars are available that 
would enhance the ability of forward deployed minesweepers to 
detect and classify sea mines located on the bottom of the 
ocean floor. These sonars have been used by Navy units with 
great success in locating aircraft wreckage. The Navy's 
experience with these sonars provides the basis for developing 
operational expertise to apply this technology to the 
challenging task of detecting and classifying bottom sea mines.
    The committee recommends an increase of $5.0 million for 
the procurement and installation of a side-scanning sonar in a 
forward deployed minesweeper to enhance the ability to detect 
and classify bottom mines.

Joint Engineering Data Management and Information Control System

    The budget request included no funds for the Joint 
Engineering Data Management and Information Control System 
(JEDMICS), the designated Department of Defense standard system 
for management, control and storage of engineering drawings. 
This system is designed as an open, client-server architecture 
and is nearing full deployment for global access to the data in 
its repositories. However, the JEDMICS data available is not 
fully accessible to all clients using the joint technical data 
environment.
    The committee recommends an increase of $4.0 million for 
procurement, integration and accreditation surveys to ensure 
JEDMICS is fully compliant with the joint technical data 
environment.

Aviation life support

    The budget request included $20.4 million for aviation life 
support equipment. The committee continues to support efforts 
designed to improve the ability of Marine Corps flight crews to 
operate their aircraft at night by providing the most capable 
night vision systems available. The committee recommends an 
increase of $9.9 million to procure additional AN/AVS-9 night 
vision goggles which offer significant improvements over 
existing AN/AVS-6 goggles, a total authorization of $30.3 
million.

Gun fire control radar performance improvements

    The budget request included $15.6 million for AN/SPQ-9B gun 
fire control equipment (GFCE) procurement, installation, and 
engineering change proposals. The AN/SPQ-9B radar interface is 
the primary gun fire control radar for surface ships. The AN/
SPQ-9B GFCE program provides a low cost product improvement to 
support both surface and sea skimming target engagements. The 
committee recommends an increase of $4.0 million to develop 
andfield engineering change proposals to improve the performance of the 
SPQ-9B radar.

Cruiser smart ship

    The budget request included $47.9 million for programs 
referred to as ``smart ship'' programs. Of this amount $22.5 
million is for smart ship equipment procurement and logistics 
for Ticonderoga-class cruisers.
    The Navy's goal in introducing smart ship programs was to 
leverage technology to reduce the workload on sailors at sea. 
Prior year authorizations of funds for the smart ship program 
were originally justified by expectations that hardware and 
software installation would enable subsequent manpower 
reductions. Unfortunately, for the past five years, program 
delays and software problems have resulted in little progress 
toward achieving the Navy's goal.
    The Navy is currently testing version 11 of the software 
and has stated that version 12 is required prior to further 
test and evaluation. The damage control assistant flooding and 
counter flooding software developed by a fleet sailor almost 
six years ago on a laptop computer has yet to be introduced as 
part of the smart ship software for the fleet.
    Installation of smart ship equipment has not yet resulted 
in any personnel savings. The Chief of Naval Operations has 
instituted a policy which requires a waiting period of one year 
with smart ship equipment aboard before the Navy will consider 
realizing any end strength savings. The justification for the 
smart ship program appears to be evolving to a basis of 
installing the equipment for a potential reduction of workload 
on sailors.
    The committee recommends a decrease of $17.5 million for 
procurement of smart ship equipment. The committee will assess, 
during the review of the fiscal year 2002 budget request, the 
progress in testing and development of cruiser smart ship 
software and the results of the Navy's Smart Ship Steering 
Committee (SSSC). The SSSC is attempting to standardize 
procurement of hardware, software, and training for surface 
combatants, amphibious ships, aircraft carriers, and 
minesweepers.

NULKA anti-ship missile decoy system

    The budget request included $33.8 million for procurement 
and installation of the NULKA anti-ship missile decoy program. 
NULKA is a proven decoy against anti-ship missiles. The 
committee recommends an increase of $4.3 million for the 
procurement of launcher systems and decoys to outfit the fleet 
with this key self-defense equipment.
    In addition, the committee recommends an increase of $4.3 
million in the Navy operations and maintenance account for 
critical training on the NULKA system.

Civil engineering support equipment

    The budget request included $10.5 million for light and 
medium duty tactical equipment used mostly by the Naval 
Construction Force (NCF), Maritime Prepositioning Force (MPF), 
Naval Beach Group (NBG), and other special operating units. The 
light duty tactical vehicles are used for the movement of 
personnel and equipment. The medium tactical trucks are 
essential for rapid deployment of material to support combat 
construction of airfields, landing zones, road battle damage 
repair and rapid runway repair.
    Heavy use of the equipment to support military and 
humanitarian assistance operations during the past decade have 
heavily strained the existing inventory of already over-aged 
civil engineering support equipment (CESE). The committee 
recommends an increase of $10.0 million for the procurement of 
civil engineering support equipment for the Naval Construction 
Force.

                        Marine Corps Procurement


Night vision

    The budget request included $14.4 million for Marine Corps 
night vision equipment. The committee notes an outstanding 
requirement for the improved night/day fire-control observation 
device (INOD). The committee recommends an increase of $2.7 
million to procure INOD devices for the Marine Corps, a total 
authorization of $17.1 million for night vision devices.

Radio systems

    The budget request included $3.1 million for Marine Corps 
radio system equipment. The committee notes outstanding 
requirements for additional enhanced position location 
reporting system (EPLRS) equipment necessary to provide network 
data distribution capabilities and enhance situational 
awareness. The committee recommends an increase of $6.4 million 
for additional EPLRS systems necessary to meet requirements 
associated with the acquisition objective, a total 
authorization of $9.5 million.


Repeal of requirement for annual report on B-2 bomber aircraft program 
        (sec. 131)

    Since the B-2 bomber is no longer in production, the 
committee recommends a provision that would repeal section 112 
of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Years 1990 
and 1991 (Public Law 101-189; 103 Stat. 1373), as amended by 
section 141 of Public Law 104-106 (110 Stat. 213).

                        OTHER AIR FORCE PROGRAMS


                           Air Force Aircraft


EC-130J

    The budget request included no funding for the procurement 
of EC-130J aircraft, a high demand, low density asset. The EC-
130 is used to conduct special missions such as psychological 
operations, civil affairs radio and television broadcasts, 
command and control countermeasures, and limited intelligence 
gathering. The Air Force is converting the inventory EC-130 
aircraft to the EC-130J configuration. Procurement of 
additional EC-130J aircraft is on the Air National Guard 
unfunded priorities list. The committee recommends an increase 
of $90.0 million for the procurement of one EC-130J aircraft.

Joint primary aircraft training system

    The budget request included $113.8 million for the 
procurement of 27 joint primary aircraft training system 
(JPATS) aircraft. The Air Force has requested additional JPATS 
aircraft on its unfunded requirements list. The committee 
recommends an increase of $18.9 million for the procurement of 
seven JPATS aircraft, a total authorization of $132.7 million.

Joint surveillance and target attack radar system

    The budget request included no funding for advanced 
procurement of a 16th E-8C Joint Surveillance and Target Attack 
Radar System (JSTARS) aircraft or shutdown of the production 
line. Funding for either advance procurement or line shutdown 
was, however, included in the Air Force's unfunded requirements 
list.
    JSTARS provides target information for pairing direct 
attack aircraft and standoff weapons against selected targets. 
JSTARS successfully supported Operation Allied Force. General 
Wesley Clark, Commander in Chief, Europe, in testimony before 
the Committee on Armed Services of the Senate, stated that if 
he were able to have more of anything in support of this 
operation, it would have been another JSTARS.
    The last Quadrennial Defense Review, however, recommended 
the Air Force inventory objective of JSTARS be reduced from 19 
to 13, with the understanding that the North Atlantic Treaty 
Organization (NATO) would acquire four to six aircraft. This 
NATO acquisition did not materialize, and the budget request is 
for the 15th JSTARS aircraft.
    The committee, therefore, recommends an increase of $46.0 
million, to be used, at the discretion of the Secretary of 
Defense, either for: (1) long lead funding for aircraft number 
16, if the Department requests funding for a 16th JSTARS 
aircraft in the fiscal year 2002 budget request; or (2) 
production line shutdown and last lot costs.

B-52H aircraft modifications

    The budget request included $8.4 million for modifications 
to the B-52H aircraft. The budget request included no funding 
for ALQ-172 self-protection electronic countermeasures. The Air 
Force has included continued procurement of self-protection 
electronic countermeasure equipment for the B-52 on its 
unfunded requirements list. The committee recommends an 
increase of $12.0 million in aircraft procurement, Air Force, 
for the ALQ-172 electronic countermeasures improvement program 
for the B-52H aircraft, a total authorization of $20.4 million.

A-10 aircraft integrated flight and fire control computer

    The budget request included $33.9 million for modifications 
to the A-10 aircraft, but included no funds for procurement of 
the integrated flight and fire control computer (IFFCC). 
Although development of this capability is to be complete in 
fiscal year 2001, production funding would commence in fiscal 
year 2002 in the Future Years Defense Program. The IFFCC 
provides the processing power that handles fire control, flight 
control, digital terrain system, data link management, 
situational awareness, and cockpit control and display 
management. The A-10 IFFCC is included on the Air Force 
unfunded priorities list. The committee recommends an increase 
of $11.2 million for the procurement and fielding of IFFCCs for 
the A-10 aircraft, a total authorization of $45.1 million.

F-15 aircraft modifications

    The budget request included $258.2 million for 
modifications to the F-15 aircraft. The committee recommends an 
overall increase of $74.9 million, a total authorization of 
$333.1 million. Both increases recommended by the committee are 
included on the Air Force unfunded priorities list.
    The budget request included $37.3 million for upgrading F-
15 engines from the F100-PW-100 to the F100-PW-220E 
configuration. This upgrade would significantly improve the 
reliability and maintainability of the engine, and has reduced 
the unscheduled engine removal rate by 35 percent. Procurement 
savings are achievable by accelerating this program. The 
committee recommends an increase of $48.0 million for 
additional F-15 engine upgrades.
    The budget request did not include any funding for the 
procurement of BOL chaff and flare systems or countermeasures 
for the F-15 aircraft. The committee understands that the BOL 
countermeasure system is being evaluated under a foreign 
comparative test program, and that the system has been 
successfully integrated on other tactical aircraft. The 
committee recommends an increase of $26.9 million for the 
procurement of BOL systems and countermeasures for the F-15 
aircraft.

F-16 aircraft modifications

    The budget request included $248.8 million for 
modifications to the F-16 aircraft. The committee recommends an 
overall increase of $119.5 million in F-16 modifications, a 
total authorization of $368.3 million.
    The committee also recommends a series of increases to 
address the fact that the budget request included no funding 
for other F-16 aircraft modifications. Each of these items were 
included on an Air Force or Air National Guard unfunded 
priority list.
    The digital terrain system includes precise navigation 
capabilities and a ground collision avoidance system designed 
to prevent mishaps. The committee recommends an increase of 
$16.5 million for the digital terrain system. The committee 
understands that this amount of funding was removed from the 
budget request late in the cycle, so recommended offsets for 
this increase have been taken from other Air Force programs.
    Precision targeting pods are the number one unfunded 
requirement for the Air National Guard. The committee 
recommends an increase of $34.0 million for the procurement of 
precision targeting pods.
    Compared to other F-16 block aircraft, the thrust of the 
block 42 is relatively low. For this reason, block 42 F-16 
aircraft have not been used in combat. The committee recommends 
an increase of $69.0 million for the retrofit of Air National 
Guard block 42 F-16 aircraft with F100-PW-229 engines.

C-17 simulator

    The budget request included $97.1 million for modifications 
to the C-17 aircraft. The committee recommends an overall 
increase of $26.4 million for C-17 aircraft modifications, a 
total authorization of $123.5 million.
    The budget request included no funding for the procurement 
of another C-17 cockpit system simulator. Procurement of an 
additional cockpit system simulator is necessary to meet 
projected aircrew training requirements, and the Air Force has 
included the procurement of this simulator on its unfunded 
requirements list. The committee recommends an increase of 
$14.9 million for the procurement of a C-17 cockpit system 
simulator.
    The budget request included no funding for the C-17 
aircraft maintenance systems trainer (AMST), for which $3.5 
million in long lead funding was provided in fiscal year 2000. 
The committee recommends an increase of $11.5 million to 
complete procurement of the C-17 AMST.

Defense airborne reconnaissance program aircraft modifications

    The budget request included $165.5 million for 
modifications to defense airborne reconnaissance program 
aircraft. The budget request included no funding for the 
procurement of Senior Year electro-optic reconnaissance system 
(SYERS) equipment. The committee recommends an increase of $3.0 
million for the procurement of SYERS equipment, a total 
authorization of $168.5 million.

ALE-50 towed decoys

    The budget request included $43.0 million for war 
consumables, with $32.3 million dedicated to the procurement of 
ALE-50 towed decoys. The ALE-50 is a low cost radio frequency 
countermeasure that provides increased survivability against 
semi-active guided missile threats. This countermeasure was 
credited with saving aircraft and lives during Operation Allied 
Force. Additional procurement of the ALE-50 is included on the 
Air Force unfunded requirements list. The committee recommends 
an increase of $46.2 million for the procurement of additional 
ALE-50 towed decoys, a total authorization of $89.2 million for 
war consumables.

Compass Call

    The budget request included $398.5 million for other 
production charges for the Air Force. Compass Call is the 
premier tactical airborne information warfare platform. In 
fiscal year 1993, funding for the block 30 Compass Call mission 
simulator was cut, and there is no training system fielded for 
the current configuration. Key Compass Call program content was 
lost in fiscal year 1999 due to Operation Allied Force costs, 
which were absorbed out of existing budget authority. Compass 
Call block 35 improved frequency coverage has been reduced. The 
committee, therefore, recommends increases of $23.7 million for 
the procurement of a Compass Call mission training system for 
block 30/35 aircraft and $4.1 million to provide a technology 
upgrade to the acquisition subsystem of Compass Call block 35, 
a total authorization of $426.3 million. Both of the increases 
recommended by the committee are included on the Air Force 
unfunded priorities list.

Defense airborne reconnaissance program

    The budget request included $98.4 million for the 
procurement of equipment for the defense airborne 
reconnaissance program (DARP), of which, $85.1 million was for 
equipment for the joint signals intelligence avionics family 
(JSAF). The committee understands this does not fully outfit 
the first U-2 aircraft with a complete JSAF unit. The committee 
recommends an increase of $8.0 million in Aircraft Procurement, 
Air Force, for the procurement of additional JSAF equipment for 
the U-2 aircraft.

                           Air Force Missile


Global Positioning System

    The budget request included $210.3 million in Missile 
Procurement, Air Force, and $250.2 in Research, Development, 
Test, and Evaluation, Air Force, for the Global Positioning 
System (GPS). The committee has recently received an amended 
budget request for the GPS system that reflects the Air Force's 
GPS modernization plan. The committee supports this effort. In 
order to properly align funds according to the amended budget 
request, the committee recommends a decrease of $30.3 million 
in Missile Procurement, Air Force, and an increase of $10.7 
million in PE 35165F.

Titan space boosters

    The budget request included $469.7 million for procurement 
of Titan IV space boosters. Based on current projections, it 
appears that the Titan IV program may not require this full 
amount to execute its fiscal year 2001 requirements. Therefore, 
the committee recommends a decrease of $10.0 million in Air 
Force Missile Procurement for Titan space boosters.

Medium launch vehicle

    The budget request included $55.9 million for Medium Launch 
Vehicle (MLV) procurement. As a result of the Department of 
Defense's Global Positioning System (GPS) modernization plan, 
the Air Force now plans to delay a number of GPS block IIR 
launches. This delay reduces the procurement funding 
requirement for MLV during fiscal year 2001. Therefore, the 
committee recommends a decrease of $10.0 million in Air Force 
Missile Procurement funds for MLV.

                          Air Force Ammunition


Procurement of ammunition, Air Force

    The budget request included $11.5 million for the 
procurement of 2.75 inch rockets for the Air Force. The 
committee is concerned with continued reports of inadequate 
supplies of ammunition for training and war reserves. The Chief 
of Staff of the Air Force recently identified a requirement for 
$211.0 million for high priority munition programs, including 
2.75 inch rockets, that were not included in the fiscal year 
2001 budget request. Ammunition is an important contributor to 
military readiness--for training and in anticipation of 
conflict. Therefore, the committee recommends an additional 
$28.0 million for 2.75 inch rockets.

                      Other Air Force Procurement


Combat training ranges

    The budget request includes $26.0 million for procurement 
of equipment for combat training ranges, of which $18.4 million 
is for advanced threat upgrades. Realistic simulation of 
threats in training increases the survivability of our aircraft 
and aircrews in actual combat situations. The committee 
understands there are competing systems to fill the Air Force 
requirement for advanced threat emitters. The committee 
recommends an increase of $20.0 million to procure additional 
advanced threat emitters for its combat training ranges, a 
total authorization of $46.0 million.

Night vision goggles

    The budget request included $2.8 million for the 
procurement of night vision goggles (NVGs) and associated test 
equipment for aircrew, maintenance, and security personnel. 
There is a shortage of this equipment, and the Air Force has 
included procurement of additional NVGs on its unfunded 
priority list. The committee recommends an increase of $8.0 
million for the procurement of additional NVGs and associated 
test equipment, a total authorization of $10.8 million.


Advanced SEAL delivery system design enhancements

    The budget request included $33.5 million for the Advanced 
SEAL Delivery System (ASDS) Program. The committee recommends 
an increase of $3.3 million in the Defense Wide Procurement, 
Special Operations Command, ASDS account to fund design 
enhancements required to implement necessary changes and 
enhancements on subsequent ASDS production vehicles.
    ASDS design enhancement costs are estimated to be $10.0 
million. Special Operations Command has funded $6.8 million of 
ASDS design costs with savings in its ongoing ASDS 
developmental testing program. Full funding of these design 
enhancements could result in a $10.0 million reduction in 
procurement unit cost for the remaining five ASDS vehicles.
    The statement of managers accompanying the National Defense 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2000 (H. Rept. 106-301) 
required the Commander-in-Chief, U.S. Special Operations 
Command (CINCSOCOM) to report on various aspects of the ASDS 
program, including whether the program should be elevated to a 
major acquisition program. The CINCSOCOM provided a report on 
technical aspects of the ASDS program, but failed to address 
whether the program had been reviewed by the Department of 
Defense (DOD), and why the program was not elevated to the 
category of a major defense acquisition. The committee expects 
the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology and 
Logistics to provide a report explaining why he decided not to 
elevate this program to a higher level of review, as was 
required.

Special operations forces small arms and support equipment

    The budget request included $11.8 million for Special 
Operations Forces (SOF) Small Arms and Support Equipment, but 
did not include funding to continue procurement of SOF Body 
Armor Load Carriage System, the Modular Integrated 
Communications Helmet, or the SOF Peculiar Modifications to the 
M-4 Carbine. The Commander-in-Chief, U.S. Special Operations 
Command (CINCSOCOM), identified procurement of this improved 
body armor, improved helmets, and special modifications to 
individual weapons, as his highest set of priority unfunded 
requirements for fiscal year 2001. The committee has followed 
developments in this area closely and is encouraged that 
equipment that will enhance the survivability, flexibility, and 
precision of our special operations forces is now available for 
general procurement.
    The committee understands this equipment has been 
rigorously tested and fielded to some SOF elements. The 
committee applauds the efforts of CINCSOCOM to field this 
important equipment to all SOF operators. The committee 
recommends an increase of $21.7 million for SOF Small Arms and 
Support Equipment to be distributed as follows: $4.9 million 
for SOF Body Armor Load Carriage System; $4.7 million for SOF 
Modular Integrated Communications Helmet; and $12.1 million for 
SOF Peculiar Modifications to the M-4 Carbine. This represents 
approximately one-half of the funding requested by CINCSOCOM to 
fully equip all SOF operators. The committee further directs 
that CINCSOCOM fully evaluate the suitability of this equipment 
for all SOF operators across the wide spectrum of activities 
conducted by SOCOM and report back to the defense committees of 
Congress his assessment of the suitability of these 
enhancements for all SOF operational elements and any 
recommendations for improvements to meet the unique needs of 
the various, diverse operational elements of SOCOM. Upon 
receipt of such an assessment, the committee would consider 
additional authorizations to complete procurement of this 
equipment for all SOF operators.

Nuclear, Biological and Chemical Defense Enhancement Kits

    The budget request included no funding for Nuclear, 
Biological, and Chemical (NBC) Defense Enhancement Kits. The 
Marine Corps continues to require the development of NBC force 
protection training and equipment support packages for 
deploying Marine Expeditionary Units. The NBC Defense 
Enhancement Kits will provide equipment to on-scene leaders to 
allow for isolation of NBC contaminated areas, agent detection 
and identification, and decontamination. The Marine Corps has a 
requirement for thirteen NBC kits; nine kits have been 
procured. The committee recommends an increase of $2.5 million 
in the Chemical and Biological Defense Program for four NBC 
Defense Enhancement Kits to complete the planned acquisition.

Communications assistance for law enforcement act

    The budget request included $120.0 million for the 
Telecommunications Carrier Compliance Fund, which was created 
as a result of the Communications assistance for law 
enforcement act of 1994. The committee is concerned that this 
may represent an inappropriate first step by the Department of 
Defense towards involvement in placing wiretaps on 
communications system of American citizens. Court-authorized 
wiretaps are, and should remain, the responsibility of law 
enforcement agencies. Therefore, the committee recommends a 
reduction of $120.0 million to the budget request for this 
activity.

                       SUBTITLE E--OTHER MATTERS


Pueblo Chemical Depot chemical agent destruction technologies (sec. 
        141)

    The committee recommends a provision that would provide for 
the destruction of the stockpile of lethal chemical agents at 
the Pueblo Chemical Depot either by incineration or any 
technology demonstrated by the Assembled Chemical Weapons 
Assessment on or before May 1, 2000.
    Residents and leaders of communities surrounding the Pueblo 
Chemical Depot continue to voice concerns about delays in the 
destruction of chemical agents at the Pueblo depot and the 
attendant risk to community safety. The National Academy of 
Sciences (NAS) has reported on several occasions about the risk 
associated with the prolonged storage of chemical agents and 
munitions. According to the NAS, this risk increases 
significantly with time.
    Approximately eight percent of the total U.S. chemical 
weapons inventory is stored at the Pueblo Chemical Depot, 
Colorado. Community leaders have expressed support for the 
baseline incineration method and the technologies developed 
through the Assembled Chemical Weapons Assessment program. This 
provision is intended to expedite destruction activities 
utilizing one of these technologies at the Pueblo Chemical 
Depot in the interest of community safety.

                        OTHER ITEMS OF INTEREST


Acquisition programs at the National Security Agency

    There are substantial challenges facing the National 
Security Agency (NSA) as it seeks to modernize its operations 
and infrastructure. The United States has relied on the NSA for 
vital information in the past, and will need a significant 
contribution from NSA as we face the new demands of the future.
    The committee believes that the Director of the NSA is 
making significant progress in making fundamental reform within 
the agency. The committee encourages the Director to continue 
this important process.
    Although the Director has indicated the need to improve the 
acquisition process, the committee has become concerned that 
the current acquisition management procedures may not provide 
sufficient structure, accountability, or visibility for these 
important programs.
    The committee directs that NSA and the Department of 
Defense manage the current NSA modernization effort as though 
it were a major defense acquisition program, as defined in 
section 2430 of title 10, United States Code. The committee 
does not intend that these programs be merged into a single 
contracting vehicle, rather these programs should be elevated 
to a higher level of review to ensure that the overall 
modernization effort receives appropriate review and management 
attention within the Office ofthe Secretary of Defense. Further 
discussion of this issue is included in the classified annex to this 
report.

Army aviation

    The committee has been very pleased with Army efforts over 
the last year to revise outdated and incomplete aviation 
modernization plans. The committee applauds the outstanding 
efforts of active Army, Army National Guard, and Army Reserve 
leaders to establish a plan that will ultimately result in a 
seamless force of modernized aircraft. The most significant 
action taken will be that of retiring legacy UH-1 Huey and AH-1 
Cobra aircraft by fiscal year 2004 and replacing these aircraft 
with UH-60 Blackhawks. Most of these aircraft, largely found in 
the reserve components, have reached the end of their useful 
life and must be retired as soon as practicable. The revised 
modernization plan will result in an aviation force structure 
that is common across both active and reserve components, will 
reduce the number of rotary wing platforms from seven to four, 
and will facilitate crew rotation requirements for the broad 
range of missions that will challenge the Army over the next 
decade.
    The committee still has serious questions about the ability 
of the Army to fund some of the critical requirements in the 
revised plan. In fact, despite congressional direction that the 
Secretary of the Army to fully fund the revised plan, the Army 
plan remains underfunded by at least $400.0 million each year.

C-5 aircraft upgrades

    In testimony before the Subcommittee on Readiness and 
Management Support in March, 2000, the Secretary of the Air 
Force stated that the decision regarding the priority for 
upgrade of the C-5As or the newer C-5Bs was pending the results 
of the outsized and oversized cargo portion of the larger Joint 
Chiefs of Staff mobility requirements study 05 (MRS-05). The 
Air Force budget documentation, however, clearly indicates a 
schedule for upgrade of the C-5Bs before C-5As. The budget 
documentation also includes a plan to continue kit development 
options for two aircraft. The committee is concerned that the 
Air Force will upgrade the newer C-5Bs to optimize strategic 
airlift operational readiness rates in the near-term, with 
severe effects on the overall airlift force readiness in the 
not-too-distant future. This is one of several key decisions 
being delayed pending the results of MRS-05. Section 1034 of 
the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2000 
required the Secretary of Defense to submit a report based on 
MRS-05 to the congressional defense committees by February 15, 
2000. The Secretary of Defense has asked for an extension of 
this requirement until September 30, 2000. The committee 
directs the Secretary of the Air Force to submit a report by 
February 15, 2001, which contains the analysis to support the 
Air Force recommendation on sequence of C-5 aircraft upgrades 
based on the lift requirements outlined in MRS-05. The kit 
development efforts for the two aircraft should be for one C-5A 
and one C-5B. The analysis should project lift capabilities for 
ten years based on most likely operational readiness rates 
under the scenario of upgrading the C-5As before the C-5Bs and 
under the scenario of upgrading the C-5Bs before the C-5As.

Electronic digital compass system

    The committee continues to support the Army digitization 
effort, which will establish a tactical internet for enhanced 
situational awareness. The output from the Global Positioning 
System (GPS) receiver on Army combat and tactical vehicles is 
key to the knowledge of friendly positions. GPS is generally an 
effective device, but has its limitations, such as 
susceptibility to blockages from terrain and foliage, enemy 
electronic countermeasures, including jamming, constellation 
misalignments, and multi-path errors. The committee is 
concerned that there is currently no backup to GPS, other than 
the enhanced position location reporting system, to ensure that 
critical situational awareness inputs to the tactical internet 
are not interrupted. This backup could be improved at modest 
cost by an electronic digital compass system, which can also 
provide steer-to navigation capabilities. The committee directs 
the Secretary of the Army to provide a report assessing the 
utility and costs involved in integrating and procuring 
electronic digital compass systems for combat and tactical 
vehicles of the first digitized division and the digitized 
corps.

Single channel ground and airborne radio system

    The committee is aware of outstanding requirements for 
additional single channel ground and airborne radio systems 
(SINCGARS) to provide necessary voice and data communications 
for a small number of Army National Guard units that are still 
operating with earlier generation equipment. The committee 
recognizes plans within the Department of Defense to begin an 
acquisition program that will procure the next generation joint 
tactical radio system. Unfortunately, these radios will not be 
available in the near-term and there are still units in the 
Army that must be modernized. The committee encourages the Army 
to review the plans and programs associated with communications 
fielding requirements and identify alternatives that will meet 
outstanding requirements as soon as practicable.

Soldier's portable on-system repair tool

    For the last several years, the committee has monitored the 
fielding of the soldier's portable on-system repair tool 
(SPORT) and is aware that the current contract will expire in 
fiscal year 2001. SPORT is the on-system tester designed to 
augment the built-in test equipment of all major Army weapon 
systems, including the M1 Abrams, the M2 Bradley, the UH-60 
Blackhawk, the Paladin, and the multiple launch rocket system. 
In addition, SPORT has served as a significant maintenance 
diagnostic tool for many other Army systems. The committee is 
concerned that any interruption in the fielding of SPORT could 
have a significant impact on overall readiness. The committee 
directs the Army to review outstanding requirements for SPORT 
equipment, identify an acquisition strategy designed to meet 
those requirements, and provide the Congress with a report on 
that strategy.
         TITLE II--RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST, AND EVALUATION

Explanation of tables
    The tables in this title display items requested by the 
administration for fiscal year 2001 for which the committee 
either increased or decreased the requested amounts. As in the 
past, the administration may not exceed the amounts approved by 
the committee (as set forth in the tables or, if unchanged from 
the administration request, as set forth in the Department of 
Defense's budget justification documents) without a 
reprogramming action in accordance with established procedures. 
Unless noted explicitly in the report, all changes are made 
without prejudice.


    SUBTITLE B--PROGRAM REQUIREMENTS, RESTRICTIONS, AND LIMITATIONS

Fiscal year 2002 joint field experiment (sec. 211)
    The committee has worked closely with the Secretary of 
Defense and the Chairman, Joint Chiefs of Staff (CJCS) to 
develop a credible, comprehensive joint experimentation 
program. The creation of the U.S. Joint Forces Command 
(USJFCOM) on October 1, 1999, with an organizational element 
dedicated to joint experimentation, institutionalized this 
process. The committee has noted, with great interest, the 
strides made by USJFCOM in implementing this program.
    The committee is encouraged that a joint experimentation 
program has been established, but was disappointed to learn 
that the first fully planned, joint field experiment is not 
scheduled until fiscal year 2004. While the need to carefully 
build this program is appreciated, this has to be balanced 
against the need for urgency. Many of the transformation 
concepts being explored by the respective services will have 
evolved considerably by 2004, without the benefit of 
experimentation and evaluation within a joint war fighting 
context.
    The committee is concerned that familiar problems continue 
to plague joint operations. Many of the lessons learned in the 
recent Kosovo operation were noted in previous military 
operations. Combatant commanders continue to appear before the 
committee with recurring concerns, including: incompatible 
command and control; interoperability problems; no combat 
identification standard; insufficient strategic lift; 
insufficient intelligence assets (intelligence, surveillance 
and reconnaissance); and inadequate theater-level force 
protection capabilities. While efforts appear to be underway to 
correct these deficiencies, questions are continuously raised 
regarding the priority and urgency assigned to these 
requirements, and the absence of a detailed, defense-wide 
strategy to guide transformation of our forces.
    Therefore, the committee directs that the Secretary of 
Defense plan in fiscal year 2001 and conduct in fiscal year 
2002, a joint field experiment focused on exploring the most 
critical war fighting challenges at the operational level of 
war which will confront U.S. joint military forces. This 
experiment should incorporate elements of all military services 
and special operations forces. In addition, the Secretary of 
Defense is directed to ensure that each military service and 
U.S. Special Operations Command participate with elements 
representative of their future force concepts, e.g., Air Force 
Expeditionary Aerospace Force, Army medium-weight brigades, and 
Navy Forwardfrom the Sea vision. The committee sees merit in 
each of these individual service initiatives, and believes that 
combining these concepts in a joint context has potential for improving 
our military capabilities, individually and collectively. The committee 
directs the services to adjust their fiscal year 2001 planning 
activities and fiscal year 2002 experimentation activities to 
accommodate participation in this experiment and evaluation of 
capabilities. The committee recommends an increase of $6.0 million in 
PE 63727N to accomplish the necessary planning and preparation for this 
joint experiment in fiscal year 2001. The committee expects the 
Department of Defense (DOD), the military departments and USJFCOM to 
include adequate funding in the fiscal year 2002 budget request to 
properly conduct this experiment.
    The Report of the Defense Science Board Task Force on DOD 
War Fighting Transformation, published in August 1999, observed 
that there is no comprehensive DOD-wide strategy and road map 
for a coordinated transformation of our armed forces and that 
there are no apparent standards to measure progress. The 
committee recommends that the Secretary use the opportunity 
presented by this joint field exercise to accomplish the 
following: collect the data that will enable a more specific 
description of the desired attributes of the objective joint 
forces for Joint Vision 2010; establish the standards to 
measure progress; and establish achievable, affordable 
milestones.

Nuclear aircraft carrier design and production modeling (sec. 212)

    The budget request included $38.3 million in PE 64567N for 
aircraft carrier contract design. The committee recommends a 
provision that would authorize the Navy to convert nuclear 
aircraft carrier design to a three-dimensional, computer based 
system. The budget request did not include funds specifically 
designated for this effort. However, minimal conversion of 
paper designs has occurred from funds designated for aircraft 
carrier research and development and shipbuilding and 
conversion. The Navy conversion effort thus far has proven to 
be cost-effective in saving taxpayer dollars.
    The Navy intends to develop a three-dimensional product 
model for portions of CVNX-1. The committee also understands 
that the Navy intends to build certain sections of CVN-77 that 
will be major new designs derived from the CVN-76 baseline. The 
Navy recently made the decision that CVNX hulls will be based 
on the Nimitz-class hull design. Because of this decision, it 
may now be possible to achieve cost savings in designing, 
constructing, and modifying CVNX and sections of CVN-77 through 
use of a computer-aided design and product model. Such a 
product model might also be beneficial in supporting the Nimitz 
class ships in the fleet.
    Major new construction shipbuilding programs, including the 
Flight IIA Arleigh Burke-class destroyer, the Virginia-class 
submarine, and the San Antonio-class amphibious ship, using the 
three-dimensional, computer-based product models have resulted 
in over $184.0 million savings. The Navy predicts that 
additional savings will continue to accrue throughout the life 
cycle of the ships when they are repaired and modified. These 
product models were developed and funded through the ship 
class' research and development and construction funds.
    The committee recommends an increase of $10.0 million in PE 
64567N to develop an electronic product model of the CVNX-1 and 
applicable sections of CVN-77 nuclear aircraft carrier design. 
The committee also directs the Navy to provide an analysis of 
the potential costs and benefits of extending this product 
model effort for use in supporting the Nimitz-class ships in 
the fleet.

DD-21 class destroyer program (sec. 213)

    The budget request included $549.7 million for research and 
development for DD-21, the Navy's new destroyer program. The 
committee recommends authorization of the budget request for 
fiscal year 2001 and fully supports the DD-21 as the future 
destroyer required to replace Spruance-class destroyers and 
Oliver Hazard Perry-class frigates. The committee concurs that 
the administration's research and development budget request is 
required to attain a fiscal year 2005 start of construction and 
that additional resources would most likely be required for a 
fiscal year 2004 construction start.
    While the committee fully supports DD-21, the committee has 
not been provided adequate explanation of the following issues:
          (1) the advisability of delaying the initial 
        operational capability for three years;
          (2) maintaining key capabilities required for 
        completion of the mission of DD-21;
          (3) the need for a one year delay in the start of 
        construction of DD-21;
          (4) the requirement for extending the construction 
        performance period by two years; and
          (5) the inclusion of all life-cycle maintenance in a 
        non-competitive life-of-the-ship contract award.

               Delaying the Initial Operating Capability

    It would appear that the Navy has given a lower priority to 
the mission of DD-21, providing ordnance on target to influence 
the events ashore (land attack), than that of building a 
technologically superior ship in the first hull. The one 
yeardelay in the DD-21 program without analysis of technology insertion 
approaches, successful in previous ship procurement programs and 
presently being used in the CVN(X) and the Virginia-class attack 
submarine programs, requires additional explanation.
    While Marine Corps witnesses testified that the two 155 
millimeter guns on the DD-21 would be the first at-sea system 
to fully meet the Marine Corps requirements for fire support 
since decommissioning of the battleships, Navy witnesses did 
not provide information regarding the risks to the Marines 
caused by the one year delay in commencing construction and two 
year delay in delivery of the first DD-21.

                      Maintaining Key Capabilities

    The Marine Corps has stated a requirement that all naval 
surface fire support weapon systems be easily sustainable via 
underway replenishment. The Navy apparently intends to provide 
the surface fire support with options that includes both gun-
fired 155 millimeter ammunition and land attack missiles. The 
committee understands that the Navy is working with the 
contractor teams to specify underway replenishment requirements 
and fully supports the continued refinement of capabilities. 
The committee encourages the Navy to fully involve the Marine 
Corps with the review of requirements which affect Marine Corps 
concepts of operations including whether the land attack 
missile at-sea resupply requirement is valid for the DD-21.

                             One Year Delay

    The Navy has consistently emphasized the need for a 
destroyer which has lower procurement and operating costs than 
the present fleet of destroyers and frigates. In attempting to 
bring such a ship to reality, the Navy determined that manning 
the ship was the main cost driver in operating the ship. To 
reduce manning requirements, the Navy challenged two industry 
teams to develop a new destroyer design which would reduce 
total ownership cost. The Navy directed the two teams to 
include in their design proposal justification of the 
requirement for each member of the crew and consideration of 
the life-of-the-ship cost of maintaining each piece of 
equipment when determining what equipment would be included in 
their design.
    Without the advantage of analysis, the Navy set a goal of a 
95 person crew and a threshold of a 150 person crew. 
Consequently, the focus of design and scheduling efforts for 
the land attack destroyer, thus far, appear to have been on 
manning and total operating costs. Again, apparently without a 
thorough analysis, the Navy determined that the design teams 
could not produce a design which met the 95 person crew and 
life cycle costs criteria in time to commence construction in 
fiscal year 2004, the time frame both teams had been working 
toward. This determination resulted in the Navy submitting a 
Future Years Defense Program for DD-21 which would delay 
commencing construction of the first DD-21 for one year (from 
fiscal year 2004 to fiscal year 2005).

             Extending the Construction Performance Period

    The Navy determined that the original five year performance 
period (fiscal year 2004 through fiscal 2008) for building the 
first DD-21 would result in unacceptable risk for successful 
completion of the program. Therefore, the Navy budget supports 
a two year delay in the delivery of DD-21 (from fiscal year 
2008 to fiscal year 2010).

         Non-competitive Award of Life-of-the-Ship Maintenance

    The Navy intends to build 32 DD-21 land attack destroyers 
to replace the aging Spruance-class (DD-963) and Oliver Hazard 
Perry-class (FFG-7) destroyers. The Navy has discussed the 
possibility of awarding the winner of the phase II design 
competition not only the contract to build the first DD-21, but 
also a contract to provide life-cycle support for all DD-21 
ships. The estimated value of a full support contract that 
includes all ship maintenance for the life of all DD-21 ships 
would be greater than the contract value for building all 32 
ships. If such a maintenance contract were awarded, the winner 
of the full service support contract could be in a position to 
determine the ship repair contractors in fleet concentration 
areas that would be permitted to repair DD-21 ships. The 
committee believes that this could be a troubling divestiture 
to a contractor of what is inherently a government function. In 
addition, the committee is concerned that awarding a full 
service support contract for maintenance of DD-21 may reduce 
the flexibility of the operational fleet commanders to maintain 
all the fleet ships based on a prioritization of overall fleet 
maintenance requirements.
    Therefore, the committee recommends a provision which 
would:
          (1) authorize the Secretary of the Navy to pursue a 
        technology insertion approach to DD-21 that would 
        commence construction of the first DD-21 in fiscal year 
        2004 followed by a fiscal year 2009 delivery;
          (2) express the sense of Congress that there are 
        compelling reasons to commence DD-21 in fiscal year 
        2004 followed by sequential construction of DD-21 
        destroyers until a total of 32 are built, and that the 
        Secretary should consider the following when making his 
        decisions regarding DD-21 procurement:
                  (a) the Marine Corps requires fire support 
                which the Navy will be unable to provide until 
                the DD-21 155 millimeter guns are introduced in 
                the fleet;
                  (b) a technology insertion approach has been 
                successful for other ship construction programs 
                and is being used in the CVN(X) aircraft 
                carrier and Virginia-class submarine programs;
                  (c) a stable configuration for the first 10 
                ships of the class could help ensure the 
                greatest capabilities are provided at the 
                lowest cost; and
                  (d) action to acquire DD-21 destroyers should 
                be taken as soon as possible to realize fully 
                the cost savings of construction and operation 
                of DD-21 class destroyers when compared to 
                construction and operation of other classes of 
                destroyers;
          (3) direct the Secretary to submit a report not later 
        than April 18, 2001, on a plan, including the resources 
        required, for pursuing a technology insertion approach 
        to DD-21; and
          (4) direct the Secretary of Defense to submit a 
        report not later than April 18, 2001, that discusses 
        the following:
                  (a) the technical feasibility of commencing 
                DD-21 construction in fiscal year 2004 with a 
                delivery date in fiscal year 2009. For this 
                section of the report, the committee suggests 
                input by an independent entity, such as the 
                Defense Science Board;
                  (b) an analysis of various contracting 
                strategies for acquiring the first 10 ships of 
                the DD-21 class;
                  (c) the effects on the destroyer industrial 
                base and on the costs of other shipbuilding 
                programs of delaying constructing the first DD-
                21 until fiscal year 2005, and of delaying the 
                construction of the second DD-21 destroyer 
                until 2007; and
                  (d) the effects on fleet maintenance 
                strategies and on commercial maintenance 
                facilities in fleet concentration areas of 
                awarding a shipbuilding contractor team a 
                maintenance contract which includes all 
                maintenance actions above ships force and below 
                depot maintenance levels.
    The committee fully supports the DD-21 program and 
recognizes the difficulty the Navy faces in instituting an 
acquisition strategy that emphasizes private sector flexibility 
in meeting general Navy requirements for a complicated ship.
    The committee encourages the Navy and the DD-21 program 
office to make maximum use of the expertise and facilities 
resident in Navy field activities for analysis, test, and 
evaluation of private sector proposals and designs.

F-22 aircraft program (sec. 214)

    The committee recommends a provision that would increase 
the F-22 program engineering and manufacturing development 
(EMD) cost cap by one percent, funds for which could only be 
obligated for testing requirements approved by the Defense 
Acquisition Executive and the Director of Operational Test and 
Evaluation. This provision will add a cushion to the 
development phase, as it nears completion, to ensure adequate 
testing has been accomplished. The Defense Acquisition 
Executive and the Director, Operational Test and Evaluation, 
would share the responsibility for ensuring that the 
expenditure of any funds above the EMD cost cap would be for 
testing purposes only.
    The performance of the F-22, in testing to date, has been 
impressive. When introduced as the Air Force's air dominance 
fighter, it will be far and away the best fighter aircraft in 
the world. A comprehensive test program now is required to 
prevent costly retrofits later.
    The budget request included $2.2 billion to commence low 
rate initial production of 10 F-22 Raptor aircraft, $396.2 
million for advance procurement items for 16 more aircraft in 
fiscal year 2002, and $1.4 billion in PE 64239F for continuing 
F-22 EMD. The Director of Operational Test and Evaluation has 
voiced concern that the congressionally mandated cost cap for 
the EMD Phase may drive the Air Force to reduce too much 
content from the F-22 test program. The committee echoes this 
concern.
    The EMD and production cost caps were established by the 
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1998. This 
action was taken after the Air Force canceled the manufacture 
of four pre-production verification aircraft and slowed 
aircraft production, transferring $2.2 billion from procurement 
to cover an EMD overrun. The purpose of the cost caps was to 
force the program to exercise a greater degree of fiscal 
discipline. In testimony before the AirLand Subcommittee, the 
Air Force has given the caps credit for exacting this 
discipline on both the government and the contractor teams. In 
its latest annual report on the F-22 program, the General 
Accounting Office concluded that: ``the F-22 development 
program could still be managed within its cost limitation,'' 
but ``[s]hould further significant cost increases materialize, 
the development program may need to be scaled back, or other 
ways may need to be found to reduce the costs.''
    In the past year, the F-22 program has implemented two 
structural fixes: the forward aft tail boom and a structural 
member in the flaperon. These occurrences are normal in any 
development program, but because flight testing constitutes the 
majority of the remaining EMD efforts, funding for fixing these 
occurrences is more difficult to find without reducing testing 
effort. The committee is concerned that if the program were to 
be scaled back due to cost increases in other areas, it would 
be testing that would be cut. The Air Force has already 
announced that testing efficiencies have enabled it to reduce 
the actual flight test hours from 4,337 hours to 3,757 hours. 
It is not the committee's intent to prevent the service from 
finding further testing efficiencies, but rather to ensure the 
test program remains adequate.

Joint strike fighter (sec. 215)

    The budget request for the Joint Strike Fighter (JSF) 
program included $261.1 million to complete the concept 
demonstration phase, with $129.5 million in PE 63800F and 
$131.6 million in PE 63800N. The budget request also included 
$595.5 million to initiate the engineering and manufacturing 
development (EMD) phase, with $299.5 million in PE 64800F and 
$296.0 million in PE 64800N.
    The committee fully appreciates the critical need to 
modernize our aging fleet of legacy aircraft with aircraft 
possessing the capabilities promised by the JSF program. The 
purpose of the JSF program is to develop and field an 
affordable, highly common family of next generation strike 
fighter aircraft for the U.S. Navy, U.S. Marine Corps, the U.S. 
Air Force, and allies. The Navy variant (called CV) will be 
aircraft carrier capable, the Marine Corps variant will be 
capable of short takeoff and vertical landing (STOVL), and the 
Air Force variant will be of a conventional takeoff and landing 
(CTOL) design. Commonality within this family of aircraft is 
crucial to keeping the overall tactical aviation modernization 
plan affordable.
    Two contractor teams are competing to win a competition to 
enter into the next phase of the program, the EMD phase. In 
addition to conducting design and risk mitigation activities, 
each contractor team is building two concept demonstration 
aircraft. Although these are not JSF prototypes, they are 
required to demonstrate key enabling performance criteria, such 
as slow speed handling characteristics for aircraft carrier 
approaches, and short takeoff and vertical landing for the 
Marine Corps variant.
    Unfortunately, the schedule for flying the concept 
demonstrator aircraft has slipped for both of the contractor 
teams, primarily due to propulsion system problems. The 
committee understands that, if the program adheres to the 
current schedule, with no further delays, the STOVL variants 
will not fly until after the contractor teams deliver their 
proposals for EMD to the government. While the contractors may 
still be able to present additional test results to the 
government on these flights and on the STOVL design, the 
competitive environment will inevitably restrict the free flow 
of information after proposal delivery. This leaves uncertainty 
on the technical readiness of the program to enter EMD along 
the budgeted schedule.
    The committee has also been apprized of a General 
Accounting Office (GAO) report on the JSF program that raises 
concerns about the level of maturity of the design at the point 
when the Department intends to make a decision to proceed into 
EMD. The GAO report specifically mentioned several enabling 
technologies whose technical risk will not have been reduced to 
an acceptable level before the planned transition to EMD.
    In addition to the testing maturity, the committee has 
additional concerns about the nature of the acquisition 
strategy and how potential changes in that acquisition strategy 
might affect the program. Many have questioned the advisability 
of continuing the current ``winner-take-all'' strategy for 
selecting the winning team for EMD on one of the largest 
defense programs in history. Losing outright could force one of 
the teams to leave the fighter development and production 
business, which would in turn leave the government in the 
position of depending on a single team for all future tactical 
aviation modernization. Recognizing the import of this 
situation, the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, 
Technology, and Logistics has commissioned a review of the 
currently approved JSF acquisition strategy. The Department of 
Defense has not completed this review, but expects to make a 
decision on the appropriate acquisition strategy within the 
next two months. The time spent making this decision could 
delay releasing the call for improvement (analogous to a 
request for proposal), the response to which will be the basis 
for making the final decision before proceeding to EMD.
    The committee continues to be a strong advocate for the JSF 
program. The committee believes that the JSF program, with 
certain modest exceptions, has demonstrated how a joint service 
requirement development process should work and how a joint 
service program should be implemented. However, with so much at 
stake in this centerpiece of tactical aviation modernization, 
the committee believes that it would be terribly shortsighted 
for the Department to pursue a program that is driven by the 
calendar, and not by events.
    The committee does not believe that it would be prudent to 
proceed into EMD without having conducted adequate testing, and 
reduced the data from that testing, for the competing 
demonstrator aircraft. This is particularly the case for the 
version possessing the highest technical risk, the STOVL 
version, which is also on the slowest track to testing.
    Therefore, the committee recommends a provision that would 
require the Department to submit a report, before December 15, 
2000, describing: (1) how the program may have been 
restructured to reflect any changes in the acquisition 
strategy; and (2) exit criteria that the Department has 
established to ensure that technical risks are at acceptable 
levels before the program enters into EMD.
    In consonance with this recommendation, the committee also 
recommends no funding in support of the budget request for EMD 
funds, specifically a decrease of $595.5 million, including 
$299.5 million in PE 64800F and $296.0 million in PE 64800N, 
but recommends an increase of $424.2 million in demonstration 
and validation funds, including $212.1 million in PE 63800F and 
$212.1 million in PE 63800N.
    The committee believes that the Department should use this 
time and funding to complete flight testing of the concept 
demonstrator aircraft, acquire the data from the test program, 
spend such funds as can be used to reduce risk for technologies 
that would need to mature during EMD, and define and implement 
a preferred acquisition strategy.
    The committee is not interested in having the contractor 
team or teams sitting around waiting for the first day of 
fiscal year 2002. Indeed, the committee would support the 
Department's moving past the concept demonstration tests with 
the fiscal year 2001 funds provided. Such activities could 
perhaps include even selecting a contractor team or teams to 
conduct various pre-EMD activities to begin planning for EMD. 
Such committee support, however, presumes that: (1) the 
Department will have provided the report required by the 
provision regarding acquisition strategy and technical risk 
exit criteria; and (2) the results of flight testing the STOVL 
variants will have been available to inform such decisions.
    The committee is also not interested in having the 
contractors make additional unreimbursed investments in winning 
this program. The Department has informed the committee that it 
has recently modified the current JSF demonstration contracts 
to allow significant contractor investment in the concept 
demonstration phase. The committee recommends that the 
Department not propose any restructured program that would 
allow any further individual contractor investment beyond the 
levels envisioned by this modification. While the Department 
has made a reasonable case for implementing the current 
modification, the committee does not view additional contractor 
investment during the competition phase as conducive to smooth 
implementation of any potential acquisition strategy.
    The committee is well aware of the considerable 
international interest in this program. The actions recommended 
by the committee should in no way be interpreted as a lack of 
support for the JSF or a lack of appreciation for the critical 
role that the JSF can play in tactical aviation modernization. 
At this critical juncture, however, the JSF program is too 
important to be rushed into the EMD phase until the program is 
ready to graduate. The committee believes that a more prudent 
technical and programmatic approach will, in the final 
analysis, strengthen the process of developing and fielding the 
family of aircraft that will dominate tactical aviation for the 
next half century.

Global Hawk high altitude endurance unmanned aerial vehicle (sec. 216)

    The budget request included $109.2 million for the 
development of endurance unmanned aerial vehicles (HAE UAVs), 
of which $103.2 million was for the continued development of 
the Global Hawk HAE UAV. The Global Hawk is an advanced concept 
technology demonstration (ACTD), nearing completion of its 
highly successful military utility phase, and preparing for its 
engineering and manufacturing (EMD) phase.
    The budget request also included $22.4 million for the 
procurement of long lead items for the first two production 
Global Hawk HAE UAVs and one common ground station. The General 
Accounting Office (GAO) has studied the Global Hawk program, 
and has concluded that production in fiscal year 2001 would be 
premature. The GAO identified three reasons for arriving at 
this conclusion:
          (1) Global Hawk has not yet begun a scheduled one 
        year EMD phase;
          (2) testing of a production representative Global 
        Hawk system will not have been started; and
          (3) during EMD, the Global Hawk design will be 
        changing.
    The committee strongly supports the continued development 
of the Global Hawk HAE UAV, but concurs with the GAO that long 
lead production for two additional HAE UAVs is premature. The 
committee recommends a decrease of $22.4 million in Aircraft 
Procurement, Air Force, that would allow the Air Force 
sufficient time to use the EMD program to stabilize the final 
design.
    Although one developmental Global Hawk HAE UAV was 
destroyed in a mishap, six other developmental Global Hawk HAE 
UAVs have either been delivered to the Air Force or are at 
varying stages of production. The Air Force has requested 
additional electro-optical and infra-red sensor payloads for 
the Global Hawk HAE UAV on its unfunded requirements list 
because there are not enough sensors to outfit all six of these 
Global Hawk HAE UAVs.
    The six remaining ACTD HAE UAVs do not meet the operational 
requirement. The committee believes, however, that these 
aircraft are still excellent platforms for continuing 
development and expansion of the current HAE UAV operational 
concept. For example, advances in the production of active 
electronic scanned array (AESA) radars and the development of 
associated technologies, such as modular, scalable antennas 
could make this an appropriate time to further expand 
operational concepts to include an airborne surveillance 
capability. This may be preferable to merely buying more of the 
current sensor payloadsthat we know will not meet the Air 
Force's requirements. The committee also understands that Commander in 
Chief, Joint Forces Command, is interested in using the existing ACTD 
Global Hawk aircraft for experimentation after the Air Force begins 
producing HAE UAVs that meet the operational requirement.
    The committee is well aware of how taxing recent operations 
have been on such low density, high demand units such as the E-
3A Airborne Warning and Control (AWACS) aircraft. The long 
endurance capability of the Global Hawk could make it an ideal 
candidate to substitute for such low density, high demand units 
as AWACS aircraft in certain situations, if it were to be 
outfitted with an appropriate payload. Such situations could 
include such lower threat environments as the area of 
responsibility of the Commander in Chief, Southern Command. 
Appropriate missions could include filling the air surveillance 
requirements in support of counter-drug operations off the 
coast of Central and South America.
    The committee recommends an increase of $18.0 million in PE 
35205F to extend the ACTD effort. The Air Force should use 
$12.0 million of this amount to acquire and integrate a non-
developmental AESA radar on Global Hawk, and to demonstrate its 
operational viability in the Southern Command area of 
responsibility. This demonstration should be conducted as soon 
as practicable in fiscal year 2001, with participation and 
guidance from the Commanders in Chief of the Joint Forces and 
Southern Commands, to include requirements and scenario 
planning. To further this goal, the committee recommends a 
provision that would direct the Secretary of Defense to 
coordinate a demonstration of the capability of the Global Hawk 
HAE UAV in an airborne surveillance role in the counter-drug 
effort, and to provide a report on the technical feasibility 
and operational concept for using Global Hawk HAE UAVs in this 
role.
    In the long-term, the Air Force should apply the remaining 
$6.0 million of this total to begin a concurrent development 
effort for an improved surveillance radar for potential use on 
the Global Hawk. The committee believes that this development 
effort should capitalize on the efforts detailed in the report 
delivered to Congress in April, 2000, on modular, scalable, 
active electronically scanned antenna (AESA)-based radar 
development activities.

Unmanned advanced capability aircraft and ground combat vehicles (sec. 
        217)

    The challenges that the United States will face in the new 
millennium are diverse--new threats, new battlefields, and new 
weapons. Our armed forces must remain vigilant, forward 
thinking and prepared to address these challenges. The 
committee believes that the Department of Defense must exploit 
the opportunities created by the rapid pace of technological 
development to provide our men and women in uniform with the 
most advanced weaponry and leverage these developments in a way 
that minimizes the risk to those deployed in harm's way.
    During the offensive military operation in Kosovo, U.S. 
forces carried out 78 days of round-the-clock operations and 
over 38,000 combat sorties with no combat casualties. The 
American people are coming to expect that military operations 
are casualty free. This is a factor that is more and more 
influencing the planning of military operations. How else do we 
explain bombing operations in Kosovo that largely restricted 
coalition pilots to altitudes between ten and fifteen thousand 
feet?
    Limiting risk to our personnel is clearly an important goal 
and one of the most advantageous benefits of deploying unmanned 
combat systems and technologies. An initiative to expand the 
use of such technologies would allow the Department to 
aggressively pursue and field remotely controlled combat 
systems with this goal: within 10 years one-third of U.S. 
military operational deep strike aircraft will be unmanned and 
within 15 years one- third of all U.S. military ground combat 
vehicles will also be unmanned. It is not the intention of the 
committee to replace pilots and manned aircraft with unmanned 
combat systems, but to provide added capabilities to manned 
combat aircraft--added capabilities that would provide 
alternatives to sending military personnel into the highest 
risk missions.
    Casualty aversion limits the flexibility of foreign policy. 
Taking full advantage of advances in technology will allow 
future administrations greater flexibility and, at the same 
time, reduce exposure of U.S. personnel. For these reasons, the 
committee recommends an increase of $200.0 million in research, 
development, test and evaluation (RDT&E) to accelerate the 
technologies that will lead to the development and fielding of 
remotely controlled air combat vehicles by 2010 and remotely 
controlled ground combat vehicles by 2015. The committee has 
identified three promising programs, initiated by the services, 
in which to invest these funds:

              Air Force Unmanned Combat Air Vehicle (UCAV)

    The committee recognizes the on-going joint Defense 
Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA)/Air Force unmanned 
combat air vehicle (UCAV) program, initiated in 1998. The 
committee notes that a small-scale demonstrator will flight 
test in the Spring of 2001. The committee recommends an 
increase of $100.0 million in PE 62702E to accelerate risk 
reduction and ``Concept of Operation'' evaluation. The 
additional funds would be applied as follows: design, 
development of additional demonstrator vehicles; invest in low-
cost commercial core engine derivative; demonstrate intelligent 
decision aids; validate suppression of enemy air defense(SEAD)/
strike targeting in realistic environment; and fully validate 
multi-vehicle flight modes.

                    Navy Unmanned Combat Air Vehicle

    DARPA and the Navy initiated a joint program this year to 
explore concepts for a Naval unmanned combat air vehicle (UCAV-
N). The committee recommends an increase of $25.0 million to be 
applied to a preliminary design of a UCAV-N demonstrator system 
suitable for ship-based SEAD/strike/surveillance missions.

                    Army Future Combat Systems (FCS)

    In February 2000, the Army signed a Memorandum of Agreement 
(MOA) with DARPA to develop a future combat system (FCS) to 
replace the current generation of armored combat vehicles. 
Although robotics is a key part of development, there is not a 
requirement for an autonomous, remotely-controlled vehicle in 
the current program. The committee recommends an increase of 
$121.3 million for the FCS program as follows: an increase of 
$46.3 million in PE 63005A to accelerate the enabling 
technologies for the FCS program, and an increase of $75.0 
million in PE 62702A to add an unmanned, remotely-controlled 
aspect to the future combat system. The committee expects this 
requirement to be added to the MOA on FCS.
    The committee directs the Secretary of Defense report to 
the congressional defense committees by January 31, 2001, on: 
(1) the schedule for this initiative; (2) the funding required 
for fiscal year 2002 and for the future years defense program; 
and (3) a description and assessment of the acquisition 
strategy for remotely-controlled air and ground combat 
vehicles.

Army space control technology (sec. 218)

    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
$20.0 million for the Army's Kinetic Energy Anti-Satellite (KE-
ASAT) program and $5.0 million for other Army space control 
technology development emphasizing temporary and reversible 
effects. The provision would limit the obligation of funds for 
space control technology, other than KE-ASAT, until the funds 
authorized for the KE-ASAT program have been released to the 
KE-ASAT program manager.
    The committee directs the Commander of the Army Space and 
Missile Defense Command (SMDC) to use the $20.0 million 
authorized for the KE-ASAT program to advance the three 
existing KE-ASAT kill vehicles and associated hardware to a 
point where a flight test could occur one year following any 
decision to do so. None of the funds authorized for the KE-ASAT 
program may be used to support research and development on 
capabilities to counter satellites in a non-destructive, 
reversible manner. The Commander of SMDC shall also begin 
planning and preparation for a KE-ASAT flight demonstration. 
The committee is aware that the Kodiak Island launch facility 
in Alaska is well suited to support a launch of a KE-ASAT test 
vehicle. The committee directs the Commander of SMDC to include 
an assessment of the Kodiak Island facility as part of the 
overall flight test planning and evaluation process.
    The committee continues to support the KE-ASAT technology 
program. At the same time, the committee has also directed the 
Army to develop capabilities to counter satellites in a non-
destructive, reversible manner. The committee does not view 
these two objectives to be incompatible.

Russian American Observation Satellites program (sec. 219)

    As detailed elsewhere in this report, the committee is 
concerned that the Ballistic Missile Defense Organization plans 
a two-satellite Russian American Observation Satellites (RAMOS) 
program. The committee believes that the Secretary of Defense 
should develop, and seek congressional approval of, a 
technology protection plan before proceeding with the RAMOS 
program, regardless of the program's structure and focus. 
Therefore, the committee recommends a provision that would 
prohibit the obligation or expenditure of any funds for RAMOS 
until 30 days after the Secretary submits to Congress a report 
explaining how the Secretary plans to protect U.S. advanced 
military technology that may be associated with the RAMOS 
program.

Joint Biological Defense Program (sec. 220)

    The committee recommends a provision that would prohibit 
the obligation of funds to procure the vaccine for the 
biological agent anthrax until the Secretary of Defense: (1) 
notifies the congressional defense committees in writing that 
the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has approved the current 
production facility of the anthrax vaccine for FDA-approved 
vaccine production operations; and (2) provides a report to the 
congressional defense committees that addresses contingencies 
associated with relying on the current manufacturer to produce 
the vaccine. The report will include recommended strategies to 
mitigate the risk of the loss of the current sole-source 
manufacturer of the vaccine and a budget to support these 
strategies. The report will also provide recommended strategies 
to ensure that an FDA-licensed anthrax vaccine can be procured 
should the sole-source manufacturer fail to obtain FDA approval 
to release stockpiled or newly produced vaccine, or the 
manufacturer terminates anthrax vaccine production permanently. 
The Secretary will report the funding requirements and the 
criteria for implementing these strategies.
    In the Senate report accompanying S. 2060 (S. Rept 105-
189), the committee noted that the anthrax vaccine is approved 
by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), and has been used by 
cattle and sheep ranchers since the 1970s. The committee also 
emphasized the criticality of maintaining sufficient supplies 
of the vaccine to immunize U.S. military personnel against the 
biological warfare agent anthrax.
    The Department of Defense (DOD) currently relies on a 
single-source manufacturer to supply the military services with 
the anthrax vaccine. The vaccine manufacturer, however, failed 
to maintain required FDA approvals for the vaccine production 
facility and the stockpiled vaccine. As a result, the DOD 
delayed the start of phase two of the Anthrax Vaccine 
Immunization Program (AVIP). In addition, the Defense Contract 
Audit Agency (DCAA) conducted audits of the manufacturer's 
financial capability in June 1999, and February 2000, and 
reported after both reviews that there is ``* * * substantial 
doubt * * * '' that the manufacturer will be financially able 
to continue performing on government contracts. The committee 
believes that it is incumbent on the Department to assess the 
implications of the FDA, DCAA, and other federal agency reviews 
of the current procurement plan, and to ensure that an 
effective plan is in place to provide a vaccine to immunize 
U.S. military personnel against the anthrax virus.

Report on biological warfare defense vaccine research and development 
        programs (sec. 221)

    The committee recommends a provision that would direct the 
Secretary of Defense to report on the progress of the 
Department of Defense (DOD) program to develop and procure 
vaccines for biological warfare agents. The Secretary will 
provide this report to the congressional defense committees no 
later than February 1, 2001. The report will include: an 
evaluation of the ability of the commercial sector to meet the 
vaccine requirements of the Department; a design for a 
government owned/contractoroperated (GOCO) vaccine production 
facility at an alternative site determined by the Secretary; and a 
comparison of the costs and benefits of the current acquisition 
strategy, a GOCO facility at an alternative site determined by the 
Secretary, and other acquisition alternatives. The design 
recommendation for the GOCO facility at the alternative site determined 
by the Secretary will include: a recommendation, in consultation with 
the U.S. Surgeon General, on the possibility of the GOCO providing 
support for civilian vaccine requirements and the related impact on the 
operating costs of the GOCO vaccine production facility; and an 
analysis of the impact of international requirements for vaccines on 
the operating costs of the GOCO.
    The biological warfare capability of the government of Iraq 
during Operation Desert Storm led to a requirement for vaccines 
to immunize military personnel against biological agents. Since 
that time, the Joint Chiefs of Staff (JCS) biological warfare 
threat list now includes over twenty biological agents that are 
in some stage of development, from basic research to 
production, by several countries. During this same period, the 
Department has initiated a mandatory program to immunize all 
active and reserve military personnel against the biological 
warfare agent anthrax.
    During an April 14, 2000, hearing of the Subcommittee on 
Personnel, witnesses from the DOD and General Accounting Office 
identified many of the challenges associated with vaccine 
development and acquisition. These challenges included the 
reluctance of large pharmacuetical companies to participate in 
vaccine development and production, the speculative costs 
associated with working with start-up commercial vaccine 
research and production companies, and the requirement to pay a 
premium to the private sector for vaccine research and 
development due to the relatively limited quantities of 
vaccines required by the DOD. The committee notes the 
recommendation of Project Badger in the early 1990s for a GOCO 
vaccine production facility and subsequent DOD plans and 
budgeting to construct a facility at the Pine Bluff Arsenal in 
Pine Bluff, Arkansas. Based on the work that has already been 
done, the committee believes that the Secretary should give 
strong consideration to the Pine Bluff Arsenal as the site for 
the alternate facility. Given these issues, the committee 
believes a reevaluation by the DOD of the issues relating to 
vaccine development and production, and the merits of a GOCO 
facility at an alternative site are necessary at this time.

                       SUBTITLE C--OTHER MATTERS


Mobile offshore base (sec. 241)

    The committee recommends a provision that would require the 
Secretary of Defense to provide the congressional defense 
committees with the results of the operational utility cost-
benefit analysis. The provision would also require the 
Secretary to designate a lead service and tentative program 
schedule if the Secretary decides to continue the MOB program.
    The Senate report accompanying S. 1059 (S. Rept. 106-50) 
directed the Secretary of Defense to initiate an analysis of 
the operational utility of the mobile offshore base (MOB), and 
report to the congressional defense committees by March 1, 
2000. The analysis was to include the results of the technical 
feasibility studies, assessment of the operational utility 
versus the life-cycle cost of such a system, and a 
recommendation on whether to proceed with pre-development or 
development activities. The report further directed that, if 
the recommendation were to proceed with the program, the 
Department of Defense should designate an executive service and 
provide an estimate of fiscally phased resources for program 
execution.
    The Navy delivered a report to the congressional defense 
committees in April, 2000. This report, however, only detailed 
the technical work accomplished and described the effort that 
would need to be accomplished were the program to be initiated, 
along with cost estimates of the remaining effort. There was no 
mention of operational utility versus life-cycle cost, nor was 
there a recommendation on whether to proceed with the program.

Air Force science and technology planning (sec. 242)

    The committee recommends a provision that would require the 
Secretary of the Air Force to submit a report to the 
congressional defense committees on the long-term challenges 
and short term objectives of the Air Force science and 
technology (S&T) program.
    The committee was deeply disappointed by the science and 
technology budget proposed by the Air Force for fiscal year 
2000. This budget not only failed to measure up to the 
congressional goals established in section 214 of the Strom 
Thurmond National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 
1999 (Public Law 105-261), but also risked mortgaging the 
future of the Air Force by sacrificing long-term technological 
superiority in favor of short-term readiness. The science and 
technology budget proposed by the Air Force for fiscal year 
2001 shows some improvement, but the committee remains 
concerned that the Air Force has made deep cuts to some 
programs without undertaking a comprehensive planning process 
to ascertain its long-term technology needs and how those needs 
can be supported by the science and technology program.
    Over the last five years, the Department of Defense (DOD) 
has developed a coordinated planning process for S&T 
spending,known as the joint warfighting science and technology planning 
process. This process has helped DOD address redundancies and overlaps, 
and ensure that the S&T programs funded by the services are 
appropriately designed to meet the Department's warfighting needs. The 
result has been a significant improvement in the quality of the 
Department's science and technology budget submissions. As successful 
as it has been, however, the current S&T planning process appears to 
focus on the micro issue of ensuring that individual projects address 
legitimate warfighting needs, rather than on the macro issue of 
prioritizing those needs and ensuring that sufficient funding is made 
available to meet them.
    Two of the three services have undertaken ambitious steps 
to try to address that shortcoming in the science and 
technology planning process by prioritizing their own needs on 
a macro basis, and realigning S&T funding to match new 
priorities. The Army has attempted to identify science and 
technology spending that is directly linked to the planned 
transformation of the force, and prioritized that spending over 
funding for incremental improvements to existing platforms. The 
Navy has undertaken to reevaluate all science and technology 
spending from the ground up and focus investments on areas 
designated as long-term Grand Challenges and more immediate 
Future Naval Capabilities. By focusing its spending in this 
way, the Navy hopes to avoid the usual practice of trying to 
fund a little bit of everything, and ensure that it will have 
critical mass in the areas that are most important to the Navy 
of the future.
    In view of the serious cuts in the Air Force S&T budget and 
the danger that these cuts could undermine long-term 
technological superiority in key areas, the provision 
recommended by the committee would require the Air Force to 
undertake a comparable planning effort. This process must 
include not only the Air Force research community, but also the 
entire warfighter community, requirements community, and 
acquisition community. It is the committee's hope that the 
planning process--and the Air Force science and technology 
program--will be driven by the future needs of the Air Force, 
rather than the budgetary constraints of today.


Counter-terrorism basic research

    The committee recommends an increase of $3.0 million in PE 
61102A for the Army's counter-terrorism research program. Last 
year, the committee provided the funding to initiate a basic 
research program in order to explore technologies that deter, 
resolve, and mitigate terrorist acts, including physical 
structure and physical effects research. It is of the utmost 
concern that we conduct research and development not only for 
near-term solutions, but also for investigating revolutionary 
approaches in science and techologies that will provide next 
generation solutions for force protection and terrorist 
threats. The committee urges the Army to include funding for 
this important project in the future.

Composite materials

    The committee recommends an increase of $6.0 million in PE 
62105A for composite materials for the next generation armored 
vehicle for the Army's objective force. The committee directs 
that all applicable competitive procedures be used in the award 
of contracts or other agreements under this program and that 
cost sharing be used to the maximum extent practicable.

Advanced missile composite components

    The committee recommends an increase of $5.0 million in the 
missile technology applied research program (PE 62303A) to 
develop the enabling technology for the next generation of 
tactical missiles. The committee directs that all applicable 
competitive procedures be used in the award of contracts or 
other agreements under this program and that cost sharing be 
used to the maximum extent practicable.

Smart truck initiative

    The committee recommends an increase of $3.5 million in PE 
62601A, the Army's combat vehicle and automotive technology 
account for the National Automotive Center, to conduct 
demonstrations for the smart truck initiative. The committee 
directs that cost sharing be used to the maximum extent 
practicable.

Portable hybrid electric power system

    The committee recommends an increase of $1.5 million in PE 
62705A for research in a portable, hybrid electric power system 
that would combine battery, fuel cell, super-capacitor, and 
other subsystems. The additional funds would be used to model 
and assess the tradeoffs as they relate to military missions. 
The committee directs that all applicable competitive 
procedures be used in the award of contracts or other 
agreements under this program and that cost sharing be used to 
the maximum extent practicable.

Thermoelectric power generation

    The committee recommends an increase of $1.0 million in PE 
62784A for a feasibility study on thermoelectric power 
generation for military applications.

Operational support

    The committee recommends an increase of $4.0 million in the 
Army's military engineering program (PE 62784A) for university 
partnering for operational support. The committee directs that 
all applicable competitive procedures be used in the award of 
contracts or other agreements under this program and that cost 
sharing be used to the maximum extent practicable.

Equipment readiness

    Long lead times and the high costs of procuring and 
inventory of replacement parts has resulted in soaring 
operation and support costs with a reduction of equipment 
readiness rates. The committee understands the Department of 
Defense has initiated a program to address these problems 
through the development of a self-contained, mobile 
manufacturing center that can produce spare parts at the point 
of need. The committee recommends an increase of $8.0 million 
in PE 63005A for the continuation of this important effort. The 
committee directs cost sharing be used to the maximum extent 
practicable.

Fuel cell auxiliary power units

    The committee recommends an increase of $4.0 million in PE 
63005A for research in fuel cell auxiliary power units for use 
in the Army's objective force. The Army's transformation 
strategy includes reducing the size of the deployed logistics 
footprint and prioritizing the development of vehicles that are 
smaller, lighter, more lethal, yet more reliable, fuel 
efficient and survivable. A key component of increased 
survivability is reducing the signature of future Army 
platforms. Addressing these logistics and survivability 
challenges should entail a full evaluation of alternative 
energy sources.

Big Crow program office

    The committee recommends an increase of $7.0 million in PE 
63006A for the Big Crow program, a national test asset 
supporting a wide variety of electronic warfare test and 
training exercises. The Big Crow program has historically been 
operated under the Department of Defense Major Range and Test 
Facility Base (MRTFB), primarily in a test asset role. 
Recently, however, the operational forces have recognized the 
asset's potential. The Big Crow program has been deployed 
operationally to support NATO and U.S. force deployments in 
southeast Europe as well as Commander in Chief for Space 
(CINCSpace) activities. The committee understands that the 
Department is making progress in developing a new strategy to 
ensure long-term funding for this program that will provide 
stability to support test and evaluation as well as operational 
missions. Oversight of the program has been assigned to the 
Army Space and Missile Defense Command and funding for this 
program is provided in the Future Years' Defense Program 
beginning in fiscal year 2002. The additional $7.0 million 
would provide bridge funding to maintain continuity in 
operations until the program completes this transition.

Army Space and Missile Defense Command Simulations

    The committee recommends an increase of $3.0 million in PE 
63308A for Family of Systems Simulators and an increase of $4.5 
million in PE 63308A for Simulations Center Upgrade.

Aero-acoustics instrumentation

    The budget request included no funds for aero-acoustics 
instrumentation. The committee has supported research and 
development activities conducted by the Army Space and Missile 
Defense Command in the area of aero-acoustics. Aero-acoustics 
instrumentation will enable the Army to understand acoustic 
coupling of missile airframes to the internal components for 
vehicles flying as fast as Mach 10. Therefore, the committee 
recommends an increase of $4.0 million in PE 63308A to continue 
this important research and development.

Acoustic technology research

    The committee continues to support research sponsored by 
the Army's Space and Missile Defense Command in acoustic 
applications for detection, identification, and tracking of 
cruise missiles and mobile missile launchers. The committee 
recommends an increase of $4.0 million in PE 63308A to support 
continued effort in this area.

Missile defense flight experiment

    The committee has supported the Army's program to 
demonstrate critical missile defense kill vehicle technologies 
through flight testing. To continue this effort, the committee 
recommends an increase of $14.7 million in PE 63308A.

Radar power technology

    The committee continues to support advanced radar power 
technology development at the Army Missile Defense and Space 
Technology Center. The committee recommends an increase of $4.0 
million in PE 63308A to continue this important research and 
development.

Scramjet acoustic combustion enhancement

    The committee is aware of research and development 
activities being conducted by the Army Space and Missile 
Defense Command in the area of scramjet acoustic mixing. A 
scramjet engine that can utilize acoustics to more efficiently 
burn propellant could significantly increase the performance 
and efficiency of air defense interceptors. Therefore, the 
committee recommends an increase of $2.0 million in PE 63308A 
to support continuation of this important research and 
development.

Space and missile defense battle lab

    The committee continues to support the Army's Space and 
Missile Defense Battle Lab. To support this important modeling 
and simulation capability, the committee recommends an increase 
of $5.0 million in PE 63308A.

Supercluster distributed memory technology

    The budget request included no funds for supercluster 
distributed memory technology. The committee is aware that 
supercluster distributed memory technology may provide a cost-
effective approach to running complex computer simulations to 
predict the control forces exerted on a missile over its flight 
trajectory. To support evaluation of this technology, the 
committee recommends an increase of $2.0 million PE 63308A.

Tactical High Energy Laser

    The budget request included no funding for completion of 
testing of the Tactical High Energy Laser (THEL) program. The 
committee supports expeditious completion of THEL development 
and testing. The committee recommends an increase of $15.0 
million in PE 63308A to support continued THEL testing and 
deployment preparation activities.

Anti-malarial research

    The committee recommends an increase of $2.0 million in PE 
63807A to accelerate the development and fielding of the anti-
malarial compound taphenoquine. The committee directs that cost 
sharing be used to the maximum extent practicable.

Electronic warfare development

    The budget request included $61.1 million for Army 
electronic warfare development activities. The committee notes 
and appreciates ongoing efforts by the Army to completely 
identify and understand issues associated with the deployment 
of Task Force Hawk last year during operations in Kosovo. The 
committee recognizes an outstanding requirement to install a 
suite of radio frequency countermeasures (SIRFC) and advanced 
threat infrared countermeasures (ATIRCM) equipment on Apache 
helicopters necessary to improve the ability of aircraft crews 
to survive in future conflicts. The committee recommends an 
increase of $38.5 million in PE 64270A for electronic warfare 
development, a total authorization of $99.6 million. Of this 
amount, $18.0 million would be used to support the development 
of a SIRFC production line and $20.5 million to complete 
development of SIRFC and ATIRCM ``A'' kits for the Apache 
Longbow helicopter.

Threat simulator development

    The budget request included $13.9 million for threat 
simulator development activities. The committee recognizes the 
important roles that threat simulators play in preparing our 
forces to fight and win future battles. The committee 
recommends an increase of $4.6 million in PE 64256A, a total 
authorization of $18.5 million. Of the $4.6 million increase, 
$2.1 million would be used for threat information operations 
attack simulator development and $2.5 million would be used for 
threat virtual mine simulator development.

Multiple launch rocket system product improvement program

    The budget request included $59.5 million for multiple 
launch rocket system product improvements. The committee 
understands that the Army continues to pursue a cost reduction 
initiative associated with the multiple launch rocket system 
(MLRS) improved launcher and the high mobility artillery and 
rocket system (HIMARS). The committee understands this 
initiative could result in cost savings of greater than $500.0 
million over the life of these programs. The committee, 
therefore, recommends an increase of $16.0 million in PE 63728A 
to support the ongoing MLRS and HIMARS cost reduction 
initiatives.

Joint Land Attack Cruise Missile Defense Elevated Netted Sensor

    The budget request included $25.0 million for the Joint 
Land Attack Cruise Missile Defense Elevated Netted Sensor 
(JLENS) system. The committee is concerned about possible 
vulnerabilities of an aerostat to climatic conditions and 
understands that the Army has established an Aerostat Design 
and Manufacturing (ADAM) program to facilitate the design and 
manufacture of affordable aerostats with improved performance 
and availability. The committee recommends an increase of $2.0 
million in PE 12419A in support of the ADAM program to provide 
the type of material and tether technology to make the JLENS 
system viable.

Communications and networking technologies

    The budget request included $8.1 million for Army 
information systems security research, development, test and 
evaluation. The committee supports efforts managed by the 
Army's Communications and Electronics Command (CECOM) in the 
area of applied communications and networking technology. To 
support these efforts, the committee recommends an increase of 
$5.0 million in PE 33140A.


Free electron laser

    The committee recommends an increase of $5.0 million in PE 
62111N to complete the development of the infrared free 
electron laser demonstration project to the 10 kilowatt level. 
This investment would enable the Department of the Navy to 
determine capabilities of such a tool for infrared counter-
measures and further the technology base in high energy lasers.

Biodegradable polymers

    The budget request included no funds for biodegradable 
polymers. The committee recommends an increase of $1.25 million 
in PE 62121N to aid in the development of polymer membrane 
methods for treating graywater (kitchen, shower, and cleaning 
solution), blackwater (sewage), and bilge water (oily 
contaminants) to acceptable levels prior to shipboard release.

Bioenvironmental hazards research

    The committee recommends an increase of $3.0 million in PE 
62121N for bioenvironmental hazards research. The committee is 
concerned that there is insufficient knowledge of the full 
impact and hazards to humans, animals, and plants from the 
potential use of biological warfare agents. Besides the obvious 
lethal effects on living organisms, biological warfare agents 
could have other very serious long-term consequences that would 
require a dedicated mitigation response or prophylaxis. The 
additional funds should be applied to research and development 
of the technologies and methods for better measuring and 
understanding the full range of impacts of biological warfare 
hazards to people and other living organisms, and thus improve 
our ability to develop suitable preparations or responses to 
such hazards. The committee directs that all applicable 
competitive procedures be used in the award of contracts or 
other agreements under this program and that cost sharing be 
used to the maximum extent practicable.

Nontraditional warfare initiatives

    The committee recommends an increase of $2.0 million in PE 
62131M for the Marine Corps to conduct applied research 
directed at their role as first responders. The additional 
funds should be used to explore innovative concepts for 
addressing non-traditional tactics and operational challenges 
arising in the 21st Century. The committee directs that all 
applicable competitive procedures be used in the award of 
contracts or other agreements under this program and that cost 
sharing be used to the maximum extent practicable.

Communications, command, and control, intelligence, surveillance, and 
        reconnaissance

    The committee recommends an increase of $3.0 million in PE 
62232N to accelerate the introduction of fused hyperspectral, 
synthetic aperture radar and electronic intelligence. The 
committee directs that cost sharing be used to the maximum 
extent practicable.

Cognitive research

    The committee recommends an increase of $3.0 million in PE 
62233N for applied cognitive technologies to improve learning. 
In a hearing before the Subcommittee on Emerging Threats and 
Capabilities, Dr. Delores Etter, Deputy Under Secretary of 
Defense for Science and Technology, explained the importance 
and the growing need for cognitive research, ``. . . an area 
that we think is one of increasing importance is cognitive 
readiness. This is really the area of human optimization. The 
challenges in this area include sustained operations, 
environmental ambiguity, distributed learning, and the overall 
information overload that we are presenting to our soldiers.'' 
The committee understands that the Chief of Naval and Education 
and Training has initiated a program to deal with cognitive 
development for Navy personnel. The additional funds would 
extend this program's focus to include technological research 
in cognitive readiness and human optimization.

Ceramic and carbon based composites

    The committee recommends an increase of $2.0 million in PE 
62234N for the continued development, evaluation and testing of 
ceramic and carbon based composites for use in strategic 
missiles and hypersonic vehicles. The committee directs that 
cost sharing be used to the maximum extent practicable.

Nanoscale sensor research

    The committee recommends an increase of $3.0 million in PE 
62234N for applied research in nanoscale sensor technologies. 
The additional funding would be expected to support the area 
designated by the Office of Naval Research as a Grand Challenge 
to develop highly multi-functional nanoscale architecture 
devices to their ultimate limits (high speed (100x), small size 
(0.01x), and low power (0.001x)), that interactively combine 
sensing, image processing, computation, signal processing, and 
communication functions, to achieve real-time adoptive 
response, on-site for Navy missions. The committee directs that 
all applicable competitive procedures be used in the award of 
contracts or other agreements under this program and that cost 
sharing be used to the maximum extent practicable.

Littoral area acoustic demonstrations

    The committee recommends an increase of $3.0 million in PE 
62435N for acoustic data collection, all source data fusion, 
and advanced acoustic modeling and signal processing techniques 
in support of Navy research and development efforts. The 
committee directs that all applicable competitive procedures be 
used in the award of contracts or other agreements under this 
program and that cost sharing be used to the maximum extent 
practicable.

Computational engineering design

    The committee recommends an increase of $2.0 million in PE 
62633N for computational engineering research and design for 
marine and aerospace vehicles. This research provides a focus 
on the simulation and design of surface ship and submarine 
applications. It is particularly relevant in the view of the 
Navy's decision to transfer ship design from the Navy 
laboratories to the shipyards. There is also some extension of 
the technology to aerospace based on requirements of the 
National Aeronautical and Space Administration (NASA). The 
committee expects the Office of Naval Research to fully explore 
such applications in the execution of the research. The 
committee directs that all applicable competitive procedures be 
used in the award of contracts or other agreements under this 
program and that cost sharing be used to the maximum extent 
practicable.

Advanced water-jet technology

    The budget request included no funds for advanced water-jet 
technology. Advanced water-jet technology represents the type 
of technological improvement in ship propulsion that could 
reduce both acquisition and total ownership costs. Water-jet 
technology has the potential to reduce ship signatures critical 
to maintaining war fighting superiority through battle space 
awareness. Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of 
$4.0 million in PE 63508N for advanced water-jet technology.

Composite helicopter hangar door

    The budget request included no funds for developing a 
composite helicopter hangar door. The initiative to design and 
fabricate a composite helo hangar door for surface combatants 
has the potential to reduce combatant ship life-cycle costs by 
improving reliability and reducing maintenance requirements. 
Theprogram will leverage enabling technologies that can lead to 
reduced radar signatures and cost and weight savings.
    The committee recommends an increase of $5.0 million in PE 
63508N for the design and fabrication of a DDG-51 helicopter 
hangar door structure using composite materials.

Composite modules for ship hull construction

    The budget request included no funding in PE 63508N for 
development of composite hull modules which may be required for 
future ship construction. While composites have some war 
fighting advantages over standard ship construction using steel 
and aluminum components, the technical expertise for 
constructing composite modules is limited. It is anticipated 
that future ship construction may include expanded use of 
composites.
    The committee encourages development of key technologies 
that will provide the foundation should the Navy decide to 
pursue the war fighting advantages of composites. Therefore, 
the committee recommends an increase of $4.0 million in PE 
63508N for the development and construction of prototype 
composite modules for ship construction.

Laser welding and cutting

    The budget request included no funding in PE 63508N for 
development of laser welding and cutting techniques. Navy ships 
are built using structural shapes and plate steel. Most shapes 
are currently stripped or split from I-beam stock material. 
Laser cutting and welding shapes from plate steel could enhance 
the quality and reduce the cost of producing shapes used in 
ship construction. Laser cutting and welding also has the 
potential to enable more creative designs for shapes.
    The committee encourages development of key technologies 
that have the potential to provide higher quality and lower 
costs for building Navy ships. Therefore, the committee 
recommends an increase of $2.8 million in PE 63508N for the 
development and application to naval ship construction of laser 
welding and cutting techniques.

Supply chain best practices

    The budget request included $37.4 million in PE 63508N for 
surface ship and submarine hull, mechanical, and engineering 
systems in support of present and future ships and submarines.
    The supply system for ships and submarines requires 
interface and interaction of a number of different 
communications and software systems. This incompatibility 
requires reentry of data which is manpower intensive. Because 
the supply chain best practices initiative has the potential to 
improve affordability, quality, and productivity by providing 
connectivity for an alliance among the Navy, industry, 
universities, and government agencies, the committee recommends 
an increase to the initiative.
    The committee recommends an increase of $2.0 million in PE 
63508N for supply chain best practices.

Virtual test bed for reconfigurable ship

    The budget request included no funds for a virtual test bed 
for a reconfigurable ship. The Navy is developing a virtual 
machinery design, test, and evaluation capability for future 
ship systems. This will enable the combination of real time, 
interactive, software simulation with the hardware in-the-loop 
technologies.
    The committee fully supports this simulation and testing 
prior to committing to system configuration. Therefore, the 
committee recommends an increase of $2.0 million in PE 63508N 
for a virtual test bed for a reconfigurable ship.

Ocean modeling for mine and submarine warfare

    The budget request included $45.6 million for mine and 
expeditionary warfare advanced technology. Within that amount, 
the request included funds for algorithm development and 
modeling and simulation to provide battle space products to the 
Office of the Naval Oceanographer for promulgation to the war 
fighting commanders in chiefs (CINCs).
    Research and development of products critical to 
monitoring, modeling, and disseminating environmental data are 
key factors in battle space awareness. Specifically, the 
databases and information regarding environments and 
predictions in littoral regions require emphasis on the mine 
warfare mission area. Investigation, data analysis, and 
prediction tools are required for current and eddy flow, bottom 
contour and content, and thermal layer behavior, cold water 
phenomena and man-made clutter.
    Effective mine and submarine warfare are dependent on 
correct and timely environmental data. The committee recommends 
an increase of $3.0 million in PE 603782N for ocean modeling.

Marine Corps advanced technology transition

    The committee recommends an increase of $15.0 million in PE 
63792N for a Marine Corps advanced technology transition 
initiative focused on the development of expeditionary 
warfighting technologies identified and developed through 
experimentation at the Commandant's Warfighting Laboratory 
(CWL). The committee expects the Marine Corps program to be 
implemented in the same fashion as the current Navy initiative 
in PE 63792N.The program should demonstrate high risk/high 
payoff technologies and provide the Marine Corps with the opportunity 
to identify and move emerging technologies quickly and efficiently from 
laboratory to field. These projects should be selected by matching 
technological potential with requirements derived from operational 
issues of concern to the Marine Corps.

Integrated combat weapons system for mine countermeasures ships

    The budget request included $14.4 million in PE 63502N for 
an integrated combat weapons system (ICWS) for mine 
countermeasures ships. The global positioning system, 
autonomous mine-hunting neutralization, and mine sweeping 
capabilities contribute to a complex mine warfare information 
battlefield in ICWS. The mine countermeasures ships have the 
responsibility of maintaining mine warfare tactical and 
operational situations. At present, information from multiple 
sources is gathered and plotted by slow and manpower-intensive 
methods.
    The committee recommends an increase of $5.0 million in PE 
63502N for continuation of ICWS for mine countermeasures ships.

Trident SSGN design

    The budget request included $34.8 million for the design of 
the Trident-class nuclear ballistic missile submarine (SSBN) 
conversion to a nuclear guided missile submarine (SSGN). In 
addition, the Future Years Defense Program (FYDP) includes $1.1 
billion in fiscal years 2002 through 2005 for maintaining 
additional attack submarine (SSN) force structure by either (1) 
refueling SSN 688-class submarines which were previously 
scheduled for decommissioning or (2) refueling and converting, 
to SSGN configuration, Trident SSBNs which were also previously 
scheduled for decommissioning. The decision to refuel up to 
four Ohio-class SSBNs, which would be converted for the SSGN 
mission, or use the funding to refuel Los Angeles-class SSNs, 
will be proposed by the administration as part of the fiscal 
year 2002 budget submission.
    The committee recognizes that the design work on the SSGN 
capability which began in fiscal year 2000 must be sufficient 
to maintain viable options for converting SSBNs to the SSGN 
until the fiscal year 2002 decision is made. To meet the 
requirements for planning coincidental with the refueling of 
the first available SSBN, the committee recommends an increase 
of $9.0 million in PE 63559N to continue design activity for 
converting SSBNs to an SSGN configuration.
    The study of attack submarine force structure requirements 
conducted by the Joint Chiefs of Staff (JCS) evaluated 
requirements of the commanders in chief (CINCs). That study 
concluded that a submarine force structure below 55 SSNs in 
2015 would be insufficient to meet warfighting requirements and 
that 68 SSNs would be necessary by 2015 to meet all the CINCs' 
and national intelligence community's highest operational and 
collection requirements. The study focused on intelligence, 
surveillance, and reconnaissance (ISR) requirements of the 
CINCs.
    The committee is concerned that the Navy's decision to 
refuel

Los Angeles-class SSNs or convert Ohio-class SSBNs could be 
based more narrowly on the ISR deficiencies identified in the 
JCS study, without giving adequate consideration to the other 
warfighting capabilities offered by the SSGN, such as those 
outlined in the March 1999 Navy study of the Trident SSGN 
conversion option. Therefore, the committee directs the Navy to 
report to Congress on the attributes used to analyze the 
options of whether to refuel SSNs or to refuel and convert 
SSBNs and the distinctions among these attributes in the near-
term and long-term. The committee directs that the Navy submit 
this report with the fiscal year 2002 budget.

Enhanced performance electric motor brush technology

    The budget request included $2.2 million in PE 63561N for 
enhanced performance electric motor brush technology. Electric 
motors use monolithic carbon brushes to transfer electricity 
from a stationary stator to a rotating rotor. Carbon brushes 
wear relatively quickly and must be frequently inspected and 
replaced. A Navy-funded small business innovative research 
(SBIR) project demonstrated that fiber metal brushes provide 
significant wear and survivability improvements compared to 
carbon brushes. Fiber metal electric motor brushes have the 
potential to significantly reduce total ownership costs of 
ships and increase the survivability and operational 
reliability of electric motors.
    The committee recommends an increase of $2.0 million in PE 
63561N for shock and vibration qualification and completion of 
design and testing of enhanced performance electric motor brush 
technology.

Submarine composite sail

    The budget request included no funding for development of a 
submarine sail made from composite materials. Preliminary 
studies indicate that a submarine sail with areas fabricated 
from composite materials may provide enhanced war fighting 
capabilities. In addition, the composite sail may provide lower 
weight and life-cycle costs for submarines. A composite sail is 
consistent with the technology insertion approach of the 
Virginia-class submarine program. The committee recommends an 
increase of $2.5 million in PE 63561N for development of an 
advanced submarine composite sail.

Joint command and control ship

    The budget request included $30.8 million in PE 63564N to 
continue feasibility studies for the joint command and control 
ship (JCC(X)). The request is an increase of $14.1 million over 
the amount projected for the effort when the Administration 
submitted the fiscal year 2000 budget request. Congress 
authorized and appropriated $11.9 million for this program in 
fiscal year 2000.
    The analysis of alternatives for the joint command and 
control ship mission is scheduled for completion in fiscal year 
2001 and will be followed by the development of an operational 
requirements document. When the fiscal year 2001 request for 
JCC(X) is added to the amount included for the same effort in 
fiscal year 2000, the total is $42.7 million. However, the Navy 
required less than $26.3 million for analysis of alternatives 
and to commence the competition for the ADC(X)-class ship. 
These efforts for the ADC(X) should be similar in complexity to 
the JCC(X) effort.
    Therefore, the committee recommends a decrease of $16.4 
million in PE 63564N to bring the research and development for 
JCC(X) in line with the planning for a ship of similar 
complexity in the study phase of analysis.

Shipboard simulators for Marine Corps operations

    The budget request included no funding for analysis of 
shipboard Marine Corps operational simulator technology. The 
committee is aware of advances made in training simulation 
technology and the potential that training and rehearsal 
planning simulators have in supporting Marines deployed at sea. 
It is clear that technology exists to provide shipboard 
simulators for many of the expeditionary missions embarked 
Marines will have to execute. As these simulators will allow 
Marines an opportunity to train to the fullest extent possible 
while in transit, the committee believes it is time to explore 
the availability and applicability of both existing and new 
training simulators to meet Marine Corps requirements.
    Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $20.0 
million in PE 63564N to initiate a program to provide enhanced 
shipboard operational training simulators on amphibious ships 
for embarked Marines. The committee directs the Secretary of 
the Navy to provide a report, no later than March 1, 2001, that 
provides the following:
         (1) an assessment of Marine Corps training 
        requirements, plans to enhance future training 
        opportunities, candidate systems that could provide 
        both individual and collective training simulators to 
        enhance the warfighting ability of deployed Marines, 
        and an assessment of existing training simulators 
        available for Marines afloat;
         (2) a program to develop and field additional 
        simulation capabilities beyond those currently 
        available; and
         (3) plans for obligating the funding provided, and 
        future program adjustments necessary to support the 
        fielding of new training simulation systems.

Navy common command and decision system

    The budget request did not include funding for a common 
command and decision system. The common command and decision 
system development is a pre-planned product improvement (P3I) 
to the AEGIS Weapon System and the Mk 2 Ship Self-Defense 
System (SSDS). The improvement would replace the command and 
decision capability presently in these systems with a common 
computer architecture.
    This effort will reduce future life-cycle costs by:
         (1) reducing the number of computer programs that must 
        be maintained;
         (2) enabling the Navy to field new or modified 
        warfighting capability much more quickly and at a lower 
        cost; and
         (3) improving warfighting capability by eliminating 
        the redundant and conflicting processing now inherent 
        in these systems.
    Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $10.0 
million in PE 63582N for continuation and completion of small 
business innovative research (SBIR) project for the common 
command and decision system.

Advanced amphibious assault vehicle

    The budget request included $138.0 million for research and 
development efforts associated with Marine Corps assault 
vehicles. The committee has noted with great interest progress 
made to date in the ongoing evaluation of the advanced 
amphibious assault vehicle (AAAV). Early testing has yielded 
positive results and the committee looks forward to the results 
of future testing as these new combat vehicles continue in 
development. The committee notes an unfunded requirement for an 
additional AAAV which would be used to mature the vehicle's 
software and accelerate reliability testing. The committee 
recommends an increase of $27.5 million to support efforts to 
accelerate the development and testing of AAAV hardware and 
software, a total authorization of $165.5 million.

Marine corps ground combat/support system

    The budget request included $23.2 million to support 
research and development activities associated with Marine 
Corps ground combat and combat support systems. The committee 
continues to be concerned about inadequate levels of fire 
support available to support Marine Corps operations ashore. 
The committee was interested to note a new effort by the Marine 
Corps to explore the utility of the Army's high mobility 
artillery rocket system (HIMARS) to meet some of their 
outstanding fire support requirements. The committee believes 
this effort could result in a potential near-term solution for 
longer range general support artillery requirements. The 
committee recommends an increase of $17.3 million to support 
the acquisition of two HIMARS systems and to support testing 
and evaluation of the equipment and rocket systems, a total 
authorization of $40.5 million.

Extended range guided munition

    The budget request included $39.1 million in PE 63795N for 
development of the extended range guided munition (ERGM). ERGM 
will provide precision fire support for forces ashore from 
Naval gunfire support ships. The budget request includes a two 
year delay (fiscal year 2002 to fiscal 2004) in the initial 
operating capability for ERGM. However, ERGM has demonstrated 
success in a number of technical issues and is scheduled for 
flight tests in calendar year 2000. The program appears to have 
regained momentum lost after moving the contractor's program 
office to a new geographic area. This move resulted in having 
to fill key staff positions with new personnel.
    Because the development of ERGM technologies are key to 
providing extended range fire support to the Marine Corps, the 
committee recommends an increase of $10.0 million in PE 63795N 
to reduce the risk in developing the advanced technologies 
required for ERGM.

Nonlethal research and technology development

    The budget request included $23.6 million for the joint 
nonlethal weapons program. The committee recommends an total 
increase of $8.0 million in PE 63851M.
    The committee recommends an increase of $2.0 million in PE 
63851M for research in nonlethal environmental effects and 
remediation. Both at home and abroad, Americans, our allies, 
and innocent populations face an escalating danger of 
environmental threats and hazards: purposely from rogue 
elements and inadvertently from the results of adjacent or 
contiguous conflict. The committee finds current understanding 
of the environmental effects of emerging military responses to 
asymmetric and conventional threats and availability of 
protections from environmental agents woefully inadequate. 
Protections for civilian populations and their environs do not 
exist at all.
    These additional funds should be applied to develop a 
program for assessing, determining and optimizing the 
environmental effects and remediative capabilities of emerging 
nonlethal weapons, as well as for removing, destroying, 
neutralizing, or containing environmental hazards once those 
hazards are deployed by adversaries. Only by assessment, 
evaluation, and development of methodologies to limit the 
spread of environmental damage from the fielding of emerging 
environmental threats and capabilities can new environmental 
consequences be avoided or countered. The committee directs 
that all applicable competitive procedures be used in the award 
of contracts or other agreements under this program and that 
cost sharing be used to the maximum extent practicable.
    The committee authorizes the remaining $6.0 million in 
additional funds be allocated as follows: $2.0 million to 
continue the nonlethal technology research innovation 
initiative; an increase of $1.0 million for the neutralization 
of weapons of mass destruction sites; and $3.0 million for the 
nonlethal smart mortar casing demonstration. The committee 
notes that all four of these items were included on the 
Commandant's unfunded priority list.

Navy collaborative integrated information technology initiative

    The committee continues to support the Navy collaborative 
integrated information technology initiative (NAVCIITI) to 
continue development in reliable secure communications and 
advanced information technologies. The committee recommends an 
increase of $4.0 million in PE 64707N for this purpose.

Parametric airborne dipping sonar

    The budget request included no funds for the parametric 
airborne dipping sonar (PADS). The PADS program is the 
continuation of a small business innovative research project 
that is designed to develop, demonstrate, and evaluate the 
three dimensional, stabilized steerable acoustic beams for mine 
avoidance and submarine detection in shallow water. It is the 
only system that has the potential to provide airborne active 
dipping sonars with antisubmarine and anti-mine capabilities 
for shallow water littoral operations.
    The committee is encouraged with test results that 
demonstrated anti-mine detection capability superior to present 
and other planned systems. In addition, Navy analysis and 
present plans include the possibility of PADS being a shallow 
water adjunct to the Airborne Low Frequency sonar (ALFS) 
systemdeployed on H-60 helicopters. Demonstrations of its capability 
with the H-60 aircraft have thus far been successful.
    The dual mine and submarine warfare potential of PADS makes 
it a flexible and cost effective war fighting enhancement for 
two deficient missions: mine location and diesel submarine 
detection. The Navy is encouraged to continue the present 
testing and development of PADS. The committee recommends an 
increase of $10.0 million in PE 64212N for the continued 
development of PADS.

Multi-mission helicopter upgrade development

    The budget request included $69.9 million for the continued 
development of the multi-mission helicopter upgrade. Although 
the Navy had planned to integrate the advance threat infrared 
countermeasure (ATIRCM) on the SH-60R, a fiscal year 1999 
program and schedule restructure has resulted in a funding 
shortfall to complete this integration on time. The committee 
recommends an increase of $8.0 million in PE 64216N to continue 
to develop the integrated self-defense suite for the SH-60R, a 
total authorization of $77.9 million.

Power node control centers

    The budget request did not include funding for power node 
control centers (PNCCs). PNCCs have the potential to integrate 
all of the shipboard power functions, such as switching, 
conversion, distribution and system operation and protection. 
This technology would support present and future surface ship 
and submarine platforms as a building block for increased use 
of electrical equipment. The committee recommends an increase 
of $3.0 million to PE 64300N for PNCCs.

Ship manpower reduction initiative

    The budget request included no funding for research and 
development of technologies that could lead to manpower 
reductions resulting from altering food service operations on 
ships. Committee visits to fleet units verified that food 
service operations at sea are manpower intensive in preparing 
and serving food, cleaning of food service areas, and 
maintaining food service equipment.
    Civilian cruise ships have developed technologies and 
methods for food service operations at sea that may be 
applicable to Navy ships. The Navy is investigating methods of 
reducing manpower required for food service operations at sea, 
while maintaining the quality and freshness of meals. These 
methods could lead to reduced manpower requirements in fleet 
units. Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $2.0 
million in PE 64300N for advanced food service technology 
testing.

SPY-3 and volume search radars

    The budget request included $69.6 million for development 
of the SPY-3 multi-function radar and $57.5 million for 
development of a new volume search radar (VSR) in PE 64300N. 
Both radars are being developed for future surface ships 
including CVN-77 and DD-21.
    The goal of the SPY-3 is to provide an affordable, high 
performance radar for ship defense. It will provide search, 
detect, track, and weapon control functions that are now 
provided by two to three different radars.
    The VSR will be required to complement the SPY-3 by 
providing long range above the horizon surveillance and timely 
cuing to the SPY-3. Development of these radars are keys to 
reducing life-cycle costs in the combat systems of future 
surface ships. The committee recommends an increase of $8.0 
million to PE 64300N for the development of the SPY-3 and VSR 
radars.

Acoustic rapid commercial-off-the-shelf insertion of multi- purpose 
        processor

    The budget request included $28.2 million for submarine 
sonar improvement. The multi-purpose processor (MPP) is the 
result of a small business innovative research (SBIR) 
initiative. The MPP provides a capability to transport new, 
advanced software to existing hardware installations more 
easily. It lies at the heart of the Navy's acoustic rapid 
commercial-off-the-shelf (COTS) insertion (ARCI) program. This 
program is designed to permit anti-submarine forces to regain 
acoustic superiority over diesel and nuclear submarines of 
other navies.
    The committee believes that the proven success of MPP and 
ARCI in attack submarines should be applied to other platforms 
such as surface ships, integrated undersea surveillance systems 
(IUSS), and maritime patrol aircraft.
    Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $15.0 
million in PE 64503N for continuation of the SBIR follow-on for 
advanced development of MPP transportable software technology, 
technology insertion, advanced processor software builds, and 
for providing MPP units and training throughout the fleet and 
the Navy research and development community.

Submarine antenna technology improvement

    The budget request included $0.9 million in PE 64503N for 
submarine communications antenna systems improvement. Submarine 
communications are vital to the evolving submarine 
littoraloperational concepts. The submarine's ability to remain 
undetected while communicating depends on continuous development of 
submarine antenna technology. The committee recommends an increase of 
$5.0 million in PE 64503N for submarine antenna technology 
improvements.

Submarine common architecture

    The budget request included no funding in PE 64558N for 
migrating the Virginia-class submarine architecture to the Los 
Angeles-class submarines. Systems engineering and integration 
to define and manage common network interfaces enables low cost 
and low risk capability improvements for the Los Angeles, Ohio, 
and Seawolf-classes' submarine non-propulsion electronics and 
tactical integrated electronics systems. Therfore, the 
committee recommends an increase of $5.0 million in PE 64558N 
for development of a submarine common architecture.

Advanced tactical software for submarines

    The budget request included $20.5 million in PE 64562N for 
software upgrades to integrate improved submarine weapons 
capabilities. Integration and installation planning for 
implementation of the Navy's family of processors and displays, 
the AN/UYQ-70, will enable maximum results from submarine 
combat systems software upgrades.
    The committee recommends an increase of $4.0 million in PE 
64562N for the system engineering necessary to integrate 
advanced tactical software into existing combat control systems 
for submarines.

NULKA anti-ship missile decoy system

    The budget request included $1.1 million for continued 
development and testing of the NULKA active countermeasures 
decoy. Development of a dual band, spatially distributed 
infrared signature payload is required for defense against 
advanced heat-seeking anti-ship missiles (ASMs).
    The NULKA decoy was developed to improve surface ship 
survivability against ASMs. The ASM threat is growing rapidly. 
An estimated 100 nations possess more than 40,000 ASMs. These 
missiles pose a potent threat to surface combatants and 
amphibious ships involved in littoral operations.
    The committee recommends an increase of $2.1 million in PE 
64755N for the development and operational testing of the dual 
band, spatially distributed infrared signature payload upgrade.

Navy single integrated human resources strategy

    The budget request included $15.3 million PE 65013N for 
information technology development. The Navy has been 
designated the lead agency for development of software which 
will be used by all services to consolidate pay and personnel 
reporting systems. However, there are a number of service-
specific systems which will provide information to the joint 
system that is under development. The Navy's single integrated 
human resources strategy (SIHRS) will update legacy systems 
which will provide input data to the joint personnel and pay 
system. SIHRS has the potential to provide enhanced system 
performance, workload reduction, and reduced cost.
    Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $3.0 
million in PE 65013N for the business process re-engineering of 
Navy legacy systems through the single integrated human 
resources strategy (SIHRS).

Marine Corps research university

    The committee recommends an increase of $3.0 million in PE 
65873M for the Marine Corps Research University. The Marine 
Corps Research University, initiated by the Corps and 
competitively awarded to Pennsylvania State University in May 
of 1999, was established to assist the Marine Corps to enter 
the 21st Century. The rush of the information age and increased 
operational requirements has taxed the capabilities of the 
Corps to remain on the cutting edge of a broad range of issues 
routinely dealt with on a university campus. These and other 
factors led the Marine Corps to seek a relationship with a 
major multi-disciplinary research university. Additional funds 
should be used to provide support initiatives and critical 
research in areas, such as the new Marine Corps Integrated 
Logistics Concept (ILC), the Human Effects Advisory Panel 
(HEAP) which supports non-lethal weapons development, the V-22 
alternative metals study, the Probable Cause Detection System 
(PCDS) for Chem-Bio detection, continuing and distance 
education courses, and supply-chain courses in support of 
logistics education.

Reentry system applications program

    The committee continues to support the reentry system 
applications program (RSAP) as a sustaining technology program. 
The committee recommends an increase of $2.0 million in PE 
11221N to support the RSAP program. Also, the committee directs 
that the Navy establish a separate project category for the 
RSAP program within PE 11221N to ensure program continuity and 
execution.

Joint tactical combat training system

    The budget request included $27.1 million for consolidated 
training systems development. Of this amount, $7.8 million was 
for the joint tactical combat training system (JTCTS). JTCTS is 
a joint Navy and Air Force program to provide realistic combat 
training for joint air and sea forces through a combination of 
simulated and real targets, instrumented aircraft, and ship 
participants. The committee recommends an increase of $5.0 
million in PE 24571N to accelerate hardware and software 
integration of JTCTS, a total authorization of $32.1 million.

F-14 tactical reconnaissance

    The budget request included $1.2 million for operational 
systems development of the F-14 aircraft. The F-14 remains the 
only near-term tactical reconnaissance aircraft organic to the 
carrier battle group. Weather and battlefield conditions with 
smoke and dust continue to hamper tactical reconnaissance 
platforms for both pre-strike reconnaissance and battle damage 
assessment. Synthetic aperture radar (SAR) systems offer a 
technical solution to all-weather, day and night reconnaissance 
that is missing on our tactical reconnaissance platforms. The 
committee understands that there are potentially two non-
developmental SAR systems that could be demonstrated for 
suitability on strike fighter aircraft, neither of which is 
being procured for U.S. tactical aircraft at this time. Recent 
experience in Operation Allied Force in marginal weather again 
emphasized the need for all weather reconnaissance and battle 
damage assessment capabilities to match the all weather weapons 
now available. Because of the high military utility provided to 
operational commanders, the committee recommends an increase of 
$9.0 million in PE 25667N to demonstrate the military utility 
of non-developmental SAR reconnaissance systems, a total 
authorization of $10.2 million.

Software interoperability process tools

    The budget request included $0.9 million for joint command 
control communications computer intelligence surveillance and 
reconnaissance (C4ISR) operational architectures. The 
operational architectures will provide the baseline to identify 
war fighter requirements, design and structure assessments, and 
generate functional metrics.
    Software interoperability process tools prevent 
interoperability problems by anticipating needs and shortfalls 
and implementing solutions. The process tools have the 
potential to reduce software development time lines by 
providing essential analysis that complements the joint 
communications infrastructure synchronization initiative. The 
committee recommends an increase of $2.0 million in PE 35118N 
for software interoperability process tools.

Satellite communications systems integration initiative

    The budget request included no funding for the Space and 
Naval Warfare Systems Command (SPAWAR) satellite communications 
(SATCOM) systems integration (SSI) initiative. The SSI 
initiative is intended to facilitate improved identification 
and evaluation of new and emerging communication and network 
technologies in the area of SATCOM that can distribute a wider 
diversity of information products. The committee recommends an 
increase of $2.0 million in PE 35972N for the SSI initiative.

Distributed engineering plant

    The budget request included $9.1 million in PE 38601N for 
modeling and simulation activities including development and 
analysis. It is the Navy's intention to continue a new focus 
for battle group pre-deployment hardware and software testing 
by leveraging shore based facility capabilities. The linking of 
the shore based facilities with battle group assets is referred 
to as a distributed engineering plant (DEP). The DEP will be 
used to feedback information into the acquisition cycle as well 
as to test software and hardware compatibility in both actual 
and virtual environments.
    The East Coast Command Control Communications and Computers 
Intelligence Surveillance and Reconnaissance (C4ISR) 
Engineering Center is a critical node in the DEP. Three of the 
C4ISR focus areas that will improve the connectivity and 
responsiveness of the DEP are:
          (1) fusing geographically distributed simulators 
        using the high level architecture to conduct end-to-end 
        system interoperability testing;
          (2) adapting visualization and computer-aided design 
        tools to shipboard C4ISR configuration management; and
          (3) integrating systems for distributed simulation/
        stimulation in end-to-end Navy and joint testing.
    The committee recommends an increase of $5.0 million in PE 
38601N for the three C4ISR battle center focus areas described 
in the above paragraph.


Laser processing tools

    The committee recommends an increase of $4.0 million in PE 
62102F for the development and application of a high power, 
tunable, ultraviolet laser processing tool for the fabrication 
of micro-engineered components and subsystems pertinent to 
aerospace applications. A high-average power free electron 
laser with ultraviolet capability would allow processing 
materials and micro make micro- and nano-devices for space 
systems applications. This research would also assist in 
enabling the Air Force's ability to manufacture low-cost pico 
and nano-satellites, and microsystems. The committee directs 
that all applicable competitive procedures be used in the award 
of contracts or other agreements under this program and that 
cost sharing be used to the maximum extent practicable.

Resin systems for Air Force applications

    The committee recommends an increase of $2.0 million in PE 
62102F for the development and demonstration of high 
temperature resin systems for Air Force engine applications. 
The committee understands that this technology could reduce the 
cost of high temperature components in turbine engines for 
fighter aircraft. The committee directs that cost sharing be 
used to the maximum extent practicable.

Thermal protection systems

    The committee recommends an increase of $1.5 million in PE 
62102F for the development of thermal protection systems for 
hypervelocity vehicles and atmospheric flight trajectories. The 
committee directs that all applicable competitive procedures be 
used in the award of contracts or other agreements under this 
program and that cost sharing be used to the maximum extent 
practicable.

Aeronautical research

    The committee remains gravely concerned with the failure of 
the Air Force to properly fund critical aeronautical research. 
The committee recommends an increase of $6.0 million in PE 
62201F for advanced concepts research and technology 
development for long term aeronautical systems. The committee 
directs that all applicable competitive procedures be used in 
the award of contracts or other agreements under this program 
and that cost sharing be used to the maximum extent 
practicable.

Polyphenylene benzobisoxozole membrane fuel cell

    The committee recommends an increase of $5.0 million in PE 
62203F for research in polyphenylene benzobisoxozole (PBO) 
films for fuel cell membranes. The committee notes that fuel 
cells can provide a lower cost, lighter weight, higher 
performance and more energy efficient fuel cell. The 
microporous PBO substrate may provide a component solution that 
will increase the strength and high temperature capabilities 
currently inhibiting fuel cell technologies. The committee 
directs that all applicable competitive procedures be used in 
the award of contracts or other agreements under this program 
and that cost sharing be used to the maximum extent 
practicable.

Variable displacement vane pump

    The committee recommends an increase of $3.0 million in PE 
62203F to complete the development and demonstration of the 
variable displacement vane pump (VDVP) as an alternate engine 
fuel pump. The committee directs that cost sharing be used to 
the maximum extent practicable.

High frequency active auroral research

    The committee recommends an increase of $12.0 million to 
continue experimentation in the high frequency active auroral 
research program as follows: an increase of $7.0 million in PE 
62601F and an increase of $5.0 million in PE 63714D.

Space survivability

    The committee recommends an increase of $5.6 million in PE 
62601F to continue critical research in clutter mitigation, 
space weather effects on spacecraft, ionospheric effects on 
global positioning systems (GPS), communication and 
geolocation, and space environment distributed anomoly 
resolution sensor research.

Aluminum aerostructures

    The committee recommends an increase of $3.0 million in PE 
603112F for the development and demonstration of methodology 
for producing advanced aluminum aerostructures. This effort is 
critical for improved afford ability, maintainability, and 
enhanced performance of current and future Air Force systems. 
The committee directs that all applicable competitive 
procedures be used in the award of contracts or other 
agreements under this program and that cost sharing be used to 
the maximum extent practicable.

Hyperspectral research

    The committee recommends an increase of $6.0 million in PE 
63203F to complete the development of a multi-spectral 
synthetic battlespace simulation capability to address the 
critical needs of the Air Force's advanced air and space sensor 
technologies. The committee directs that cost sharing be used 
to the maximum extent practicable.

Fiber optical control technology

    The committee recommends an increase of $2.0 million in PE 
63205F for the development and demonstration of all optical 
control interface with an electro-mechanical flight actuator. 
The committee understands this technology has the potential to 
improve performance and survivability while lowering operating 
costs for future Air Force flight vehicles. The committee 
directs that all applicable competitive procedures be used in 
the award of contracts or other agreements under this program 
and that cost sharing be used to the maximum extent 
practicable.

Low cost launch technology

    The committee continues to support the development of a 
range of low-cost launch technologies, including the Scorpius 
concept. Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of 
$5.0 million in PE 63401F for low cost launch technology 
development, including Scorpius.

Micro-satellite technology

    The committee continues to support the Micro-Satellite 
Technology program. The committee was disappointed that the Air 
Force Research Laboratory was unable to complete preparations 
for the launch of the XSS-10 micro-satellite with funds 
available in fiscal year 2000. Therefore, the committee 
recommends a transfer of $5.0 million requested for the Tech-
Sat 21 program in PE 62601F to PE 63401F for an overall 
increase of $12.0 million in PE 63401F to complete work on and 
launch the XSS-10.

Miniature satellite threat reporting system

    The budget request included no funding for the Miniature 
Satellite Threat Reporting System (MSTRS). The committee 
continues to support MSTRS to develop the capability to protect 
satellites from uplink jamming, interference, or intrusion. The 
committee also supports efforts to develop sensors capable of 
detecting laser threats. Therefore, the committee recommends an 
increase of $5.0 million in PE 63401F for the MSTRS program.

Next generation composite launch vehicle payload fairings and shrouds

    The committee supports the development of composite 
manufacturing and processing technologies for the next 
generation of payload fairings and shrouds to improve the 
performance of U.S. space systems while reducing overall 
production cost. The committee recommends an increase of $2.0 
million in PE 63401F to support this effort.

Solar orbital transfer vehicle

    The committee has supported development of the solar 
orbital transfer vehicle (SOTV) technology program. The SOTV 
program combines thermionic technology for electricity 
production and thermal propulsion. To continue this effort, the 
committee recommends an increase of $5.0 million in PE 63401F.

Space maneuver vehicle

    The committee continues to support the Air Force and 
National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) 
partnership to develop a reusable upper stage vehicle. The 
committee supports the Air Force effort to acquire a ``second 
tail number'' of NASA's X-37 as a Space Maneuver Vehicle 
operational technology demonstrator (X-40B). Therefore, the 
committee recommends an increase of $15.0 million in PE 63401F 
to support acquisition of the ``second tail number'' X-40B SMV 
demonstrator.

Upper stage flight experiment

    The Air Force has developed a program to demonstrate 
advanced upper stage technologies to lower the cost of space 
launch. To support the launch of this experimental rocket motor 
in the near future, the committee recommends an increase of 
$5.0 million in PE 63401F.

Space Based Laser program

    The budget request included $137.7 million for the Space 
Based Laser (SBL) program, including $63.2 million in the Air 
Force budget and $74.5 million in the Ballistic Missile Defense 
Organization budget. Although the Air Force and BMDO have 
structured a viable program to launch an SBL integrated flight 
experiment (IFX) in the fiscal year 2012-2014 timeframe, this 
program remains funding-constrained. Therefore, the committee 
recommends an increase of $30.0 million in PE 63876F to support 
acceleration of the IFX and its integrated test facility.

Airborne laser program

    The budget request included $148.6 million for the Airborne 
laser (ABL) program. Although the committee has raised concerns 
regarding the maturity of the ABL technology in the past, the 
committee is concerned by the Air Force's decision to 
significantly reduce funding for the ABL program in fiscal year 
2001, and throughout the years of the Future Years Defense 
Program. The committee notes that the Air Force has implemented 
a range of risk reduction measures that the committee had 
previously directed, including efforts in the area of 
atmospheric compensation being conducted at the North Oscura 
Peak test facility in New Mexico. As required by the National 
Defense Authorization Act of Fiscal Year 2000, the Air Force 
reviewed progress in five specific risk reduction areas. 
Pursuant to this requirement, the Secretary of the Air Force 
reported to Congress on December 6, 1999, that ``[e]xcellent 
progress has been made in all five areas,'' and that ``[t]he 
ABL Program continues to meet or exceed every technical and 
programmatic milestone and remains on-cost and on-schedule.''
    In light of this positive report, the committee does not 
understand or support the Air Force's decision to significantly 
reduce the ABL program funding. This cut jeopardizes the 
ability to complete the initial ABL test aircraft in a timely 
manner. The first test aircraft is critical to determining 
whether all necessary ABL technologies are ready for 
production. The committee supports rapid demonstration of these 
key technologies and thus strongly opposes the delay in the 
completion of the Program Definition and Risk Reduction (PDRR) 
aircraft. Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of 
$92.4 million in PE 63319F, the amount needed in fiscal year 
2001 to keep the PDRR aircraft on schedule to conduct the first 
lethal demonstration during fiscal year 2003. The committee 
directs the Secretary of the Air Force to spend these 
additional fiscal year 2001 funds consistent with the fiscal 
year 2000 program plan. Absent the development of technical 
problems, the ABL program should remain on schedule for a 
lethal demonstration in fiscal year 2003 and initial 
operational capability in fiscal year 2007.

Rocket systems launch program

    The committee continues to support the Rocket Systems 
Launch Program (RSLP), which utilizes excess strategic missile 
rocket motors to launch small payloads. The committee 
recommends an increase of $19.2 million in PE 63851F to 
demonstrate quick reaction launch capabilities, Global 
Positioning System range safety, and common strategic missile 
technology.

Wideband gapfiller military satellite communications

    The budget request included $92.3 million in research, 
development, test and evaluation (RDT&E), Air Force, for the 
Wideband Gapfiller satellite communications system (WGS). The 
committee notes that, as a result of the Department of Defense 
policy to fully fund satellites with procurement funding, the 
fiscal year 2001 RDT&E budget request for WGS was increased by 
$34.1 million over fiscal year 2000 projections. The committee 
recommends a decrease of $18.0 million in PE 63854F for WGS 
satellite design.

B-2 advanced technology bomber

    The budget request included $48.3 million for continued 
development of the B-2 advanced technology bomber. The Air 
Force unfunded requirements list included a request for 
additional risk reduction for connectivity. The committee 
recommends an increase of $5.0 million in PE64240F for the 
connectivity risk reduction for the B-2 advanced technology 
bomber.
    The budget request also included $17.8 million for the 
operational system development of military satellite 
communications (MILSATCOM) terminals. The committee recommends 
an increase of $3.0 million in PE33601F for risk reduction 
efforts in MILSATCOM terminals specific to integration with the 
B-2 advanced technology bomber.

Milstar satellite communications

    The budget request included $236.8 million for Milstar 
satellite communications research, development, test and 
evaluation, including an increase of $11.0 million over fiscal 
year 2000 budget projections for satellite engineering 
requirements. The committee believes that this growth is not 
fully justified. Therefore, the committee recommends a decrease 
of $4.0 million in PE 64479F.

F-15E squadrons

    The budget request included $61.3 million for continued 
operational systems development of the F-15 aircraft. The 
budget request included no funding for the integration of the 
BOL countermeasure system on the F-15 series of aircraft, 
although it was included on the Air Force unfunded priorities 
list. Integration of this system will dramatically increase the 
chaff and flare capacity of the F-15, giving it preemptive 
expendable capability. The committee recommends an increase of 
$7.6 million in PE 27134F for BOL countermeasure system 
integration on the F-15, a total authorization of $68.9 
million.

Hyperspectral system development

    The committee supports research and development of 
hyperspectral technology for use in high altitude and space 
applications. Therefore, the committee recommends an increase 
of $2.0 million in PE 27247F to support these efforts.

Extended range cruise missile

    The budget request included no funding for the extended 
range cruise missile (ERCM). Section 132 of the National 
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2000 (Public Law 106-
65) required the Secretary of the Air Force to submit a report 
on replacement options for the conventional air-launched cruise 
missile (CALCM). The CALCM has become the Air Force weapon of 
choice in recent conflicts, and as such, its inventory has been 
seriously depleted. This report defined near-term, mid-term, 
and long-term solutions to address this required capability. 
The near-term solution, which is ongoing and funded, is to 
convert the remaining, available air-launched cruise missiles 
(ALCMs) to CALCMs. The mid-term solution, which is not funded 
in the fiscal year 2001 budget request, is to begin a two to 
three-year ERCM development to upgrade an existing cruise 
missile design. This development will be followed by a four-
year production run to build up the cruise missile stockpile. 
Funding for the initiation of this development is very high on 
the Air Force unfunded priorities list. The committee 
recommends an increase of $86.1 million in PE 27323F to 
commence ERCM development.

Joint surveillance and target attack radar system

    The budget request included $144.1 million for operational 
system development of the E-8 joint surveillance and target 
attack radar system (JSTARS) aircraft and weapons system. The 
global access, navigation, and safety strategic management 
plan, published in fiscal year 1999, included a requirement for 
installation of global air traffic management (GATM) equipment 
in the E-8 JSTARS aircraft. This modification will be required 
to maintain current access to oceanic and continental routes in 
Europe, ensuring that missions can be safely and effectively 
flown. The Air Force has included development of GATM 
modifications for the E-8 on its unfunded requirements list. 
The committee recommends an increase of $7.2 million in PE 
27581F for development and integration of GATM on the JSTARS 
aircraft, a total authorization of $151.3 million.

Lighthouse cyber security

    The budget request included $7.2 million for Air Force 
information system security research, development, test and 
evaluation. The committee supports the Lighthouse Cyber 
Security Program managed by the Air Force, which focuses on 
computer system vulnerabilities and threats, and provides 
guidance and corrective courses of action through the use of 
modeling and prototype tools. The committee recommends an 
increase of $5.0 million in PE 33140F to support the Lighthouse 
Cyber Security Program.

Dragon U-2

    The budget request included $27.5 million in PE 35202F for 
operational systems development of the U-2 aircraft. The budget 
request included no funding for the continued development of 
the Senior Year electro-optic reconnaissance system (SYERS). 
The committee recommends an increase of $6.0 million in PE 
35202F for further SYERS development, a total authorization of 
$33.5 million.


Advanced photonic composites research

    The budget request includes $90.1 million for defense 
research sciences (PE 61101E). The committee recommends that, 
of the funds, $3.0 million be used to extend the Advanced 
Photonic Composites Research Program in the Defense Advanced 
Research Projects Agency. Photonic composite materials are 
complex material systems whose key optical property is 
described by a periodic function. The optical property 
typically is an index of refraction or some non-linear optical 
behavior. Due to their complex three dimensional nature, 
photonic composite materials are very difficult to produce. 
However, these materials offer great promise for the 
development of photonic devices with greatly improved 
performance due to their inherent ability to substantially 
reduce the volume of material required to achieve certain 
optical effects.

Infrasound detection capability basic research

    The committee recommends an increase of $1.5 million in PE 
61103D for basic research in the Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban 
Treaty verification. The additional funds will be used to 
develop and evaluate infrasound sensors and conduct studies and 
analysis for use in developing more effective and efficient 
infrasound detection capability to support the detection of 
nuclear explosions on a global basis. The committee directs 
that all applicable competitive procedures be used in the award 
of contracts or other agreements under this program and that 
cost sharing be used to the maximum extent practicable.

Personnel research initiative

    The committee recommends an increase of $4.0 million in PE 
61103D for the defense personnel research initiative. The 
additional funds will support basic research efforts in 
manpower and personnel including operations research, 
economics, cognitive and experimental psychology with the 
objective of reducing attrition, increasing retention, and 
ensuring an efficient allocation of military forces.

Defense experimental program to stimulate competitive research

    The budget request includes $9.9 million for the Defense 
Experimental Program to Stimulate Competitive Research 
(DEPSCoR) to broaden the infrastructure for universities that 
support national defense research. The research conducted is 
peer reviewed and competitively awarded. The committee 
recommends an increase of $15.0 million in PE 61114D to 
continue efforts in this merit-based program.

Chemical and biological defense basic research

    The budget request included $33.2 million in PE 61384BP for 
chemical and biological defense basic research. The goal of 
this program is to improve the operational performance of the 
military services by concentrated research in areas that can 
contribute to defense against chemical and biological agents. 
The committee recommends an increase of $5.0 million in PE 
61384BP for basic research, to be distributed as follows: $2.0 
million for optical computing chemical agent detection; and 
$3.0 million for continued research in thin film technology 
development.

Ballistic Missile Defense Organization funding and programmatic 
        guidance

    The budget request included approximately $4.9 billion for 
the Ballistic Missile Defense Organization (BMDO), including 
Procurement, Research, Development, Test and Evaluation (RDT&E) 
and military construction. The committee's recommended changes 
to the budget request for BMDO procurement and RDT&E are 
provided below. The committee's recommendations for BMDO 
military construction are provided elsewhere in this report.

                           Support Technology

    The committee continues to support BMDO's efforts in the 
area of wide bandgap electronics materials and devices. To 
support this important technology effort, the committee 
recommends an increase of $2.0 million in PE 62173C and an 
increase of $10.0 million in PE 63173C.
    The committee continues to support the Atmospheric 
Interceptor Technology (AIT) program to develop advanced 
interceptor kill vehicle technologies. The committee recommends 
an increase of $15.0 million in PE 63173C to support the AIT 
program.
    The committee believes that BMDO should immediately begin 
to define and develop the necessary technology for the Navy 
Theater Wide (NTW) Standard Missile-3 (SM-3) block II kill 
vehicle. The committee recommends an increase of $10.0 million 
in PE 62173C to support the development of advanced NTW kill 
vehicle concepts employing light-weight non-toxic pumped-
propulsion and active/passive sensor technology.
    The committee has supported BMDO's efforts to evaluate 
innovative and low-cost launch technologies. The committee 
recommends an increase of $3.0 million in PE 63173C to support 
low cost launch technology, including the Excalibur concept.
    The committee recommends an increase of $9.0 million in PE 
63173C to support the Magdalena Ridge Observatory.

                        National Missile Defense

    The budget request included approximately $1.8 billion for 
the National Missile Defense (NMD) program, including 
Procurement and RDT&E. The committee notes that the Director of 
BMDO has identified an additional $300.0 million that could be 
utilized to further enhance risk reduction and testing 
activities. Of this amount, the Director identified $129.0 
million as critical risk reduction unfunded requirements. 
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $129.0 
million in PE 63871C for NMD risk reduction.
    The committee understands that BMDO is considering entering 
into a competition for the NMD X-band ground-based radars (GBR) 
that would be deployed following the initial deployment of the 
Alaska GBR site. The committee directs the Director of BMDO to 
conduct an analysis of the advantages and disadvantages of a 
competitive approach to follow-on GBR development and 
deployment, and provide a report to the congressional defense 
committees by April 1, 2001.

                           Navy Theater Wide

    The committee continues to support the NTW program and 
urges the Secretary of Defense to accelerate this important 
program to the extent permitted by the pace of technological 
development. The committee recommends an increase of $60.0 
million in PE 63868C to accelerate the NTW SM-3 interceptor.

                        BMD Technical Operations

    The committee continues to support the Army Space and 
Missile Defense Command's Advanced Research Center (ARC). The 
ARC provides a valuable tool in support of both theater and 
national missile defense programs. The committee recommends an 
increase of $6.5 million in PE 63874C in support of the ARC.
    The committee supports BMDO's efforts to improve missile 
defense technologies and capabilities against advanced theater 
ballistic missile threats. One promising area of research is in 
optical data and sensor fusion for detection and discrimination 
of advanced threats, missile plumes, and penetration aids using 
advanced image processing and optical discrimination 
algorithms. The committee recommends an increase of $3.0 
million in PE 63874C for BMDO to continue this work.

                   International Cooperative Programs

    The budget request included $117.0 million for BMDO 
International Cooperative Programs, including $81.2 million for 
Israeli Cooperative Projects and $35.8 million for the Russian-
American Observation Satellites (RAMOS) program.
    The committee is pleased that the budget request includes 
funding to support continued acquisition of the Arrow Third 
Battery. The committee recommends an increase of $8.0 million 
in PE 63875C to initiate the Arrow System Improvement Plan.
    The committee notes that the Department of Defense has 
revised the Russian-American Observation Satellites (RAMOS) 
program from its fiscal year 2000 approach to a restructured 
two-satellite program. The committee understands that this 
revised program is intended to improve the prospects for 
technical success with a greater focus on defense objectives, 
while also protecting sensitive U.S. technology. Under the 
revised proposal, Russia would build, launch and operate two 
essentially identical satellites that carry U.S.-built infrared 
sensors. The U.S. is attempting to devise a plan to place these 
sensors in tamper-resistant containers and have monitors to 
ensure proper handling to preclude unauthorized technology 
transfer.
    Although this revised two-satellite program is a 
significant improvement over the previous two-satellite RAMOS 
concept, the committee continues to have serious concerns. The 
committee is concerned that, one year after the U.S. Department 
of Defense (DOD) determined that RAMOS was of marginal benefit 
to BMDO, the Department now proposes to spend approximately 
$350.0 million on the development and production of two 
satellites over the Future Years Defense Program (FYDP), and 
that this entire amount is to be paid for by DOD. In contrast, 
BMDO's core technology program is widely recognized to be 
under-funded throughout the years of the FYDP. The committee 
also is not convinced that the United States can provide 
infrared sensors for integration into Russian-built and 
launched satellites without compromising this technology or 
otherwise providing significant technical assistance to Russia 
to accommodate the integration and proper functioning of the 
U.S.-built sensors. In light of these concerns, the committee 
directs the Secretary of Defense to restore the RAMOS program 
to the approach presented to Congress in the fiscal year 2000 
budget request, which was approved by Congress in the National 
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2000. Consistent with 
this approach, the committee recommends a reduction of $20.0 
million in PE 63875C for the RAMOS program.

                              BMD Targets

    The committee continues to support BMDO's effort to develop 
a theater missile defense surrogate target based on a liquid 
fuel engine. The committee recommends an increase of $5.0 
million in PE 63872C to continue this effort.

Bio-defense research

    The budget request included $18.6 million for PE 62234D, 
the Lincoln Laboratory research program. This reflects a 10 
percent decrease that has not been explained or substantiated 
by the Department of Defense. The reduction included in the 
budget request will have a significant impact on the advanced 
bio-defense development activities, a project that the 
Department has extolled as ``best in its class''. Performance 
was rated ``beyond expectation''. The effort is to develop an 
integrated bio agent detection, identification, and warning 
sensor system that is smaller, lighter and quicker; the actual 
target is an integrated system the size of a mailbox.
    The committee recommends an increase of $2.1 million in PE 
62234D to continue the development and demonstration of this 
bio- defense technology in the vital national security 
interest.

Hybrid sensor suite

    The budget request included no funding in PE 62384BP for a 
lightweight, man-portable hybrid sensor suite using thin film 
technology. The committee notes the requirement for a low-
power, inexpensive chemical agent detector. Therefore, The 
committee recommends an increase of $8.0 million in PE 62384BP 
for a hybrid sensor suite using thin-film technology.

High definition systems

    The committee recommends an increase of $7.0 million in PE 
62708E for the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency's high 
definition system program. The committee directs that all 
applicable competitive procedures be used in the award of 
contracts or other agreements under this program and that no 
projects be pursued without an industry cost share.

Three dimensional structures research

    The committee recommends an increase of $3.0 million in PE 
62712E for the development, optimization and demonstration of 
fabrication processes for highly integrated three dimensional 
microcircuits. The committee directs that all applicable 
competitive procedures be used in the award of contracts or 
other agreements under this program and that cost sharing be 
used to the maximum extent practicable.

Biological agent sensor technologies

    The budget request included $300,000 for combating 
terrorism technology support to continue to develop aerogel and 
fiber optic based technologies for chemical and biological 
collector and detector prototypes that meet the requirements of 
multiple federal agencies. The committee notes that since 
calendar year 1997, the Defense Advanced Research Projects 
Agency (DARPA) has provided an estimated $2.9 million for 
technology base development of aerogel-based chemical and 
biological sample collector and sensor systems. The research 
efforts of DARPA indicate that aerogel properties can be 
tailored to meet or exceed the requirements of existing and 
future collector and sensor platforms. Therefore, the committee 
recommends an increase of $5.0 million in PE 63122D to 
transition the continued development of aerogel and coupled 
fiber optic-based biological sensor technologies from the DARPA 
Biological Defense Program to the Technical Support Working 
Group support program.

Blast mitigation testing

    The committee recommends an increase of $3.0 million in PE 
63122D, Combating Terrorism Technology Support, to accelerate 
the testing and certification of blast mitigation effects 
technology. These funds would allow the Department of Defense 
to accelerate the testing and analysis of building components 
and improve building design standards and guidelines for use in 
new construction applications.

Facial recognition access control technology

    The committee recommends an increase of $2.0 million in PE 
63122D, Combating Terrorism Technology Support, for facial 
recognition access control technology. These funds will be used 
to further the Department of Defense's efforts to develop, test 
and evaluate this surveillance, identification, and access 
control technology, and allow prototype development and 
testing.

Chemical and Biological Incident Response Force detector technologies

    The budget request included no funding in PE 63384BP for 
the Chemical and Biological Individual Sampler (CBIS) or the 
Small Unit Biological Detector (SUBD) programs. The committee 
notes the continuing requirement of the Marine Corps for 
chemical and biological detectors and analyzers in conjunction 
with the Chemical and Biological Incident Response Force 
capability requirements. The committee continues to support 
CBIS and SUBD research and development initiatives and 
recommends an increase in PE 63384BP of $11.2 million, to be 
distributed as follows: $2.7 million for the CBIS program to 
carry forward multiple, mature technologies and allow for 
operational assessments by the Joint Forces Command; and $8.5 
million for the SUBD program toevaluate component detection 
sensitivity, and to fabricate prototypes.

Consequence Management Information System

    The budget request included no funding in PE 63384BP for a 
Consequence Management Information System. The committee notes 
the requirement for a program to enable civilian and military 
incident responders, such as Weapons of Mass Destruction Civil 
Support Teams, to access and share selected information for 
operational planning and execution. The committee supports this 
initiative and recommends an increase of $6.4 million in PE 
63384BP for a Consequence Management Information System.

Reactive materials

    The budget request included no funding in PE 63384BP for 
the evaluation of advanced materials that contain reactive 
technologies. These technologies have demonstrated the 
potential to increase protection to the warfighter when 
incorporated into clothing, tentage, and shelters for defense 
against chemical and biological agents. The committee 
recommends an increase of $3.5 million in PE 63384BP for the 
evaluation of advanced materials that contain reactive 
technologies.

Complex systems design

    The committee recommends an increase of $5.0 million in PE 
63704D to continue the development of the multi-view data 
standards for integrated digital environment for complex 
systems design. The Department of Defense currently employs a 
number of computer-based synthesis and analysis tolls that 
advance all phases of the life cycle of complex defense 
systems. From concept design, through development and 
production, and throughout life cycle ownership of a complex 
system, these tools have dramatically improved the efficiency 
and reduced the costs of each discrete phase. However, since 
each tool employs its own unique data representation and data 
storage mechanism, there exists, with few exceptions, no 
substantial interoperability between tools at the semantic 
level for interchange of similar data structures. This 
inability to collaborate results in a development process that 
remains largely manual, with no means for even semi-automated 
configuration management of the total project design. Congress 
has expressed strong support of this effort. The committee 
requires the Department to conduct a review of the project and 
report back to congressional defense committees on the 
Department's plan to implement this technology once it is 
completed.

Competitive sustainment initiative

    The committee recommends an increase of $8.0 million in PE 
62712S for the competitive sustainment initiative. This 
initiative provides the foundation for forging new, more 
cooperative links between the Department of Defense and the 
supply base to eliminate waste and improve the velocity of 
logistics. The committee directs that all applicable 
competitive procedures be used in the award of contracts or 
other agreements under this program and that cost sharing be 
used to the maximum extent practicable.

Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD) Attack-Effects-Response Assessment 
        capability at U.S. Joint Forces Command (USJFCOM)

    The committee recommends an increase of $5.0 million in PE 
63832D, Joint Wargaming Simulation Management Office, for the 
development and installation of a Weapon of Mass Destruction 
Attack-Effects-Response Assessment capability for the Joint 
Task Force-Civil Support that was recently established as part 
of the U.S. Joint Forces Command (USJFCOM). This program will 
allow USJFCOM, along with government agencies, state, and local 
authorities, to model chemical, biological or radiological 
incidents from the initial detection of the attack and initial 
effects through the medical response to the incident in an 
integrated, interoperable manner.

Integrated data environment technology

    The committee recommends an increase of $2.0 million in PE 
63736D for the continuous acquisition life-cycle support 
initiative's integrated data environment program. This 
technology addresses the critical issues of life-cycle costs 
and logistic support for the warfighter. The committee directs 
that cost sharing for this project be used to the maximum 
extent practicable.

Demonstration/validation of technology for the remediation of 
        unexploded ordnance at active, inactive, closing, transferred, 
        and transferring ranges

    The budget request included $9.0 million for research, 
development, testing, and evaluation (RDT&E) related to the 
environmental remediation of unexploded ordnance (UXO), $5.0 
million for development of UXO technology through the Strategic 
Environmental Research and Development Program (SERDP)(PE 
63716D) and $4.0 million for demonstration/validation through 
the Environmental Security Technology Certification Program 
(ESTCP)(PE 63851D). The committee recommends an increase 
of$10.0 million in ESTCP (PE 63851D) for demonstration/validation of 
UXO remediation technology.
    The committee has previously expressed concern (S. Rept. 
106-50) about the lack of focus or support in the Department of 
Defense (DOD) RDT&E base for UXO remediation. Based on 
information provided to the committee, it is evident that 
increased emphasis in this area is absolutely essential, 
particularly for demonstration/validation of technology that 
has been developed through SERDP and other DOD programs. It is 
the committee's expectation that the increased funding will be 
used for the demonstration/validation of viable, cost effective 
solutions that will help the military departments meet the 
extraordinary challenge of UXO remediation at active, inactive, 
closed, transferred, and transferring ranges. Moreover, the 
committee intends that ESTCP shall establish performance 
measures for UXO remediation technologies in order to determine 
the resulting level of implementation within the DOD.

Next generation anthrax vaccine

    The budget request included $400,000 in PE 64384BP for a 
second generation, recombinant vaccine against the biological 
warfare agent anthrax. The committee recommends an increase of 
$2.1 million in PE 64384BP for continued research and 
development of a recombinant vaccine against the biological 
warfare agent anthrax.
    The U.S. Army Medical Research Institute of Infectious 
Diseases (USAMRIID) developed a second generation, recombinant 
vaccine against the biological warfare agent anthrax in 1995. 
The committee notes that the vaccine currently utilized by the 
Department of Defense in the Anthrax Vaccine Immunization 
Program (AVIP) was licensed in 1970 and has been certified as 
safe and effective by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA). 
The committee is concerned that there is inadequate support for 
continued research and development of a second generation, 
recombinant vaccine against the biological agent anthrax and 
provides additional funding for this effort.

Remote Ordnance Neutralization System

    The budget request included $11.6 million for the Joint 
Robotics Program, PE 64709D. The committee recommends an 
increase of $1.6 million in PE 64709D to develop and test 
improvements to the Remote Ordnance Neutralization System 
(RONS). These funds would allow the Department of Defense to 
upgrade RONS to a digital system and improve operator interface 
capabilities.

Cyber attack sensing and warning

    The committee is aware of efforts being undertaken by the 
Department of Defense to develop technologies to detect and 
respond to cyber attacks on the defense information 
infrastructure. To support the development and deployment of 
such sensors, the committee recommends an increase of $20.0 
million in PE 33140G.

Information Operations Technology Center

    The committee strongly supports the efforts by the 
Information Operations Technology Center (IOTC) to develop 
information operations/information warfare tools. The committee 
recommends an increase of $5.0 million in PE 33140G to support 
these important efforts by the IOTC.

Trusted RUBIX

    The budget request included no funding to complete 
evaluation of the Trusted RUBIX multilevel security database 
guard. The committee recommends an increase of $1.8 million in 
PE 33140G for evaluation and certification of the Trusted RUBIX 
information system security technology for interface with 
multilevel security software.

Virtual worlds initiative

    The U.S. Special Operations Command has developed a program 
for integrating various sources of imagery and other 
information into three-dimensional products to support special 
operations forces. In order to support development of a scene 
generation database and other elements of the Virtual Worlds 
Initiative, the committee recommends an increase of $2.0 
million in PE 34210BB.

Intelligent spatial technologies for smart mapping systems

    The committee recognizes the importance and technological 
challenges involved in developing intelligent spatial 
technologies for military applications. Therefore, the 
committee recommends an increase of $2.0 million in the 
advanced research and development component of PE 35102BQ for 
intelligent spatial technology development in spatio-temporal 
database research for smart maps.

Joint Mapping Tool Kit

    The committee continues to support the development of the 
Joint Mapping Tool Kit (JMTK) by the National Imagery and 
Mapping Agency (NIMA). The committee recommends an increase of 
$5.0million in PE 35102BQ for continued development of the JMTK 
and the NIMA viewer.

Information assurance testbed

    The budget request included no funding to support the 
Information Assurance Testbed. Section 1043 of the National 
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2000 (Public Law 106-
65) established an Information Assurance Testbed within the 
Department of Defense (DOD) to facilitate simulations, 
wargames, exercises and experiments in the area of information 
assurance and information warfare. The Testbed was also 
intended to provide an organizational structure with which DOD 
could interact with other departments and agencies and with the 
private sector on matters related to cyber security and cyber 
threats. The committee continues to support this important 
effort. Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $5.0 
million in PE 35190D to support the Testbed.

Joint course of action analysis and targeting support for information 
        operations

    The committee supports the Secretary of Defense's efforts 
to coordinate and de-conflict activities in the Department of 
Defense in the area of information operations (IO). The joint 
course of action analysis and targeting support for IO (JCOATS-
IO) program is intended to establish a centralized process for 
IO-based capabilities. To support this important initiative, 
the committee recommends an increase of $5.0 million in PE 
35190D.

Advanced lightweight grenade launcher

    The budget request included $87.1 million for Special 
Operations Forces (SOF) Operational Enhancements. The committee 
recommends an increase of $5.6 million in SOF Operational Force 
Enhancements (PE 1160408BB) to fund the continued research and 
development of the advanced lightweight grenade launcher.

Management reform for Department of Defense test and evaluation centers

    Congress has addressed the issue of management reform for 
Department of Defense test and evaluation centers twice in the 
last two years.
    Section 907 of the Strom Thurmond National Defense 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1999 (Public Law 105-261) 
required the Secretary to conduct a comprehensive review of the 
management of the test and evaluation centers. Section 907 
specifically required the Secretary to develop a plan, 
including a schedule for establishing a cost-based management 
information system for the test and evaluation centers. The 
statement of managers on the conference report on the National 
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2000 (H. Rept. 106-
301) added the requirement that the Department report to the 
congressional defense committees on the feasibility of 
financing test and evaluation facilities through a working 
capital fund.
    The committee is concerned that the Department has not yet 
submitted the plan and schedule required by section 907 or the 
report required by the statement of managers. The committee 
directs the Department to ensure that these requirements are 
fully implemented in a timely manner. In particular, the 
committee understands that the Department has developed a cost-
based information system for use by the major range test 
facilities base (MRTFB). In accordance with the requirements of 
section 907, the Department should develop a schedule to 
implement this system for all test and evaluation centers and 
to ensure that the data collected by this system is actively 
used to make management and investment decisions.
    The committee is also aware of certain cases in which 
developmental testing has been conducted outside the 
Department's test and evaluation base to reduce program costs. 
The committee directs the Department to review these decisions 
and ensure that the quality and integrity of the testing 
program has not been compromised by these cost-cutting 
decisions.
    Furthermore, the committee has serious concerns with the 
budget request for the Central Test and Evaluation Investment 
Program (CTEIP). CTEIP provides critical test and evaluation 
capabilities for joint and multi-service system test 
requirements. In this role, CTEIP provides a corporate means to 
leverage test investments for the services and defense 
agencies. This year funding decreased even though the Annual 
Report of the Office of Operational Test and Evaluation for 
1999 stated the clear and pressing need for new investments in 
the test and evaluation infrastructure, ``. . . with its 
emphasis on such efforts as improving and test efficiencies, 
promoting increased use of modeling and simulation, creating 
common instrumentation, and developing capabilities for test 
information systems, the CTEIP is clearly focused on developing 
the test capabilities we will require to meet the test 
challenges of the next century.''
    The committee recommends an increase of $20.0 million in PE 
64940D to be applied to critical upgrades at the defense test 
and evaluation facilities as determined by the Director of 
Operational Test and Evaluation (DOT&E). The committee directs 
that the additional funds be awarded in accordance with the 
standards provided in the assessment of the centers from the 
MRTFB criteria. The DOT&E should report back to committee on 
the allocation of such funds and the criteria used to determine 
the recipients.

Augmented reality fire-fighting training

    The committee recommends an increase of $1.5 million in PE 
65131D for augmented reality fire-fighting training. Augmented 
reality is the use of live and virtual (computer generated) 
objects. The current project has demonstrated the basic 
technology in a multi-room office environment. This follow-on 
would focus on a shipboard system that would allow the actual 
crew to train in the actual environment during a deployment. 
The Live Fire Test and Evaluation Office is chartered with 
ensuring timely and accurate assessments of system 
survivability, vulnerability, and munitions effectiveness of 
weapons systems. One of the leading causes of casualties, in 
wartime or peace, is fire or fire effects. Evaluation of the 
training of ship crews under realistic combat emergency 
conditions is of critical importance to total ship 
survivability assessments.

                        OTHER ITEMS OF INTEREST


Aircraft carrier modernization

    The Navy is acquiring the next nuclear powered aircraft 
carrier in the Nimitz-class, the CVN-77. In order to reduce the 
total operational cost and improve system capability, the Navy 
intends to rely on the contractor team to provide total systems 
integration effort for the combat system, a function that has 
previously been managed by the Department of the Navy. The Navy 
believes that this approach will take advantage of commercial-
based design to improve overall capability.
    The committee is aware that the Department of Defense is 
conducting a review of the process by which we acquire 
electronic warfare programs. This review has been generated 
because of the Department's repeated experience of cost, 
schedule and technical problems associated with such 
acquisitions.
    The committee believes that the Department of the Navy 
should apply appropriate lessons derived from this on-going study to 
the aircraft carrier program. In particular, the committee 
believes that the Navy should give due consideration to risk, 
cost, and benefit of newer electronic warfare systems compared 
to other alternatives.

Advanced ship hull demonstrators

    The budget request included no funding in PE 63792N for 
advanced ship hull demonstrators. However, within PE 64300N and 
PE 64558N, both destroyer and submarine hull designs are being 
tested.
    Tactics and operational concepts for littoral operations 
from the sea continue to evolve. The introduction of new 
capabilities requires the review of both strategic and tactical 
doctrine. Although it is not feasible to build a full scale 
prototype test vehicle for the many advanced hull designs 
proposed to the Navy, the Navy should leverage investments in 
advanced hull designs made by other entities including those of 
allied/foreign navies.
    Rapid evaluation of advanced hull design tactical and 
strategic advantages should provide the Navy with valuable 
information for the development of operational concepts and 
tactics.
    The committee is encouraged by Navy War College innovative 
concepts for applying available and future ship capabilities to 
influence both strategic and tactical operations.
    Therefore, the committee recommends the Navy demonstrate 
capabilities inherent in advanced hulls where those 
capabilities have the potential to provide valuable insights 
for use in modeling, simulation, war gaming, operational 
concept development, and ship construction. In addition, the 
committee encourages the Navy to take advantage of authority 
previously provided to them, by including the use of advanced 
hull designs in joint and combined exercises, as well as fleet 
battle experiments.

Crusader

    The committee noted with interest decisions made by the 
Secretary of the Army to restructure the Crusader artillery 
system development program. The committee has supported efforts 
to develop and field this next generation system to fully 
modernize a heavy corps, and is concerned that adjustments made 
to the program appear to make this outcome unlikely. The 
committee understands the Chief of Staff has directed the 
program manager to determine the feasibility of producing a 40-
ton system that will be easier to deploy but just as 
operationally capable as the existing concept. While the notion 
of lightening this system is admirable, this action will 
further delay any potential fielding of a system that has been 
in development for more than a decade. Most troubling is the 
revised schedule that now calls for a production decision to be 
delayed until the first quarter of fiscal year 2009. The 
committee does not understand how this delayed program fits 
with efforts to field an objective force, with common 
platforms, in the fiscal year 2012 time frame. The committee 
directs the Army to provide a report, by March 1, 2001, that 
describes how the current development and acquisition strategy 
for Crusader will fit with efforts designed to field the 
objective force described in the Army transformation 
initiative.

Future ship technology research and development

    The budget request includes significant investments in 
future ship research and development. These investments are key 
to ensuring future ships have the technology required to 
maintain a war fighting advantage. In addition, some 
technologies may lower operating and construction costs. The 
Navy is encouraged to review the following technologies which 
have the potential to provide a technological edge and/or 
reduce life-cycle costs for future ships:
          (1) applying multi-purpose processor technology to 
        advanced integrated electronic warfare systems;
          (2) developing a battle force tactical trainer with 
        an upgraded personal computer system;
          (3) modernizing aircraft carrier design software;
          (4) pursuing advanced hull, mechanical, and 
        engineering development of integrated topside 
        structures and reduced ship signatures;
          (5) emphasizing total ship engineering for enhanced 
        damage control and survivability;
          (6) modifying surface ship sonars for advanced mine 
        detection;
          (7) developing a damage control action management 
        system;
          (8) reviewing life-cycle cost benefits of an inter-
        cooled recuperated gas turbine engine;
          (9) commercial off the shelf desktop computers which 
        are capable of processing both secure information and 
        unclassified data;
          (10) wireless, low power level onboard and off-board 
        personnel tracking and monitoring device with 
        applications for shore material tracking;
          (11) developing interfaces between Navy legacy human 
        resources systems and the Global Combat Support System; 
        and
          (12) developing business process re-engineering of 
        legacy Navy and Naval Reserve personnel systems.

Joint training and experimentation

    The committee has noted with great interest the ongoing 
efforts by the Department of Defense (DOD) and the Joint Chiefs 
of Staff (JCS) to establish the organizational and procedural 
mechanisms to promulgate doctrine, concepts, and requirements 
for joint military operations. The establishment of the U.S. 
Joint Forces Command (USJFCOM) on October 1, 1999 was a major 
milestone on this path.
    The steps taken by USJFCOM to date are promising. The joint 
experimentation program is underway. The Joint Warfighting 
Center continues to make progress in standardizing joint 
training and procedures across the entire force. The federation 
of the various service and defense agency battle labs to 
eliminate unnecessary duplication and provide a unifying vision 
for future efforts was especially notable.
    In its December 1997 report on the Quadrennial Defense 
Review, the National Defense Panel recommended the 
establishment of a joint national training center. Other 
official and independent studies have made similar 
recommendations to make use of the capabilities of the existing 
training centers, e.g., Joint Readiness Training Center, 
National Training Center, Nellis Air Force Base, 29 Palms, and 
the San Diego Navy training facilities, for joint training and 
concept development. During his testimony before the committee 
on March 1, 2000, General James Jones, USMC, Commandant, U.S. 
Marine Corps, stated that the Marine Corps and Army were 
discussing the possibility of physically joining the 29 Palms 
Training Center and the Army National Training Center at Fort 
Irwin, CA.
    Such proposals appear to have great merit and potential for 
further enhancing joint training and experimentation. While 
each service clearly has specific core competencies it must 
train to at its own centers, the benefits that would accrue 
from having a joint organization that monitors and leverages 
these training activities for future joint concept development 
and periodically coordinated joint training and experimentation 
activities seem compelling.
    The committee directs the Chairman, Joint Chiefs of Staff 
to provide a report to the congressional defense committees no 
later than March 1, 2001, containing an assessment of the 
advisability and feasibility of establishing a joint national 
training center. The report shall include a summary of actions 
taken, planned or under consideration regarding the 
establishment of such a center.

Joint operational test bed system

    The Commander, Joint Forces Command (JFCOM) intends to 
establish a joint operational test bed system (JOTBS) to 
conduct joint interoperability testing and experimentation. The 
committee understands that, under the current plan, JFCOM 
intends to demonstrate interoperability of Predator unmanned 
aerial vehicles (UAVs) and the tactical control system (TCS). 
The committee encourages JFCOM to continue this JOTBS activity 
and other efforts to continue fulfilling its mandate for 
ensuring interoperability among various services' systems. The 
committee also encourages the services to provide appropriate 
assistance to JFCOM to continue these efforts.

Maritime patrol aircraft

    The committee is concerned about the overall state of 
maritime patrol and reconnaissance forces. The recent 
cancellation of the P-3 sustained readiness program is cause 
for concern about the age and condition of these aircraft, and 
whether there will be sufficient assets to meet unified and 
fleet commander in chief requirements. Insufficient funding of 
capability upgrade programs for the P-3, such as anti-surface 
warfare improvement program (AIP) and the block modification 
upgrade, further exacerbates the problem by causing over-
utilization of the limited numbers of aircraft with these 
modifications. The capability of AIP-equipped P-3s was 
demonstrated in Operation Allied Force with the destruction of 
multiple targets with standoff land attack missiles.
    The committee is aware of the recent acquisition decision 
by the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology 
and Logistics, which approved entry into concept exploration of 
the multi-mission maritime aircraft (MMA) and directed an 
analysis of alternatives for such a program. The committee 
directs the Secretary of Defense to provide a report to the 
congressional defense committees by March 1, 2001, which 
outlines the current status of the MMA concept exploration, to 
include the impact of funding requested in the fiscal year 2002 
budget request to prevent near-term shortfalls in this critical 
mission area.

Patriot theater missile defense

    The committee notes that Patriot is the first system that 
the United States has deployed specifically to counter theater 
ballistic missile threats, and is evolving toward significantly 
improved capabilities with the PAC-3 system. The Army currently 
has almost 3,000 Patriot PAC-2 missiles deployed and has 
recently commenced low-rate production of the Patriot PAC-3 
missile. The Army is planning to upgrade approximately 1,500 
PAC-2 missiles into the Guidance Enhanced Missile Plus (GEM+) 
configuration by fiscal year 2005. The Army has also invested 
significant resources in the development of the Patriot Anti-
Cruise Missile (PACM) upgrade to PAC-2. At the same time, the 
Army and the Ballistic Missile Defense Organization (BMDO) are 
seeking to reduce the per-unit cost of the PAC-3 missile. To be 
successful, BMDO will have to increase the production rate for 
the PAC-3 missile. Further complicating the dilemma regarding 
the Patriot force composition and funding priorities is the 
fact that the Army has recently discovered a number of 
technical problems associated with the fielded Patriot 
inventory. Therefore, the Army and BMDO need to balance the 
needs of the existing PAC-2 force with those of the future PAC-
3 force. The committee strongly supports both the GEM+ and PAC-
3 programs and directs the Secretary of the Army and the 
Director of BMDO to develop an investment strategy that 
properly balances the need to upgrade the PAC-2 system and 
accelerate deployment of PAC-3.

Prophylactic pharmaceuticals

    Many life-threatening diseases today are treated by 
multiple drug efforts that can include vaccines. The committee 
notes the efforts of the Department of Defense (DOD) to procure 
a vaccine and develop a second generation vaccine to protect 
service personnel against the biological agent anthrax. Relying 
on a single medical approach strategy rather than multiple drug 
therapies may expose protection efforts to undue risk should a 
vaccine procurement or development effort fail. Relying on a 
single medical approach may also deny service personnel the 
full range of modern pharmaceutical treatment that may be 
available from the medical research community.
    The committee is aware of medical research involving 
synthetic compounds which inhibit the anthrax enzyme NAD 
Sythetase. Application of this synthetic compound could 
possibly be developed into a man-made prophylactic 
pharmaceutical to protect against exposure to anthrax and cure 
post-infection exposure.
    The committee supports efforts to explore a multi-tiered 
medical approach to defending military service members against 
biological agents. The committee directs the U.S. Army Medical 
Research Institute of Infectious Diseases (USAMRIID) to report 
to the congressional defense committees the results of a cost-
benefit analysis of a prophylactic pharmaceutical development 
program that is based on current medical research to develop 
synthetic compounds that inhibit the anthrax enzyme NAD 
Sythetase. USAMRIID will also report on the funding requirement 
to fully develop this research into a prophylactic 
pharmaceutical. The development program will have the following 
goals: (1) to develop synthetic pharmaceutical compounds that 
can be taken prophylactically immediately before exposure to 
anthrax spores and offer additional post-exposure protection 
against the germinating spore for non-vaccinated personnel; and 
(2) to develop a novel mechanism of action-based drugs that 
would kill the infectious anthrax bacteria whether it was a 
natural strain or a genetically engineered strain.

Radiation hardened electronics investment strategy

    The committee strongly supports the Secretary of Defense's 
establishment of a Radiation Hardened Oversight Council and 
other initiatives to ensure the availability of radiation 
hardened microelectronic components to meet the Department of 
Defense's unique requirements for future national security 
systems. The investment strategy directed by the Under 
Secretary of Defensefor Acquisition, Technology and Logistics, 
would ensure adequate funding to meet science and technology, 
engineering, and production needs from fiscal year 2001 to fiscal year 
2005. The committee supports this strategy and urges the military 
departments and defense agencies to support the investment strategy 
goals.
    The committee directs the Secretary of Defense, in 
consultation with the Secretary of Energy, to submit a report 
to the congressional defense committees by April 1, 2001, and 
annually thereafter, on the implementation of the Radiation 
Hardened Electronics Investment Strategy, including the degree 
to which the relevant military departments and defense agencies 
are fulfilling their directed investment goals.

Small arms fire control system

    The committee notes with great interest progress made to 
date in developing the small arms fire control system (SAFCS). 
This lightweight, automated, optical sight system greatly 
enhances the accuracy of fire for both the Mark 19 grenade 
launcher and the M2 .50 caliber machine gun. The committee was 
pleased to note that the Army has recognized the critical role 
this system can play in ground combat operations and has 
requested the funding necessary to continue the development of 
this system. The committee encourages the Army to complete the 
development of SAFCS as soon as is practical and begin a robust 
procurement program to enhance the ability of our ground forces 
to fight and win decisively.

Transition of successful research projects into the acquisition system

    The Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) has a 
long history of successfully providing innovative technologies 
and revolutionary warfighting systems concepts to the services. 
In recent years, DARPA has worked closely with the services to 
identify areas of opportunity and technological needs where 
DARPA can play an effective role. Unfortunately, the percentage 
of DARPA initiatives transitioned to the services continues to 
be relatively low. In some cases, this transition problem 
appears to be attributable to the rapid pace of technological 
developments and the comparatively slow pace of the acquisition 
system. As a result, a research program may be successfully 
completed before the money is available, leaving a budget gap 
that adversely affects the program.
    The committee directs the Under Secretary of Defense for 
Acquisition, Technology and Logistics to review this problem 
and report to the congressional defense committees not later 
than six months after the date of enactment of this Act on 
alternative approaches to ensuring that successful research 
initiatives are fielded in a timely manner. The review should 
consider possible changes to the acquisition and budgeting 
systems, including, but not limited to, the development of a 
transition opportunity fund that would provide the Department 
greater flexibility to take advantage of rapidly developing 
technology.
                  TITLE III--OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE

Explanation of tables
    The tables in this title display items requested by the 
administration for fiscal year 2001 for which the committee 
either increased or decreased the requested amounts. As in the 
past, the administration may not exceed the amounts approved by 
the committee (as set forth in the tables or, if unchanged from 
the administration request, as set forth in the Department of 
Defense's budget justification documents) without a 
reprogramming action in accordance with established procedures. 
Unless noted explicitly in the report, all changes are made 
without prejudice.


Armed Forces Retirement Home (sec. 303)

    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
$69.832 million to be appropriated from the Armed Forces 
Retirement Home Trust Fund for fiscal year 2001.

    SUBTITLE B--PROGRAM REQUIREMENTS, RESTRICTIONS, AND LIMITATIONS


Impact aid for children with disabilities (sec. 311)

    The committee recommends a provision that would add $20.0 
million to Operation and Maintenance funding for defense-wide 
activities for impact aid payments for children with 
disabilities under section 8003(d) of the Elementary and 
Secondary Education Act of 1965, title 20 United States Code, 
7703(d).

Joint Warfighting Capabilities Assessment Teams (sec. 312)

    The budget request included $157.9 million for the Joint 
Chiefs of Staff (JCS), but did not include funding to 
strengthen the Joint Requirements Oversight Council (JROC). The 
Chairman, Joint Chiefs of Staff (CJCS) requested an additional 
$12.0 million to obtain the additional analytical expertise 
required to strengthen the Joint Warfighting Capabilities 
Assessment (JWCA) teams that support the JROC process, thus 
enabling the JROC to focus on more strategic, future-oriented, 
overarching issues. The committee is concerned that an 
investment of $12.0 million for this effort is premature. The 
committee favors a more modest, focused investment that would 
allow the CJCS to measure the progress and effectiveness of 
these reforms before reporting back to the Congress and 
requesting additional resources.
    Therefore, the committee directs that, of the $157.9 
million authorized to be appropriated for the JCS under 
Operations and Maintenance, Defense Wide, Budget Activity 04, 
$4.0 million will be available only for the purpose of 
additional investment in the JWCA teams to re-focus and 
strengthen their analytical efforts in support of the JROC 
process. Upon receipt of the CJCS report on the progress to 
strengthen and re-focus the JROC process, required by a 
separate provision in this bill, the committee would consider 
requests for a re-programming, additional authorizations, and/
or legislative provisions to support the CJCS in this 
important, timely effort to improve the joint warfighting 
capabilities of U.S. armed forces.

             SUBTITLE C--HUMANITARIAN AND CIVIC ASSISTANCE


Increased authority to provide health care services as humanitarian and 
        civic assistance (sec. 321)

    The committee recommends a provision that would allow any 
underserved community, in addition to rural underserved areas, 
to receive medical, dental, and veterinary services through the 
humanitarian and civic assistance program.

Use of humanitarian and civic assistance funding for pay and allowances 
        of special operations command reserves furnishing demining 
        training and related assistance as humanitarian assistance 
        (sec. 322)

    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
pay and allowances from within funds for the Overseas 
Humanitarian, Disaster, and Civic Assistance Account, for 
reserve members of the U.S. Special Operations Command when 
these reservists perform humanitarian demining activities. This 
will enable these individuals to benefit from the same valuable 
training opportunities currently experienced by their active 
duty counter-parts, and will help mitigate the high operations 
tempo of the active component resulting from the numerous 
requirements placed on them for low intensity engagement 
operations.

        SUBTITLE D--DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE INDUSTRIAL FACILITIES

    The committee is concerned with the long-term efficiency of 
the industrial facilities of the armed forces including depots, 
arsenals, and ammunition manufacturing plants. Over the past 
several years the military services have continued to downsize 
their force structure, which has reduced the requirement for 
the products and services of these facilities. However, as a 
result of the national security requirement to retain an 
industrial infrastructure capable of surging to meet the 
military's needs during a conflict, the Department of Defense 
must maintain industrial facilities that are not required on a 
day-to-day basis.
    In 1992, the Congress enacted the Armament Retooling and 
Manufacturing Support Initiative which provided the mechanisms 
necessary to allow the Army's ammunition plants to attract 
private sector firms to locate at these plants, utilizing the 
unused surge capacity, and paying rents which were used to 
offsetthe Army's cost of maintaining and operating these 
plants. The private sector jobs also provided for the retention of 
critical skills at the ammunition plants that would then be available 
whenever necessary. This initiative has had great success, saving the 
Army $37.0 million each year and preserving hundreds of skilled 
workers.
    Section 361 of the National Defense Authorization Act for 
Fiscal Year 1998 authorized the Secretary of Defense to 
designate of each depot level activity of the Department of 
Defense as a Center of Industrial and Technical Excellence in 
the recognized core competencies of the depot activity, to 
adopt best-business practices at these facilities in connection 
with their core competency, and encourage the creation of 
public-private partnerships at these Centers for the 
performance of depot-level maintenance and repair in order to 
maximize the utilization of the capacity at these Centers. It 
also authorized the lease of excess depot-level equipment and 
facilities to private sector entities. Unfortunately, because 
of conflicting legal interpretations and other institutional 
barriers, the Department of Defense has made only limited use 
of these authorities.
    The committee believes it is important to improve the 
efficiency of all Department of Defense industrial facilities 
that are required to maintain a core capability necessary for 
the repair and manufacturing of military ordnance and weapon 
systems. Therefore, the committee includes a number of 
provisions to clarify and enhance current legal authorities to 
provide the mechanisms necessary to more fully utilize these 
facilities by government and commercial organizations.

Codification and improvement of armament retooling and manufacturing 
        support programs (sec. 331)

    The committee recommends a provision that would make 
certain changes and codify in permanent law the Armament 
Retooling and Manufacturing Support Initiative. The provision 
would expand the objectives of the program to include a 
reduction of the cost of ownership and/or disposal of 
ammunition plants, to enhance best business practices, and 
foster cooperation with the private sector at these facilities. 
The provision would also make it easier for non-federal 
entities to use excess capacity at these facilities, and offset 
the costs to the Federal Government of ownership by allowing 
revenues generated through private sector use to be applied to 
overhead and production costs.

Centers of industrial and technical excellence (sec. 332)

    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 2474 of title 10, United States Code, by devolving the 
authority to designate the depot-level activities to the 
respective secretaries of the military departments, including 
the arsenals of the United States Army. The provision would 
also expand the activities authorized to be conducted at these 
centers by employees of the center, the private sector, or 
other entities outside the Department of Defense, to include 
the performance of work under contract, or subcontract, in any 
of the core competencies of the center; the performance of 
depot-level maintenance and repair at the center; other work 
consistent with the needs of the Department of Defense that 
requires the use of any facility or equipment of the center 
that are not fully utilized by a military department for its 
own production and maintenance requirements. The full costs of 
work performed by the employees of the Center under contract 
from the private sector must be charged to the contract. Any 
revenues generated, by rents or through other mechanisms, by 
private sector use of facilities and equipment at these centers 
would be available to offset the costs of facility operations, 
maintenance, and environmental restoration at the center where 
the leased property is located.
    The committee believes that the head of the center should 
use these authorities to maximize the utilization of the 
capacity at the center, reduce or eliminate the cost of 
Department of Defense ownership of the center, reduce the cost 
of products of the Department of Defense produced or maintained 
at the center, foster cooperation between the armed forces and 
private industry, and leverage private sector investment in the 
recapitalization of plant and equipment at the center.

Effects of outsourcing on overhead costs of centers of industrial and 
        technical excellence and ammunition plants (sec. 333)

    The committee recommends a provision that would require the 
Secretary of Defense to submit a report to Congress thirty days 
prior to entering into a contract that would result in moving 
workload, performed by 50 or more employees, from a center or 
ammunition plant. The report should describe the impact of any 
reduction in workload at a center or ammunition plant as a 
result of a contract and describe the overhead costs of that 
facility
    The committee is concerned that the process for determining 
the costs associated with entering into a contract with a 
private sector source for the performance of a workload 
currently performed at a center of industrial and technical 
excellence, or an ammunition plant, does not include a review 
of the impact that such a contract will have on the overhead 
costs of the center or plant.

Revision of authority to waive limitation on performance of depot-level 
        maintenance (sec. 334)

    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 2466 of title 10, to allow the President of the United 
States rather than the secretary of the respective military 
service to waive the 50 percent requirement for reasons of 
national security. The committee is concerned that the 
Secretary of the Air Force has not taken the actions necessary 
to ensure the Air Force is able to comply with the requirement 
contained in section 2466 of title 10, that 50 percent of all 
depot maintenance funds of a military service be spent on depot 
maintenance services provided by employees of the Federal 
Government. The committee believes that this requirement is 
essential to maintain the core maintenance capability necessary 
to preserve a ready and controlled source of repair and 
maintenance.

Manufacturing technical assistance pilot program

    The committee recognizes the valuable contribution that the 
manufacturing technical assistance pilot program has made to 
the development and retention of a skilled private sector 
workforce capable of supporting the manufacturing requirements 
of the United States Air Force. The committee believes that 
this program could also provide great value to the 
manufacturing and maintenance needs of the other military 
services, such as the ship building industry that supports the 
United States Navy.
    Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $2.0 
million to support an Atlantic Fleet pilot program for the 
development and retention of the manufacturing skills necessary 
to support the Navy's shipbuilding requirements of the 21st 
Century. The committee also directs the Secretary of Defense to 
provide the congressional defense committees with a report 
outlining the results of this pilot program.

                  SUBTITLE E--ENVIRONMENTAL PROVISIONS


Environmental restoration accounts (sec. 341)

    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 2703(a) of title 10, United States Code, by inserting a 
new paragraph that would designate an account for formerly used 
defense sites within the Environmental Restoration Account. The 
provision would also ensure that all site closeout activities 
would be funded out of an appropriate Environmental Restoration 
Account.

Payments of fines and penalties for environmental compliance violations 
        (sec. 342)

    The committee recommends a provision that would require the 
Secretary of Defense or the secretaries of the military 
departments to seek congressional authorization prior to paying 
any fine or penalty for an environmental compliance violation 
if the fine or penalty amount agreed to is $1.5 million or more 
or is based on the application of economic benefit or size of 
business criteria. Supplemental environmental projects carried 
out as part of fine or penalty for amounts $1.5 million or more 
and agreed to after the enactment of this Act would also 
require specific authorization by law.
    The committee recommends this provision as a result of 
concerns that stem from a significant fine imposed at Fort 
Wainwright, Alaska, (FWA), a related policy established by U.S. 
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), and an apparent need for 
further congressional oversight in this area. On March 5, 1999, 
EPA Region 10 sent FWA a notice of violation (NOV) and on 
August 25, 1999, EPA sent a settlement offer of $16.07 million: 
(1) $155,000 for the seriousness of the offenses; (2) $10.56 
million for recapture of economic benefit for noncompliance; 
and (3) an additional $5.35 million because of the ``size of 
business'' at FWA.
    According to EPA, the $16.07 million fine was imposed to 
correct excessive emissions of particulate matter from an aging 
coal-fired central heat and power plant (CHPP) at FWA, and to 
impose a penalty for years of violations under the Clean Air 
Act (CAA). The EPA policy or rule that directs the application 
of economic benefit or ``size of business'' penalty assessment 
criteria to federal facilities is based on memoranda dated 
October 9, 1998, and September 30, 1999, issued by the EPA 
headquarters Federal Facilities Enforcement Office (FFEO). 
Notice and comment procedures were not used to promulgate these 
memoranda.
    The compliance and enforcement history of the CHPP provides 
some insight into this committee's concerns regarding the EPA 
NOV. In the mid-1980s, EPA delegated its CAA program authority 
to the State of Alaska. In order to comply with opacity 
requirements, FWA purchased opacity monitors in 1988 and 
installed them in 1989, however, the monitors had a high 
failure and maintenance rate. In March 1994, the Alaska 
Department of Environmental Conservation (ADEC) issued an NOV 
for opacity violations at the FWA CHPP that identified a need 
for PM emission reductions. In response, FWA negotiated a 
compliance schedule with ADEC for the construction of a full-
steam baghouse for each of the boilers in the CHPP.
    FWA continued to work with ADEC from March 1994 to 1999 to: 
accomplish about $15.3 million worth of numerous CHPP upgrades 
for controlling air emissions; resolve Department of Defense 
(DOD) privatization issues; conduct a baghouse feasibility 
study; and seek military construction authorization for a $15.9 
million baghouse project. In the interim, FWA received a CAA 
Title V Permit completeness determination from the state on 
February 19, 1998. As a result, FWA continues to operate the 
CHPP under a CAA Title V permit application, which contains 
schedules for compliance that were the result of careful 
coordination with ADEC.
    The $15.9 million baghouse was programmed for fiscal year 
2000 and was authorized and appropriated by Congress in fiscal 
year 2000. As planned, the baghouse design complies with all 
applicable CAA requirements, including compliance assurance 
monitoring. When the EPA NOV was issued, FWA was in compliance 
with the Title V schedules for implementing air emission 
control technologies agreed to with ADEC.
    First, the committee questions EPA's regulatory judgement 
in assessing fines and penalties despite the fact that the 
installation was operating in good faith under a Title V permit 
application that is overseen by a state with delegated 
authority. Second, it is the committee's view that the 
application of economic benefit or ``size of business'' penalty 
assessment criteria to the DOD is inconsistent with the 
statutory language and the legislative history under section 
7413 of title 42, United States Code.
    The terms economic benefit and ``size of business'' suggest 
market-based activities, not government functions subject to 
congressional appropriations. In addition, the statement of 
managers accompanying the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 
(Public Law 101-549; 104 Stat. 2399 (October 27, 1990)) 
provides that with respect to the economic benefit criterion: 
``Violators should not be able to obtain an economic benefit 
vis-a-vis their competitors as a result of their noncompliance 
with environmental laws.'' The committee is not aware that the 
DOD has competitors.
    As a practical matter, the functions of DOD facilities are 
not analogous to private business. The DOD, unlike private 
sector, must fund all of its operations, to include 
environmental compliance, through congressional appropriations. 
``No money shall be drawn from the Treasury but in consequence 
of appropriations made by law; and a regular statement and 
account of the receipts and expenditures of all public money 
shall be published from time to time.'' (U.S. Constitution, 
Article 1, Section 9, Clause 7; Anti-Deficiency Act (ADA) 31 
U.S.C. 1501). Moreover, the expenditure of federal funds must 
be consistent with authorization and appropriation acts--
Congress and the Office of Management and Budget oversee 
apportionment of funds to agencies during the fiscal year to 
avoid overspending--DOD allocates funds to the military 
departments, which in turn issue allotments to command and 
staff organizations. (31 U.S.C. 1341(a)(1); Department of 
Defense Directive 7200.1, Administrative Control of 
Appropriations (1984)).
    The committee has concluded that DOD payment of fines or 
penalties based on economic benefit or size of business 
criteria would interfere with the management power of the 
Federal Executive Branch and upset the balance of power between 
the Federal Executive and Legislative Branches, exceeding the 
immediate objective of compliance. Therefore, the committee 
recommends a provision that would prohibit the Secretary of 
Defense and the secretaries of the military departments from 
paying such fines and penalties without specific authorization 
by law.

Annual reports under Strategic Environmental Research and Development 
        Program (sec. 343)

    The committee recommends a provision that would modify the 
current reporting requirement for the Science Advisory Board to 
allow for its inclusion in the annual report for the Strategic 
Environmental Research and Development Program. This provision 
allows for more streamlined reporting by the Department of 
Defense.

Modification of authority for indemnification of transferees of closing 
        defense property (sec. 344)

    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 330 of the National Defense Authorization Act for 
Fiscal Year 1993 (Public Law 102-484; 106 Stat. 2315) to 
clarify the application of the existing indemnification 
authority. The exercise of the current authority under section 
330 is predicated upon cumbersome conditions for claimant 
eligibility, which has resulted in confusion and a complete 
absence of claims for indemnification. The provision would 
eliminate ambiguous conditions, streamline claimant access, and 
facilitate early transfer of base closure properties to assist 
communities in recovering from the initial effects of base 
closure.
    Consistent with existing authority, the recommended 
provision would authorize the Secretary of Defense to indemnify 
any state, political subdivision, or any person who acquires 
ownership or control over transferred surplus base closure 
property for the costs of legally required remediation. 
Presently, the capital markets are reluctant to finance certain 
projects at base closure properties due to the potential for 
contamination, and liability under the Comprehensive 
Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA) 
and analogous state laws. That concern is magnified in those 
instances in which a military department transfers surplus base 
closure property for which there is a deferral of covenants 
under section 120(h)(3)(C) of the Comprehensive Environmental 
Response, Compensation and Liability Act (42 U.S.C. 9601 et 
seq.)

Payment of fines or penalties imposed for environmental compliance 
        violations at certain Department of Defense facilities (sec. 
        345)

    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
the Department of Defense (DOD) to pay fines and penalties, or 
to carry out supplemental environmental projects in accordance 
with section 8149 of the Department of Defense Appropriations 
Act for Fiscal Year 2000. The Secretary of the Army would be 
specifically authorized to pay following supplemental 
environmental projects carried out in satisfaction of an 
assessed fine or penalty: (1) $993,000 for Walter Reed Army 
Medical Center, Washington, D.C.; (2) $377,250 for Fort 
Campbell, Kentucky; (3) $20,701 for Fort Gordon, Georgia; (4) 
$78,500 for Pueblo Chemical Depot, Colorado; (5) $20,000 for 
Deseret Chemical Depot, Utah. The Secretary of the Navy would 
be specifically authorized to pay the following fines and 
penalties: (1) $108,000 for Allegany Ballistics Laboratory, 
West Virginia; and (2) $5,000 for Naval Air Station, Corpus 
Christi, Texas.

Reimbursement for certain costs in connection with the former Nansemond 
        Ordnance Depot Site, Suffolk, Virginia (sec. 346)

    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
the Secretary of Defense to pay not more than $98,210 from the 
Environmental Restoration, Formerly Used Defense Sites Account 
to reimburse the Nansemond Ordnance Depot Site Special Account 
of the Hazardous Substance Superfund, established by section 
9507 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (26 U.S.C. 9507). The 
reimbursement is for oversight costs incurred by the U.S. 
Environmental Protection Agency on a time critical removal 
action at the Former Nansemond Ordnance Depot performed by the 
Department of Defense under the Comprehensive Environmental 
Response, Compensation and Liability Act (42 U.S.C. 9601 et 
seq.) and the Defense Environmental Restoration Program (10 
U.S.C. 2701 et seq.).

Environmental restoration activities (sec. 347)

    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
the Secretary of Defense or the secretaries of the military 
departments to use funds available in the environmental 
restoration accounts, pursuant to section 2703 of title 10, 
United States Code, to permanently relocate facilities. That 
authorization is contingent upon a secretary's written 
determination that such permanent relocation is part of a 
response action that: (1) has the support of the affected 
community; (2) has the approval of relevant regulatory 
agencies;and (3) is the most cost effective response action 
available. The authority would terminate after September 30, 2003, and 
be subject to a five percent funding cap within each fiscal year for 
the funds available under section 2703. The secretary concerned would 
also be required to provide an annual report to the congressional 
defense committees on each response action for which there has been a 
written determination made under this provision.
    The committee expects the Department of Defense (DOD) to 
use this authority judiciously, and ensure that funds are used 
only for legitimate environmental restoration priorities. It is 
expected that this provision will provide the necessary 
flexibility to facilitate environmental restoration at certain 
formerly used defense sites (FUDS), where progress has been 
slow.
    The committee is concerned about the progress of 
environmental remediation planning and activities, and the 
appearance of an overall lack of support for the FUDS Program 
within the Army and the DOD. (Formerly Used Defense Sites: Army 
Corps of Engineers, U.S. Army Audit Agency Report, AA 99-186, 
April 19, 1999). It is expected that both the Secretaries of 
Defense and Army shall address with consistency the 
environmental remediation issues at these sites. Moreover, the 
Secretaries of Defense and Army shall ensure that there is 
adequate funding in the fiscal year 2002 budget request and the 
Future Years Defense Program to meet environmental remediation 
requirements and other related activities throughout the FUDS 
program.

Ship disposal project (sec. 348)

    The committee recommends a provision that would direct the 
Secretary of the Navy to continue to carry out a ship disposal 
project in fiscal year 2001 and to use competitive contracting 
procedures to award task orders within the ship disposal 
project. The provision would also direct the Secretary to 
submit, not later than December 31, 2000, a report to the 
congressional defense committees on the ship disposal project.

Report on the Defense Environmental Security Corporate Information 
        Management Program (sec. 349)

    The committee recommends a provision that would direct the 
Secretary of Defense to submit, not later than 60 days after 
the date of the enactment of this act, a report to the 
congressional defense committees. The report shall contain 
specific recommendations regarding the future mission of the 
Defense Environmental Security Corporate Information Management 
Program and address issues of concern within the Department of 
Defense.

Report on Plasma Energy Pyrolysis System (sec. 350)

    The committee recommends a provision that would require the 
Secretary of the Army to submit, not later than October 1, 
2000, a report to the congressional defense committees that 
includes the Army's analysis and recommendations regarding 
future applications for both phases of the Plasma Energy 
Pyrolysis System (PEPS) technology. The committee notes that 
PEPS has demonstrated merit as a research and development 
project (PE 62720A) that could provide the Army and other 
military departments with the capability to reduce costs 
associated with treatment and disposal of hazardous and toxic 
waste streams. The project has been executed in two phases: (1) 
a fixed-transportable unit demonstration; and (2) a mobile unit 
demonstration. It is expected that the data produced during 
both phases of the technology demonstrations should provide the 
Army with the information necessary to determine PEPS 
applications within the military user community.

                       SUBTITLE F--OTHER MATTERS


Effects of worldwide contingency operations on readiness of certain 
        military aircraft and equipment (sec. 361)

    The committee recommends a provision that would require the 
Secretary of Defense to submit a report to Congress on the 
effects of worldwide contingency operations on the aircraft of 
the Navy, Marine Corps, and Air Force, and the ground equipment 
of the Army and Marine Corps. The report shall include the 
Secretary's assessment of the effects of those operations on 
the ability of the Department of Defense to maintain a high 
level of readiness.
    The committee is concerned that the continued high OPTEMPO 
of military forces is wearing out already aging weapon systems. 
This is particularly true for aviation assets that have been 
used to provide extensive support in the no-fly zone over Iraq, 
to execute the air war over Kosovo, and support the numerous 
other contingency operations around the world, including East 
Timor. This is also true for the ground equipment that is used 
in these operations.

Realistic budgeting for readiness requirements of the Army (sec. 362)

    The committee recommends a provision that would require the 
Secretary of the Army to develop a new methodology to be used 
in preparing a budget request that more accurately reflects the 
Army's requirements. This methodology should be based on the 
level of training that is required to be conducted to maintain 
essential readiness, the cost of conducting that 
requiredtraining, and the cost of all other Army operations, including 
the cost of funding its infrastructure requirements. This methodology 
should be used in the preparation of the fiscal year 2002 budget 
request.
    The committee is concerned that the U.S. Army, despite 
repeated assurances, continues to migrate training funds to its 
infrastructure support and other accounts as a result of 
insufficient funding for these programs in the budget request. 
Over the past several years the Army has included funding for 
800 miles of training in its budget, but has only executed 
between 600 and 650 training miles during the fiscal year. 
Those funds that were not utilized for training were 
reprogrammed to pay for such things as real property 
maintenance and base operations, which have been dramatically 
underfunded over the past few years.
    The committee is concerned that this practice indicates 
there are significant problems with the methodology used to 
identify resources necessary to fund its operations. The first 
problem stems from the fact that the current methodology does 
not accurately reflect the required training that must be 
conducted to maintain a division's necessary level of 
readiness. If it did, the Army would not report that its 
divisions are ready to perform the National Military Strategy 
when they only execute 75 percent of the funds programmed for 
this purpose. The second problem stems from the unrealistic 
budget request for must pay accounts, such as base operations, 
and other essential accounts, such as real property 
maintenance. Insufficient funding in these areas will continue 
to force operational commanders to reprogram funds from their 
training accounts to their infrastructure accounts in order to 
ensure the delivery of essential services such as utilities and 
building maintenance.

Additions to plan for ensuring visibility over all in-transit end items 
        and secondary items (sec. 363)

    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 349 of the Strom Thurmond National Defense 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1999 by including specific 
requirements for monitoring and measuring implementation of the 
plan to ensure visibility over in-transit inventory items. The 
requirements would include the assignment of oversight 
responsibility for each action required to address weaknesses 
in the controls over in-transit items, a description of the 
resources required for oversight, and an estimate of the annual 
cost of oversight.

Performance of emergency response functions at chemical weapons storage 
        installations (sec. 364)

    The committee recommends a provision that would prohibit 
the Secretary of the Army from converting to contractor 
performance the emergency response functions of any chemical 
weapons storage installation currently performed by U.S. 
government employees until the Secretary certifies to the 
Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the House of 
Representatives that the plan for conversion of the emergency 
response functions:
          (1) is consistent with the recommendation contained 
        in the General Accounting Office report, Department of 
        Defense Competitive Outsourcing, dated March 2000; and
          (2) provides for a transition to contractor 
        performance of emergency response functions that ensure 
        an adequate transfer of the relevant knowledge and 
        expertise regarding chemical weapon emergency response 
        to the contractor personnel.
The Secretary's certification is necessary to ensure that there 
will be no lapse of capability to perform the chemical weapon 
emergency response mission at a chemical weapons storage 
installation during any transition to contractor performance of 
those emergency response functions.

Congressional notification of use of radio frequency spectrum by a 
        system entering engineering and manufacturing development (sec. 
        365)

    The committee recommends a provision that would require the 
Secretary of Defense to submit a report to the congressional 
defense committees before a new weapon system is acquired that 
would outline the frequency that the system will use. The 
report would also include a statement of whether the Department 
is designated as the primary user of that frequency and, if 
not, the unique technical characteristics that make it 
necessary to use that particular frequency, and a description 
of the protections that the Department of Defense has been 
given to ensure that it will not incur costs as a result of 
current or future interference from other users of that 
particular frequency. The committee further recommends an 
increase of $25.0 million for the upgrade of the Joint Spectrum 
Center data base.
    The committee is concerned that in the past the Department 
of Defense has pursued the development of weapons systems 
utilizing portions of the radio frequency spectrum that are not 
designated for military use. This can lead to unintended 
interference between that system and a commercial system 
licensed to use the same frequency. This interference could 
then result in operational constraints, or expensive redesign 
of the weapon system. The committee is further concerned that 
there is insufficient funding in the budget request to maintain 
an effective data base to assist program managers in 
determining the characteristics of various systems currently 
operating on particular frequencies, and in testing these 
systems to ensure non-interference.

Monitoring of value of performance of Department of Defense functions 
        by workforces selected from between public and private 
        workforces (sec. 366)

    The committee recommends a provision that would require the 
Secretary of Defense to establish a system for monitoring the 
performance of functions of the Department of Defense that are 
performed by 50 or more employees of the Department and have 
been subjected to a review to determine whether the function 
should be performed by federal employees or a private sector 
workforce. The provision would also establish three performance 
measures; the costs incurred, the savings derived, and the 
value of the performance by the selected workforce measured 
against the costs of the performance of the workload by the 
workforce at the beginning of the review. Finally, the 
provision would require the Secretary of Defense to provide the 
Congress with an annual report outlining the results of the 
performance reviews conducted over the previous years.

Suspension of reorganization of naval audit service (sec. 367)

    The committee is concerned that the Naval Audit Service has 
launched a program for total consolidation of audit personnel 
into the National Capitol Region without benefit of a 
convincing, detailed cost-benefit analysis, an assessment of 
the impact of the reorganization on the service's auditing 
mission, including an assessment of the impact of such a 
consolidation on this highly skilled and critical workforce. 
The committee is concerned that consolidation will undermine 
the efficiency and effectiveness of auditing functions 
throughout the Navy and particularly in the three highest 
concentrations of naval facilities and activities: San Diego, 
Norfolk, and Honolulu. The Congress, and the military 
departments, depend upon the quality of investigation and 
reporting done by audit agencies as an independent and credible 
source of information necessary to fulfill oversight 
responsibilities. The committee is concerned that consolidation 
could undermine the institutional and individual auditor 
independence so essential to an effective audit service and the 
quality of information provided to Navy leadership and the 
Congress. Therefore, the committee includes a provision that 
would delay the implementation of further consolidations until 
such time as the Secretary provides his analysis of the savings 
that the reorganization will achieve.

Investment of commissary trust revolving fund (sec. 368)

    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
the Secretary of Defense to invest a portion of the Commissary 
Trust Revolving Fund in public debt securities. Any income 
resulting from these investments would be credited to and 
become part of the fund.

Economic procurement of distilled spirits (sec. 369)

    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
the military exchanges to use private distributors to 
distribute distilled spirits in those cases in which such an 
option is determined to be the most cost-effective means of 
distribution.

Resale of armor piercing ammunition disposed of by the Army (sec. 370)

    The committee is concerned that excess Department of 
Defense armor-piercing ammunition could be made available to 
the public. The committee recommends a provision that would 
require the Secretary of the Army to ensure that excess armor-
piercing ammunition that is not transferred to law enforcement 
or other governmental agencies or made available for foreign 
military sales is destroyed. This requirement would not apply 
to the non- armor-piercing components of that ammunition, but 
such components could not be used to produce armor-piercing 
ammunition for sale to civilian purchasers.

Damage to aviation facilities caused by alkali silica reactivity (sec. 
        371)

    The committee recommends a provision that would require the 
Secretary of Defense to test the use of lithium salts to 
preserve runway integrity and provide the congressional defense 
committees with a report outlining its success in mitigating 
the impact of Alkali Silica Reactivity (ASR).
    The committee is concerned with reports of significant 
damage to aircraft engines as a result of the ingestion of 
pieces of cement from runways and parking aprons that have 
deteriorated because of alkali silica reactivity (ASR). The 
Corps of Engineers' Research and Development Center recently 
recommended the application of lithium salts to selected 
pavements at Fort Campbell to test the ability of this product 
to reduce or eliminate ASR damage to cement surfaces.

Reauthorization of pilot program for acceptance and use of landing fees 
        charged for use of domestic military airfields by civil 
        aircraft (sec. 372)

    The committee recommends a provision that would reauthorize 
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. The pilot program would be authorized through fiscal 
year 2010.

Reimbursement by civil air carriers for support provided at Johnston 
        Atoll (sec. 373)

    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
the Secretary of the Air Force to require payment from a civil 
air carrier for support provided by the United States to that 
carrier at Johnston Atoll that is either requested by the 
carrier, or determined to be necessary to accommodate the 
carrier's use of Johnston Atoll. The payment shall be equal to 
the actual costs incurred by the United States, and shall be 
credited to either Air Force operation and maintenance accounts 
or to the Army chemical demilitarization accounts.

Review of costs of maintaining historical properties (sec. 374)

    The committee recommends a provision that would require the 
Comptroller General of the United States to conduct a review of 
the annual costs incurred by the Department of Defense in 
complying with the requirements of the National Historic 
Preservation Act (NHPA)(16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.). The committee 
is concerned that NHPA places a significant burden on the 
already underfunded real property maintenance budgets of the 
military services. As those buildings which were constructed 
during World War I and the Korean War reach fifty years of age, 
the cost of meeting these requirements has increased and will 
continue to increase.
    The provision would require the Comptroller General to 
provide the congressional defense committees with a report of 
the results of the review including the projected costs of 
maintaining these properties over the next 10 years, an 
analysis of maintaining only those properties which originally 
qualified as historic properties when the NHPA was first 
enacted, the accounts used for paying the costs to comply with 
the NHPA, and the identity of all properties that must be 
maintained in order to comply with the NHPA.

Extension of authority to sell certain aircraft for use in wildfire 
        suppression (sec. 375)

    The committee recommends a provision that would extend the 
current authority for the Secretary of Defense to sell excess 
aircraft and spare parts to persons or entities that contract 
with the Federal Government for the delivery of fire retardant 
by air in order to suppress wildfires. The provision would 
extend the authority which currently expires at the end of 
fiscal year 2000 through fiscal year 2005.

Overseas airlift service on Civil Reserve Air Fleet aircraft (sec. 376)

    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 41106(a) of title 49, United States Code, to bring it 
in line with current Department of Defense (DOD) policy 
regarding the procurement of air transportation services. This 
provision would require that the DOD procure transportation 
from air carriers with aircraft in the Civil Reserve Air Fleet 
(CRAF) for travel from a place in the United States to a place 
outside the United States, and to the extent practicable, 
between two locations outside the United States.
    The committee understands the need to maintain a viable 
CRAF to transport military personnel and equipment to a theater 
of operations during conflict. Following Operation Desert 
Storm, the General Accounting Office testified before Congress 
that the CRAF program had saved the DOD between $50.0 billion 
and $90.0 billion over the 40 year life of the program. United 
States air carriers commit their aircraft to the CRAF program 
largely in exchange for DOD international airlift business. DOD 
has little to offer these carriers in return for their 
commitment except U.S. Government business.

                     ADDITIONAL MATTERS OF INTEREST


                                  Army


Real property maintenance

    The committee is concerned with the continuing growth in 
the backlog of real property maintenance (RPM) throughout the 
Department of Defense. The current backlog of real property 
maintenance exceeds several billion dollars. This is a 
particular problem for our aging Army facilities. The 
insufficient funding dedicated to maintaining our military 
infrastructure is having a direct and negative impact on 
military readiness as necessary repairs on roads, airstrips, 
rifle ranges, and other training and operational facilities are 
continually deferred. Furthermore, the underfunding is 
undermining the quality of life of our military personnel and 
their families as repairs on the buildings in which they work 
and live, such as barracks, are also deferred. 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. In 
many cases, this deferral of property maintenance will lead to 
higher costs in a few short years when the military is already 
facing a ``bow wave'' of procurement to replace its aging 
weapon systems.
    Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $320.0 
million to the operations and maintenance accounts of the 
military services for the maintenance of real property, as 
outlined below:

                                                                Millions
Army..........................................................     120.0
Navy..........................................................     180.0
National Guard................................................      20.0
                    --------------------------------------------------------------
                    ____________________________________________________

    Total.....................................................     320.0

Excess carryover-defense working capital fund activities

    Current Department of Defense policy states that three 
months of carryover is the maximum amount allowable for the 
Defense Working Capital Fund Business Activities for organic 
work. Carryover workload is the gross unfilled orders at the 
end of the prior fiscal year, plus new orders for the current 
fiscal year, minus work in process for the current fiscal year. 
This does not include carryover for non-supply intra and inter 
working capital fund orders, foreign military sales orders, 
base closure orders, non-Department of Defense orders and 
contract obligations. The committee is aware that several 
defense working capital fund activities currently exceed the 
allowable carryover under the Department of Defense policy. The 
budget request for fiscal year 2001 in these activities would 
provide $678.4 million in funding that could not be expended 
until sometime after December 31, 2001, more than three months 
after the beginning of fiscal year 2002 when additional 
resources would be made available.
    Therefore, the committee recommends a reduction of $678.4 
million in the military service operation and maintenance 
accounts to reflect the funds that cannot be expended during 
fiscal year 2001, and bring these accounts within the 
Department's policy. These reductions are distributed, as 
follows:

                                                                Millions
Army..............................................................  40.5
Navy.............................................................. 585.7
Air Force.........................................................  52.2

Foreign currency fluctuation

    The committee notes the continuing strength of the American 
dollar in relation to other currencies. This makes the purchase 
of services and goods overseas less expensive than was 
originally believed when the Department of Defense put together 
the fiscal year 2001 President's budget request. Furthermore, 
the committee is aware that the foreign currency fluctuation 
(FCF) account currently contains approximately $639.4 million, 
or $319.4 million more than the historical level of foreign 
currency fluctuation reserves. The committee further 
understands that current exchange rates mean the Department 
will accumulate an additional $290.4 million in these reserves 
through the operation and maintenance (O&M) accounts during 
fiscal years 2000 and 2001 for a total of $929.8 million.
    The committee believes that this is more than enough to 
compensate for any unforseen weakening of the dollar in 
relation to foreign currencies. Therefore, the committee 
recommends a reduction of $607.8 million in the military 
services O&M accounts to reflect the savings that will be 
realized in fiscal years 2000 and 2001, and to draw down the 
FCF account to an appropriate level. These reductions are 
distributed as follows:

                                                                Millions
Army.............................................................. 292.1
Navy.............................................................. 105.1
USMC..............................................................  25.8
Air Force......................................................... 157.6
Defense Wide......................................................  27.2
                                                                  ______
    Total......................................................... 607.8

Civilian personnel pay in excess of requirements

    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 when the budgets for each succeeding fiscal 
year were drafted. This drawdown resulted in lower-than-
budgeted civilian personnel levels, yielding savings of several 
million dollars during the past few fiscal years. Analysis 
performed by the General Accounting Office of the President's 
budget request indicates that this under-execution will 
continue during fiscal years 2000 and 2001.
    Therefore, the committee recommends a reduction to the 
military services operation and maintenance accounts to reflect 
the funds that were requested for civilian personnel budgets 
but will not be necessary as a result of the lower civilian 
personnel levels:

                                                                Millions
Army..............................................................   4.6
Navy..............................................................  53.8
Defense Wide......................................................  27.5
                                                                  ______
    Total.........................................................  81.9

Army equipment maintenance

    The committee is concerned with the continuing impact that 
aging equipment is having on the Army's ability to maintain its 
readiness. Aging equipment and extensive deployments have led 
to increased work hours as young soldiers have labored to 
prevent mission capable rates from falling. The committee is 
aware of the shortfall in equipment maintenance that needs to 
be performed in order to restore the readiness of this 
equipment. The committee is also aware of the unfunded 
requirement for corrosion control treatments on this equipment 
to slow its rate of degradation. Therefore, the committee 
recommends an increase of $10.0 million for Army corrosion 
control, and $5.0 million for depot level maintenance of Army 
Reserve equipment.

Battlefield mobility enhancement system

    The committee recommends an increase of $10.0 million for 
the purchase of the battlefield mobility enhancement system, a 
six wheeled vehicle used for logistical support in training and 
on the battlefield by light infantry divisions.

Army aviation spares

    The committee is concerned with the continuing reports of 
increased cannibalization rates and decreased mission capable 
rates as a result of insufficient quantities of spare parts. In 
testimony before the Subcommittee on Readiness and Management 
Support, and during visits to the field, military officers have 
listed spare parts shortfalls amongst their principal concerns. 
Furthermore, in letters to the Congress, spares were identified 
as one of the leading unfunded requirements of the service 
chiefs and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs. Therefore, the 
committee recommends an increase of $40.0 million for Army 
aviation spares.

Adjustments to Junior Reserve Officers Training Corps

    The budget request included $77.5 million for the Junior 
Reserve Officer Training Corps program. The committee 
recommends an increase of $3.0 million for Army Junior Reserve 
Officer Training Corps programs.

                                  Navy


Navy spares

    The committee is concerned with the continuing reports of 
increased cannibalization rates and decreased mission capable 
rates as a result of insufficient quantities of spare parts. In 
testimony before the Senate Armed Services Committee, and in 
the field, military officers have listed spare parts shortfalls 
amongst their principal concerns. These shortfalls exist for 
new systems, as well as older, established systems. 
Furthermore, in letters to the Congress, spares were identified 
as one of the leading unfunded requirements of the Chief of 
Naval Operations and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs. 
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $232.0 
million for Navy spares including; $82.0 million for TACAMO 
spares; $75.0 million for spares for other fielded aviation 
systems; and $75.0 million for ship spares.

Ship depot maintenance

    The budget request included $2.2 billion for ship depot 
maintenance. The committee is concerned with reports of 
insufficient funding for ship depot maintenance. Recent 
testimony of the Chief of Naval Operations indicates that there 
is more than $200.0 million worth of such maintenance that 
currently cannot be executed because of a lack of funding. The 
committee is also concerned with reports that many private 
shipyards, which are essential to maintaining a healthy 
domestic maintenance capability, are being forced to downsize 
their operations as a result of insufficient workloads.
    Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $237.3 
million for ship depot maintenance, including $40.0 million for 
the AOE class ships, $32.0 million for LHA maintenance, $22.0 
million for berthing and messing barge maintenance, and $143.0 
million for general ship depot maintenance. The committee 
recommends a further increase of $5.0 million for depot 
maintenance of Navy Reserve vessels.

Oceanography

    The budget request included $257.9 million for operational 
meteorology and oceanography. The committee recommends an 
increase of $7.0 million for the Naval Meteorology and 
Oceanography Command for operations and collaborative 
oceanography programs.

Training range upgrades

    As a result of insufficient funding over the past several 
years, much of the infrastructure at our military training 
ranges is obsolete and degrading. Training range modernization 
was identified in letters to the committee as one of the 
leading unfunded requirements of the United States military. 
Furthermore, the recent difficulties at the Navy's training 
range on the island of Vieques, together with the significant 
deployment of U.S. military personnel to combat environments, 
demonstrates the need to pursue the development of most up-to-
date and non-intrusive training areas as soon as possible. 
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $50.0 
million for Army training range upgrades and $25.0 million for 
Navy training range upgrades.

Adjustments to Junior Reserve Officers Training Corps

    The budget request included $31.3 million for the Junior 
Reserve Officer Training Corps program. The committee 
recommends an increase of $3.0 million for Navy Junior Reserve 
Officer Training Corps programs.

Navy information technology center

    The budget request included no funding to support operation 
of the Navy information technology center (ITC). The Navy 
recently created the ITC organization to serve under the Navy's 
Program Executive Officer for Information Technology (PEO IT). 
The ITC will support the PEO IT organization and will provide 
officers' organization much like the naval systems commands 
operate today. The Navy needs funding to span the time between 
creating the organization and the time when the PEO IT and 
organizations that will use the services of the ITC can align 
their funding and budgets to support the ITC. The committee, 
therefore, recommends an increase of $5.0 million to support 
ITC operations.

US Navy Call Center

    The budget request included no funding for a contractor-
supported national employee benefits call center. The committee 
recommends an increase of $3.0 million in Operation and 
Maintenance Navy to establish a contractor-supported national 
employee benefits call center in Cutler, Maine. This call 
center would provide a full range of benefit and entitlement 
information and assistance to civilian employees of the 
Department of the Navy. The call center would replace eight 
separate Human Resource Services Centers now in operation.

                              Marine Corps


USMC initial issue

    The committee is concerned that the budget request does not 
adequately fund personal gear such as cold weather gear and 
bodyarmor. Adequate funding for this gear is essential to the 
safety and comfort of our military personnel in the field. Therefore, 
the committee recommends an increase of $23.1 million in the operation 
and maintenance accounts for the Marine Corps to purchase items of 
individual combat clothing and equipment including ballistic plates, 
outer vests, and polar fleece pullovers. This will help provide Marines 
in the field with the clothing, gear, and other equipment they need to 
survive and sustain themselves during combat operations.

USMC equipment maintenance

    The committee is concerned with the continuing impact that 
aging equipment is having on the Marine Corps ability to 
maintain its readiness. Aging equipment and extensive 
deployments in corrosive environments have led to increased 
work hours as young Marines have labored to prevent mission 
capable rates from falling. The committee is aware of the 
significant shortfall in depot maintenance that needs to be 
performed in order to restore the readiness of this equipment. 
The committee is also aware of the unfunded requirement for 
corrosion control treatments on this equipment to slow its rate 
of degradation.
    Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $33.1 
million for general and depot level maintenance of aging Active 
Marine Corps equipment, and $5.0 million for equipment of the 
Marine Corps Reserves. The committee recommends a further 
increase of $7.5 million for the Marine Corps corrosion control 
program.

Adjustments to Junior Reserve Officers Training Corps

    The budget request included $11.9 million for the Junior 
Reserve Officer Training Corps program. The committee 
recommends an increase of $3.0 million for Marine Corps Junior 
Reserve Officer Training Corps programs.

                               Air Force


Air Force base operations

    The budget request included $4.6 billion for Air Force base 
operations. The committee is concerned with the continued 
underfunding of essential base operations. The Chief of Staff 
of the Air Force has informed the committee that the Air Force 
has $144.7 million in base operating requirements, including 
the installation of communications networks for C-17 support 
that were not funded within the President's budget request for 
fiscal year 2001. Insufficient funding for base operations 
forces unit commanders to migrate funding from training 
accounts in order to meet the day-to-day requirements of 
military installations, such as sewer, electricity, and 
communications. Therefore, the Committee recommends an increase 
of $144.7 million for Air Force base operations.

Adjustments to Junior Reserve Officers Training Corps

    The budget request included $31.8 million for the Junior 
Reserve Officer Training Corps program. The committee 
recommends an increase of $3.0 million for Air Force Junior 
Reserve Officer Training Corps programs.

Air Force readiness spares packages

    The committee is concerned with the continuing reports of 
increased cannibalization rates and decreased mission capable 
rates as a result of insufficient quantities of spare parts. In 
testimony before the Subcommittee on Readiness and Management 
Support, and during visits to the field, military officers have 
listed spare parts shortfalls amongst their principal concerns. 
Finally, in letters to the Congress, spares were identified as 
one of the leading unfunded requirements of the Chief of Staff 
of the Air Force and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs. 
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $75.0 
million for Air Force readiness spares packages.

Air Force nuclear, biological and chemical defense

    The budget request included $12.4 million for Air Force 
nuclear, biological, and chemical (NBC) defense readiness 
programs. An important element of the Department of the Air 
Force Expeditionary Air Forces (EAF) program is to ensure 
sustained and effective EAF operations in an environment 
contaminated with nuclear, biological and/or chemical agents. 
The Air Force, the Air National Guard, and the Air Force 
Reserve require decontamination kits, chemical air processing 
systems, life support NBC equipment, handheld biological 
sampling kits, individual protective equipment and training to 
implement this capability. Therefore, the committee recommends 
an increase of $29.2 million for EAF NBC defense readiness 
programs.
    It is imperative that the budget request for the Department 
of Defense (DOD) fully support requirements for the NBC defense 
capabilities of each military service. Any review by the DOD to 
ensure this requirement is fulfilled should be defense-wide and 
not limited to one military branch. In funding this 
requirement, the committee intends to provide the Air Force 
with the same level of NBC defense capability as the Navy, 
Army, and Marine Corps.

                              Defense-Wide


Mobility enhancements

    With the end of the Cold War and the reduction in the 
number of U.S. military personnel stationed abroad, the armed 
forces are far more dependent upon strategic lift and its 
supporting mobility infrastructure. Unfortunately, much of this 
infrastructure, including rail heads and port facilities, 
experienced significant degradation as a result of insufficient 
funding to maintain military bases. The committee is concerned 
that this degraded infrastructure will delay the deployment of 
military forces to a theater of operations, and thereby 
increase the risk associated with the successful execution of 
that operation, unless properly repaired. Therefore, the 
committee recommends an increase of $50.0 million to repair and 
replace infrastructure associated with the deployment of 
forces.

Mechanization of Contract Administration Service (MOCAS)

    The budget request included $1.1 billion for the Defense 
Logistics Agency. The committee recommends an increase of $1.2 
million for improvements to the Mechanization of Contract 
Administration Service (MOCAS) System. The increase in funding 
is necessary for the development of a query tool and enhanced 
shared data warehouse that will allow contractors to view 
contract data that resides in the MOCAS data base.

Partnership for Peace Program (Warsaw Initiative)

    The budget request included $48.4 million within the 
Defense Security Cooperation Agency budget line for the 
Partnership for Peace (PfP) program. The committee recommends 
$45.3 million for this program for fiscal year 2001, the same 
amount allocated to the program by the Department of Defense 
for fiscal year 2000.
    When this program was initiated in fiscal year 1996 as an 
assistance program jointly funded by the Departments of Defense 
and State, the money provided by the Department of Defense was 
intended to be used to strengthen military-to-military 
relationships through joint military exercises, professional 
military education, and interoperability programs with the 
Partnership for Peace nations. The committee is concerned that 
the money provided for this program is being used increasingly 
for purposes and projects that are not focused on the military-
to-military goals for which this program was intended. For 
example, the committee notes that $1.0 million of the amount 
requested for this program is intended to be used to pay for 
packing, crating, handling and transportation charges 
associated with the delivery of Excess Defense Articles (EDA) 
to PfPnations. The committee believes that this is an 
inappropriate use of defense funds to pay for what is essentially 
security assistance. Such charges, to the extent they are paid by the 
PfP program, should be funded by the State Department's portion of this 
program. The committee believes that the Defense Department should 
conduct a review of the PfP program to ensure that it is properly 
focused on improving the military-to-military relationship between the 
United States and the PfP nations, and on enhancing military 
interoperability between NATO and the PfP nations.

Defense Environmental Security Corporate Information Management Program

    The budget request included $14.0 million for Defense 
Environmental Security Information Management (DESCIM) Program. 
Based on concerns related to program management and 
performance, the committee recommends a decrease of $5.0 
million in the DESCIM program. The $5.0 million from DESCIM 
shall be used in the Environmental Security Technology 
Certification Program (PE 63851D) to demonstrate/validate 
technology for environmental remediation of unexploded 
ordnance.

Domestic preparedness center

    The budget request included no funding for a domestic 
preparedness center. The Congress established the Clara Barton 
Center for Domestic Preparedness to contribute to providing 
civilians from federal, state, and local agencies with training 
and expert advice regarding emergency response to incidents 
involving weapons of mass destruction (WMD). The center, 
operated by the American Red Cross, is developing the 
curriculum and capability to begin training in fiscal year 
2001. The committee recommends an increase of $1.5 million for 
the Office of the Secretary of Defense for WMD response 
training. The committee notes that on October 1, 2000, the 
Department of Justice will be designated the lead federal 
agency for oversight, management, funding, and execution of the 
domestic preparedness program, including operations at the 
Clara Barton Center for Domestic Preparedness.

Cultural and historic activities

    The budget request included $300,000 for the Legacy 
Resource Management Program. The committee recommends an 
increase of $6.1 million for the recovery and preservation of 
three Civil War vessels: the H.L. Hunley, a Civil War 
submarine; the U.S.S. Monitor, a Civil War ironclad warship; 
and the C.S.S. Alabama, a Civil War commerce raider.
    The committee strongly supports continued efforts to 
recover and preserve these three sunken U.S. vessels, which 
have gained cultural and historical significance based on their 
unique design and the circumstances under which they were lost. 
All three vessels qualify for listing on the National Register 
under the National Historic Preservation Act (16 U.S.C. 470 et 
seq.). The importance of these vessels also stems from their 
identification as potential war graves. As a matter of policy, 
the Department of Defense (DOD) and the Navy, on behalf of the 
United States, have asserted sole ownership and survey 
responsibility for submerged vessels that serve as war graves. 
In addition, the activities associated with the survey, 
recovery, and preservation of these vessels have provided Navy 
salvage divers with essential deepwater diving experience.
    The committee notes that the DOD and the Navy have a 
responsibility to protect and preserve these historic vessels. 
As a result, these vessels are eligible for funding under the 
Legacy Resource Management Program. Moreover, it is the 
committee's expectation that the Navy would continue to use 
these historic preservation activities as an opportunity to 
secure valuable deepwater training for its salvage divers.
    Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense 
and the Secretary of the Navy in fiscal year 2001 to use the 
additional Legacy funds to accomplish the following: (1) to 
raise the H.L. Hunley, recover other remaining artifacts, and 
conduct related preservation activities; (2) to make 
preparations for the turret recovery of the U.S.S. Monitor and 
recover other remaining artifacts, including two cannons; and 
(3) to survey and recover the artifacts of the C.S.S. Alabama, 
including the aft pivot gun and the lifting screw.
    The committee further directs that, not later than April 1, 
2001, the Secretary of Defense shall submit to the 
congressional defense committees a report that completely 
describes all prior and current use of Legacy funds and 
relevant state funds, and the status of recovery and 
preservation activities related to the H.L. Hunley, the U.S.S. 
Monitor, and the C.S.S. Alabama. The report should also 
describe the projected funding and date for completion of all 
recovery and preservation activities.

Defense Travel System

    The committee recommends a reduction of $20.0 million for 
the Defense Travel System (DTS) Program delays.
    The committee is becoming increasingly concerned over the 
delays in the fielding of this new travel system. The 
modernization of the massive military travel system will yield 
significant savings to the Department of Defense as well as the 
government traveler. The Department spends an estimated $3.0 
billion a year on travel, and almost a third of this cost is 
the processing of the paperwork. After fielding of the DTS, the 
savings are expected to be more than $300.0 million a year and 
make trip planning less complex for the traveler.
    During fiscal year 2000, the Department used below 
threshold reprogrammings to reduce the funding for the DTS by 
more than 22 percent. While the committee is again receiving 
assurances that the program is on schedule and properly funded, 
the committee is concerned that the funding for this program 
will be further reduced from the budget request. Therefore, the 
committee directs the Secretary to treat this program as a 
congressional interest item under the procedures for prior 
approval reprogramming.

Command information superiority architecture program

    The committee has supported the Command Information 
Superiority Architecture (CISA) program. This program has 
focused on command, communications and intelligence 
architectures and is now oriented toward command-specific 
communications and computer information architectures (CCIAs). 
The committee recommends an increase of $2.0 million in 
Operations and Maintenance, Defense-Wide, to support CISA's 
efforts in the area of CCIAs.

                      Guard and Reserve Components


Air Force Reserve equipment maintenance

    The budget request included $281.0 million for Air Force 
Reserve depot maintenance. The committee is concerned with the 
continuing impact that aging equipment and extensive 
deployments are having on the Air Force Reserve's ability to 
maintain its readiness. Aging equipment and extensive 
deployments have led to increased work hours as young airmen 
have labored to prevent mission capable rates from falling. The 
committee is aware of the significant shortfall in depot 
maintenance that needs to be performed in order to restore the 
readiness of Air Force Reserve equipment. Therefore, the 
committee recommends an increase of $5.0 million for depot 
level maintenance of aging Active Marine Corps equipment, and 
$5.0 million for equipment of Air Force Reserve aircraft.

National Guard initial issue

    The committee is concerned that the budget request does not 
adequately fund personal gear such as cold weather gear. 
Adequate funding for this gear is essential to the safety and 
comfort of our military personnel in the field. Therefore, the 
committee recommends an increase of $20.0 million for 
theExtended Cold Weather Clothing System for the Army National Guard to 
provide protection in combat conditions during cold and wet weather.

Distributed mission trainer

    The committee is aware of the $4.5 million unfunded 
requirement for a 12 year fee-for-service contract and 
logistics support for F-15 linked simulators to support 
increased production of F-15 pilots. This will enable linked 
training among advanced flight training bases. Therefore, the 
committee recommends an increase of $4.5 million for this 
purpose.

                             Miscellaneous


Overseas humanitarian, disaster, and civic affairs

    The committee supports the humanitarian demining and 
emergency humanitarian response activities of the Department of 
Defense (DOD). These activities have enabled military personnel 
of the DOD to forge constructive relationships with the armed 
forces and civilian population of other nations, while carrying 
out valuable training which enhances the military skills of our 
troops. However, the committee is concerned that the Department 
continues to request funding for humanitarian assistance 
activities in this account that do not enhance military 
training, do not require military unique capabilities, and 
should therefore be funded by the Department of State. These 
activities include paying commercial carriers to deliver 
privately-donated goods to foreign recipients and procuring 
food solely for humanitarian relief operations. The committee 
is also concerned with increased reliance upon the DOD to 
construct facilities in foreign countries that would more 
appropriately be funded through the foreign aid account and 
constructed by local private sector firms.
    Therefore, the committee recommends $26.5 million for the 
humanitarian demining program, an increase of $1.0 million 
above the President's budget request. The committee further 
recommends $28.9 million for the humanitarian assistance 
program that is used by the regional commanders-in-chief for 
emergency response activities. This represents a level of 
funding for this program that is equal to last year's level in 
real terms. However, it does not include the $1.0 million that 
was requested to pay commercial carriers to deliver privately-
donated goods to foreign recipients. The committee directs the 
DOD to restrict its use of commercial carriers in this area to 
instances where such use enhances a military activity. The 
committee is also concerned with the continued reliance upon 
the DOD for the procurement of humanitarian daily rations that 
the committee indicated in the Senate report accompanying S. 
1059 should be funded through the Department of State.
    The committee expects the Department of State in the future 
to fund those activities and programs that do not require 
military unique capabilities, and do not enhance the military 
mission. If the Department continues to request funding for 
activities that are clearly foreign assistance, rather than 
activities related to a military mission, the committee will 
recommend legislation providing strict guidelines on what 
activities can be funded through this program in the future.

                        OTHER ITEMS OF INTEREST


Charlestown Naval Auxiliary Landing Field, Charlestown, Rhode Island

    The Charlestown Naval Auxiliary Landing Field (CNALF), 
Rhode Island, is a formerly used defense site (FUDS) that was 
used for pilot and aviation crew training during World War II. 
In 1970, CNALF was closed and reported as excess to the General 
Services Administration for disposal in 1974. By deed, dated 
May 22, 1981, 172.4 acres were conveyed to the Town of 
Charlestown and in June 1982 an additional 55 acres was 
conveyed.
    The site was determined eligible for the Defense 
Environmental Restoration Program (DERP) for FUDS. In 1992, the 
Town of Charlestown, Rhode Island, requested the consideration 
of a military warehouse and two boiler houses for demolition 
because of hazards that existed prior to disposal of the site. 
The town previously had not wanted these buildings to be 
considered for demolition. In June 1993, the Army recommended a 
building demolition project for these buildings, which was 
included in the fiscal year 1994 DERP-FUDS workplan, but has 
been continually delayed as a result of funding constraints. 
The Army has now tentatively rescheduled the CNALF building 
demolition activities for fiscal year 2001.
    The committee is generally concerned about the lack of 
adequate funding for DERP-FUDS. Delayed action at sites like 
CNALF is further reason for questions regarding the management 
of the FUDS Program. It is the committee's expectation that the 
Secretary of the Army would ensure better management of the 
FUDS program, and specifically the CNALF site. If the site 
demolition workplan cannot be executed in fiscal year 2001, 
then the Secretary of the Army shall, not later than January 1, 
2002, provide a report to the congressional defense committees 
that explains the Army's inaction.

Commander-in-Chiefs Initiative Fund

    The Department of Defense (DOD) and the Department of State 
(DOS) have numerous programs and authorities to provide 
education and training to military and civilian personnel 
associated with foreign militaries. Combatant commanders, who 
are charged with peacetime engagement with foreign militaries 
in their respective geographic regions, unanimously attest to 
the value of foreign military education and training. During 
hearings this year before the committee, three combatant 
commanders and the Director of the Central Intelligence Agency, 
praised foreign military education and training as a very low-
cost investment that produces great results. These results are 
significant numbers of foreign military officials, many of whom 
rise to senior leadership positions, military and civilian, 
within their respective nations who were positively exposed to 
American democratic values, military professionalism, and the 
role of the military within a democracy. All of these witnesses 
stressed that modest increases in foreign military education 
and training programs would produce significant dividends in 
the form of friendly, professional, military partners for the 
United States.
    A review of existing DOD authorities and use of available 
funds in this area revealed that combatant commanders are 
authorized to use up to $2.0 million of the Commander-in-Chiefs 
Initiative Fund (CIF) for foreign military education and 
training. However, the committee is concerned that virtually 
none of this authority has been used in the past several years, 
despite the testimony of our senior military and civilian 
leadership on the importance of such education and training.
    Therefore, the committee directs that $2.0 million of the 
$25.0 million authorized to be appropriated for the CIF 
(Operations and Maintenance, Defense Wide, BA 01, Joint Chiefs 
of Staff) shall be used only for foreign military education and 
training.

Inventory of financial management and feeder systems

    Section 1007 of the National Defense Authorization Act for 
Fiscal Year 2000 required the Department of Defense to include 
an inventory of financial management and feeder systems in its 
biennial Financial Management Improvement Plan. Section 1007 
requires the Secretary of Defense to develop a detailed plan 
for ensuring that systems have appropriate interfaces and 
internal controls.
    In addition to the material required to be included in this 
inventory pursuant to section 1007, the committee directs the 
Secretary to identify each system listed in the inventory as 
critical or non-critical and major or non-major, and provide 
the criteria used in making these designations.
    It is the expectation of the committee that the Chief 
Financial Officer and the Chief Information Officer of 
theDepartment will certify the accuracy and completeness of the 
inventory required by section 1007. The committee directs the 
Comptroller General to review the Financial Management Improvement Plan 
and report any findings and recommendations to the congressional 
defense committees.

Joint computer-aided acquisition and logistics support (JCALS) program

    The committee is pleased with the progress that the Joint 
computer-aided acquisition and logistic support (JCALS) program 
has made during fiscal year 2000. JCALS is a demonstrated 
effective tool in the automated technical manual area that has 
helped the Department of Defense achieve its goals for cost-
reduction and moving to paperless operations. Beyond its 
traditional technical manual capability JCALS has also proven 
to be an effective tool in addressing the paper-intensive 
acquisition and procurement processes used by the military 
services. The committee applauds these efforts by the 
Department to leverage its significant investment in JCALS to 
support other initiatives in acquisition and logistics, and 
would encourage even greater use of the program in the future. 
The Department's ability to capitalize on existing assets such 
as JCALS by making them multi-functional rather than single 
purpose will pay dividends by minimizing investment in 
duplicative systems development and support for the 
Department's acquisition and logistics community. The committee 
directs the Department to report to the congressional defense 
committees by March 1, 2001, on the progress made to 
restructure the program to expand the functionality and use of 
the JCALS program beyond the technical manual capability.

Mechanization of Contract Administration Service

    The committee is concerned that the Department of Defense 
will not maintain adequate funding for Mechanization of 
Contract Administration Service (MOCAS) pending full 
replacement by the Defense Procurement Payment System (DPPS). 
The DPPS has experienced system problems that have delayed the 
implementation of this system. It is critical that the 
Department maintain the MOCAS system until the conversion is 
complete. Failure to adequately fund MOCAS will lead to 
unacceptable delays in the payment of service, commercial, and 
payment vouchers, and force the committee to seek further 
action.

National Defense Center for Environmental Excellence

    In the statement of managers to accompany the National 
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1999, the conferees 
directed the Secretary of the Army to transfer the National 
Defense Center for Environmental Excellence (NDCEE) to a new 
program element under the control and oversight of the 
Assistant Secretary of the Army (Installations and 
Environment). The conferees directed the Secretary to take such 
action based on concerns related to management and focus.
    The committee notes that, through a memorandum dated March 
14, 2000, the Secretary successfully accomplished the transfer 
and provided specific direction regarding the environmental 
technology focus of NDCEE. The committee agrees with the 
Secretary's direction that the NDCEE address technologies for 
all environmental quality issues, to include pollution 
prevention, conservation, compliance, and restoration.
    It is the committees view that the NDCEE has significant 
potential to serve as a national asset that will promote 
demonstration/validation of innovative technologies. It is 
anticipated that the NDCEE efforts will serve to reduce the 
total ownership costs of the Department of Defense (DOD) weapon 
systems. The committee is particularly interested in an 
emphasis on demonstration/validation of viable technologies 
that address the complexities associated with environmental 
remediation of unexploded ordnance (UXO).

Pesticide contamination at the former Fort Devens, Devens, 
        Massachusetts, and other closed and active military 
        installations

    In order to transfer portions of Fort Devens in 1996, the 
Army made a finding of suitability to transfer (FOST) pursuant 
to section 120(h)(3) of the Comprehensive Environmental 
Response, Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA) (42 U.S.C. 
9601 et seq.). That finding of suitability certified that a 
comprehensive assessment had been conducted to identify sources 
of hazardous contaminants and to specify that all remedial 
actions had been taken. The FOST was based on the environmental 
baseline survey (EBS) that identified limited quantities of 
pesticides in buildings used for storage of such chemicals at 
Fort Devens. Contrary to the Army's FOST, environmental testing 
conducted on behalf of Massachusetts Development Finance Agency 
(MassDevelopment) revealed a widespread and pervasive presence 
of pesticides in the soils. These undisclosed environmental 
conditions have jeopardized the MassDevelopment's 
implementation of its reuse plan at Fort Devens.
    In early 1997, MassDevelopment notified the Army of the 
extraordinarily high levels of pesticide contamination that 
existed at locations which the Army had not disclosed prior to 
the 1996 property transfer, and demanded Army remedial action 
pursuant to section 120(h)(3) of CERCLA. While the Army has 
participated in discussions with MassDevelopment about the 
undisclosed environmental conditions, the Army has not formally 
responded to the MassDevelopment notice or demand. In these 
discussions the Army suggested that the Army may have no 
liability for the remediation of the pesticides.
    The committee is very concerned about the Army's lack of 
responsiveness and apparent inclination to deny remedial action 
liabilities under section 120(h)(3) of CERCLA at Fort Devens. 
The committee expects the Secretary of the Army to conduct 
cleanup of the pesticide contamination, consistent with section 
120(h)(3) and the relevant congressional intent under CERCLA. 
The Secretary of Defense and the secretaries of the military 
departments will comply with all environmental legal 
requirements, to include ``. . . any remedial action found to 
be necessary after the date of such transfer. . . .'' (42 
U.S.C. 9620(h)(3)).

Revised requirements for report on Defense use of smart card as PKI 
        authentication device carrier

    The Secretary of Defense shall submit a report not later 
than December 1, 2000 on the cost and feasibility of existing 
hard disk storage technology or other technologies that could 
be used as a Public-Private Key Infrastructure (PKI) 
authentication device. The Secretary should include in this 
report a comparison of these technologies on the basis of cost 
and performance to the Smart Card discussed in the report 
required by section 374 of the National Defense Authorization 
Act for Fiscal Year 2000. This review should not delay the 
Department's ongoing deployment of the Smart Card.
              TITLE IV--MILITARY PERSONNEL AUTHORIZATIONS

                       SUBTITLE A--ACTIVE FORCES

End strengths for active forces (sec. 401)
    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
active duty end strengths for fiscal year 2001, as shown below:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                       2000                            2001
                                                                   Authorization   2001  Request  Recommendation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Army............................................................         480,000         480,000         480,000
Navy............................................................         372,037         372,000         372,000
Marine Corps....................................................         172,518         172,600         172,600
Air Force.......................................................         360,877         357,000         357,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                       SUBTITLE B--RESERVE FORCES

End strengths for Selected Reserve (sec. 411)
    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
Selected Reserve end strengths for fiscal year 2001, as shown 
below:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                           Fiscal Year--
                                                                       2000      -------------------------------
                                                                   Authorization                       2001
                                                                                   2001 Request   Recommendation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Army National Guard of the United States....................         350,000         350,000         350,088
The Army Reserve................................................         205,000         205,000         205,000
The Naval Reserve...............................................          90,288          88,900          88,900
The Marine Corps Reserve........................................          39,624          39,500          39,558
The Air National Guard of the United States.....................         106,678         108,000         108,022
The Air Force Reserve...........................................          73,708          74,300          74,300
The Coast Guard Reserve.........................................           8,000           8,000           8,500
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The increase of 88 in the Army National Guard and 22 in the 
Air National Guard is necessary to support five additional 
Weapons of Mass Destruction-Civil Support Teams.
    The increase of 58 above the request in the Marine Corps 
Reserve end strength is necessary to accommodate an additional 
four officers and 54 enlisted Active Reserve personnel on 
active duty in support of the reserves to enhance the readiness 
of the Marine Corps Reserve.
    The increase in the Coast Guard Reserve end strength is the 
continuation of the committee's efforts to restore the Coast 
Guard Reserve to a robust augmentation force. An Office of 
Management and Budget study has validated the requirement that 
the Coast Guard Reserve strength be 12,293. The Coast Guard 
Reserve is to be commended for recovering from the severe 
shortfall of the past several years. The committee recommends 
that the appropriation for the Coast Guard Reserve be increased 
from $73.6 million to $80.0 million.
End strengths for reserves on active duty in support of the reserves 
        (sec. 412)
    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
the full time support end strengths for fiscal year 2001, as 
shown below:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                           Fiscal Year--
                                                                       2000      -------------------------------
                                                                   Authorization                       2001
                                                                                   2001 Request   Recommendation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Army National Guard of the United States....................          22,430          22,448          22,536
The Army Reserve................................................          12,804          12,806          12,806
The Naval Reserve...............................................          15,010          14,649          14,649
The Marine Corps Reserve........................................           2,272           2,203           2,261
The Air National Guard of the United States.....................          11,157          11,148          11,170
The Air Force Reserve...........................................           1,134           1,278           1,278
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The increase of 88 in the Army National Guard and 22 in the 
Air National Guard is necessary to support five additional 
Weapons of Mass Destruction-Civil Support Teams.
    The recommended increase of 58 above the request in the 
Marine Corps Reserve end strength will permit the Marine Corps 
Reserve to retain four officers and 54 enlisted Active Reserve 
personnel on active duty in support of the reserves to enhance 
the readiness of the Marine Corps Reserve.
End strengths for military technicians (dual status) (sec. 413)
    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
the minimum level of dual status technician end strengths for 
fiscal year 2001, as shown below:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                           Fiscal Year--
                                                                       2000      -------------------------------
                                                                   Authorization                       2001
                                                                                   2001 Request   Recommendation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Army National Guard of the United States....................          23,125          22,357          22,357
The Army Reserve................................................           6,474           5,249           5,249
The Air National Guard of the United States.....................          22,247          22,221          22,221
The Air Force Reserve...........................................           9,785           9,733           9,733
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Fiscal year 2001 limitation on non-dual status technicians (sec. 414)
    The committee recommends a provision that would establish 
numerical limits on the number of non-dual status technicians 
who may be employed in the Department of Defense as of 
September 30, 2001, as shown below:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                           Fiscal Year--
                                                                       2000      -------------------------------
                                                                   Authorization                       2001
                                                                                   2001 Request   Recommendation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Army National Guard of the United States....................           1,180           1,600           1,600
The Army Reserve................................................           1,295           1,195           1,195
The Air National Guard of the United States.....................             342             326             326
The Air Force Reserve...........................................               0               0               0
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Increase in number of members in certain grades authorized to be on 
        active duty in support of the reserves (sec. 415)
    The committee recommends a provision that would increase 
the control grades for Active Guard Reserve personnel. The 
recommended control grade increases support changes in the 
roles and missions of the reserve components.

       SUBTITLE C--OTHER MATTERS RELATING TO PERSONNEL STRENGTHS

Suspension of strength limitations during war or national emergency 
        (sec. 421)
    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
the Secretary of Defense to suspend the grade limitations for 
senior enlisted personnel and senior reservists on active duty 
in support of the reserve during time of war or national 
emergency.
Exclusion of certain reserve component members on active duty for more 
        than 180 days from active component end strengths (sec. 422)
    The committee recommends a provision that would exempt a 
number, limited to not more than two tenths of one percent of 
the active duty end strength, of reserve component members on 
active duty performing special work in support of the armed 
forces and the combatant commands from counting against the 
active component end strengths.

Exclusion of Army and Air Force medical and dental officers from 
        limitations on strengths of reserve commissioned officers in 
        grades below brigadier general (sec. 423)

    The committee recommends a provision that would exempt 
reserve component medical and dental officers of the Army and 
Air Force from the grade ceiling limits on the same basis as 
active component and Naval Reserve medical and dental officers.

Authority for temporary increases in number of reserve personnel 
        serving on active duty or full-time National Guard duty in 
        certain grades (sec. 424)

    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
the Secretary of Defense to temporarily increase the number of 
reserve personnel serving on active duty or full-time National 
Guard duty in certain grades. The recommended provision would 
permit the Secretary of Defense to increase, by not more than 
two percent, the number of reserve component personnel serving 
on active duty or full-time National Guard duty only when the 
Secretary has authorized an increase in end strength for a 
fiscal year.

Temporary exemption of Director of the National Security Agency from 
        limitations on number of Air Force officers above major general 
        (sec. 425)

    The committee recommends a provision that would temporarily 
exempt the Air Force officer serving as the Director of the 
National Security Agency from the limitations on the number of 
Air Force officers authorized to serve on active duty in grades 
above major general. The exemption of the recommended provision 
would expire on September 30, 2005.

              SUBTITLE D--AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS


Authorization of appropriations for military personnel (sec. 431)

    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize a 
total of $75,632,266,000 to be appropriated to the Department 
of Defense for military personnel.
    The budget request of $75,801,666,000 was reduced by 
$172,600,000 due to adjustments in foreign currency fluctuation 
and military personnel under execution. $3,200,000 was added to 
accommodate the recommended increase in full-time reservists in 
the Army National Guard and the Air National Guard.
                   TITLE V--MILITARY PERSONNEL POLICY

                  SUBTITLE A--OFFICER PERSONNEL POLICY

Eligibility of Army Reserve colonels and brigadier generals for 
        position vacancy promotions (sec. 501)
    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
the Secretary of the Army to use a single selection board to 
recommend Army Reserve colonels and brigadier generals for 
assignment to vacant positions and to recommend the colonels or 
brigadier generals for promotion to brigadier general or major 
general.
Promotion Zones for Coast Guard Reserve Officers (sec. 502)
    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
the Secretary of Transportation the same flexibility as 
secretaries of the military departments to establish promotion 
zones for the Coast Guard Reserve based on service need.
Time for release of officer promotion selection board reports (sec. 
        503)
    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
the Secretary of Defense to make public the names of officers 
recommended for promotion by a selection board prior to 
approval of the board by the President. The recommended 
provision would permit reserve component promotion board 
results to be made public in a more timely manner and in a 
manner consistent with that used for active component promotion 
board results.
Clarification of authority for posthumous commissions and warrants 
        (sec. 504)
    The committee recommends a provision that would clarify the 
existing statute concerning the authority for posthumous 
promotion to include an officer who had been selected for 
promotion but died before the service secretary approved the 
recommendation of the selection board.
Inapplicability of active-duty list promotion, separation, and 
        involuntary retirement authorities to reserve general and flag 
        officers serving in certain positions designated by the 
        Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff (sec. 505)
    The committee recommends a provision that would exclude 
reserve component general and flag officers in certain joint 
duty assignments from the active duty list for promotion 
purposes. These reserve component general and flag officers 
would be considered for promotion on the active-status list of 
their reserve component.
Review of actions of selection boards (sec. 506)
    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
the secretary concerned to correct a person's military records 
in accordance with a recommendation made by a special board. 
The remedy may be restoration to active duty or status, if the 
person was separated, retired, or transferred to the retired or 
inactive reserve as the result of a recommendation made by a 
selection board; or the person may elect to receive back pay 
and allowances in lieu of restoration. If a special board does 
not recommend the correction, the action of the original 
selection board shall be considered as final. The secretaries 
concerned are to prescribe regulations to carry out this 
provision, which may include the circumstances under which 
consideration by a special board requires an application by the 
person, and applicable time limits. All such regulations are to 
be subject to the approval of the Secretary of Defense.
    A person challenging the action or recommendation of a 
selection board, or a secretary's action thereon, is not 
entitled to relief in any judicial proceeding unless the matter 
has first been considered by a special board or a secretary has 
denied such consideration. A court reviewing a special board's 
action or recommendation or the action of a secretary thereon 
may hold it unlawful only on the basis that it did not comply 
with applicable procedures, or was contrary to law. If the 
review is of a secretary's denial of special board 
consideration, the bases are the same, with the addition of the 
arbitrary and capricious standard. The remedies provided under 
this provision are exclusive. This provision does not limit the 
jurisdiction of any federal court to determine the validity of 
any relevant statute, regulation, or policy, but the remedies 
set out herein are to be the exclusive remedies for any person 
challenging the action of a selection board on the basis of any 
invalidity. These provisions also do not limit the secretaries' 
authority to correct military records through boards for 
correction of such records under section 1552 of title 10, 
United States Code. A special board may include a board for 
correction of military or naval records, if designated by the 
secretary concerned. For these purposes, a ``selection board'' 
includes boards for continuation on active duty, or selective 
early retirement, but does not include promotion selection 
boards. Similarly, the term ``special board'' does not include 
a promotion special selection board.
    The provision would also amend section 628 of title 10, 
United States Code, the statute dealing with promotion special 
selection boards, to require exhaustion of a person's remedies 
before a special selection board (or the Secretary of Defense's 
rejection of the claim without consideration by such a board). 
No official or court of the United States may grant any relief 
on a promotion claim until the officer or former officer has 
been selected for promotion by a promotion special selection 
board and the board's report has been approved by the 
President. A court may review a secretary's determination not 
to convene a special selection board. If the determination is 
found to be arbitrary, capricious, not based on substantial 
evidence, or contrary to law, the secretary concerned shall 
convene such a board. Similarly, a court may review the 
recommendation of a special selection board and, if it finds 
that the recommendation was contrary to law or involved 
material error, the secretary must provide for reconsideration 
of the officer or former officer by another special selection 
board. The provision has additional requirements on exclusivity 
and remedies similar to those provided for on continuation and 
special early retirement boards referred to above. As in the 
earlier provision, nothing herein would limit the authority of 
correction boards under section 1552 of title 10, United States 
Code.
    The provision would take effect on the date of enactment of 
this Act and would apply to all proceedings pending on or after 
that date, but would not apply with respect to any action 
commenced in a court of the United States before the date of 
enactment.

Extension to all Air Force biomedical sciences officers of authority to 
        retain until specified age (sec. 507)

    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
the Secretary of the Air Force to retain, with the officer's 
consent, biomedical sciences officers. The recommended 
provision would provide the Secretary of the Air Force with the 
same authority to retain biomedical sciences officers as 
currently used by the Secretary of the Army and the Secretary 
of the Navy.

Termination of application requirement for consideration of officers 
        for continuation on the Reserve Active-Status List (sec. 508)

    The committee recommends a provision that would terminate 
the requirement that a reserve officer apply for continuation 
on the Reserve Active-Status List. The recommended provision 
would permit the secretary of a military department to offer 
continuation on the Reserve Active-Status List to an officer 
who was recommended for continuation by a board without 
requiring the officer to apply for such consideration. The 
officer would retain the option to accept or decline such an 
offer.

Technical corrections relating to retired grade of reserve commissioned 
        officers (sec. 509)

    The committee recommends a provision that would eliminate 
conflicting provisions regarding the time-in-grade requirement 
to retire at the current grade held by a reserve component 
officer. The recommended provision would apply to reserve 
commissioned officers promoted as a result of a selection board 
recommendation after October 1, 1996, the effective date of the 
Reserve Officer Personnel Management Act.

Grade of chiefs of reserve components and directors of National Guard 
        components (sec. 510)

    The committee recommends a provision that would require the 
secretaries of the military departments to, within 90 days of 
enactment of this Act, increase the grade of the Chief of Army 
Reserve, Chief of Naval Reserve, Chief of Air Force Reserve, 
Director of the Army National Guard, and the Director of the 
Air National Guard to lieutenant general or, in the case of the 
Navy, vice admiral. The recommended provision would permit the 
Secretary of the Navy to increase the grade of the Chief of 
Marine Corps Reserve to lieutenant general.

                  SUBTITLE B--JOINT OFFICER MANAGEMENT


Joint officer management (sec. 521-528)

    The committee recommends a series of provisions that would 
streamline the designation and management of joint speciality 
officers. The recommended provisions would simplify the 
requirements to be designated as a joint speciality officer, 
would require that Joint Professional Military Training be 
conducted in residence, would establish the promotion 
objectives for joint speciality officers as a group to be equal 
to or greater than the rate for officers of the same armed 
force in the same grade and competitive category serving on the 
headquarters staff of that armed force, would establish the 
minimum tour length to qualify for a joint tour, and would 
modify the required contents of the annual report to comply 
with the simplified management requirements.

                   SUBTITLE C--EDUCATION AND TRAINING


Eligibility of children of reserves for Presidential appointment to 
        service academies (sec. 541)

    The committee recommends a provision that would make the 
children of members of reserve components and retired or 
retirement-eligible reservists eligible for presidential 
appointments to the service academies on the same basis as 
children of active duty or retired active duty personnel.

Selection of foreign students to receive instruction at service 
        academies (sec. 542)

    The committee recommends a provision that would require the 
secretaries of the military departments to give priority 
consideration to foreign students applying for admission to the 
service academies who have a national service obligation upon 
graduation from the academy.

Repeal of contingent funding increase for Junior Reserve Officers 
        Training Corps (sec. 543)

    The committee recommends a provision that would repeal the 
requirement that any amount in excess of $62,500,000 
appropriated for the National Guard Youth Challenge Program be 
made available for the Junior Reserve Officers Training Corps.

Revision of authority for Marine Corps platoon leader class tuition 
        assistance program (sec. 544)

    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
members of the Marine Corps platoon leader class to continue to 
receive tuition assistance while in pursuit of an undergraduate 
degree. Currently, participants in the Marine Corps platoon 
leader class lose their eligibility to use the tuition 
assistance program once they are commissioned.

               SUBTITLE D--MATTERS RELATING TO RECRUITING


Army recruiting pilot programs (sec. 551)

    The committee recommends a provision that would require the 
Secretary of the Army to carry out three distinct pilot 
programs to assess the effectiveness for creating enhanced 
opportunities for recruiters and to improve the effectiveness 
of Army recruiting programs. The recommended provision would 
require the pilot programs to be carried out during a period 
beginning onOctober 1, 2000 and ending on December 31, 2005. 
The Secretary of the Army would be required to submit, not later than 
February 1, 2006, a separate report that would assess the value of each 
of the pilot programs and make recommendations for permanent authority 
to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the House of 
Representatives.

Enhancement of the joint and service recruitment market research and 
        advertising programs (sec. 552)

    The committee recommends a provision that would direct the 
Secretary of Defense to take the necessary actions to enhance 
joint and service recruiting and advertising programs through 
an aggressive market research program and would waive certain 
requirements of the Paperwork Reduction Act to enhance the 
flexibility of the Secretary of Defense and the military 
services to react to changes in the recruiting market.

Access to secondary schools for military recruiting purposes (sec. 553)

    The committee recommends a provision that would, effective 
July 1, 2002, require local educational agencies to provide 
military recruiters access to secondary schools on the same 
basis as colleges, universities, and private sector employers, 
unless the governing body of the local educational agency acts 
by majority vote to deny access to military recruiters. The 
recommended provision would also establish a process to ensure 
that secondary schools provide military recruiters access to 
the campus, directories, and student lists on the same basis as 
that afforded colleges, universities, and private sector 
employers. The recommended provision would require the relevant 
military service to send a senior official to meet with the 
local educational agency within 120 days of a military 
recruiter being denied access. If the secondary school 
continues to deny access to military recruiters the Secretary 
of Defense shall, within 60 days, communicate with the governor 
of the state requesting assistance in restoring access for 
military recruiters. A copy of this correspondence shall be 
provided to the Secretary of Education. If one year after the 
date of the transmittal of the letter from the Secretary of 
Defense the local educational agency continues to deny access 
to at least two of the armed forces, the Secretary of Defense 
shall notify the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and 
the House of Representatives, and the members of the House of 
Representatives and the Senate who represent the district or 
districts in which the local educational agency operates.
    Today, more than 600 high schools deny access to military 
recruiters from three or more services. Thousands of high 
schools deny access to military recruiters of at least one 
service. The Department of Defense, the military services, and 
the Department of Education have not aggressively pursued 
restoration of access to these high schools despite the 
requests of the military recruiters. The recommended provision 
would establish a process through which the military services, 
the Department of Defense, the Department of Education, the 
governors, and the local educational agencies would work 
together to establish local procedures and practices that would 
permit military recruiters the same access to high school 
students as colleges and universities. The committee believes 
that every high school student deserves the opportunity to 
learn of the opportunities of military service just as they 
learn of the opportunities associate with college or private 
sector employment.
    The committee directs the Secretary of Defense to report, 
not later than March 1, 2001, to the Committees on Armed 
Services of the Senate and the House of Representatives 
outlining his plan to eliminate the backlog of high schools 
that currently deny access to military recruiters. The required 
report shall include specific milestones for each service.

                       SUBTITLE E--OTHER MATTERS


Authority for award of Medal of Honor to certain specified persons 
        (sec. 561)

    The committee recommends a provision that would waive the 
statutory time limits and authorize the President to award the 
Medal of Honor to Ed W. Freeman of Boise, Idaho for valor 
during the Vietnam Conflict; to James K. Okubo of Detroit, 
Michigan for valor during World War II; and to Andrew J. Smith 
of Massachusetts for valor during the Civil War.

Waiver of time limitations for award of certain decorations to certain 
        persons (sec. 562)

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

Ineligibility for involuntary separation pay upon declination of 
        selection for continuation on active duty (sec. 563)

    The committee recommends a provision that would make an 
officer, who has twice failed selection for promotion to the 
next higher grade, and who was offered the opportunity to 
continue on active duty, and who declines this offer, 
ineligible to receive involuntary separation pay.

Recognition by states of military testamentary instruments (sec. 564)

    The committee recommends a provision that would exempt a 
military testamentary instrument from any requirement of form, 
formality, or recording before probate under the laws of a 
state; and would provide that such an instrument has the same 
legal effect as a testamentary instrument prepared and executed 
in accordance with the laws of the state in which it is 
presented for probate. A ``military testamentary instrument'' 
is one prepared with testamentary intent in accordance with 
regulations prescribed under this provision by a person 
eligible for military legal assistance, which makes a 
disposition of that person's property, and takes effect upon 
his death. An instrument is a valid military testamentary 
instrument only if: it is executed by the testator (or in his 
presence, by his direction, and on his behalf); it is executed 
in the presence of a military legal assistance counsel, whether 
a judge advocate or a civilian attorney; it is executed in the 
presence of at least two disinterested witnesses; and it is 
executed in accordance with any additional requirements as may 
be provided by regulation. In addition, a military testamentary 
instrument may be regarded as self-proving with respect to the 
genuiness of the signature, the testator's status and title, 
and compliance with applicable regulations if certain 
prescribed additional formalities are complied with.

Sense of Congress on the court-martial conviction of Captain Charles 
        Butler McVay, Commander of the USS Indianapolis, and the 
        courageous service of its crew (sec. 565)

    The committee recommends a provision that would express a 
sense of Congress that, on the basis of facts presented in a 
public hearing conducted by the Committee on Armed Services of 
the Senate on September 14, 1999, the American people should 
now recognize Captain McVay's lack of culpability for the loss 
of the USS Indianapolis and the lives of the men who died as a 
result of the sinking and that Captain McVay's military record 
now reflect that he is exonerated for the loss of the ship and 
its crew; and that Congress strongly encourages the Secretary 
of the Navy to award a Navy Unit Commendation to the USS 
Indianapolis and its final crew.

                        OTHER ITEMS OF INTEREST


Automated in- and out-processing of military personnel

    The committee is aware that Fort McPherson, Georgia, a U.S. 
Army installation, is conducting a pilot program using standard 
commercial-off-the-shelf software products to implement an 
electronic one-stop in/out-processing system. The committee 
believes that any effort that reduces the personnel time lost 
to in/out-processing and streamlines these processes while 
improving efficiency is a positive initiative that should be 
considered for expanded use. The committee urges the Secretary 
of the Navy and the Secretary of the Air Force to review the 
pilot program at Fort McPherson, Georgia, and consider 
conducting a similar pilot program at several bases. The 
committee believes that such an electronic one-stop in/out-
processing concept would work very well at any installation, 
especially at an installation that is using smart cards in 
other base support activities. The committee also urges the 
secretaries of the military departments to consider expanding 
the concept of electronic one-stop in/out- processing to 
civilian employees.

Funeral honors for members of the uniformed services

    Section 578 of the National Defense Authorization Act for 
Fiscal Year 2000 requires the Secretary of Defense to ensure 
that, upon request, a funeral honors detail be provided for the 
funeral of any veteran. For the purposes of this provision, the 
term veteran was defined to include a decedent who served in 
the active military, naval, or air service. The committee 
directs the Secretary of Defense, in consultation with the 
Secretary of Veterans Affairs, the Secretary of Health and 
Human Services, and the Secretary of Commerce, to convene a 
conference, not later than December 31, 2000, to assess the 
desirability and feasibility of expanding eligibility for a 
funeral honors detail to former members of the Commissioned 
Officer Corps of the U.S. Public Health Service and the 
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. The committee 
further directs the Secretary of Defense to report the findings 
and recommendations resulting from the conference to the 
Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the House of 
Representatives not later than March 1, 2001.

Information related to alternatives to the Survivor Benefit Plan

    The committee recognizes that the Department of Defense has 
consistently and commendably administered, through the military 
departments, mandatory Transition Assistance Programs (TAP) for 
military members prior to separation. Among the mandatory 
briefing subjects during these pre-retirement programs is a 
session on the Survivor Benefit Plan (SBP). The committee notes 
that, today, military members are retiring at younger ages and 
with an increased actuarial longevity in their retirement 
years. This fact should have a substantial positive impact on 
the financial condition of the funds supporting SBP. The 
committee also notes that, many times, during the required TAP 
seminars, alternatives to the SBP are excluded from 
presentation or exposure even though many in the retiring 
population might benefit from considering alternatives to SBP 
during pre-retirement processing. The committee directs the 
Secretary of Defense to provide, not later than January 30, 
2001, to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the 
House of Representatives, a description of the TAP program and 
its content by service, including a description of the methods 
of exposure, if any, to information on to SBP; the number of 
retirees by pay grade for the last three years; and the number 
of individuals in the same categories with full participation 
in SBP (55 percent), those who elected a reduced SBP between 35 
and 55 percent, those who elected a reduced SBP below 35 
percent, and those who declined SBP.

Prevention of alcohol-related incidents

    The committee is aware of the potential for reducing the 
incidence of alcohol-related automobile accidents and incidents 
of misconduct through the use of portable one-step, saliva-
based test strips that provide an immediate estimate of blood 
alcohol concentration. The committee directs the secretaries of 
the military departments to examine how and if the use of 
personal, one-step, blood-alcohol concentration tests might 
enhance ongoing efforts to reduce the incidence of drunk 
driving and alcohol-related misconduct on military bases and 
installations.

Study on the use of peyote by military personnel

    The committee is aware that current Department of Defense 
policy permits, as an accommodation of a religious practice, 
service members who are Indian Tribe members to use peyote, a 
hallucinogenic drug, providing it is not used on a military 
installation and is used at least 24 hours prior to any 
scheduled duty. Although the committee supports reasonable 
accommodation of religious practices of military personnel, the 
committee is also concerned that the Department of Defense has 
not conducted a comprehensive study of the impact the use of 
peyote may have on the long-term health of military personnel 
and on military safety and readiness. To ensure that these 
concerns are addressed, the committee directs the Secretary of 
Defense to conduct a study, in coordination with the National 
Institute on Drug Abuse, on the real and potential hazards 
related to peyote use. The Secretary of Defense shall report 
the findings of the study and any recommendations to the 
Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the House of 
Representatives prior to finalizing the Department of Defense 
directive regarding accommodation of religious practices within 
the Department.
          TITLE VI--COMPENSATION AND OTHER PERSONNEL BENEFITS

                     SUBTITLE A--PAY AND ALLOWANCES

Increase in basic pay for Fiscal Year 2001 (sec. 601)
    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 3.7 
percent. This increase would be effective January 1, 2001.
Corrections for basic pay tables (sec. 602)
    The committee recommends a provision that would make 
several technical corrections to the basic pay tables for the 
uniformed services. The recommended provision would change the 
pay table as it pertains to monthly basic pay for members of 
the Joint Chiefs of Staff and the Commandant of the Coast Guard 
from $12,441.00 to $12,488.70. Since the pay of these officers 
is capped under other provisions of law, there will be no 
change in the pay these officers receive. The recommended 
provision would also change the monthly basic pay for members 
serving as Sergeant Major of the Army, Master Chief Petty 
Office of the Navy, Chief Master Sergeant of the Air Force, 
Sergeant Major of the Marine Corps, or Master Chief Petty 
Officer of the Coast Guard from $4,701.00 to $4,719.00. The 
recommended changes would be effective July 1, 2000.
Pay in lieu of allowance for funeral honors duty (sec. 603)
    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
the secretary of a military department to pay a reserve 
component member who performs funeral honors duty using either 
the stipend authorized in the National Defense Authorization 
Act for Fiscal Year 2000 or one day of basic pay, as if the 
funeral honor duty was a unit training assembly.
Clarification of service excluded in computation of creditable service 
        as a Marine Corps officer (sec. 604)
    The committee recommends a provision that would clarify 
that the limitation on creditable service computation as a 
result of accepting tuition assistance applies only to service 
as an enlisted member and not as a commissioned officer.
Calculation of Basic Allowance for Housing (sec. 605)
    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
the Secretary of Defense to prescribe the Basic Allowance for 
Housing based on the cost of adequate housing for civilians of 
comparable income levels in the area at rates that would reduce 
or eliminate the member's out-of-pocket expenses. The 
recommended provision would eliminate the current requirement 
that 15 percent of the estimated housing expenses for military 
personnel be paid by the service member.
Eligibility of members in grade E-4 to receive basic allowance for 
        housing while on sea duty (sec. 606)
    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
the payment of the basic allowance for housing to members 
serving in the grade of E-4, without dependents, who are 
assigned to sea duty in ships. The recommended provision would 
authorize the Secretary of the Navy to permit an E-4 assigned 
to a ship to live off-base and receive the basic allowance for 
housing while that ship is in port.
Personal money allowance for the senior enlisted members of the armed 
        forces (sec. 607)
    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
payment of a personal money allowance of $2,000 per year to the 
Sergeant Major of the Army, the Master Chief Petty Officer of 
the Navy, the Chief Master Sergeant of the Air Force, the 
Sergeant Major of the Marine Corps, and the Master Chief Petty 
Officer of the Coast Guard. The personal money allowance is 
intended to defray expenses incurred in connection with 
official duties not reimbursable through the use of Official 
Representation Funds. The Personal Money Allowance is currently 
authorized for certain senior officers.
Increased uniform allowances for officers (sec. 608)
    The committee recommends a provision that would increase 
the initial uniform allowance for officers from $200 to $400 
and the additional uniform allowance for officers from $100 to 
$200.
Cabinet-level authority to prescribe requirements and allowance for 
        clothing of enlisted members (sec. 609)
    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
the Secretary of Defense, and the Secretary of Transportation 
with respect to the Coast Guard when it is not operating as a 
service of the Navy, to prescribe the clothing to be furnished 
annually to enlisted members and to establish the amount of the 
cash allowance paid when the prescribed clothing is not 
provided.

             SUBTITLE B--BONUSES AND SPECIAL INCENTIVE PAYS


Extension of certain bonuses and special pay authorities for reserve 
        forces (sec. 611)

    The committee recommends a provision that would extend, 
until December 1, 2001, the authority to pay the special pay 
for critically short wartime health care 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 education loans for certain health professionals who serve 
in the Selected Reserve, and the prior service enlistment 
bonus.

Extension of certain bonuses and special pay authorities for nurse 
        officer candidates, registered nurses, and nurse anesthetists 
        (sec. 612)

    The committee recommends a provision that would extend, 
until December 1, 2001, the authority to pay certain bonuses 
and a special pay for nurse officer candidates, registered 
nurses, and nurse anesthetists.

Extension of authorities relating to payment of other bonuses and 
        special pays (sec. 613)

    The committee recommends a provision that would extend, 
until December 1, 2001, the authority to pay the aviation 
officer retention bonus, the reenlistment bonus for active 
members, the enlistment bonuses for critical skills, the Army 
enlistment bonus, 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.

Consistency of authorities for special pay for reserve medical and 
        dental officers (sec. 614)

    The committee recommends a provision that would make the 
amount of special pays for reserve medical and dental officers 
consistent. Currently, reserve component medical officers and 
reserve component dental officers receive disparate pays for 
similar qualifications and periods of service.

Special pay for physician assistants of the Coast Guard (sec. 615)

    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
the payment of a special pay to Coast Guard physician 
assistants on the same basis as non-physician health care 
providers in the military services.

Authorization of special pay and accession bonus for pharmacy officers 
        (sec. 616)

    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
the secretary of a military department or, in the case of the 
Public Health Service Corps, the Secretary of Health and Human 
Services, to pay a special pay and an accession bonus for 
pharmacy officers. The recommended provision would provide the 
military departments and the Public Health Service additional 
incentives to recruit and retain trained pharmacy officers.

Corrections of references to Air Force veterinarians (sec. 617)

    The committee recommends a provision that would clarify 
that the special pay for board certified veterinarians in the 
armed forces and the Public Health Service includes Air Force 
biomedical sciences officers who hold a degree in veterinary 
medicine.

Entitlement of active duty officers of the Public Health Service Corps 
        to special pays and bonuses of health professional officers of 
        the armed forces (sec. 618)

    The committee recommends a provision that would make the 
special pays and bonuses for active duty officers of the Public 
Health Service Corps equal to those of health professional 
officers of the armed forces. The recommended provision would 
eliminate inequities in the special pays and bonuses paid to 
health professionals of the uniformed services.

Career sea pay (sec. 619)

    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
the secretary of a military department to establish the rates 
of career sea pay up to a limit of $750 per month and would 
increase the maximum career sea pay premium pay from $100 per 
month to $350 per month for consecutive or cumulative duty at 
sea.

Increased maximum rate of special duty pay assignment pay (sec. 620)

    The committee recommends a provision that would increase 
the limit on special duty assignment pay from $275 per month to 
$600 per month. The secretary of a military department would 
retain the flexibility to establish the rate of special duty 
assignment pay within the maximum limit to meet the needs of 
the service. For those assignments common to all services, such 
as recruiters, the Secretary of Defense would ensure that the 
rate of the special duty assignment pay is consistent among the 
services.

Expansion of applicability of authority for critical skills enlistment 
        bonus to include all armed forces (sec. 621)

    The committee recommends a provision that would extend, to 
all the services, the authority, now available only to the 
Army, to offer a bonus for enlistment for a period of two years 
in a critical skill.

            SUBTITLE C--TRAVEL AND TRANSPORTATION ALLOWANCES


Advance payments for temporary lodging of members and dependents (sec. 
        631)

    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
the secretary of a military department to pay the temporary 
lodging allowance in advance of the incurrence of the expenses. 
Currently, payment of the temporary lodging allowance must be 
paid after a service member pays the bills and files a claim. 
The recommended provision would also require the Secretary of a 
military department to consider all elements of the cost of 
living to service members and their families, including the 
cost of housing, subsistence and necessary incidental expenses, 
when determining the per diem allowance for a member on duty 
outside the Continental United States in a travel status.

Incentive for shipping and storing household goods in less than average 
        weights (sec. 632)

    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
the secretary of a military department to pay a service member 
a share of the amount of savings resulting from the service 
member shipping or storing a lower household good or baggage 
weight than the average weight shipped or stored by members of 
the same grade and dependent status.

Expansion of funded student travel (sec. 633)

    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
unmarried military dependents, under the age of 23 and enrolled 
in an accredited, full-time graduate degree program or an 
accredited vocational technical educational program in the 
Continental United States, one funded round trip per year to 
the sponsor's overseas duty location. Currently, only 
dependents in secondary or undergraduate educational programs 
are entitled to this funded travel.

Benefits for members not transporting personal motor vehicles overseas 
        (sec. 634)

    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
the secretary of a military department to pay a service member 
a share of the savings that accrue when an authorized member 
elects not to ship their personal vehicle overseas at 
government expense. The recommended provision would also limit 
the amount payable to store a personal vehicle in lieu of the 
authorized shipment of the vehicle to an amount equal to the 
cost that would have been incurred by shipping the vehicle 
overseas and back.

                    SUBTITLE D--RETIREMENT BENEFITS


Exception to high-36 month retired pay computation for members retired 
        following a disciplinary reduction in grade (sec. 641)

    The committee recommends a provision that would require the 
computation of retired pay for military personnel who retire 
following a reduction in grade be based on the basic pay of the 
grade held at the time of retirement rather than the average of 
the highest three years of basic pay. The recommended provision 
would correct a situation in which a service member who is 
reduced in grade as a result of a disciplinary action and 
subsequently retires would have his or her retired pay computed 
based on the average of the highest three years of basic pay, 
effectively circumventing the intention of the reduction-in-
grade.

Automatic participation in Reserve Component Survivor Benefit Plan 
        unless declined with spouses' consent (sec. 642)

    The committee recommends a provision that would require 
reserve component personnel notified of eligibility for retired 
pay upon reaching 60 years of age to make an election regarding 
coverage under the Reserve Component Survivor Benefit Plan. The 
recommended provision would require spousal consent if the 
member makes an election to decline or to provide less than the 
full, immediate annuity for the spouse. Currently, the 
reservecomponent member may decline coverage or elect less than full 
participation without the spouse's knowledge or consent. The 
recommended provision would treat spouses of reserve component members 
in the same manner as spouses of active component members.

Participation in thrift savings plan (sec. 643)

    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 663 of the National Defense Authorization Act for 
Fiscal Year 2000 to establish the effective date for offering 
the Thrift Savings Plan to active and reserve military 
personnel, effective not later than 180 days from the enactment 
of this Act. The recommended provision would also eliminate the 
requirement for the President to identify mandatory spending 
offsets that are currently provided in the Concurrent 
Resolution on the Budget for Fiscal Year 2001.

Retirement from active reserve service after regular retirement (sec. 
        644)

    The committee recommends a provision that would permit a 
retired active component service member who later serves, and 
is promoted in an active reserve position, to retire as a 
member of the retired reserve at the higher grade. The 
recommended provision would permit such individuals to retire 
as a member of the retired reserve. Promotion in the reserves 
is currently authorized by sections 1370, 1406(b)(2) and 12771 
of title 10, United States Code.

Same treatment for federal judges as for other federal officials 
        regarding payment of military retired pay (sec. 645)

    The committee recommends a provision that would make a 
technical correction to ensure that Article III federal judges 
are treated the same as other federal officials with regard to 
reduction in military retired pay. Section 651 of the National 
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2000 eliminated the 
reduction in military retired pay for retired uniformed 
services personnel who are civilian employees of the federal 
government. The recommended provision makes a technical 
correction eliminating this reduction of retired pay for 
retired uniformed services personnel who are employed in 
certain judicial positions.

                       SUBTITLE E--OTHER MATTERS


Reimbursement of recruiting and ROTC personnel for parking expenses 
        (sec. 651)

    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
the secretary of a military department to reimburse military 
recruiters, Senior Reserve Officer Training Corps cadre 
members, and Military Entrance Processing Command members for 
parking expenses incurred in the performance of their duties.

Extension of deadline for filing claims associated with capture and 
        internment of certain persons by North Vietnam (sec. 652)

    The committee recommends a provision that would permit the 
Secretary of Defense to pay claims to a person, or the survivor 
of a person, who demonstrates that he or she served as a 
Vietnamese operative pursuant to OPLAN 34A or OPLAN 35, was 
captured, remained in captivity after 1973, has not received 
any payment for the period spent in captivity, and whose 
original claim was received after the deadline for submitting 
claims, if the Secretary considers it necessary to prevent an 
injustice. The committee is aware of four claims that would 
qualify under the recommended provision. Payment of the 
additional claims would be made from within the original 
appropriations for this program.

Settlement of claims for payments for unused accrued leave and for 
        retired pay (sec. 653)

    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
the Secretary of Defense to settle claims for payments for 
unused accrued leave and to waive time limitations for filing 
claims for payments for unused accrued leave and for retired 
pay. The committee encourages liberal use of this authority to 
ensure that otherwise valid claims of service members and 
former service members are not denied solely because the claim 
was not filed within the time required.

Eligibility of certain members of the Individual Ready Reserve for 
        Servicemembers' Group Life Insurance (sec. 654)

    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
volunteers for assignment to a category in the Individual Ready 
Reserve that is subject to involuntary recall to active duty to 
participate in the Servicemembers' Group Life Insurance 
program.

Authority to pay gratuity to certain veterans of Bataan and Corregidor 
        (sec. 655)

    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
the Secretary of Veterans Affairs to pay a $20,000 gratuity to 
a veteran or surviving spouse of a veteran who served at Bataan 
or Corregidor, was captured and held as a prisoner of war, and 
was required to perform slave labor by the Japanese.

                        OTHER ITEMS OF INTEREST


Adjustments to the Basic Allowance for Housing

    The Basic Allowance for Housing (BAH) rates for uniformed 
services personnel are determined by the Secretary of Defense 
based on the monthly cost of adequate housing for civilians of 
comparable income levels in the area in which the service 
member is assigned. Section 403 of title 37, United States 
Code, includes a protection against reductions in the BAH as 
long as the member retains uninterrupted eligibility to receive 
BAH. The committee is aware of cases in which the BAH for 
service members who have made a no-cost permanent change of 
station move and who remain in the same quarters they occupied 
during their previous assignment has been reduced. The 
committee believes that implementation of the statutory 
provisions, as interpreted in the Joint Federal Travel 
Regulations, is flawed. The committee did not intend that 
service members would be adversely affected by a no-cost 
permanent change of station move in which the original quarters 
continue to be occupied. The committee directs the Secretary of 
Defense to review the statute and the Joint Federal Travel 
Regulations, and to make such changes as may be necessary to 
ensure that service members who make no-cost moves are not 
adversely impacted by a reduction in BAH. The committee 
believes these changes should be retroactive, effective as of 
the date of the BAH legislation.
                         TITLE VII--HEALTH CARE

                     SUBTITLE A--SENIOR HEALTH CARE

Extension of TRICARE senior supplement demonstration program (sec. 701)
    The committee recommends a provision that would extend the 
TRICARE senior supplement demonstration program providing 
health care delivery to the over-64 Medicare eligible 
population. Congress authorized implementation of several 
demonstration programs (Medicare Subvention, the Federal 
Employee Health Benefits Program, a Medicare insurance 
supplement or ``medi-gap'' type policy, and pharmacy pilot 
programs). One of these programs is due to expire this year, 
some have just started, and others are due to start later this 
year. The recommended provision would extend the TRICARE senior 
supplement program to allow for continuity of care through 
calendar year 2005, and to allow the Department of Defense and 
the Congress time to evaluate and determine the most 
appropriate long-term health care solutions for these 
beneficiaries.
TRICARE senior prime demonstration program (sec. 702)
    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
expansion of the TRICARE Senior Prime, or ``Medicare 
Subvention'' program to major medical centers of the Department 
of Defense and extend the program through calendar year 2005. 
While the Medicare subvention demonstration program has 
provided limited data upon which to base evaluation and 
expansion decisions, it appears clear that the most productive 
expansion sites are those with the more extensive capabilities 
of major medical centers. Teaching programs conducted at the 
medical centers require a more extensive case-load and 
beneficiary population to support medical educational programs 
and readiness training requirements.
    Although data is still limited, the committee believes that 
the reimbursement methodology agreed to by the Department of 
Defense and the Health Care Financing Administration may need 
modification. Therefore, the committee directs the Department 
of Defense to engage in consultation with the Health Care 
Financing Administration to determine what modifications need 
to be addressed, both in terms of data collection and 
reimbursement methods, to facilitate expansion of the program.
Extension and expansion of demonstration project for participation of 
        uniformed services personnel in the Federal Employee Health 
        Benefit program (sec. 703)
    The committee recommends a provision that would remove the 
limitation on the number of sites covered by the demonstration 
program allowing participation of Medicare-eligible military 
beneficiaries and their family members in the Federal Employees 
Health Benefits Program. The recommended provision would extend 
the program through calendar year 2005 to allow for continuity 
in the provision of care for beneficiaries while the Department 
of Defense and the Congress analyze approaches to meeting the 
health care needs of the Medicare-eligible military retiree 
population.
Implementation of redesigned pharmacy system (sec. 704)
    The committee recommends a provision that would direct the 
Department of Defense to reduce the enrollment fee and consider 
using deductibles for the pharmacy pilot program authorized in 
the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1999. 
The Department of Defense has been slow to implement this pilot 
program and there is considerable concern among the beneficiary 
population over the high cost of participation. The committee 
believes that the use of deductibles, which apply only when a 
benefit is utilized, are a more prudent management tool.

                      SUBTITLE B--TRICARE PROGRAM

Additional beneficiaries under TRICARE prime remote program in CONUS 
        (sec. 711)
    The committee recommends a provision that would expand 
TRICARE prime remote to the uniformed services and to family 
members of active duty personnel who qualify for TRICARE prime 
remote. The committee recognizes the importance of providing a 
uniform and equitable medical benefit to all military members 
and their families, without regard to where they happen to be 
stationed in the United States.
Elimination of copayments for immediate family (sec. 712)
    The committee recommends a provision that would eliminate 
copayments for those immediate family members of active duty 
service members enrolled in TRICARE Prime who receive care from 
a source that currently requires copayment.
Improvement in business practices in the administration of the TRICARE 
        program (sec. 713)
    The committee recommends a provision that would direct the 
Secretary of Defense to complete implementation of 
improvedhealth care business practices no later than October 1, 2001. 
Previous legislation directed the Secretary of Defense to make 
improvements in providing access to beneficiaries, scheduling 
appointments, simplifying and making more efficient claims processing 
and payment systems, and ensuring portability and national enrollment. 
These improvements have not been fully implemented in a timely manner. 
The committee directs the Secretary to ensure the systemic changes 
necessary to achieve improved business practices and increased 
beneficiary and provider satisfaction are implemented no later than 
October 1, 2001.

   SUBTITLE C--JOINT INITIATIVES WITH DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS


Tracking patient safety in military and veterans health care systems 
        (sec. 721)

    The committee recommends a provision that would direct 
enhanced cooperation between the Department of Defense and 
Department of Veterans Affairs in the area of patient safety. 
The two Departments are currently collaborating on a number of 
joint initiatives, including common information systems and 
patient safety initiatives. This provision directs the two 
agencies to work to develop a common set of patient safety 
indicators and to provide for centralized tracking of those 
indicators.

Pharmaceutical identification technology (sec. 722)

    The committee recommends a provision that would direct the 
Secretary of Defense and the Secretary of Veterans Affairs to 
jointly develop a plan to bar code pills and to explore a bar 
code capability for the mail order pharmacy program. Joint 
initiatives and the commonality they produce can provide 
opportunities to greatly enhance patient safety.

Medical informatics (sec. 723)

    The committee recommends a provision that would direct the 
Secretary of Defense to include two additional sections in the 
medical informatics report required by section 723(d)(5) of the 
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2000. The 
recommended provision includes a requirement to report on the 
progress or growth in medical informatics and how the TRICARE 
program and the Department of Veterans Affairs health care 
system can use medical information technology to raise 
standards of treatment. The provision also directs that, from 
within the resources of the Defense Health Program, $64.0 
million be expended on a computerized patient record system, 
and $9.0 million be expended on an integrated pharmacy system 
in fiscal year 2001.

                       SUBTITLE D--OTHER MATTERS


Permanent authority for certain pharmaceutical benefits (sec. 731)

    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize a 
specific pharmacy benefit for eligible beneficiaries of the 
military health care system, including those eligible for 
Medicare. The recommended provision would authorize a national 
mail order program and a retail pharmacy network. The 
recommended provision would not require an enrollment fee nor 
an annual deductible for the mail order program. Drugs obtained 
through the retail network would require beneficiary cost 
shares of 20 percent and government coverage of 80 percent. The 
recommended provision would phase out the current base 
realignment and closure pharmacy benefit now in effect, in 
recognition of implementation of the recommended program.
    The committee believes that meeting the pharmaceutical 
needs of our older retirees is a major step in meeting the 
commitment to ensure access to health care for those who have 
made military service a career. This is the first time the age 
65 and over military retiree population will have a legal 
entitlement to health care benefits. The recommended provision 
would provide a uniform benefit for all military beneficiaries 
and would meet the major unmet healthcare need of older 
retirees, access to a pharmacy benefit.

Provision of domiciliary and custodial care for CHAMPUS beneficiaries 
        (sec. 732)

    The committee recommends a provision that would cap the 
Department of Defense domiciliary and custodial care program 
costs at $100.0 million per year. The committee understands 
that the current programmatic estimates are significantly less 
and expects the Secretary of Defense to move quickly to 
implement a case management program to address the needs of 
those with chronic conditions. The recommended provision would 
also grandfather those that participated in the Department of 
Defense's home health care demonstration and allow their 
continued participation in the case management program, without 
regard to age.

Medical and dental care for medal of honor recipients and their 
        dependents (sec. 733)

    The committee recommends a provision that would extend 
lifetime medical and dental care, to be provided by the 
Department of Defense, to medal of honor recipients and their 
dependents. The committee recognizes the significant 
contributions of these current and former service members and 
their families, and would extend complete legal entitlement for 
these beneficiaries.

School-required physical examinations for certain minor dependents 
        (sec. 734)

    The committee recommends a provision that would direct the 
Secretary of Defense to provide eligible dependents a physical 
examination when such an examination is required by a school in 
connection with the enrollment in that school. Eligible 
dependents are between the ages of 5 and 12 years of age. The 
proposed provision would recognize school requirements for such 
physicals and, consistent with other provisions in this bill, 
would require no copayment for TRICARE Prime enrollees. 
Enrollees in TRICARE options other than Prime would pay 
appropriate cost shares. The committee expects, to the extent 
possible, that primary care managers would utilize the results 
of school physicals to accommodate other requirements for 
health assessments for school age children, such as sports 
physical requirements.

Two-year extension of dental and medical benefits for surviving 
        dependents of certain deceased members (sec. 735)

    The committee recommends a provision that would extend the 
medical and dental benefits for surviving dependents of certain 
deceased members from one year to three years. The committee 
recognizes the impact on dependents of loss of a family member 
and that transition to alternate sources of health care may 
take a period of time longer than previously permitted. The 
recommended provision would recognize the sacrifices of these 
family members and assist in their difficult transition from 
the military system.

Extension of authority for contracts for medical services at locations 
        outside medical treatment facilities (sec. 736)

    The committee recommends a provision that would extend from 
December 31, 2000 to September 30, 2002, the authority to enter 
into personal services contracts with physicians for medical 
screening of enlistment applicants. The Secretary of Defense is 
currently conducting a test to evaluate whether the employment 
of fee-basis physicians in medical screening of enlistment 
applicants should be sustained, or whether an alternate 
approach is more appropriate. The recommended provision would 
allow the Secretary of Defense to complete the evaluation of 
alternative medical screening strategies, and to sustain the 
pace of medical screening for armed forces applicants by 
extending contracting authority for an additional period of 
time.

Transition of chiropractic health care demonstration program to 
        permanent status (sec. 737)

    The committee recommends a provision that would make 
permanent the provision of chiropractic health care services to 
military health care system beneficiaries who enroll in TRICARE 
Prime. The recommended provision would direct the Secretary of 
Defense to develop and implement a plan to make available 
chiropractic services using a primary care manager model, that 
requires referral by a primary care physician. The recommended 
provision would continue services at existing demonstration 
sites until 180 days after the date of the enactment of this 
Act, at which time TRICARE Prime enrollees at those sites would 
continue to have available chiropractic services. The 
recommended provision recognizes the importance of the primary 
care manager in a managed care program and the value of 
offering a variety of approaches to meeting the health care 
needs of the beneficiary population.

Use of information technology for enhancement of delivery of 
        administrative services under the Defense Health Program (sec. 
        738)

    The committee recommends a provision that would direct the 
Secretary of Defense to implement, in at least one TRICARE 
region, a managed care support contract using commercially 
available internet-based systems and products, to assist in 
simplifying administrative processes in the TRICARE program. 
The recommended program would comply with patient 
confidentiality and security requirements and incorporate data 
requirements that are currently used in the marketplace, to 
include those used by Medicare and/or commercial insurers. This 
effort would include such areas as marketing, enrollment, 
beneficiary and provider education, appointment setting, and 
claims processing. The committee expects the initiative to 
enhance efficiency and improve services, as well as match 
commercially recognized standards of performance.

Patient care reporting and management system (sec. 739)

    The committee recommends a provision that would direct the 
Secretary of Defense to implement a patient care reporting and 
management system in the military health system. The 
recommended provision would create a patient care reporting and 
management system that would identify, track, and report on 
errors and safety problems in the military medical system. The 
recommended provision would direct development of a process to 
study occurrence of errors, identify system factors 
contributing to occurrences, and provide for corrective actions 
throughout the military health care system.

Health care management demonstration program (sec. 740)

    The committee recommends a provision that would direct the 
Secretary of Defense to conduct a test of two models to improve 
health care delivery in the Defense Health Program. The 
recommended provision would provide for two tests of health 
care simulation models: one for studying alternative delivery 
policies, processes, organizations, and technologies; and the 
second for studying long term disease management. The 
recommended provision directs the Secretary of Defense to 
implement each of these concepts in at least one site in fiscal 
year 2001 and report, not later than January 31, 2002, to the 
Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the House of 
Representatives on the desirability and feasibility of 
incorporating these programs throughout the military health 
care system.

Studies of accrual financing for health care for military retirees 
        (sec. 741)

    The committee recommends a provision that would direct the 
Secretary of Defense to conduct two studies, one by the 
Department of Defense and one by an independent entity, to 
evaluate the potential of revising the financing of the 
military medical benefit through an accrual based system. While 
the committee recognizes the potential of such a proposal, 
there remain many unanswered questions about administration and 
budgeting. The required studies will provide the committee with 
the necessary data to determine if permanently implementing 
such a concept would be warranted.

Augmentation of Army Medical Department by reserve officers of the 
        Public Health Service Corps (sec. 742)

    The committee recommends a provision that would permit the 
Secretary of the Army and the Secretary of Health and Human 
Services to enter into an agreement to conduct a program under 
which officers of the Public Health Service Corps Inactive 
Reserve may be detailed to augment the Army Medical Department, 
subject to existing legislative authorities.
    The recommended provision would require the Secretary of 
the Army, in consultation with the Secretary of Health and 
Human Services, to review existing legislative authorities and 
report to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and 
the House of Representatives not later than March 1, 2001, on 
the findings of this review and any recommendations necessary 
to permit enhanced augmentation by the Public Health Service 
Inactive Reserve.

                        OTHER ITEMS OF INTEREST


Consultation with schools of pharmacy and nursing

    The committee directs the military services to implement a 
program in which military treatment facilities and clinics 
would partner with local pharmacy and nursing schools to 
incorporate the full range of health care professional 
resources in health care endeavors. The committee supports 
integrating all aspects of professional health care delivery. 
Specifically, students of pharmacy and nursing schools could 
become a significant resource to pharmacies through 
participation in patient education programs. Patients would 
benefit from increased personal interaction, pharmacies would 
benefit by access to increased professional resources, and 
students would expand their clinical experience.

Financial assistance for those beneficiaries requiring animal 
        assistance

    The committee directs the Secretary of Defense to study and 
report to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and 
the House of Representatives on the requirements for animal 
assistance for dependents of military personnel whose medical 
conditions may require such assistance. The report should 
include an assessment of the economic impact to families of 
obtaining animals for such purposes as ``seeing-eye'' 
assistance and other medical conditions. The report should 
include an analysis of the current benefit coverage by the 
Department of Defense, if any, and, if appropriate, a proposal 
for coverage of such assistance.

Health care benefits for retirees living overseas

    The committee directs the Secretary of Defense to study and 
report to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and 
the House of Representatives, no later than March 12, 2001, on 
thedesirability and feasibility of providing health care 
benefits to military retirees living outside the United States. The 
committee recognizes that some military retirees make a conscious 
choice to live overseas but other military members return to their home 
of origin upon retirement from military service. The study will include 
an assessment of the numbers of retirees permanently residing overseas, 
an assessment of how many have returned to their home of origin, and 
options for providing health care benefits to retirees overseas.

Implementation of Department of Defense and Veterans Affairs Department 
        sharing initiatives

    The committee directs the Secretary of Defense and the 
Secretary for Veterans Affairs to develop a plan and report to 
the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the House of 
Representatives, not later than January 31, 2001, on the 
formation of problem solution groups and regional liaisons to 
facilitate sharing opportunities. Issues to be addressed should 
include reimbursement and payment, joint contracting, data 
commonality, and any other issues inhibiting full and 
beneficial sharing of resources. The committee continues to 
observe that additional sharing is of value and that 
administrative obstacles preclude full benefit of existing 
arrangements between the two departments.

Notification of persons affected by unanticipated adverse outcomes of 
        medical care

    The committee directs the Secretary of Defense to review 
the process for identifying serious medical errors and 
notifying affected patients or their families of such error 
events. The review shall include the mandatory reporting system 
used in the 500 hospitals and clinics within the Department of 
Defense, as described in the Report of the Quality Interagency 
Coordination Task Force to the President, dated February 2000. 
The Secretary of Defense shall report to the Committees on 
Armed Services of the Senate and the House of Representatives, 
not later than March 1, 2001, on the current notification 
process and any additional requirements the Secretary deems 
necessary after such review.

Special pays for military health care professionals

    The committee directs the Secretary of Defense to conduct a 
review and to report to the Committees on Armed Services of the 
Senate and the House of Representatives, not later than March 
1, 2001, on the adequacy of special pays and bonuses for 
medical corps officers and other health care professionals. The 
committee directs this review because of the level of 
competition within the economy for health care professionals 
and the potential devaluation of current special pays and 
bonuses, which could have a significant impact on recruiting 
and retention of health care professionals.
  TITLE VIII--ACQUISITION POLICY, ACQUISITION MANAGEMENT, AND RELATED 
                                MATTERS

Improvements in procurements of services (sec. 801)
    The committee recommends a provision that would address 
concerns about the manner in which the Department of Defense 
(DOD) contracts for services. The committee is concerned that 
the DOD has not adjusted its contracting and oversight 
practices to meet the increasing significance of service 
contracting. From 1992 through 1999, DOD procurement of 
services increased from $39.9 billion to $51.8 billion while 
procurement of goods during that same time period decreased 
from $59.8 billion to $53.5 billion.
    The DOD Inspector General (IG) recently reviewed contracts 
for professional, administrative, and management support 
services, which is the largest sub-category of contracts for 
services valued at $10.3 billion. The IG reviewed 105 contracts 
and each contract had one or more significant problems. These 
problems included the non-use of prior history to define 
requirements (58 out of 84 or 69 percent), inadequate 
government cost estimates (81 out of 105 or 77 percent), 
cursory technical reviews (60 out of 105 or 57 percent), 
inadequate competition (63 out of 105 or 60 percent), failure 
to award multiple-award contracts (7 out of 38 or 18 percent), 
inadequate contract surveillance (56 out of 84 or 67 percent) 
and lack of cost control (21 out of 84 or 24 percent). The IG 
found that `` * * * cost-type contracts that placed a higher 
risk on the government continued without question for the same 
services for inordinate lengths of time (39 years in one 
extreme case) and there were no performance measures in use to 
judge efficiency and effectiveness of the services rendered.''
    The committee is concerned about the lack of oversight and 
accountability in managing these contracts. As a result, the 
committee recommends a provision that would require the 
Secretary of Defense to develop specific training applicable to 
services contracting and for the Secretary of each military 
department to establish centers of excellence in contracting 
for services. The committee has added $2.0 million to the 
Defense Acquisition University account to be used at the 
Defense Systems Management College for this purpose. The 
committee expects that these centers of excellence will be 
staffed with trained and experienced personnel that can assist 
the acquisition community when procuring services, make all 
acquisition personnel aware of the problems identified by the 
DOD IG, develop a time-phased plan with goals and performance 
measures to track improvements in the acquisition of services, 
and serve as a clearinghouse for best practices in contracting 
for services in the public and private sectors.
    This provision would require the Secretary of Defense to 
establish a contracting preference for performance based 
contracting in services in which performance work statements 
would set forth requirements in clear, specific, and objective 
terms with measurable outcomes. As an incentive for DOD to 
adopt performance based contracting techniques, performance 
based contracts for services under $5.0 million may be treated 
as contracts for a commercial item. The committee expects these 
improvements to lead to improved oversight and a greater 
results based focus on service contracting.
Addition of threshold value requirement for applicability of a 
        reporting requirement relating to multiyear contract (sec. 802)
    The committee recommends a provision that would clarify the 
multiyear reporting requirements required by section 809 of the 
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2000. Under 
this provision, the head of an agency may not enter into a 
multiyear contract if the value exceeds $500.0 million until 
the Secretary of Defense has submitted to the congressional 
defense committees a report on the total obligational authority 
associated with existing and requested multiyear contracts 
contained in the Future Years Defense Program.
Planning for the acquisition of information systems (sec. 803)
    The committee recommends a provision that would require the 
Chief Information Officers of the Department of Defense (DOD) 
and the military services to maintain a consolidated inventory 
of DOD mission critical and mission essential information 
systems, to identify interfaces between these and other 
information systems, and to maintain contingency plans for 
responding to a disruption in the operation of any of these 
information systems. The DOD in its report to the committee on 
Year 2000 Lessons Learned stressed the importance of 
maintaining the information that was developed to meet the Year 
2000 problem and stated that `` * * * centralized visibility of 
assets is fundamental to information technology management 
(e.g. acquisition, configuration management, and information 
assurance).''
    The provision would also require that Department of Defense 
Directive 5000.1 be revised to establish minimum planning 
requirements for the acquisition of information technology 
systems, require registration and oversight by the Chief 
Information Office before award of a contract for mission 
critical or essential information technology systems, and 
prohibit Milestone I, II, or III approval until the Chief 
Information Officer has determined that the system is 
beingdeveloped in accordance with the Clinger-Cohen Act of 1996, 
including capital planning and investment control and performance, 
results based management techniques, and incremental acquisition.

Tracking of information technology purchases (sec. 804)

    The committee recommends a provision that would require the 
Secretary of Defense and the secretaries for each military 
department to administer an automated system to track and 
manage purchases of information technology products and 
services in excess of the simplified acquisition threshold.
    As a result of recent procurement reforms, there are many 
new procurement vehicles from which agencies can buy 
information technology. The Department of Defense (DOD) and the 
services can choose to buy information technology goods and 
services from the General Services Administration (GSA) 
multiple award schedules, government-wide acquisition contracts 
(GWACs), blanket purchase agreements, indefinite delivery/
indefinite quantity contracts, multiple award task order 
contracts, by credit card directly from vendors, or through a 
standard competitive contract.
    The committee is concerned that there is insufficient data 
available to effectively support management decisions in 
determining whether the government is choosing the most 
appropriate vehicle to obtain the best price or best value for 
information technology (IT) purchases. For example, DOD and the 
services are negotiating enterprise software agreements 
designed to give DOD customers commercial off-the-shelf 
software products at prices significantly lower than those 
available on the GSA's Federal Supply Schedules. There is no 
data, however, to show to what degree buyers are using other 
agreements to buy the same products at potentially higher 
prices. In another example, the services, when asked by the 
committee how much IT was bought through GWACs, could not 
provide the answer. One military service tried to get this 
information and was told by the non-DOD agency who administered 
a GWAC that they would not share sales data with the service. 
This provision would prohibit any purchase by DOD off GWACs 
unless sales data is included in the data base required by this 
provision.
    With DOD planning to spend $20.3 billion on information 
technology it is imperative that the Department have visibility 
over how these funds are being spent and whether there are more 
appropriate contracting strategies for achieving the 
Department's information technology needs. The committee 
expects DOD to use the data contained in this data base to more 
efficiently manage IT purchases to obtain best value products 
and services, while maximizing cost savings, competition, and 
efficient use of resources.

Repeal of requirement for contractor assurances regarding the 
        completeness, accuracy, and contractual sufficiency of 
        technical data provided by contractor (sec. 805)

    The committee recommends a provision that would eliminate 
the requirement for contractors providing technical data to the 
government to furnish written assurances that the technical 
data is complete, accurate, and satisfies the requirements of 
the contract. This provision was requested by the Department of 
Defense.
    The committee understands that the elimination of this 
requirement will not in any way diminish either the 
contractor's obligation to provide technical data that meets 
contract requirements or the government's ability to enforce 
this requirement. The committee expects that the Defense 
Contract Management Agency will continue to monitor contractor 
technical data programs in order to protect government data 
rights and to ensure the government receives timely and 
accurate information regarding contractor processes, practice, 
and controls for developing technical data.

Extension of authority for Department of Defense acquisition pilot 
        programs (sec. 806)

    The committee recommends a provision that would extend the 
authority of section 5064 of the Federal Acquisition 
Streamlining Act (FASA) and authorize the Department of Defense 
to continue to conduct five Defense Acquisition Pilot Programs 
through October 1, 2007. The committee notes that it would be 
inefficient and inappropriate to change contracting approaches 
in the middle of these programs, and understands that the 
extension provided in this provision should be sufficient to 
permit the completion of the programs under the pilot 
authority.
    The committee directs the Secretary of Defense to report to 
the congressional defense committees by March 1, 2001, on the 
lessons learned from the section 5064 pilot programs, how these 
lessons are being incorporated in major weapons systems 
acquisition, and what specific statutory constraints preclude 
new weapons systems programs from adopting the practices tested 
in the pilot programs.

Clarification and extension of authority to carry out certain prototype 
        projects (sec. 807)

    The committee recommends a provision that would extend for 
three years the other transaction prototype authority under 
section 845 of the National Defense Authorization Act for 
Fiscal Year 1994 and identify appropriate uses of this 
authority to include cost sharing arrangements and the 
participation ofnontraditional defense contractors. The 
committee also recommends a pilot program for the transition to follow-
on production contracts for prototypes developed under the section 845 
authority. Under the pilot program, an item or process developed by 
nontraditional defense contractors may be treated as a commercial item 
under a contract or subcontract for less than $20.0 million and 
purchased under the streamlined procedures established under the 
Federal Acquisition Regulations (48 C.F.R. Part 12). The committee 
intends that this provision will test and identify alternative methods 
to transition successful section 845 prototypes to production.
    This provision would support using section 845 authority to 
attract companies that typically do not do business with the 
Department of Defense and encourage cost sharing and 
experimentation in potentially more efficient ways of doing 
business with traditional defense contractors. Other 
transaction authority is an important acquisition tool that can 
facilitate the incorporation of commercial technology into 
military weapon systems. In an environment where, in many 
areas, commercial technology is now more advanced than defense 
technology, it is imperative that the Department continue to 
have the flexibility to use innovative contractual instruments 
that provide access to this technology. There are, however, 
improvements that can be made in managing and overseeing these 
contractual arrangements.
    The General Accounting Office (GAO) recently reviewed the 
Department's use of section 845 authority for the committee and 
recommended that the Secretary of Defense provide updated 
guidance that sets out the conditions for using section 845 
agreements and provides a framework to tailor the terms and 
conditions appropriate for each agreement. In addition, the GAO 
recommended that the Secretary of Defense establish and require 
the use of a set of performance metrics directly related to the 
use of the agreements. The committee directs the Secretary of 
Defense to implement these recommendations by March 1, 2001, 
and further directs the GAO to report to the committee on the 
Department's compliance with these recommendations.

Clarification of authority of Comptroller General to review records of 
        participants in certain prototype projects (sec. 808)

    The committee recommends a provision that would clarify the 
audit access of the General Accounting Office (GAO) over other 
transaction prototype authority agreements for those 
contractors who have only done business with the government 
under other transaction authority or through cooperative 
agreements.
    Congress in the National Defense Authorization Act for 
Fiscal Year 2000 required the Department of Defense to ensure 
that the General Accounting Office has audit access to other 
transaction prototype authority agreements that provide for 
payments in excess of $5.0 million, unless a public interest 
waiver is obtained, or if a party or entity, or a subordinate 
element of a party or entity, has not entered into any other 
agreement that provides for audit access in the year prior to 
the agreement. This provision would clarify audit access by the 
GAO in those cases where a firm may have had a cooperative 
agreement or other transaction with the government prior to one 
year and has had no other government contracts.

Eligibility of small business concerns owned and controlled by women 
        for assistance under the mentor-protege program (sec. 809)

    The committee recommends a provision that would add small 
business concerns owned and controlled by women to the list of 
entities that are eligible to participate in the pilot mentor-
protege program established by section 831 of the National 
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1991.
    The pilot mentor-protege program provides incentives to 
major defense contractors to assist qualified small business to 
enhance their capabilities as contractors on Department of 
Defense (DOD) contracts. The mentor-protege program does not 
guarantee contracts to qualified small businesses. Instead, it 
is designed to equip these businesses with the knowledge and 
expertise that they need to win such contracts on their own, in 
the competitive market place.
    The DOD has yet to meet the five percent government-wide 
annual goal for women-owned business participation in federal 
contracting required by section 7106 of the Federal Acquisition 
Streamlining Act of 1994. The committee encourages the 
Department to use the authority granted in this section, as 
well as existing programs, outreach, training and technical 
assistance to further the participation of women-owned 
businesses in DOD contracting.

Navy-Marine Corps Intranet (sec. 810)

    The committee recommends a provision that would require the 
Secretary of the Navy to submit a report to Congress on the 
amount to be expended on the Navy-Marine Corps Intranet (NMCI) 
contract, the accounts from which the contract will be funded, 
a plan for incremental development, the management information 
specified in section 803(e), and any impact on the existing 
civilian workforce before beginning performance of the NMCI 
contract. The provision would require that the Marine Corps, 
the naval shipyards, and the naval aviation depots be excluded 
from the performance of the contract in the first year, and 
that the program be implemented in accordance with the 
requirements of the Clinger-Cohen Act of 1996 and applicable 
regulations and directives.
    The NMCI is a long-term ``seat management'' arrangement 
under which the Navy would transfer to a contractor the 
responsibility for providing and managing the Navy's desktop 
computer, server, infrastructure, and communication assets and 
services. Up to $2.0 billion a year could be expended on the 
contract over the next five years.
    The committee recognizes that each of the military services 
faces aging information technology infrastructure, which is 
plagued with severe interoperability and information assurance 
problems. The committee supports the Navy's efforts to address 
these problems, and encourages the other military services to 
address them in an equally comprehensive manner. However, many 
questions have been raised by the General Accounting Office and 
others about the effectiveness of the Navy's NMCI contracting 
approach. To move forward before these questions have been 
addressed could risk wasting valuable defense resources and put 
in jeopardy the future use of this innovative contracting 
concept by the Federal Government.
    The committee believes that for the Navy to successfully 
implement the NMCI, it will have to outline the business case 
for its information technology investments, demonstrate 
superior information technology project management expertise, 
and develop performance metrics based on sound baselines. The 
NMCI should be managed according to best private and public 
sector practices, including incremental development, as 
mandated in the Clinger-Cohen Act of 1996. The committee also 
believes that oversight by the DOD Chief Information Office is 
critical to the success of the program and that effective 
implementation of the memorandum of agreement between the Navy 
and DOD officials is a first step in ensuring effective 
management of the program.
    The committee further recommends that the Navy ensure that 
the contractor for the NMCI program evaluates the use of 
commercial off the shelf desktop computers capable of securely 
processing, storing, and networking classified, sensitive, and 
unclassified data via the NMCI.

Qualifications required for employment and assignment in contracting 
        positions (sec. 811)

    The committee recommends a provision that would require a 
baccalaureate degree and 24 semester credit hours in business 
disciplines for new entrants into the GS-1102 occupational 
series and for contracting officers above the simplified 
acquisition threshold. The 24 semester credit hours may be 
included within the requirements for the baccalaureate degree 
or may be in addition to the basic undergraduate degree 
requirement. The credit hours may be either undergraduate or 
graduate credit hours or a combination of both. These 
requirements will not apply to those who are already serving in 
these capacities as of September 30, 2000. This provision also 
does not effect the waiver authority in section 1724(d) of 
title 10, United States Code, which allows employees who do not 
meet these requirements to serve in these capacities if it is 
determined by the acquisition career program board of a 
military department that they possess significant potential for 
advancement based on demonstrated job performance and 
qualifying experience.
    Defense contracting has changed significantly since the 
passage of the Defense Acquisition Workforce Improvement Act of 
1990. This provision will ensure that new entrants into the 
contracting field have the educational tools they need to 
effectively perform as contracting professionals in the 
changing federal marketplace.

Defense acquisition workforce (sec. 812)

    The committee recommends a provision that would establish a 
moratorium on further cuts in the acquisition workforce for 
three years. The Secretary of Defense may waive this 
prohibition upon certification to Congress that any reductions 
to the workforce will not negatively impact on the ability of 
the workforce to efficiently and effectively carry out its 
legally required functions.
    The provision would also require a report on the 
sufficiency of the acquisition and support workforce of the 
Department of Defense (DOD). This provision would require the 
Secretary of Defense to perform a comprehensive reassessment of 
programmed reductions in the acquisition workforce, assess the 
impact of impending retirements, develop a plan to address 
future acquisition workforce challenges and problems arising 
from past reductions in the acquisition workforce, and identify 
steps that are being taken or could be taken by the DOD to 
enhance the tenure and reduce the turnover of program executive 
officers, program managers, and contracting officers.
    The DOD Inspector General (IG) recently reported that DOD 
has reduced its acquisition workforce from 460,516 to 230,556 
personnel, about 50 percent, from the end of fiscal year 1990 
to the end of fiscal year 1999, while the workload has remained 
essentially constant, and even increased by some measures. The 
committee recognizes that the implementation of acquisition 
reform has improved efficiency in DOD contracting. However, 
according to the IG: ``. . . staffing reductions have clearly 
outpaced productivity increases and the acquisition workforce's 
capacity to handle its still formidable workload.''
    The IG reported that reductions in the acquisition 
workforce have resulted in: (1) an increased backlog in closing 
out completed contracts; (2) increased program costs resulting 
from contracting for technical support versus using in-house 
technical support; (3) insufficient personnel to fill-in for 
employees ondeployment; (4) insufficient staff to manage 
requirements; (5) reduced scrutiny and timeliness in reviewing 
acquisition actions; (6) personnel retention difficulty; (7) an 
increase in procurement action lead time; (8) some skill imbalances; 
and (9) lost opportunities to develop cost savings initiatives. The 14 
DOD acquisition organizations reviewed by the IG anticipate additional 
adverse effects on performance if further downsizing occurs.
    In addition to concerns about the impacts of past 
acquisition workforce reductions, the committee is concerned 
about the changing demographics of the acquisition workforce as 
DOD loses a projected 55,000 of its most experienced personnel 
through attrition by fiscal year 2005.
    In a hearing before the Subcommittee on Readiness and 
Management Support, Administration witnesses testified about 
the need for innovative personnel changes to address impending 
demographic changes in the workforce, as well as addressing 
qualitative shortfalls. As a means to test personnel changes, 
the committee recommends a provision that would extend for 
three years the acquisition workforce demonstration project 
conducted under section 4308 of the National Defense 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1996. In addition, the 
committee recommends, as part of the report required by this 
provision, that the Secretary report on the lessons learned 
from this demonstration project and provide any recommendations 
to improve personnel management laws, policies, or procedures 
with respect to the DOD acquisition workforce.

Financial analysis of use of dual rate for quantifying overhead costs 
        at army industrial facilities (sec. 813)

    The committee recommends a provision that would require the 
Secretary of the Army to conduct a financial analysis of the 
benefits and costs of permitting the use of dual overhead rates 
at Department of Army Government-Owned facilities as a means of 
encouraging commercial use of these facilities. The provision 
would also require the Secretary to report to the congressional 
defense committees on the results of this study by February 15, 
2001.

                        OTHER ITEMS OF INTEREST


Application of Cost Accounting Standards to universities

    Section 802 of the National Defense Authorization Act for 
Fiscal Year 2000 contained provisions that modified and 
streamlined the applicability of the Cost Accounting Standards. 
Section 802(h) provided that these changes should not be 
construed to modify, supersede, impair, or restrict the 
applicability of the Cost Accounting Standards to educational 
institutions. Section 802(h) has been interpreted by some to 
preclude the Cost Accounting Standards Board (CAS Board) from 
altering the Cost Accounting Standards in any way, as they 
apply to universities and other educational institutions. That 
was not the committee's intent.
    The committee understands that the applicability of both 
the Cost Accounting Standards and the cost accounting 
provisions in the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) 
Circular A-21 to universities and other educational 
institutions has led to confusion and misunderstanding. The 
committee believes that OMB and the CAS Board should work 
together to develop a more complete and seamless incorporation 
of the relevant Cost Accounting Standards into OMB Circular A-
21. It is the committee's hope that OMB and the CAS Board will 
utilize terminology applicable to basic and applied research, 
and give examples relevant to university operations to provide 
clear and consistent guidance on the steps that educational 
institutions must take to maintain compliance with applicable 
standards.

Appropriate use of the government purchase card

    Last year, the committee directed that each of the military 
services conduct a review of purchase card transactions and 
report to Congress on their findings no later than March 1, 
2000. The committee was disappointed that none of the services 
sampled the records of actual purchases to identify the items 
purchased and determine if the prices paid were reasonable. In 
the absence of such a review, the findings of the three 
services were inconclusive. For this reason, the committee 
directs each of the three military services to develop a plan 
for sampling purchase card transactions in selected commands to 
determine whether the prices paid were fair and reasonable, and 
to ensure that the purchase card is being used in an 
appropriate manner. The committee directs the military services 
to report their findings to the congressional defense 
committees no later than February 1, 2001.
    While the services provided some data on procurement 
savings through the use of the purchase card, the committee is 
concerned that processing costs at the Defense Finance and 
Accounting Service may have increased due to increased usage of 
the purchase card. The committee directs the Secretary of 
Defense to report to the congressional defense committees on 
this problem by February 1, 2001. The Secretary's report 
should: (1) provide an estimate of financial processing costs 
incurred due to the use of the purchase card and compare those 
costs to estimated contracting savings; and (2) discuss the 
feasibility of reducing those processing costs by 
electronically integrating purchasesmade through the government 
purchase card with the payment systems of the Department of Defense 
(for example, through the use of the Standard Procurement System).

Availability of contractor past performance information

    The committee is aware that award fee determination 
information from previous contracts may be used in the 
assessment of a contractor's past performance for source 
selection purposes. Past performance information is generally 
considered to be source selection sensitive and, therefore, 
exempt from disclosure under the Freedom of Information Act 
(FOIA). Once an award fee determination has been made under the 
previous contract, however, the information underlying the 
basis for that determination, because it is no longer pre-
decisional, may be disclosed under FOIA unless some other 
express exemption applies. As a result, information may be 
treated as exempt from disclosure for the purpose of one 
contract, when it is subject to disclosure as it relates to 
another contract.
    The committee directs the Secretary of Defense to examine 
the issue to make a determination whether a clarification in 
regulation would be in the public interest. The committee 
directs the Secretary to provide a report to the congressional 
defense committees, to the Committee on Governmental Affairs of 
the Senate, and to the Committee on Government Reform of the 
House of Representatives on any determinations and actions with 
respect to this issue, no later than March 1, 2001.

Contracts for ancillary commercial services

    Section 805 of the National Defense Authorization Act for 
Fiscal Year 2000 clarified that services ancillary to a 
commercial item, such as installation, maintenance, repair, 
training, and other support services would be considered 
commercial services, regardless of whether the services are 
provided by the same vendor or at the same time as the item, if 
the services are provided contemporaneously to the general 
public under similar terms and conditions.
    It has come to the committee's attention that commercial 
practice may be to contract for such services on a basis other 
than firm-fixed prices under certain circumstances. For 
example, an elevator repair company may contract for the 
maintenance and repair of building elevators on a time and 
materials basis. The committee believes that the Department of 
Defense should utilize the flexibility provided in Section 
8002(d) of the Federal Acquisition Streamlining Act--which 
requires the use of firm, fixed price contracts ``to the 
maximum extent practicable''--by authorizing the use of other 
than firm-fixed price contracts for the acquisition of 
ancillary commercial services when this is the common practice 
in sales to the general public.
    At the same time, the committee has requested that the 
General Accounting Office undertake a broad review of best 
practices in the private sector for the acquisition of 
commercial products and services. In addition, this bill 
contains a number of provisions directed at improving the 
Department's management of contracts for commercial products 
and services. The committee does not believe that the 
Department should revise the current regulation prohibiting the 
use of other than firm-fixed price contracts under section 
8002(d) for the acquisition of categories of commercial 
products and services other than ancillary services until the 
GAO review has been completed, the required management changes 
have been implemented, and the committee has had an opportunity 
to review the results.

Online auctioning

    The Department of Defense has advised the committee that 
online auctioning may be well suited for competitive, high 
volume, commodity type purchases, and has the potential to save 
the Department significant resources in time, funding, and 
labor for such purchases. The committee urges the Department to 
identify specific markets for which the use of online 
auctioning may be appropriate and develop a pilot program to 
test the use of this innovate purchasing approach. The 
Department is directed to provide a progress report on this 
effort to the Committee on Armed Services of the Senate no 
later than March 1, 2001.

Performance goals and measures for quality of equipment and other 
        products

    The committee is concerned that reductions in the 
acquisition workforce have increased the risk that quality 
control oversight measures may be inadequate. Recent reports of 
quality control problems related to satellite launch failures, 
the continued stocking in the inventory of defective chemical 
protective suits, and concerns raised about the quality of 
aircraft carrier catapult parts raise questions about whether 
defense quality control problems may be systemic.
    The Department of Defense Inspector General (DOD IG) 
recently reported that the number of defense quality assurance 
personnel decreased from 12,117 in 1990 to 5,191 in 1999, a 57 
percent decrease. The Defense Contract Management Agency 
(DCMA), the organization primarily responsible for in-plant 
quality assurance, stated to the DOD IG that increased quality 
control risk exists because of continued workforce reductions. 
DCMA also reported this risk from reduced oversight of 
contractors in its annual statement of assurance. DCMA 
commented that somecontractors stated that when DCMA stopped 
performing inspections of all products, so did the contractors.
    The Defense Logistics Agency (DLA) stated that while 
customer complaints about the quality of material received have 
increased, DLA has placed less emphasis on responding to the 
customer complaints because of acquisition workforce 
reductions. Another military command stated that reduced 
staffing caused it to pay little attention to backlogs in 
Quality Deficiency Reports and Equipment Improvement Reports.
    The committee is concerned that while staffing for quality 
assurance has been reduced, there are no overall DOD 
performance measures for the quality of products received from 
contractors. To address this issue, the committee directs the 
Secretary of Defense to require the heads of acquisition 
activities in the DOD to establish and submit to the Secretary, 
for the Department's annual performance plan under the 
Government Performance and Results Act, performance goals and 
measures for the quality of military equipment and other 
products received from private sector sources. The Secretary of 
Defense shall also submit, by February 1, 2001, a report to 
Congress on how the Department plans to improve its quality 
assurance program.

Polyacrylonitrile carbon fibers

    Polyacrylonitrile (PAN) carbon fibers are used in a variety 
of defense and space applications such as aircraft, missiles, 
launch vehicles, and helicopters. In 1985, the Department of 
Defense (DOD) determined that DOD was overly dependent on 
foreign industry for PAN carbon fibers and directed that one-
third of PAN carbon fiber used in defense production should be 
supplied by domestic sources by the end of calendar year 1988. 
Congress included in the Defense Appropriations Act for Fiscal 
Year 1988 (Public Law 100-202) a requirement that by calendar 
year 1992, 50 percent of the DOD PAN carbon fiber requirements 
be purchased from domestic sources. To accomplish this 
objective, the statute also required that all new major systems 
use U.S. or Canadian manufacturers for all PAN carbon fiber 
requirements. DOD institutionalized these requirements in the 
Defense Federal Acquisition Regulations (DFAR). The statutory 
restrictions were not renewed after 1991. In 1996, DOD decided 
to continue the restrictions, but recommended that the issue be 
revisited in three years. The Department is currently studying 
whether to maintain the PAN carbon fiber DFAR restriction.
    The committee directs the Secretary of Defense to report to 
the congressional defense committees by February 1, 2001, on 
the domestic and international industrial structure that 
produces PAN carbon fibers, current and anticipated market 
trends for this product, and on any decision made to maintain 
or discontinue the PAN carbon fiber DFAR restriction.

Procurements from the small arms production industrial base

    The committee understands that there have been problems 
with the Department of the Army's process for forwarding waiver 
requests to the Secretary of Defense to authorize expanded 
competition on particular small arms critical repair parts 
contracts, as provided for in section 2473(a) of title 10, 
United States Code. The committee reiterates that waivers on 
small arms critical repair parts contracts should be forwarded 
to and granted by the Secretary of Defense when it is 
determined, with regard to a particular procurement, that 
restricting the procurement is not necessary to preserve the 
small arms production industrial base, as defined by section 
2473(c) of title 10, United States Code.
    The committee also reiterates its concern that quality and 
reliability be paramount in the execution of all small arms 
procurement. The Army must ensure that all solicitations for 
small arms, parts, and modifications--regardless of the method 
of procurement--will result in our troops receiving the safest 
and most reliable systems possible from reliable suppliers, and 
that each procurement will be based on detailed analyses of 
alternatives.

Risk management in the acquisition of major systems

    The committee has reviewed a report entitled Report of the 
Price-based Acquisition Study Group, dated November 15, 1999, 
prepared for the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for 
Acquisition, Technology and Logistics. Many of the 
recommendations of this report could be implemented without any 
change to existing law, and show significant promise for the 
reduction of risk in the acquisition of major systems. In this 
regard, the report is consistent with the recommendations of 
the General Accounting Office in work conducted for this 
committee.
    For example, the report recommends that the Department: (1) 
establish a Defense-wide policy for risk mitigation through the 
use of evolutionary and incremental acquisition strategies, 
consistent with the requirements established for the 
acquisition of major systems of information technology in 
section 5202 of the Clinger-Cohen Act of 1996; (2) establish a 
Defense-wide policy for using price to help prioritize 
operational requirements; (3) facilitate the development of 
competitive pricing through the use of dissimilar competition 
in major systems acquisitions where it is not practicable to 
maintain multiple sources; (4) establish a center of excellence 
in market research to coordinate the use of best practices in 
market research across the department; and (5) conduct a 
Defense Science Board study on the impact of contract 
modifications and changes on contract cost, schedule, 
andquality. The committee urges the Department of Defense to take 
strong action to implement these recommendations.
    While the committee encourages the Department to implement 
the recommendations of the Study Group report relating to risk 
mitigation, the committee is concerned that several other 
recommendations of the report appear to be inconsistent with 
the requirements of existing law. In particular, the committee 
notes that the so-called ``Cost or Pricing Analysis Decision 
Assistance Tool (COPADAT)'' developed by the study group would 
direct results that are inconsistent with the requirements of 
the Truth in Negotiations Act--encouraging contracting officers 
to avoid obtaining certified cost or pricing data in 
circumstances where it is required by law. The committee 
directs the Department to stop all use of the COPADAT or any 
similar tool that would dictate a result that is inconsistent 
with statutory requirements to obtain certified cost or pricing 
data in sole source procurements of non-commercial items, 
absent ``exceptional circumstances.''
    Similarly, the report recommends that the Defense 
Supplement to the Federal Acquisition Regulation be revised to 
express a clear, unambiguous preference for price-based 
acquisition and that price-based acquisition be addressed in 
every acquisition plan or equivalent document, even in cases 
where the statute requires contracting officers to obtain 
certified cost or pricing data. The committee supports the use 
of price-based acquisition techniques to supplement the use of 
certified cost or pricing data in the determination of fair and 
reasonable prices in sole-source contracts for non-commercial 
items. However, the use of such techniques is not a substitute 
for statutory requirements or a basis for waiving the statutory 
requirements to obtain certified cost or pricing data in such 
acquisitions.
    Finally, the committee notes that section 802 of the 
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2000, 
established a new ``exceptional circumstances'' waiver to the 
Cost Accounting Standards. This waiver authority parallels 
waiver authority already available to the Department under the 
Truth in Negotiations Act.
    The committee reminds the Department that the statement of 
managers accompanying the National Defense Authorization Act 
for Fiscal Year 2000, section 802 expressly limits the use of 
``exceptional circumstances'' waivers to circumstances ``. . . 
when the agency determines that it would not be able to obtain 
needed products or services from the vendor in the absence of a 
waiver.'' For this reason, the committee directs the Department 
to clarify that ``exceptional circumstances'' waivers to the 
Truth in Negotiations Act and the Cost Accounting Standards may 
not ordinarily be used to enter a contract with a major defense 
contractor or any other contractor that routinely does business 
with the Federal Government in contracts that are covered by 
the Truth in Negotiations Act and the Cost Accounting 
Standards.

Technical data rights for items developed exclusively at private 
        expense

    Section 2320 of Title 10, United States Code, establishes 
the statutory basis for regulations governing rights in 
technical data under Department of Defense contracts. This 
provision establishes the basic rule that the government has 
unlimited rights to technical data developed exclusively with 
federal funds; the government does not generally have rights in 
technical data established exclusively at private expense; and 
rights to data developed in part with federal funds and in part 
at private expense are negotiable. When the government 
purchases an item developed exclusively at private expense, 
however, Section 2320 reserves the government's limited right 
to technical data that ``. . . is necessary for operation, 
maintenance, installation, or training (other than detailed 
manufacturing or process data).''
    Department of Defense officials have noted that it is 
increasingly common that commercially-developed systems or 
components are either returned to the manufacturer for repair 
or discarded. In such cases, these officials state, the 
government does not need technical data, and our insistence 
that contractors provide such data could discourage commercial 
companies from doing business with the government.
    The committee believes that this concern is based upon a 
misreading of the statute. Section 2320 requires contractors to 
provide only technical data that ``is necessary'' for 
operation, maintenance, installation, or training. This 
requirement provides executive branch officials with the 
flexibility to determine what data, if any, is necessary for 
these limited purposes. If, in view of the manner in which the 
system or component will be used, no data is necessary for 
these purposes, the government should not require the seller to 
provide any such data. The committee directs the Department to 
review the regulations implementing Section 2320 and adopt any 
changes that may be necessary to clarify this point.
      TITLE IX--DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE ORGANIZATION AND MANAGEMENT

Repeal of limitation on major Department of Defense headquarters 
        activities personnel (sec. 901)
    The committee recommends a provision that would repeal the 
requirement to reduce the number of personnel assigned to major 
Department of Defense headquarters activities. The committee 
believes the reductions mandated by the previous legislation 
would adversely impact the ability of the service staffs, the 
Joint Staff, and the combatant commands to accomplish their 
missions.
Overall supervision of Department of Defense activities for combating 
        terrorism (sec. 902)
    The committee recommends a provision that would designate 
the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Special Operations and 
Low-Intensity Conflict (ASD-SOLIC) as the principal civilian 
adviser to the Secretary of Defense on, and the principal 
official within the senior management of the Department of 
Defense (DOD) (after the Secretary and Deputy Secretary of 
Defense) responsible for, combating terrorism. The ASD-SOLIC 
would provide overall direction and supervision for policy, 
program planning and execution, and allocation and use of 
resources for the activities of the Department of Defense for 
combating terrorism, including antiterrorism activities, 
counterterrorism activities, terrorism consequence management 
activities, and terrorism-related intelligence support 
activities. The committee is concerned that there is currently 
no single individual responsible for policy oversight at the 
Department to ensure a focused, comprehensive, cohesive, and 
well-funded DOD combating terrorism policy. The committee 
believes that there must be one official responsible for policy 
and budgetary oversight of this important mission. The intent 
of this provision is also to ensure that the Department's 
combating terrorism program is fully included in all stages of 
the Programs, Planning and Budgeting System (PPBS) as a single 
entity, rather than as separate activities.
    As included in the Department of Defense's report, DOD 
Combating Terrorism Activities, provided to Congress pursuant 
to section 932 of the National Defense Authorization Act for 
Fiscal Year 2000, the Department's combating terrorism 
activities are divided into four components: antiterrorism/
force protection, counterterrorism, terrorism consequence 
management, and intelligence support to combating terrorism. 
Currently, numerous DOD officials are responsible for these 
various combating terrorism activities. In many cases, 
responsibilities for these important activities overlap and it 
is unclear who has oversight for specific activities or 
ultimate responsibility for program direction. Through this 
provision, it is the committee's intent to consolidate the 
oversight and management of this vital program.
    Finally, the committee commends the Department for the 
fiscal year 2001 congressional justification book (CJB) for 
Combating Terrorism. This was a good first step in 
consolidating the numerous programs and activities of the 
Department of Defense combating terrorism program. The 
committee looks forward to working with the Department to make 
certain modifications that will improve this product. In 
particular, the committee would like to see the Department 
separate military personnel costs from the other combating 
terrorism costs.
National Defense Panel 2001 (sec. 903)
    The committee recommends a provision that authorizes the 
establishment of a National Defense Panel (NDP) in fiscal year 
2001 to accompany the fiscal Quadrennial Defense Review (QDR) 
for fiscal year 2001. The Defense Authorization Act for fiscal 
year 1997 (Public Law 105-85) established the QDR and the NDP, 
but the provision was a one year provision, and did not 
establish a recurring requirement. The Congress established the 
QDR as a permanent recurring requirement (10 U.S. Code, 118) in 
the National Defense Authorization Act of FY 2000, but did not 
include a requirement for the NDP.
    This provision responds to widespread belief that the 
combination of the QDR and NDP serve to heighten awareness of 
the administration, the Pentagon, the Congress, and the broader 
national security establishment on national defense strategies 
and policies for the future. This provision authorizes 
establishment of an NDP, consisting of nine recognized national 
security experts and appropriate support staff, to proceed 
concurrently with the QDR. Three members are to be appointed by 
the Chairman, Senate Armed Services Committee, in consultation 
with the ranking member. Three members are to be appointed by 
the Chairman, House Armed Services Committee, in consultation 
with the ranking member. Three members are to be appointed by 
the Secretary of Defense. The Secretary of Defense, in 
consultation with the Chairman and ranking member of each 
Committee on Armed Services, will designate one of the nine 
members as the Chairman of the NDP.
    The intent of this provision is to establish an NDP in 
fiscal year 2001 that will independently and objectively assess 
the current and projected strategic environment, assess the 
most dangerous threats to the national security interests of 
theUnited States over the next 10 to 20 years, and identify the 
strategic and operational challenges for the armed forces in countering 
these threats. The NDP will provide an interim report to the Secretary 
of Defense not later than July 1, 2001, that will be of assistance to 
him as he evaluates the overall QDR process. The NDP will provide a 
final report to the Secretary of Defense and to Congress not later than 
December 1, 2001. The Secretary of Defense will provide the defense 
committees of Congress his comments on the final NDP report not later 
than December 15, 2001.

Quadrennial National Defense Panel (sec. 904)

    The committee recommends a provision that amends title 10, 
United States Code, to require that a National Defense Panel 
(NDP) be established on a recurring basis, every four years in 
the year preceding the inauguration of a new President. The 
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1997 (Public 
Law 105-85) established the Quadrennial Defense Review (QDR) 
and the NDP, but the provision was a one year provision, and 
did not establish a recurring requirement. The Congress 
established the QDR as a permanent recurring requirement (10 
U.S.C. 118), but did not include a requirement for the NDP.
    This provision responds to widespread belief that the 
combination of the QDR and NDP serve to heighten awareness of 
the administration, the Pentagon, the Congress, and the broader 
national security establishment on national defense strategies 
and policies for the future. This provision authorizes the 
establishment an NDP, consisting of nine recognized national 
security experts and appropriate support staff, to precede the 
QDR. Three members are to be appointed by the Chairman, Senate 
Armed Services Committee, in consultation with the ranking 
member. Three members are to be appointed by the Chairman, 
House Armed Services Committee, in consultation with the 
ranking member. Three members are to be appointed by the 
Secretary of Defense. The Secretary of Defense, in consultation 
with the Chairman and ranking member of each Committee on Armed 
Services, will designate one of the nine members as the 
Chairman of the NDP.
    The intent of this provision is to establish a recurring 
NDP that will independently and objectively assess the current 
and projected strategic environment, assess the most dangerous 
threats to the national security interests of the United States 
over the next 10 to 20 years, and identify the strategic and 
operational challenges for the armed forces in countering these 
threats. The NDP will serve to provide an incoming Secretary of 
Defense of a new administration with a range of strategic 
directions and policy options which may assist him in 
formulating the strategic framework and guidance to be used by 
the QDR required to be conducted during the first year of a new 
administration. Additionally, this provision provides the 
opportunity for Congress, in accordance with its oversight 
role, to have insight and an avenue for input into the QDR 
process.

Inspector General investigations of prohibited personnel actions (sec. 
        905)

    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 1034 of title 10, United States Code, to broaden the 
definition of ``Inspector General'' in that section to include 
any officer of the armed forces or employee of the Department 
of Defense, not otherwise referred to in that definition, who 
is assigned or detailed to serve as an inspector general at any 
level in the Department. This expanded definition would 
authorize defense agency and joint service inspectors general, 
and civilian employees serving in such positions elsewhere in 
the Department, to handle alleged violations of the 
whistleblower protections afforded members of the armed forces 
in this statute. The provision also clarifies that the 
procedures necessary to ensure the expeditious processing and 
investigation of such alleged violations shall be set out in 
regulations to be prescribed by the Secretary of Defense. The 
committee understands that these regulations require that any 
investigation undertaken pursuant to section 1034 must be 
conducted by an inspector general who is independent of any 
individuals who may be subjects of the investigation.

Network centric warfare (sec. 906)

    The committee has noted, with great interest, the efforts 
by Department of Defense (DOD) agencies, the military services, 
the joint staff, and combatant commanders to establish 
mechanisms to integrate information systems, sensors, weapons 
systems and decision-makers. The common terminology for this is 
network centric warfare (NCW). In conversations with various 
agencies and organizations, it has become increasingly apparent 
that many of these efforts are innovative but are unnecessarily 
redundant and not designed to work in conjunction with each 
other. More importantly, it appears that there is not an 
effective overarching concept at the DOD level to fully 
integrate these various concepts of operation and maximize 
their potential contribution to information superiority--a 
cornerstone of Joint Vision 2010.
    Although ideas relating to the concepts of NCW have been 
analyzed within DOD, no clear consensus has emerged as to what 
priority it should have within broader efforts to transform the 
military. Additionally, there is no agreement on what 
fundamental organizational and doctrinal changes need to 
bepursued in order to most effectively implement these concepts or how 
the military services should work jointly in this effort. As a result, 
although the military services and several defense agencies are 
exploring new organizational concepts, operating procedures, training 
programs, and technologies to ensure information superiority in their 
operations, these efforts are often underfunded, low priority, and have 
not included joint war fighting and interoperability considerations.
    Specifically, the committee has noted the following: (1) 
NCW is a set of concepts being developed to exploit the power 
of information and U.S. superiority in information technologies 
to maintain dominance on the battlefield while protecting the 
infrastructure and information that is critical to the United 
States; (2) NCW involves the integration of information from 
combat, combat support, logistics elements and headquarters 
staffs into a seamless system that provides a common picture of 
the battlespace that can be simultaneously shared and used by 
sensors, weapons systems, combat personnel, decision makers, 
support elements, and other elements of the military services, 
unified commands, and allied forces operating in that 
battlespace; (3) a robust joint command, control, 
communications, computers, intelligence, surveillance, and 
reconnaissance (C4ISR) capability involving a networking of all 
these entities facilitates the timely flow of relevant, 
processed information that is necessary for achieving the 
sharing of an accurate common picture of the battlespace; (4) 
NCW is about networking capabilities, rather than creating 
separate networks or technologies, and is a means to generate 
greater combat power, dominance, and synergy through a linking 
of critical information sources that are geographically or 
hierarchically dispersed; (5) NCW is inherently joint, in that 
new air, sea, and land platforms under development must be able 
to integrate themselves into a seamless, overarching 
information architecture to be able to see the battlespace, 
contribute to the information base, and quickly receive orders 
to employ required capabilities; (6) being joint in nature, the 
NCW concepts must be approved at the highest levels of DOD and 
executed aggressively by a coordinated, iterative effort of all 
the military services, defense agencies, combatant commands and 
the joint staff; (7) successful implementation of the concepts 
will produce numerous benefits, including: (a) significant 
reduction in fratricide; (b) more adaptive and agile forces 
capable of engaging effectively across the spectrum of conflict 
with higher probability of success and reduced risk; (c) 
enhancement of interoperability among the military services and 
allied forces; (d) reduced manning requirements and life cycle 
costs for weapons systems; and (e) efficient combat support 
operations; (8) the well-intentioned, but separate efforts of 
the military services and defense agencies have resulted in 
recurring difficulties and deficiencies, including a number of 
interoperability failures of critical systems and 
inefficiencies in recent operations, including Kosovo.
    As a result of these findings and concerns, the committee 
directs that DOD provide three reports to the congressional 
defense committees no later than March 1, 2001, that summarize 
their efforts to coordinate NCW activities within the entire 
Department. The first report will be a comprehensive summary on 
the development and implementation of NCW concepts in DOD. The 
report will include: (1) a clear definition of NCW; (2) 
identification and description of Office of the Secretary of 
Defense, joint staff and U.S. Joint Forces Command activities 
to coordinate NCW related activities; (3) recommended metrics 
for evaluating the progress towards implementing NCW concepts 
and attainment of fully integrated C4ISR capabilities; (4) 
recommendations for joint concept development and joint 
experimentation; (5) progress made, as determined by 
quantitative standards: (a) toward establishing an overarching 
conceptual foundation in programs and initiatives currently 
underway; (b) in fielding force-wide friendly combat 
identification; and (c) in effective fire control and airspace 
management; (6) discussion of additional authorities, 
authorizations and other resources required to effectively 
implement NCW; (7) joint requirements and acquisition policy 
changes being made or considered to implement NCW; (8) a 
discussion of how private sector lessons learned in networking 
are being incorporated; and (9) a discussion of how DOD NCW 
systems will integrate with other agencies of the federal 
government when DOD civil support is required.
    Additionally, the committee directs the Commander-in-Chief, 
U.S. Joint Forces Command, on behalf of the Secretary of 
Defense, to conduct a study and submit a report on how to best 
use service and joint experimentation programs to develop NCW 
concepts and identify barriers to their implementation.
    Finally, the committee directs the Undersecretary of 
Defense for Acquisition, Technology and Logistics to submit a 
report describing the coordination in several specified areas 
of the science and technology investments of the military 
departments and defense agencies in the development of future 
NCW capabilities.

Additional duties for the Commission to Assess United States National 
        Security Space Management and Organization (sec. 907)

    Subtitle C of title XVI of the National Defense 
Authorization Act for fiscal year 2000 established a Commission 
to Assess United States National Security Space Management and 
Organization. The committee recommends a provision that would 
amend section 1622 of the National Defense Authorization Act 
for Fiscal year 2000 to include additional duties for the 
commission.

Special authority for administration of Navy Fisher Houses (sec. 908)

    The committee recommends a provision that would clarify the 
degree to which Navy Fisher Houses may be provided common 
support equivalent to category B community support activities 
and would permit the current general schedule employees to 
continue to serve until they leave those positions.

Organization and management of the Civil Air Patrol (sec. 909)

    The committee recommends a provision that would codify the 
agreement recently reached between the Secretary of the Air 
Force and the leadership of the Civil Air Patrol. However, the 
provision would not allow contract employees of the Air Force 
to commit federal resources.
    The committee commends the Secretary of the Air Force and 
the leadership of the Civil Air Patrol for their efforts to 
establish a more cooperative relationship. The committee 
supports the proposal to develop an appropriate oversight 
mechanism to ensure the responsible expenditure of federal 
resources.

Responsibility for the National Guard Challenge Program (sec. 910)

    The committee recommends a provision that would transfer 
responsibility for the National Guard Challenge Program from 
the Chief of the National Guard Bureau to the Secretary of 
Defense, and would amend the limitation on federal funding for 
the National Guard Challenge program to limit only Department 
of Defense funding. The fiscal year 2001 budget request for the 
National Guard Challenge is $62,500,000, which is also the 
maximum permitted by the existing statute. The recommended 
provision recognizes the concept of civilian control of the 
military and would clarify that the Assistant Secretary of 
Defense for Reserve Affairs is not required to communicate with 
state National Guard Challenge programs through the National 
Guard Bureau. The committee expects the National Guard Bureau 
to continue to be an important element in the National Guard 
Challenge Program.

Supervisory control of Armed Forces Retirement Home Board by Secretary 
        of Defense (sec. 911)

    The committee recommends a provision that would establish 
that the Armed Forces Retirement Home Board is subject to the 
authority, direction, and control of the Secretary of Defense 
in the performance of its responsibilities, would give the 
Secretary of Defense authority over appointment and terms of 
board members, and would make the Chairman of the Retirement 
Home Board responsible to the Secretary of Defense.

Consolidation of certain Navy gift funds (sec. 912)

    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
the Secretary of the Navy to transfer all amounts in the Naval 
Historical Center Fund to the Department of the Navy General 
Gift Fund and to close the Naval Historical Center Fund. The 
recommended provision would also authorize the Secretary of the 
Navy to transfer all amounts in the United States Naval Academy 
Museum Fund to the gift fund maintained for the benefit and use 
of the United States Naval Academy, and to close the United 
States Naval Academy Museum Fund.

Temporary authority to dispose of a gift previously accepted for the 
        Naval Academy (sec. 913)

    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
the Naval Academy to, during fiscal year 2001 and at the 
request of the donor, transfer a gift previously given to the 
Naval Academy Gift fund to another entity.
                      TITLE X--GENERAL PROVISIONS

                     SUBTITLE A--FINANCIAL MATTERS

Authorization of prior emergency supplemental appropriations for fiscal 
        year 2000 (sec. 1002)
    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
the emergency supplemental appropriations enacted in the 2000 
Supplemental Appropriations and Rescissions Act (Public Law 
106-XXX). The supplemental provided funding for fiscal year 
2000 expenses related to military operations in Kosovo, Drug 
Interdiction and Counter-Drug Activities, and natural 
disasters.
United States contributions to NATO common-funded budgets (sec. 1003)
    The resolution of ratification for the Protocols to the 
North Atlantic Treaty of 1949 on the Accession of Poland, 
Hungary and the Czech Republic contained a provision (section 
3(2)(c)(ii)) that requires a specific authorization for U.S. 
payments to the common-funded budgets of NATO for each fiscal 
year, beginning in fiscal year 1999, that U.S. payments exceed 
the fiscal year 1998 total. The committee recommends a 
provision to authorize the U.S. contribution to NATO common-
funded budgets for fiscal year 2001, including the use of 
unexpended balances from prior years.
Annual OMB/CBO joint report on scoring budget outlays (sec. 1004)
    The committee recommends a provision that makes minor 
administrative changes to the joint annual Office of Management 
and Budget/Congressional Budget Office (OMB/CBO) report on the 
scoring of budget outlays.
Prompt payment of contractor vouchers (sec. 1005)
    The committee recommends a provision that will require the 
Secretary of Defense to reduce the backlog of vouchers to be 
paid by the Defense Finance and Accounting Service (DFAS) to 
five percent or less of the total Mechanization of Contract 
Administration Service (MOCAS) vouchers received. Normal 
commercial practice, as well as the government's own policy, 
calls for payment within 30 days for work satisfactorily 
accomplished. The committee is concerned that this standard is 
not being accomplished and creates undue hardships for private 
sector enterprises doing business with the Department of 
Defense (DOD).
    The Committee recognizes the efforts by DFAS to reduce the 
backlog of vouchers and the electronic initiatives to expedite 
the processing of these vouchers, and applauds this effort. The 
DOD is urged to move more aggressively in the areas of 
electronic commerce to develop a common family of invoices, 
reduce excessive detail and supporting data, and streamline the 
payment process. Electronic invoicing and payment has 
demonstrated its value and the Department is urged to be more 
aggressive in these areas.
The repeal of certain requirements relating to timing of contract 
        payments (sec. 1006)
    The committee recommends a provision that would repeal two 
provisions of the Department of Defense Appropriations Act for 
Fiscal Year 2000 (Public Law 106-79) concerning the prompt 
payment act and the shifting of pay days for federal employees.
Plan for prompt posting of contractual obligations (sec. 1007)
    The committee recommends a provision that would require the 
Secretary of Defense to submit a plan concerning the timely 
obligation of funds. The committee notes that the ability to 
obligate funds is not standardized or even centralized within 
the Department of Defense. This obligation authority resides in 
the services in some cases and Defense Finance and Accounting 
Service in others. This lack of uniformity calls into question 
the Department's ability to reduce the backlog of vouchers and 
problem disbursements, and to improve the accounting systems.
Plan for the electronic submission of documentation supporting claims 
        for contract payments (sec. 1008)
    The committee recommends a provision that would require the 
Secretary of Defense to submit a plan to the congressional 
defense committees by March 31, 2001, for the electronic 
submission of contract supporting transactions (e.g. invoices, 
receiving reports, and certifications).
Administrative offsets for overpayment of transportation costs (sec. 
        1009)
    The committee recommends a provision that would provide a 
streamlined offset procedure for amounts overpaid for 
transportation services, that are below the simplified 
acquisition threshold of $100,000. The amounts offset would be 
credited to the appropriation or accounts that funded 
thetransportation service. This provision does not effect the budgetary 
requirements for these services.

                  SUBTITLE B--COUNTER-DRUG ACTIVITIES

    The budget request for drug interdiction and other counter-
drug activities of the Department of Defense (DOD) totals $1.1 
billion: $836.0 million in central transfer account; $166.5 
million in the operating budgets of the military services for 
authorized counter-drug operations; and $76.8 million in the 
military construction account for infrastructure improvements 
at the forward operating locations. This request is in addition 
to the $137.0 million in the emergency fiscal year 2000 
supplemental funding request for Plan Colombia.
    The Committee recommends the following fiscal year 2001 
budget for the Department's counter-narcotics activities.

Drug Interdiction & Counterdrug Activities, Operations and Maintenance

                        [In thousands of dollars]

                      [May not add due to rounding]

Fiscal Year 2001 Drug and Counterdrug Request.................$1,070,064
    Goal 1 (Dependent Demand Reduction).......................    22,736
    Goal 2 (Support to DLEAs).................................    89,905
    Goal 3 (DOD Personnel Demand Reduction)...................    74,067
    Goal 4 (Drug Interdiction--TZ/SWB)........................   447,414
    Goal 5 (Supply Reduction).................................   435,942
Increases:
    Airborne Reconnaissance Low...............................    31,000
    National Guard Support....................................    25,000
Decreases:
    DINANDRO Riverine Support.................................     3,000
    DEA Transportation Support (PC-2307)......................     1,350
    Carribean Law Enforcement Support.........................     2,703
Supplemental Appropriation
    Forward Operating Location Construction...................    76,800
    Plan Colombia.............................................    40,000
                    --------------------------------------------------------------
                    ____________________________________________________

      Total Fiscal Year 2001 Drug and Counterdrug Funding..... 1,119,011

Extension and increase of authority to provide additional support for 
        counter-drug activities (sec. 1011)

    The committee recognizes the importance of providing the 
democratically elected governments of the countries of the 
Andean Ridge, particularly Colombia, with the tools and 
training necessary to assert control over their sovereign 
national territory to prevent the illegal trafficking of 
narcotics and the regional in stability that narcotics 
trafficking creates. The committee supports the President's 
request for the supplemental funding that would be used to help 
train and equip the military and police forces of these 
countries. However, the resources requested for these 
activities would exceed the current authorities. Therefore, the 
committee recommends a provision that would extend until fiscal 
year 2006 the authority for the DOD to provide certain counter-
drug assistance to the Government of Colombia. The provision 
would also increase the level of resources authorized to be 
expended through this authority to $40.0 million each year.

Recommendations on expansion of support for counter-drug activities 
        (sec. 1012)

    The committee understands the valuable contribution that 
the Department of Defense has made in providing needed 
assistance to the counter-drug forces of Colombia and Peru. 
However, the committee is concerned about efforts to seek an 
expansion of current authority to other nations without a clear 
plan on how this assistance will be put to the most effective 
use.
    Therefore, the committee recommends a provision that would 
require the Secretary of Defense to provide a report to the 
Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the House of 
Representatives that would outline the Secretary's views 
regarding what, if any, additional countries should be 
included; what, if any, additional support should be provided; 
and a detailed plan for providing support, including the 
counter-drug activities proposed to be supported.

Review of riverine counter-drug program (sec. 1013)

    The committee is concerned with reports of problems in the 
management and operation of certain portions of the riverine 
counter-drug program. While this program has made great strides 
improving the counter-drug capability of some forces, other 
forces have had far less success.
    Therefore, the committee includes a provision that would 
require the Secretary of Defense, acting through the Assistant 
Secretary of Defense for Special Operations and Low Intensity 
Conflict, to review the riverine counter-drug program and 
provide a report to Congress on the results of that review. The 
report should include an assessment of the effectiveness of the 
program for each country receiving support, and a 
recommendation regarding which of the armed forces, units of 
the armed forces, or other organizations within the DOD should 
be responsible for managing the program.
    The committee further recommends a reduction of $3.0 
million in the support provided to the riverine operations of 
the Government of Peru.

Airborne Reconnaissance Low

    The committee recognizes the critical need for 
intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance (ISR) assets to 
be deployed to the U.S. Southern Command (SOUTHCOM) in order to 
more effectively combat the illegal trafficking of narcotics. 
In recent testimony before the Senate Armed Services Committee, 
General Wilhelm, Commander-in-Chief of the U.S. Southern 
Command, identified a need for more ISR assets. Unfortunately, 
as a result of requirements in other theaters, and the tragic 
accident in Colombia last year, there are insufficient 
quantities of ISR assets to always meet SOUTHCOM's 
requirements. In recent letters to the committee, General 
Shinseki, Chief of Staff of the U.S. Army, and General Shelton, 
Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, identified a requirement 
for an additional Airborne Reconnaissance Low aircraft that was 
not included in the fiscal year 2001 budget request.
    The committee recommends an increase of $31.0 million for 
the procurement of an Airborne Reconnaissance Low aircraft to 
be used in the Department's counter-drug mission.

National Guard counter-drug activities

    The committee understands the valuable contribution of the 
National Guard in the war on drugs. Therefore, the committee 
recommends an increase of $25.0 million for the counter-drug 
activities of the National Guard including the regional 
counter- drug operations such as the Gulf States Counter-Drug 
Initiative, the Regional Counter-Drug Training Academy, and the 
Northeast Counter-Drug Training Center.

Plan Colombia & Forward Operating Location construction

    The committee recommends a decrease of $40.0 million to the 
fiscal year 2001 budget request for Plan Colombia to reflect 
the fact that these funds were provided through the counter-
drug budget supplemental in fiscal year 2000. The adjustment 
for the supplemental appropriation for the Forward Operating 
Location construction is reflected in Division B of this 
report.

Drug Enforcement Agency transportation support

    The committee is concerned with the Drug Enforcement 
Agency's (DEA) reliance on the DOD to transport DEA personnel 
around the Caribbean. Transportation of DEA personnel does not 
enhance military capabilities or require unique military 
assets, is the responsibility of the DEA, and should be funded 
through the DEA budget. The DOD budget request includes $3.4 
million for such transportation services. The committee 
recommends a decrease of $1.4 million to the budget request for 
this activity. The committee expects the DEA to assume all 
costs for this activity after fiscal year 2001.

Caribbean law enforcement support

    The committee is concerned with the increased reliance upon 
the DOD to provide assistance to foreign law enforcement 
agencies where the Department has limited, or no mission 
responsibility. The budget request includes $6.7 million for 
assistance to law enforcement agencies of Caribbean nations. 
The committee recommends a decrease of $2.7 million to the 
request for this activity. The committee expects the State 
Department to provide the support for this activity in the 
future.

                      SUBTITLE C--STRATEGIC FORCES


Revised nuclear posture review (sec. 1015)

    Six years have passed since the nuclear posture review of 
fiscal year 1994. The committee believes that a new nuclear 
posture review is overdue and should be completed in the near 
future. Although Presidential Decision Directive 60, signed in 
November 1997, reaffirmed and updated U.S. nuclear weapons 
employment policy guidance, there has not been an end-to-end 
review of U.S. nuclear weapons strategy, requirements, and 
posture since fiscal year 1994.
    The committee recommends a provision that would require the 
Secretary of Defense, in consultation with the Secretary of 
Energy, to conduct a comprehensive nuclear posture review that 
looks out five to ten years. The review would include: (1) the 
role of nuclear forces in United States military strategy, 
planning, and programming; (2) the policy requirements and 
objectives for the United States to maintain a safe, reliable 
and credible nuclear deterrence posture; (3) the relationship 
between U.S. nuclear deterrence policy, targeting strategy, and 
arms control objectives; (4) the levels and composition of 
nuclear delivery systems that will be required to implement the 
U.S. national and military strategy, including any plans to 
replace or modify existing systems; (5) the nuclear weapons 
complex that will be required to implement U.S. national and 
military strategy, including any plans to modernize or modify 
the complex; and (6) the active and inactive nuclear weapons 
stockpile that will be required to implement U.S. national and 
militarystrategy, including any plans for replacing or 
modifying warheads. The provision would also require that, concurrently 
with the Quadrennial Defense Review due in December 2001, the Secretary 
of Defense shall submit to Congress a report, in unclassified and 
classified forms as necessary, on the nuclear posture review. Finally, 
the provision expresses the sense of Congress that a revised nuclear 
posture review should be used as the basis for establishing future arms 
control objectives and negotiating positions.

Plan for the long-term sustainment and modernization of United States 
        strategic nuclear forces (sec. 1016)

    The committee recommends a provision that would require the 
Secretary of Defense, in consultation with the Secretary of 
Energy, to prepare a plan for the long-term sustainment and 
modernization of U.S. strategic forces. The committee expects 
that the plan would look beyond current efforts to modernize 
existing systems and lay out a comprehensive vision for the 
maintenance of deterrent forces.
    The committee is concerned that the Department of Defense 
and the Department of Energy may not be adequately planning for 
United States strategic nuclear forces in the long term. The 
committee supports current efforts to provide for continued 
sustainment of existing strategic delivery systems and 
warheads, but is concerned that there appears to be no long-
range vision of how the United States should preserve strategic 
deterrent forces. The committee believes that the United States 
will require such forces beyond the date when existing systems 
become obsolete.

Correction of scope of waiver authority for limitation on retirement or 
        dismantlement of strategic nuclear delivery vehicles (sec. 
        1017)

    Section 1501 of the National Defense Authorization Act for 
Fiscal Year 2000 revised the limitation on retirement or 
dismantlement of strategic nuclear delivery vehicles contained 
in the National Defense Authorization Act of Fiscal Year 1998 
by permitting the Navy to retire (or otherwise eliminate from 
strategic nuclear operational status) four of its eighteen 
Trident ballistic missile submarines. The provision also 
includes a waiver authority that the President can exercise if 
the START II treaty enters into force. As drafted, however, the 
waiver only applies to the retirement of submarines. Therefore, 
the committee recommends a provision that would revise the 
scope of the section 1501 waiver so that it applies to all of 
the strategic nuclear delivery vehicles covered by section 
1501.

Study and report on hardened and deeply buried targets (sec. 1018)

    The committee recommends a provision that would require the 
Secretaries of Defense and Energy to assess requirements and 
options for defeating hardened and deeply buried targets. The 
provision would expressly authorize the Department of Energy 
(DOE) to conduct any limited research and development that may 
be necessary to complete such assessments.
    The committee notes that a recent legal interpretation of 
existing law raised questions regarding whether DOE could 
participate in or otherwise support certain Department of 
Defense (DOD) studies and options assessments for defeating 
hardened and deeply buried targets. This provision removes any 
uncertainty and expressly allows DOE to assist the DOD with a 
review of these targets and the options for defeating such 
targets. The committee believes that DOE should provide 
information and all other assistance required to help DOD make 
informed decisions on whether: (1) to proceed with a new method 
of defeating hardened and deeply buried targets and; (2) to 
seek any necessary modifications to existing law.
    The committee is concerned that the ability to defeat 
hardened and deeply buried targets will continue to be a 
significant challenge for the foreseeable future.

            SUBTITLE D--MISCELLANEOUS REPORTING REQUIREMENTS


Annual report of the chairman of the joint chiefs of staff on combatant 
        command requirements (sec. 1021)

    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 153(d)(1) to require the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs 
to include within his report to Congress on the readiness 
requirements of the combatant commanders, information on the 
extent to which those requirements are addressed in the future 
years defense program.

Joint Requirements Oversight Council (sec. 1022)

    The Joint Requirements Oversight Council (JROC) was formed 
by the Department of Defense (DOD) after enactment of the 
Goldwater-Nichols Defense Reorganization Act of 1986. At the 
request of DOD, title 10, U.S. Code was amended by the National 
Defense Authorization Act of 1996 (Public Law 105-85) to 
establish a legal requirement for the JROC (title 10, U.S. 
Code, 181). The JROC was formed to assist the Chairman, Joint 
Chiefsof Staff (CJCS), in carrying out his title 10 
responsibilities to provide the best possible advice to the Secretary 
on the degree to which defense budget proposals conform to requirements 
expressed by the combatant commanders, and to ensure that joint war 
fighting capabilities and joint interoperability issues were 
highlighted to the Secretary as he prepared his defense budget 
guidance. Accordingly, the JROC became a mechanism for forging 
consensus among the services on programming and budgeting issues.
    While the JROC has made progress in promoting joint 
interoperability, much remains to be done. In recent years, the 
JROC has been increasingly involved in solving short-term 
unified commander requirements. At an April 4, 2000 Emerging 
Threats and Capabilities Subcommittee hearing on joint 
requirements, capabilities, and experimentation, General 
Richard B. Myers, USAF, the Vice Chairman, Joint Chiefs of 
Staff, testified that the JROC must evolve further, shifting 
its focus to more strategic, future advanced war fighting 
requirements. To implement required changes in the JROC, the 
CJCS, with the support of the service chiefs and the combatant 
commanders has proposed an initiative, which includes: (1) 
shifting the primary focus of the JROC to more strategic 
issues; (2) integrating joint experimentation activities fully 
into the requirements, capabilities, and acquisition processes; 
and (3) shifting the focus of the Joint War Fighting Capability 
Assessment Teams from short-term, narrow issues to directly 
supporting the JROC in analyzing broader, future joint war 
fighting requirements.
    The committee is encouraged by this initiative and will 
follow it closely. However, the committee is troubled to hear 
concerns from combatant commanders about continuing 
deficiencies in joint military capabilities. A JROC process 
that recommends solutions to the most critical joint war 
fighting challenges at the strategic and operational levels 
could play a critical role in solving many of these problems.
    In order to monitor developments in this area, the 
committee directs the CJCS to submit a report to the 
congressional defense committees, by February 28, 2001, and 
semi-annually thereafter, detailing the progress made in 
reforming and re-focusing the Joint Requirements Oversight 
Council process. The report must include, but not necessarily 
be limited to, the following: (1) a listing and justification 
for each of the distinct capability areas selected by the CJCS 
as the principal domain of the JROC; (2) a listing of joint 
requirements developed, considered, and/or approved within each 
of those capability areas; (3) a listing and explanation of 
decisions made by the JROC during the reporting period, with 
special note of actions made that were in disagreement with the 
position presented by the Commander-in- Chief, U.S. Joint 
Forces Command, as the chief proponent of joint and combatant 
commander requirements; (4) an assessment of the progress made 
in elevating the JROC to a more strategic focus on future war 
fighting requirements, integration of requirements, and the 
development of over-arching common architectures; (5) a 
summation and assessment of the role and impact of joint 
experimentation on the joint requirements, service 
requirements, defense acquisition and service acquisition 
processes and decisions; (6) recommendations as to additional 
legislation and/or resources required to further refocus and 
reform the JROC process; and (7) procedural actions taken to 
improve the JROC.

Preparedness of military installation first responders for incidents 
        involving weapons of mass destruction (sec. 1023)

    The committee is supportive of the Department of Defense's 
(DOD) efforts to ensure first responder preparedness on 
military installations. However, the committee is concerned 
with the timetable for the program and also with the degree of 
coordination between the services and the local community first 
responders, particularly with regards to standardized 
equipment. The committee has included a provision directing, 
not less than 90 days after the date of enactment of this act, 
the Secretary of Defense to submit to the committee a report on 
the Department's program to ensure the preparedness of DOD 
first responders for incidents involving weapons of mass 
destruction on military installations. The provision directs 
the Secretary to include within the report the following: a 
detailed description of the program; the schedule and costs 
associated with the implementation of the program; how the 
program is being coordinated with first responders in the local 
communities in the localities of the installations; and the 
plan for promoting the interoperability of the equipment used 
by the installation first responders with the equipment used by 
the first responders in the localities.

Date of submittal of reports on shortfalls in equipment procurement and 
        military construction for reserve components in future years 
        defense programs (sec. 1024)

    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 10543(c) of title 10, United States Code, to specify 
that the report required by the section be submitted not later 
than 15 days after the date on which the President submits to 
Congress the budget for a fiscal year.
    The committee is aware that the current level of funding 
for the reserve components will not reduce the significant 
backlog in military construction requirements. The impact will 
be increased costs for repair and maintenance, declining 
readiness and quality of life. The backlog problem is further 
aggravated by the lack of a uniform standard in characterizing 
the funding requirements. For the past several years, the Air 
Force has characterized somereserve component military 
construction projects as being in the ``unfunded'' future years defense 
program (FYDP), while the other components have resorted to other means 
to identify their requirements above those in the FYDP. However, the 
reporting requirement in section 10543 requires the Department of 
Defense to identify the highest priority unfunded requirements for the 
reserve components. It does not equate those unfunded requirements to 
an ``unfunded FYDP''. The committee expects the military departments to 
adhere to the traditional practices of classifying projects as either 
in the FYDP or not in the FYDP and of inclusion of the highest priority 
projects in the FYDP. To ensure consistency and that the highest 
priority construction projects, both unfunded and those in the FYDP, 
receive appropriate congressional consideration for additional funds, 
when available, the report required by section 10543(c)(1) shall 
reflect the highest priority projects whether or not they are included 
in the FYDP.
    The committee is encouraged by the efforts of the Assistant 
Secretary of Defense for Reserve Affairs to increase funding 
and improve facilities for the reserve components through 
innovative approaches, such as joint use facilities. However, 
the ultimate solution is additional funding. The committee 
urges the military departments to more robustly fund reserve 
component construction in future budget requests and the future 
year defense program.
    To ensure the funding resources available are devoted to 
the highest priority needs, the committee stringently follows 
the criteria established by the sense of the Senate provision 
on authorization of funds for military construction projects 
not requested in the President's Annual Budget Request (section 
2856 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 
1995). The committee urges the military departments to 
cooperate in this effort by adhering to this clear standard 
when identifying military construction projects for 
authorization that are not in the military construction budget 
request.

Management review of defense logistics agency (sec. 1025)

    The committee recommends a provision that would require the 
Comptroller General of the United States to conduct a review of 
all the functions of the Defense Logistics Agency to assess 
their efficiency, their effectiveness in meeting customer 
needs, their ability to adopt best business practices, and to 
identify alternative approaches for improving the agency's 
operations.
    An effective, efficient, and responsive logistics system is 
essential for ensuring a ready and reliable military force 
capable of successfully executing the national military 
strategy with a minimum of risk. The committee believes that 
the Defense Logistics Agency must be capable of meeting its 
customer requirements in the most efficient manner, exploiting 
best business practices where practical, and exploring 
alternative approaches when they make sense.

Management review of defense information systems agency (sec. 1026)

    The Committee recommends a provision that would require the 
Comptroller General of the United States to conduct a 
comprehensive review of the operations of the Defense 
Information Systems Agency (DISA) and make such recommendations 
that the Comptroller General determines would improve the 
support that this agency provides to the military services.
    The increased role that information technology and services 
play in the national security environment requires that the 
military services receive the most efficient and effective 
support from those who provide these services. DISA, as the 
principal supplier of information services in the Department of 
Defense, must ensure that it is structured to take advantage of 
best business practices and to adopt alternative approaches 
where it makes sense.

                    SUBTITLE E--INFORMATION SECURITY


Institute for defense computer security and information protection 
        (sec. 1041)

    The committee recommends a provision that would require the 
Secretary of Defense to establish an institute for defense 
computer security and information assurance to address the 
critical information assurance requirement of the Department of 
Defense (DOD). The institute would also facilitate the exchange 
of information regarding cyber threats, technology, tools, and 
other relevant issues, between government and non-government 
organizations and entities. The provision would require the 
Secretary to enter into a contract with a not-for-profit entity 
or consortium to organize and operate the institute. Finally, 
the provision would require the use of competitive procedures 
for the selection of the organization responsible for the 
operation of the institute, to the extent determined necessary 
by the Secretary. The committee recommends an increase of $10.0 
million in Operations and Maintenance, Defense-Wide, for 
establishment and initial operation of the institute.
    The committee strongly supports the information assurance 
efforts of the DOD. A critical element of this effort is 
research and development in the area of information and network 
security. Although the DOD currently undertakes such research 
in various ways, including through private contractors, 
federally funded research and development centers and 
universities, the DODdoes not have a central mechanism for 
coordinating these efforts. Currently a significant amount of research 
relevant to DOD is not being undertaken in the private sector or within 
government. Moreover, some research being done in the private sector is 
not available to the DOD.

Information security scholarship program (sec. 1042)

    The committee recommends a provision that would establish 
an Information Security Scholarship Program within the 
Department of Defense (DOD) that would allow the Secretary of 
Defense to provide educational assistance to individuals 
seeking a baccalaureate or an advanced degree in disciplines 
related to computer security, network security, and information 
assurance in exchange for a service agreement. This program 
would allow active duty military personnel, DOD civilian 
personnel, and individuals not employed by the DOD to acquire 
such education in exchange for accepting or continuing 
employment in the DOD in the area of computer security and 
information assurance. The committee has received extensive 
testimony and other reports regarding the importance of 
education and training to the defense information assurance 
program and all other facets of cyber security.
    The committee notes that Presidential Decision Directive/
NSC-63, of May 22, 1998, regarding critical infrastructure 
protection, states that: ``. . . there shall be Vulnerability 
Awareness and Education Programs within both the government and 
the private sector to sensitize people regarding the importance 
of security and to train them in security standards, 
particularly regarding cyber systems.'' The National Plan for 
Information Systems Protection of January 12, 2000, states 
that: ``. . . within the Federal Government, the lack of 
skilled information systems security personnel amounts to a 
crisis. This shortfall of workers reflects a scarcity of 
university graduate and undergraduate information security 
programs.'' The National Plan calls for the creation of ``. . . 
a Scholarship for Service Program to recruit and educate the 
next generation of Federal information technology workers and 
security managers.'' According to the National Plan: ``. . . an 
important part of this program is the need to identify 
universities for participation in the program and assist in the 
development of information security faculty and laboratories at 
these universities.''
    The committee believes that the Secretary of Defense should 
work with selected universities to develop cyber security 
curricula that respond to the needs of the DOD. The committee 
believes that, initially, the Secretary should focus on 
establishing cyber security programs at two or three 
institutions of higher education. Such universities should 
become important sources of recruitment for satisfying the 
Department's information assurance personnel requirements. 
Although the committee believes that all qualified universities 
should be evaluated, it also believes that the universities 
already identified by the National Security Agency as 
information assurance centers of excellence should be leading 
candidates for involvement in the Information Security 
Scholarship Program. In order for universities to develop the 
requisite curricula and faculty, the DOD should also involve 
such universities in research relevant to the Department's 
information assurance needs. Once the Information Security 
Scholarship Program has been established at two or three 
institutions of higher education, the committee urges the 
Secretary to expand and adequately fund the program to satisfy 
the personnel needs of the DOD.
    The committee recommends an increase of $20.0 million in 
Operations and Maintenance, Defense-Wide, for establishment and 
initial operation of the Information Security Scholarship 
Program. The committee directs the Secretary of Defense to 
provide a report to the congressional defense committees not 
later than April 1, 2001, describing the Secretary's plans for 
implementing this program.
    The committee is also concerned that existing military and 
civilian education and training programs of the DOD and the 
military departments are not sufficiently focused on the 
problem of computer security and information assurance. 
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense to 
review the education and training programs of the defense 
agencies and the military departments to determine the 
requirements for personnel qualified in the area of information 
technology security and what education and training programs 
are available in the area of information technology security. 
In addition to the review of programs for enlisted and officer 
personnel, this examination should include a review of the 
Reserve Officers Training Corps scholarship program in each 
service to determine whether scholarships leading to degrees in 
the information technology security area are sufficient to meet 
the projected officer needs of the military departments and the 
Department of Defense. The review shall include education and 
training programs, including internships, for civilian 
employees as well. Finally, the review shall evaluate the 
adequacy of cyber security programs at the military service 
academies. The Secretary of Defense shall report the results of 
his review to the congressional defense committees by April 1, 
2001, in conjunction with the Secretary's report on the 
Information Security Scholarship Program.

Process for prioritizing background investigations for security 
        clearances for Department of Defense personnel (sec. 1043)

    The committee is concerned by delays in the background 
investigation process for granting security clearances to 
Department of Defense (DOD) personnel and contractors. The 
Defense Security Service (DSS) has experienced significant 
delays in processing requests for security investigations, 
which has resulted in a large backlog of overdue 
reinvestigations. This situation has imposed significant costs 
on DOD and its contractors and has delayed important programs. 
The committee supports the recommendations of the DOD Inspector 
General, outlined in the April 5, 2000, audit report (Report 
Number D-2000-111), which recommends that DOD implement a 
process for prioritizing security clearance investigations as a 
way of expediting the most important clearances. Therefore, the 
committee recommends a provision that would require the 
Secretary of Defense to establish a process for expediting the 
completion of background investigations. This process shall 
include: (1) quantification of the requirements for background 
investigations; (2) categorization of personnel on the basis of 
the degree of sensitivity of their duties and the extent to 
which those duties are critical to the national security; and 
(3) prioritization of the processing of investigations on the 
basis of the categories of personnel.

Authority to withhold certain sensitive information from public 
        disclosure (sec. 1044)

    The committee recommends a provision that would protect 
from unauthorized disclosure two categories of sensitive 
unclassified information. Many allied and other friendly 
nations, and some international organizations, have a category 
of unclassified information that is subject to certain special 
controls and protected from release outside the government or 
organization. In addition, many governments have a category of 
classified information, ``restricted'', that is not used by the 
United States. ``Restricted'' information is normally provided 
at a level of protection less than that protection afforded to 
``confidential'' in the U.S. classification system.
    Information falling into one of these categories is 
frequently provided to the United States by foreign governments 
or international organizations under the condition that it be 
protected from unauthorized release. Under the present U.S. 
system, the only way that the United States can do so is to 
classify the information in the interests of national security 
under Executive Order 12958. This requires that the security 
requirements for classified information apply, including 
security clearances, safes, and precautions in transmission. 
This situation frequently imposes unnecessary costs and has 
caused problems for cooperative defense programs.
    This provision would authorize the Secretary of Defense, 
the Secretary of Transportation (with respect to the Coast 
Guard when not operating in the Navy), and the Secretary of 
Energy (with respect to that Department's national security 
programs) to withhold from public disclosure otherwise 
authorized by law sensitive information provided by a foreign 
government or an international organization which is itself 
protecting the information from disclosure. The information 
must be the subject of a written request from the government or 
organization that it be withheld, or have been provided on the 
condition that it be withheld, or fall within a category 
specified in regulations as being information the release of 
which would have an adverse effect on the ability of the United 
States to obtain similar information in the future. If the 
secretary of the department having the information transfers it 
to another agency, that agency shall withhold it from 
disclosure unless specifically authorized by the secretary of 
the department transferring it. The prohibition on disclosure 
will normally extend for the period specified by the country or 
organization providing the information, or for ten years if no 
period is so stated. The ten-year rule may be extended at the 
written request of the entity providing the information, as may 
the 25-year period applicable to certain information obtained 
by the United States prior to the enactment of this provision.
    This provision does not authorize the withholding of 
information from Congress, or (except in the case of foreign 
intelligence or counterintelligence activities) the Comptroller 
General. The Secretary of Defense, the Secretary of 
Transportation, and the Secretary of Energy are to prescribe 
regulations to carry out this provision.

Protection of operational files of the Defense Intelligence Agency 
        (sec. 1045)

    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
the Secretary of Defense to withhold from public disclosure the 
operational files of the Defense Intelligence Agency. These 
files would be protected from disclosure, under the Freedom of 
Information Act or otherwise, to the same extent as provided 
for under section 701 of the National Security Act of 1947 (50 
U.S.C 431). The provision also makes applicable to these files 
the decennial review provisions of section 702 of that Act (50 
U.S.C. 432), with the Secretary of Defense exercising the 
authority granted to the Director of Central Intelligence in 
that section.

                       SUBTITLE F--OTHER MATTERS


Commemoration of the fiftieth anniversary of the Uniform Code of 
        Military Justice (sec. 1051)

    The committee recommends a provision that would request the 
President to issue a proclamation commemorating the fiftieth 
anniversary of the Uniform Code of Military Justice, which was 
enacted May 5, 1950, and call upon the Department of Defense, 
the armed forces, and the United States Court of Appeals for 
the Armed Forces to commemorate the occasion in a suitable 
manner.

Eligibility of dependents of American Red Cross employees for 
        enrollment in Department of Defense Domestic Dependent Schools 
        in Puerto Rico (sec. 1053)

    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
the Secretary of Defense to permit dependents of American Red 
Cross employees performing Armed Forces Emergency Services 
duties in Puerto Rico to enroll in Department of Defense 
Domestic Dependent Schools. The recommended provision would 
require that the Department of Defense be reimbursed for the 
education services.

Grants to American Red Cross for Armed Services Emergency Services 
        (sec. 1054)

    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
the Secretary of Defense to provide a grant to the American Red 
Cross up to $9,400,000 in each of fiscal years 2001, 2002, and 
2003 in support of the American Red Cross. The recommended 
provision would provide that a grant may not be made until the 
American Red Cross certifies that it will expend, for the Armed 
Forces Emergency Services, an amount from non-federal sources 
that equals or exceeds the amount of the grant.

Transit pass program for certain Department of Defense personnel (sec. 
        1055)

    The committee recommends a provision that would require the 
Secretary of Defense to provide Department of Defense personnel 
with a transit pass benefit if they are assigned in areas that 
do not meet the revised national ambient air quality standards 
under section 109 of the Clean Air Act and they use means other 
than a single-occupancy vehicle to commute to or from work.

Fees for providing historical information to the public (sec. 1056)

    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
the secretaries of the military departments to charge the 
public fees for providing historical information from the 
services' historical centers or agencies. These fees could be 
retained by the military departments to defray the costs of 
responding to requests for information. The fees charged for 
providing information pursuant to this section may not exceed 
the costs of providing the information. These fees would not 
apply to requests from members of the armed forces or federal 
employees which are made in the course of their official 
duties, or to requests made under the Freedom of Information 
Act (5 U.S.C. 552).

Access to criminal history record information for national security 
        purposes (sec. 1057)

    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 9101 of title 5, United States Code, to provide 
expanded access to criminal history information by the 
Department of Defense and certain other executive departments 
and agencies to better evaluate employees and contractors with 
regard to fitness for assignment or employment. Current law 
provides access to such information only for security 
clearances or assignment to sensitive national security duties. 
This provision would expand that authority to cover also 
acceptance or retention in the armed forces, and appointment, 
retention, or assignment to a position of public trust or a 
critical or sensitive position either while employed by the 
Federal Government or as a federal contractor employee. This 
provision would also authorize the Federal Government to obtain 
such information through the use of common identifiers, such as 
names or Social Security numbers, rather than the cumbersome 
submission of paper fingerprint cards, as required under 
existing law. It would further prohibit states and localities 
from conditioning the provision of such information on 
indemnification agreements, thereby clearing up a problem that 
has existed since 1989, when the Defense Department's authority 
to enter into such agreements expired. Finally, it would allow 
access to such information by the most efficient, 
technologically-advanced means, from any point within or 
without a particular state or other jurisdiction, and provide 
for the payment of reasonable fees therefor.

Sense of Congress on the naming of the CVN-77 aircraft carrier. (sec. 
        1058)

    The committee recommends a provision that would express the 
sense of Congress that it is appropriate to recommend to the 
President, as Commander in Chief of the armed forces, that 
anappropriate name for the final Nimitz-class aircraft carrier, CVN-77, 
is the U.S.S. Lexington.
    The provision also expresses the sense of Congress that 
CVN-77 should be named U.S.S. Lexington in order to honor the 
16 million veterans of the armed forces that served during 
World War II, and the incalculable number of U.S. citizens on 
the home front during that war, who mobilized in the name of 
freedom, and who are today respectfully referred to as the 
greatest generation.

Donation of civil war cannon (sec. 1059)

    The committee recommends a provision that would convey all 
right, title and interest of the United States to a Civil War 
era cannon to the Edward Dorr Tracey, Jr. Camp 18 of the Sons 
of the Confederate Veterans. This cannon was manufactured by 
the Confederate States Arsenal at Macon, Georgia. The cannon, 
on loan from the Army, is currently on public display in Macon, 
Georgia.

Maximum size of parcel posts transported overseas for Armed Forces Post 
        Offices (sec. 1060)

    The committee recommends a provision that would increase 
the authorized size of packages permitted to be mailed to 
eligible patrons of military post offices overseas to conform 
with those of the United States Postal Services.

                        OTHER ITEMS OF INTEREST


Department of Defense export control procedures

    The committee is encouraged by the Department of Defense's 
focus on improving the performance of its export control 
responsibilities and supports efforts to increase the 
effectiveness and efficiency of the defense export licensing 
system. National security concerns must always remain paramount 
over commercial concerns in this area. At the same time, where 
appropriate, the United States should not place unnecessary 
restraints on the ability of the private sector to compete in 
the global marketplace.
    The Defense Department has undertaken an internal review of 
its practices for processing and scrutinizing export licence 
applications with an aim toward reducing the time it takes to 
review licences. The committee supports this effort and 
encourages the Department to work with the State Department to 
achieve a system that protects national security, and at the 
same time does not unnecessarily penalize U.S. industry.
    The committee also supports the Department's efforts to 
modernize computer systems for licensing agencies. This 
computer modernization is important to ensure that the Defense 
Threat Reduction Agency and the State Department's Office of 
Defense Trade Controls can move, over time, to an all-
electronic system. This effort will provide more efficient and 
comprehensive review of the national security impact of 
proposed export transactions while providing exporters with a 
more transparent and timely process.

Firefighting equipment

    An important element of the chemical weapons 
demilitarization program is ensuring that the local cities and 
towns within the vicinity of destruction facilities receive the 
necessary education, training, and equipment to ensure 
community safety in the unlikely event of an accident during 
the destruction process. The Department of the Army has 
equipped the Umatilla Army Chemical Depot with firefighting 
vehicles, including an Emergency One Cyclone II Custom Pumper, 
for this purpose. To ensure the Umatilla community has 
continued and unhindered access to the Emergency One Cyclone II 
Custom Pumper, the Department of the Army is working with the 
Confederated Tribes of the Umatilla Indian Reservation to 
convey the firefighting vehicle to the community. The committee 
supports this initiative and urges the Department of the Army 
to transfer the vehicle to the Confederated Tribes of the 
Umatilla Indian Tribes as soon as possible.

Peacekeeper intercontinental ballistic missile

    Section 1302 of the National Defense Authorization Act for 
Fiscal Year 1998, as amended by section 1501 of the National 
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2000, prohibits the 
use of funds for retiring or dismantling, or preparing to 
retire or dismantle specified strategic nuclear delivery 
systems, including the Peacekeeper intercontinental ballistic 
missile, until the START II Treaty enters into force. Although 
the START II Treaty has been approved by the Russian Duma, it 
has not yet entered into force. Nevertheless, the committee 
recognizes that the Air Force must take certain steps to be in 
a position to be able to retire the Peacekeeper system if the 
START II Treaty, and associated protocols, enter into force. 
Specifically, the committee understands that the Air Force 
would need to acquire warhead containers and missile stage 
storage end rings in the near future if the Air Force is to 
retain the ability to deactivate the Peacekeeper weapon system 
by December 31, 2003, and eliminate the associated silos by 
December 31, 2007. Since the committee has long supported entry 
into force of the START II Treaty, the committee believes that 
the acquisition of such equipment is consistent with the 
current prohibition on preparing to retire or dismantle the 
Peacekeeper weapon system. Therefore, funds available to the 
Air Force from within existing appropriations are authorized to 
be utilized for the acquisition of Peacekeeper warhead 
containers and missile stage storage end rings.
       TITLE XI--DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE CIVILIAN PERSONNEL POLICY

Computer/electronic accommodations program (sec. 1101)
    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
the Secretary of Defense to expand the Computer/Electronic 
Accommodations Program to provide assistive technology, 
assistive technology devices, and assistive technology services 
to any department or agency of the Federal Government. The 
recommended provision limits the cost of the assistance 
provided to not more than $2.0 million in any fiscal year.
Additional special pay for foreign language proficiency beneficial for 
        United States national security interests (sec. 1102)
    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
the Secretary of Defense to provide additional pay for civilian 
employees who maintain a foreign language proficiency 
determined to be beneficial for national security interests.
Increased number of positions authorized for the defense intelligence 
        senior executive service (sec. 1103)
    The committee recommends a provision that would increase, 
by 25, the number of positions authorized for the defense 
intelligence senior executive service. The committee is 
concerned by recent reports that the National Imagery and 
Mapping Agency (NIMA) and the National Security Agency (NSA) 
are experiencing significant problems in the area of 
acquisition and acquisition oversight. Both agencies are 
seeking to strengthen their acquisition management and need to 
be able to attract skilled people. The committee expects that 
the recommended provision would help NIMA and NSA attract such 
individuals. The committee directs that the additional 25 
positions established by the provision would be used by NIMA 
and NSA only to address acquisition-related deficiencies.
Extension of authority for tuition reimbursement and training for 
        acquisition personnel in shortage categories (sec. 1104)
    The committee recommends a provision that would extend the 
termination date of the authority for tuition reimbursement and 
training for acquisition personnel in shortage categories from 
September 30, 2001 to September 30, 2010.
Work safety demonstration program (sec. 1105)
    The committee recommends a provision that would direct the 
Secretary of Defense to conduct a work safety demonstration 
program in which private sector work safety models would be 
used to determine whether the work safety record of Department 
of Defense civilian employees can be improved. The 
demonstration program would begin within 180 days of enactment 
of the Act and end on September 30, 2002. The Secretary of 
Defense would be required to submit an interim report not later 
than December 1, 2001 and a final report not later than 
December 1, 2002, to the Committees on Armed Services of the 
Senate and the House of Representatives.
Employment and compensation of employees for temporary organizations 
        established by law or executive order (sec. 1106)
    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
the heads of federal agencies the flexibility to hire and pay 
individuals under a streamlined process to work in temporary 
organizations, commissions, boards, etc. that have been 
established for a period not to exceed three years. The 
recommended provision would permit federal agencies to hire 
temporary employees in a timely manner so they can meet the 
deadlines imposed by the President or Congress. The recommended 
provision would permit the temporary employees to receive life 
and health insurance benefits for the duration of their 
employment. Employees transferred to a temporary position from 
a career civil service position would have return rights to 
their former positions at the end of their employment with the 
temporary organization.
Extension of authority for voluntary separations in reductions in force 
        (sec. 1107)
    The committee recommends a provision that would extend, 
from September 30, 2001 to September 30, 2005, the temporary 
authority that would permit civilian employees to volunteer for 
reductions-in-force.
Electronic maintenance of performance appraisal systems (sec. 1108)
    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
the head of an executive branch agency to administer and 
maintain the performance appraisal system electronically.

Approval authority for cash awards in excess of $10,000 (sec. 1109)

    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
the Secretary of Defense to grant a cash award up to the 
maximum of $25,000 without seeking approval from the Office of 
Personnel Management.

Leave for crews of certain vessels (sec. 1110)

    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
the Military Sealift Command to pay civil service mariners, in 
an extended leave status, a lump-sum equal to the difference 
between their pay at a temporary promotion rate and their lower 
permanent grade rates.

Life insurance for emergency essential Department of Defense employees 
        (sec. 1111)

    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
civilian employees designated by the Secretary of Defense as 
emergency essential and subject to being deployed to combat 
areas to elect to participate in the Federal Employees' Group 
Life Insurance program.

Civilian personnel services public-private competition pilot program 
        (sec. 1112)

    The committee recommends a provision that would require the 
Secretary of Defense to establish a public-private competition 
pilot program to assess the extent to which the effectiveness 
and efficiency of providing civilian personnel services could 
be increased by conducting competitions for the performance of 
such services between the public and private sectors. The 
recommended provision would require that the pilot program be 
conducted during the period beginning on October 1, 2000 and 
ending on December 31, 2004. The Secretary of Defense would be 
required to submit, not later than February 1, 2005, a report 
that would assess the value of the pilot program and make 
recommendations for permanent authority to the Committees on 
Armed Services of the Senate and the House of Representatives.

Extension, expansion, and revision of authority for experimental 
        personnel program for scientific and technical personnel (sec. 
        1113)

    The committee recommends a provision to extend, expand, and 
revise the authority for the experimental personnel program for 
scientific and technical personnel established pursuant to 
section 1101 of the Strom Thurmond National Defense 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1999 (Public Law 105-261). 
Section 1101 authorized the Secretary of Defense to appoint up 
to 20 eminent experts in science and engineering to temporary 
employment positions within the Defense Advanced Research 
Projects Agency (DARPA) without regard to existing civil 
service laws concerning appointment and compensation.
    The committee recognizes that DARPA expects to fill all 20 
authorized positions in the near future and would benefit 
greatly from the expansion of the program. The committee is 
also aware that the defense laboratories would benefit from 
similar access to capable scientists and engineers from outside 
the civil service. For these reasons, the provision recommended 
by the committee would increase the number of positions 
authorized for DARPA from 20 to 40 and expand the program to 
the defense laboratories, authorizing an additional 40 
positions for each of the military services and a total of ten 
additional positions for the National Imagery and Mapping 
Agency (NIMA) and National Security Agency (NSA). The provision 
would extend the program for an additional two years and 
clarify that the maximum pay authorized under the provision is 
intended to include locality pay adjustments.
              TITLE XII--MATTERS RELATING TO OTHER NATIONS

Transfers of naval vessels to foreign countries (sec. 1201)
    The committee recommends a provision that would transfer to 
various countries: on a combined lease-sale basis, four Kidd-
class destroyers; on a grant basis, two Thomaston-class dock 
landing ships; on a grant basis, four Garcia-class frigates; on 
a combined lease-sale basis, two Oliver Hazard Perry-class 
frigates; on a grant basis, one Dixie-class destroyer tender; 
on a grant basis, two Knox-class frigates; and, on a combined 
lease-sale basis, two Oliver Hazard Perry-class frigates. 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 2001.
Support of United Nations-sponsored efforts to inspect and monitor 
        Iraqi weapons activities (sec. 1202)
    The committee recommends a provision that extends, for one 
year, the Department of Defense's authority to support United 
Nations (UN)-sponsored inspection and monitoring efforts to 
ensure full Iraqi compliance with its international obligations 
to destroy its weapons of mass destruction and associated 
delivery systems. The committee is troubled by Iraq's long-
standing suspension of UN inspection and monitoring missions, 
and continued defiance of UN Security Council efforts to resume 
weapons inspections. Despite the December 17, 1999 adoption by 
the UN Security Council of Resolution 1284, which established 
the United Nations Monitoring, Verification and Inspection 
Commission (UNMOVIC) as the successor to the United Nations 
Special Commission on Iraq (UNSCOM), Iraq refuses to comply 
with this resolution and allow inspectors to resume operations 
in Iraq. The committee continues to believe that it is 
imperative that inspections of Iraq weapons sites resume as 
soon as possible to ensure Iraqi compliance with the 
disarmament obligations it accepted in 1991 at the end of the 
Persian Gulf conflict.
Repeal of restriction preventing cooperative airlift support through 
        acquisition and cross servicing agreements (sec. 1203)
    The committee recommends a provision to eliminate the 
restriction in section 2350c of title 10, United States Code, 
that allows the Secretary of Defense to enter into military 
airlift agreements with allied countries only under the 
authority of section 2350c. This provision would clear up any 
ambiguity regarding the Secretary's authority to include 
airlift in cross servicing agreements for ``. . . logistics 
support, supplies, and services . . .'' under the authority of 
section 2342, title 10, United States Code.
Western Hemisphere Institute for Professional Education and Training 
        (sec. 1204)
    The U.S. Army School of the Americas has been subjected to 
a great deal of controversy, mainly for the actions of a 
relatively small number of individuals who were graduated from 
the school many years ago. The committee is aware that the 
school's curricula has undergone significant positive changes 
in recent years. The committee believes that there continues to 
be a need for an institution that would provide professional 
education and training for the military, law enforcement and 
civilian (governmental and non-governmental) personnel of the 
Western Hemisphere.
    The committee recommends a provision that would repeal the 
statute authorizing the Army to operate the U.S. Army School of 
the Americas and would authorize the Secretary of Defense to 
operate a Western Hemisphere Institute for Professional 
Education and Training. The institute would be operated for the 
purpose of providing professional education and training to 
military, law enforcement and civilian personnel of the Western 
Hemisphere in areas such as leadership development, counterdrug 
operations, peace support operations, and disaster relief. The 
curricula of the institution would include, at a minimum, eight 
hours of instruction relating to human rights, the rule of law, 
due process, civilian control of the military, and the role of 
the military in a democratic society. There would be a board of 
visitors, including four members of Congress and six members 
from academia, the religious community, and the human rights 
community, to review the institute's curricula and instruction. 
The board would submit an annual report to the Secretary of 
Defense. The selection of foreign personnel to attend the 
institute would be subject to the concurrence of the Secretary 
of State. The Secretary of Defense would submit an annual 
report toCongress detailing the activities of the institute 
during the previous calendar year.

Biannual report on Kosovo peacekeeping (sec. 1205)

    The committee recommends a provision that would require a 
biannual report from the President on the contributions of 
European nations and organizations to the peacekeeping 
operations in Kosovo. Specifically, each report shall include 
detailed information on the commitments and pledges made by the 
European Commission, the member nations of the European Union 
(EU) and the European member nations of the North Atlantic 
Treaty Organization (NATO) for reconstruction assistance in 
Kosovo, humanitarian assistance in Kosovo, the Kosovo 
Consolidated Budget, police (including special police) for the 
United Nations (UN) international police force for Kosovo, and 
military personnel for peacekeeping operations in Kosovo; the 
amount of assistance that has been provided in each category, 
and the number of police and military personnel deployed to 
Kosovo by each such nation or organization. In addition, each 
report shall include a description of the full range of 
commitments and responsibilities undertaken for Kosovo by the 
UN, the EU and the Organization for Security and Cooperation in 
Europe (OSCE), the progress made by each in fulfilling those 
commitments and responsibilities, an assessment of the 
remaining tasks and an anticipated timetable for completing 
those tasks. The first report is to be provided to the relevant 
congressional committees on December 1, 2000.
    The committee is concerned with the slow pace of the civil 
implementation effort in Kosovo and, in particular, with the 
unsatisfactory progress on the part of European nations and 
organizations to provide, in a timely manner, the assistance 
and personnel they have pledged to Kosovo. The committee notes 
that the United States bore the major share of the military 
burden for the air war on behalf of Kosovo; in return, European 
nations agreed to pay the major share of the burdens to secure 
the peace. Although European nations and organizations have 
pledged billions of dollars and thousands of personnel for this 
goal, only a fraction of the assistance has been provided to 
Kosovo. As a result, U.S. troops, and troops of other nations, 
serving in Kosovo are performing non-military missions--such as 
basic police functions--to make up for the shortfalls on the 
civilian side. These are missions for which military personnel 
were not specifically trained and which increase their personal 
risk. The committee believes that more must be done by the 
international organizations that have accepted the 
responsibilities for the civil implementation efforts in 
Kosovo, and by the European nations that have committed to 
provide a major portion of the assistance, to ensure that the 
economic and security infrastructure is put in place in Kosovo 
to avoid an open-ended U.S. military commitment in Kosovo.
    The report required by this provision will provide the 
Congress with the data necessary to evaluate the performance of 
the organizations and nations covered by this provision in 
fulfilling their commitments regarding Kosovo.

Mutual assistance for monitoring test explosions of nuclear devices 
        (sec. 1206)

    The committee recommends a provision that would provide 
authority to the Secretary of Defense to remedy problems that 
may arise with respect to the installation of nuclear test 
explosion monitoring equipment as part of the International 
Monitoring System (IMS) of the Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban 
Treaty or as part of the United States Atomic Energy Detection 
System. Without this provision, the Department of Defense would 
be prohibited from accepting funds directly from an 
international organization to establish, operate, or maintain 
IMS equipment, owned by the U.S. Government, and to maintain 
equipment that is not the property of the U.S. Government.

Consolidated annual report on Cooperative Threat Reduction assistance 
        and activities (sec. 1207)

    The committee recommends a provision that would consolidate 
the information found in several Cooperative Threat Reduction 
reports into one annual report, thereby reducing the number of 
reports the committee receives each year, but maintaining the 
information the committee values. This new, consolidated annual 
report would be due no later than the first Monday in February, 
with the first report due in February 2002.

Limitation on use of funds for construction of a Russian facility for 
        the destruction of chemical weapons (sec. 1208)

    The budget request included $35.0 million for construction 
activities for the Shchuch'ye Chemical Weapons Destruction 
Facility in Russia as part of the Cooperative Threat Reduction 
(CTR) Program. While the committee recommends the requested 
amount, the committee has concerns about the construction of 
this facility. The committee believes that there may be higher 
priority CTR efforts to reduce the threat posed by chemical 
weapons in Russia that will provide a greater security return 
on investment, such as security improvements and maintenance 
for the seven Russian chemical weapons storage sites, 
completion and maintenance of the CTR-funded mobile central 
analytical laboratory, and expansion of the chemical weapons 
production facility destruction efforts at Volgograd and 
Novocheboksark.
    However, after reviewing the administration's concerns 
regarding the threats posed by the nerve agent stockpile at 
Shchuch'ye, the committee recommends a provision that would 
provide conditional authority for the administration to proceed 
with the construction of this facility. Specifically, the 
provision provides that prior to obligating or expending fiscal 
year 2000 funds, or any funds in subsequent fiscal years, the 
Secretary of Defense must provide in writing to both the House 
and Senate Armed Services Committees a certification that: (1) 
the government of the Russian Federation has annually agreed to 
provide at least $25.0 million for the construction support and 
operation of that facility to destroy chemical weapons and for 
the support and maintenance of the facility for that purpose 
for each year of the entire operating life-cycle of the 
facility; (2) the government of the Russian Federation has 
agreed to utilize the facility to destroy the remaining four 
stockpiles of nerve agents located at Kisner, Pochep, 
Leonidovka, and Maradykovsky; (3) the United States has 
obtained multiyear commitments from governments of other 
countries to donate funds for the support of essential social 
infrastructure projects in sufficient amounts to ensure that 
the projects are maintained during the entire operating life-
cycle of the facility; and (4) Russia has agreed to destroy its 
chemical weapons production facilities at Volgograd and 
Novocheboksark.

Limitation on the use of funds for the Elimination of Weapons Grade 
        Plutonium Program (sec. 1209)

    The request included $32.1 million for the Elimination of 
Weapons Grade Plutonium Program as part of the Cooperative 
Threat Reduction (CTR) Program. While the committee supports 
the request, the committee is troubled by the Russian 
Federation's announcement in February 2000 that due to 
increasing costs, Russia wanted to change the approach selected 
for converting its remaining three plutonium producing nuclear 
reactors. Since that time, meetings between the United States 
and Russia have failed to determine the future direction of the 
this program. Because of these circumstances, the committee is 
concerned that the project will be unable to expend its budget 
request during the fiscal year.
    Therefore, the committee recommends a provision prohibiting 
the obligation of more than 50 percent of the funds provided 
for this program until 30 days after the Secretary of Defense 
reports to the committee on an agreement between the U.S. 
Government and the Government of the Russia Federation 
regarding any new option selected for shutting down or 
converting the three Russian plutonium producing reactors. Any 
such agreement should include the new date on which such 
reactors will stop producing weapons grade plutonium and the 
cost sharing arrangement between the United States and Russia 
in undertaking activities under such an agreement.
   TITLE XIII--NAVY ACTIVITIES ON THE ISLAND OF VIEQUES, PUERTO RICO

Navy activities on the island of Vieques, Puerto Rico (secs. 1301-1308)
    The committee remains concerned with the lack of live fire 
access to the Naval training facility on the island of Vieques, 
Puerto Rico, and the resultant negative consequences this has 
for Navy and Marine Corps readiness. In testimony before the 
Senate Armed Services Committee, the Chairman of the Joint 
Chiefs of Staff along with the Chief of Naval Operations and 
the Commandant of the Marine Corps, stated that Vieques 
provides integrated live-fire training ``critical to our 
readiness.'' The Secretary of the Navy also testified that ``* 
* * only by providing this preparation can we fairly ask our 
service members to put their lives at risk.'' The concern of 
these individuals was reinforced by operational commanders, 
including the Commander of the Sixth Fleet of the Navy, who 
stated that the loss of Vieques would ``cost American lives.''
    The committee recognizes and appreciates the sacrifice that 
the people of Vieques and other communities throughout America 
located near military training installations have made over the 
years to ensure that our military personnel are adequately 
prepared before being sent into harm's way. The committee is 
concerned that as a result of the Navy's failure to take those 
actions necessary to develop sound relations with the people of 
Vieques, and the tragic accident which resulted in the death of 
a civilian employee of the Navy, the future of such training is 
in jeopardy.
    Therefore, the committee includes a number of provisions 
that would support the agreement reached between the Department 
of Defense and the Government of Puerto Rico intended to 
restore relations between the people of Vieques and the Navy, 
and provide for the continuation of live fire training on the 
island.
    Specifically, subtitle 13 would authorize the expenditure 
of $40.0 million for infrastructure and other economic projects 
on the island of Vieques, and require the President to conduct 
a referendum on Vieques to determine whether the people of 
Vieques approve or disapprove of the continuation of Naval 
training on the island. The conservation zones on the western 
side of the island, containing seven endangered and threatened 
species, would be transferred to the Secretary of Interior to 
be administered as wildlife refuges.
    If the people of Vieques approve the continuation of live 
fire training, the subtitle would authorize an additional $50.0 
million in economic aid for the island residents.
    If the people of Vieques do not approve the continuation of 
live fire training, the subtitle would require the Navy and 
Marine Corps to cease all training operations on the island of 
Vieques by May 1, 2003; to terminate any operations at 
Roosevelt Roads that are related to the use of training ranges 
on Vieques; and the transfer of all conservation zones on Navy 
property on the eastern side of the island of Vieques, together 
with the live impact area and other Navy property on the 
eastern side of the island, to the Secretary of the Interior 
until such time as the Congress enacts subsequent legislation 
regarding the disposition of that land.
    If the Navy ceases operations on Vieques and reduces its 
presence on Roosevelt Roads, the subtitle would place a 
moratorium on military construction projects at Fort Buchanan, 
Puerto Rico, until such time as it can be determined if the 
active military units at Fort Buchanan can be consolidated on 
Roosevelt Roads with the remaining Naval units. The Comptroller 
General of the United States will be required to conduct a 
review of the continuing requirement for Fort Buchanan and 
provide the congressional defense committees with a report 
outlining his recommendations regarding the potential 
consolidation of active U.S. Army units in Puerto Rico with the 
Navy at Roosevelt Roads.


                            TITLE XXI--ARMY

                                Summary

    The Army requested authorization of $897,938,000 for 
military construction and $1,140,381,000 for family housing for 
fiscal year 2001. The committee recommends authorization of 
$781,079,000 for military construction and $1,176,670,000 for 
family housing for fiscal year 2001.
    The budget request included 10 military construction 
projects which were authorized for appropriation by division B 
of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2000. 
Since these projects required no additional authorization, the 
committee did not authorize $168.5 million based on the prior 
year authorization. The committee also did not authorize $18.0 
million for the renovation of unaccompanied personnel barracks 
at Kwajalein Atoll based on the fact that the majority of the 
beneficiaries were not military personnel.
    The amounts authorized for military construction reflects a 
reduction of $20.5 million based on savings in the foreign 
currency account. The reduction shall not cancel any military 
construction authorized by title XXI of this bill.
Authorized Army construction and land acquisition projects (sec. 2101)
    This section contains the list of authorized Army 
construction projects for fiscal year 2001. 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.
Family housing (sec. 2102)
    This section would authorize new construction and planning 
and design of family housing units for the Army for fiscal year 
2001.
Improvement to military family housing units (sec. 2103)
    This section would authorize improvements to existing 
family housing units for fiscal year 2001.
Authorization of appropriations, Army (sec. 2104)
    This section would authorize specific appropriations for 
each line item contained in the Army's budget for fiscal year 
2001. This section also provides an overall limit on the amount 
the Army may spend on military construction projects.
Modification of authority to carry out certain fiscal year 2000 
        projects (sec. 2105)
    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 2101(a) of the Military Construction Act for Fiscal 
Year 2000 (division B of Public Law 106-65; 113 Stat. 825) to 
reduce the funding authorization for Fort Stewart, Georgia, 
from $71.7 million to $25.7 million due to a technical 
correction. The provision would also strike the funding 
authorization for Fort Riley, Kansas, due to a technical 
correction. The provision would also increase the authorization 
of appropriations for unspecified minor construction from $9.5 
million to $14.6 million and make certain conforming changes.
Modification of authority to carry out certain fiscal year 1999 project 
        (sec. 2106)
    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 2101(a) of the Military Construction Act for Fiscal 
Year 1999 (division B of Public Law 105-261; 112 Stat. 2182) to 
increase the funding authorization of a barracks project at 
Fort Riley, Kansas, from $41.0 million to $44.5 million and the 
Railhead Facility at Fort Hood, Texas, from $32.5 million to 
$45.3 million. The provision would also make certain technical 
corrections.
Modification of authority to carry out fiscal year 1998 project (sec. 
        2107)
    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 2101(a) of the Military Construction Act for Fiscal 
Year 1998 (division B of Public Law 105-85; 111 Stat. 2185) to 
increase the funding authorization of a barracks project at 
Hunter Army Airfield, Fort Stewart, Georgia, from $54.0 million 
to $57.5 million. The provision would also make certain 
technical corrections.
Authority to accept funds for realignment of certain military 
        construction project, Fort Campbell, Kentucky (sec. 2108)
    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
the Secretary of the Army to accept funds from the Federal 
Highway Administration or the State of Kentucky to fund the 
additional costs associated with the realignment of a rail 
connector military construction at Fort Campbell, Kentucky, 
authorized in section 2101(a) of the Military 
ConstructionAuthorization Act for Fiscal Year 1997 (division B of 
Public Law 104-210; 110 Stat. 2763). The provision would authorize the 
Secretary to use the funds received under this authority in addition to 
the funds authorized and appropriated for the rail connector project. 
The provision would also specify that the costs associated with 
realignment include, but are not limited to, redesign costs, additional 
construction costs, additional costs due to construction delays related 
to the realignment, and additional real estate costs.

                        OTHER ITEMS OF INTEREST


Presidio Housing, Golden Gate National Recreation Area, San Francisco, 
        California

    The committee notes that base closures in the San Francisco 
Bay Area have severely reduced the availability of government 
housing for military families and that the lack of housing in 
proximity to the duty stations of service personnel impacts on 
readiness and the quality of life of uniform personnel. The 
committee further notes that the Army and the Presidio Trust 
have reached an interim accord on the use of 22 designated 
housing units at the Presidio through September 2005. Although 
this agreement will mitigate the near-term housing crisis, it 
only postpones a problem that must have a long-term solution. 
The committee directs the Secretary of the Army and the 
Presidio Trust to develop a long-term agreement on the use of 
the 22 units by military families. The agreement should provide 
that the reimbursement for the housing will be no more than the 
basic allowance for housing. The Secretary shall report on the 
status of the negotiations to the Committees on the Armed 
Services of the Senate and the House of Representatives by 
March 15, 2001. The report shall include the issues relating to 
the 22 houses, including the rank and grade of senior occupant 
of each house, the position taken by the Presidio, the cost of 
alternative housing, and the replacement value of the 22 
houses.
                            TITLE XXII--NAVY

                                Summary

    The Navy requested authorization of $753,422,000 for 
military construction and $1,245,460,000 for family housing for 
fiscal year 2001. The committee recommends authorization of 
$817,371,000 for military construction and $1,268,441,000 for 
family housing for fiscal year 2001.
    The amounts authorized for military construction and family 
housing reflect reductions of $3.9 million based on saving in 
the foreign currency account, $5.3 million to be offset by 
prior year unobligated funds. The reductions shall not cancel 
any military construction authorized by title XXII of this 
bill.
Authorized Navy construction and land acquisition projects (sec. 2201)
    This section contains the list of authorized Navy 
construction projects for fiscal year 2001. 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.
Family housing (sec. 2202)
    This section would authorize new construction and planning 
and design of family housing units for the Navy for fiscal year 
2001.
Improvements to military family housing units (sec. 2203)
    This section would authorize improvements to existing units 
of family housing for fiscal year 2001.
Authorization of appropriations, Navy (sec. 2204)
    This section would authorize specific appropriations for 
each line item in the Navy's budget for fiscal year 2001. This 
section also provides an overall limit on the amount the Navy 
may spend on military construction projects.
Correction in authorized use of funds, Marine Corps Combat Development 
        Command, Quantico, Virginia (sec. 2205)
    The committee recommends a provision that would correct the 
authorization of appropriations for fiscal year 1997 military 
construction project at Marine Corps Combat Development 
Command, Quantico, Virginia. The provision would permit the use 
of previously authorized funds to carry out a military 
construction project involving infrastructure development at 
that installation.
                         TITLE XXIII--AIR FORCE

                                Summary

    The Air Force requested authorization of $530,969,000 for 
military construction and $1,049,754,000 for family housing for 
fiscal year 2001. The committee recommends authorization of 
$763,491,000 for military construction and $1,054,572,000 for 
family housing for fiscal year 2001.
    The amounts authorized for military construction and family 
housing reflect reductions of $12.0 million based on savings in 
the foreign currency account and $15.0 million to be offset by 
prior year unobligated funds. The reductions shall not cancel 
any military construction authorized by title XXIII of this 
bill.

Authorized Air Force construction and land acquisition projects (sec. 
        2301)

    This section contains the list of authorized Air Force 
construction projects for fiscal year 2001. 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.

Family housing (sec. 2302)

    This section would authorize new construction and planning 
and design of family housing units for the Air Force for fiscal 
year 2001.

Improvements to military family housing units (sec. 2303)

    This section would authorize improvements to existing units 
of family housing for fiscal year 2001.

Authorization of appropriations, Air Force (sec. 2304)

    This section would authorize specific appropriations for 
each line item in the Air Force's budget for fiscal year 2001. 
This section also would provide an overall limit on the amount 
the Air Force may spend on military construction projects.
                      TITLE XXIV--DEFENSE AGENCIES

                                Summary

    The Defense Agencies requested authorization of 
$784,753,000 for military construction and $44,886,000 for 
family housing for fiscal year 2001. The committee recommends 
authorization of $689,333,000 for military construction and 
$44,886,000 for family housing or fiscal year 2001.
    The committee recommends a reduction of $76.8 million for 
the construction of forward operating locations in Ecuador and 
Curacao/Aruba. The committee takes this action without 
prejudice and is aware that the funds for these military 
construction projects will be funded in a supplemental 
appropriations bill. The amounts authorized for military 
construction and family housing reflect a reduction of $7.1 
million based on savings in the foreign currency account. The 
reduction shall not cancel any military construction authorized 
by title XXIV of this bill.
Authorized Defense Agencies construction and land acquisition projects 
        (sec. 2401)
    This section contains the list of authorized Defense 
Agencies construction projects for fiscal year 2001. 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.
Energy conservation projects (sec. 2402)
    This section would authorize the Secretary of Defense to 
carry out energy conservation projects.
Authorization of appropriations, Defense Agencies (sec. 2403)
    This section would authorize specific appropriations for 
each line item in the Defense Agencies budget for fiscal year 
2001. This section also would provide an overall limit on the 
amount the Defense Agencies may spend on military construction 
projects.

                        OTHER ITEMS OF INTEREST

Certification of requirement for military construction projects, Manta 
        Air Base, Ecuador
    The budget request included $22.7 million for construction 
projects at Manta Air Base, Ecuador. The number of projects and 
funding level is based on the requirement that the facilities 
would support two E-3s, two KC-135s, three P-3s, three ARL, and 
one Senior Scout (C-130) missions and accompanying personnel. 
The committee directs that funds available for construction of 
large aerial surveillance aircraft related facilities at Manta 
Air Base, Ecuador, not be obligated until the Secretary 
ofDefense submits a report directed elsewhere in this bill on the 
demonstration of the Global Hawk HAE UAV in airborne surveillance role 
in the counter-drug effort.
    The committee further directs that the construction of the 
visiting officers quarters and visiting airmen quarters and 
dining facility not be executed until the Secretary of Defense 
certifies that sufficient aircraft are scheduled to operate out 
of the Manta Airfield on a routine basis to ensure the 
construction of these facilities is justified.

Planning and design, Defense Intelligence Agency

    The budget request included $6,786,000 for the planning and 
design for Defense Intelligence Agency. The committee is aware 
of the urgent need to consolidate and relocate the Defense 
Intelligence Agency activities to a more secure location. The 
committee supports the Department of Defense plans for a new 
Defense Intelligence Agency Headquarters and directs the 
Secretary of Defense to expedite the planning and design.
   TITLE XXV--NORTH ATLANTIC TREATY ORGANIZATION SECURITY INVESTMENT 
                                PROGRAM

                                Summary

    The Department of Defense requested authorization of 
$190,000,000 for the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) 
Security Investment Program for fiscal year 2001. The committee 
recommends $190,000,000 for fiscal year 2001.
Authorized NATO construction and land acquisition projects (sec. 2501)
    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 title and the amount of recoupment due to the United 
States for construction previously financed by the United 
States.
Authorization of appropriations, NATO (sec. 2502)
    This section would authorize appropriations of $190,000,000 
for the contribution of the United States to the North Atlantic 
Treaty Organization (NATO) Security Investment Program.
            TITLE XXVI--GUARD AND RESERVE FORCES FACILITIES

                                Summary

    The Department of Defense requested a military construction 
authorization of $221,976,000 for fiscal year 2001 for National 
Guard and Reserve facilities. The committee recommends 
authorization for fiscal year 2001 of $506,696,000 to be 
distributed, as follows:

Army National Guard.....................................    $181,629,000
Air National Guard......................................     161,806,000
Army Reserve............................................      92,497,000
Air Force Reserve.......................................      32,673,000
Naval and Marine Corps Reserve..........................      38,091,000
                    --------------------------------------------------------------
                    ____________________________________________________

    Total...............................................     506,696,000

Authorized Guard and Reserve construction and land acquisition projects 
        (sec. 2601)

    This section would authorize appropriations for military 
construction for the National Guard and Reserve by service 
component for fiscal year 2001. The state list contained in 
this report is intended to be the binding list of the specific 
projects authorized at each location.

                        OTHER ITEMS OF INTEREST


Support for Weapons of Mass Destruction Civil Support Teams

    The committee included $25.0 million in the authorization 
of appropriation for the Army National Guard military 
construction account for the specific purpose of facilitating 
the activation of the Weapons of Mass Destruction Civil Support 
Teams. Although these teams are to be assigned to locations 
that have the facilities to accommodate their needs, the 
committee understands that the Army National Guard has 
identified a requirement of approximately $31.0 million for 
renovation of the facilities to accommodate these teams. The 
committee is aware that the military construction program for 
the reserve components is underfunded and that this requirement 
would place an additional burden on an already constrained Army 
National Guard military construction program. The committee 
recommends this additionalfunding be provided on a one time 
basis and directs the Secretary of the Army to provide a report on the 
expenditure of these funds not later than October 1, 2001.
        TITLE XXVII--EXPIRATION AND EXTENSION OF AUTHORIZATIONS

Expiration of authorizations and amounts required to be specified by 
        law (sec. 2701)
    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, 2003, or the date of enactment of an 
Act authorizing funds for military construction for fiscal year 
2004, whichever is later. This expiration would not apply to 
authorizations for which appropriated funds have been obligated 
before October 1, 2003, or the date of enactment of an Act 
authorizing funds for these projects, whichever is later.
Extensions of authorizations of certain fiscal year 1998 projects (sec. 
        2702)
    This section would provide for selected extension of 
certain fiscal year 1998 military construction authorizations 
until October 1, 2001, or the date of the enactment of an Act 
authorizing funds for military construction for fiscal year 
2002, whichever is later.
Extensions of authorizations of certain fiscal year 1997 projects (sec. 
        2703)
    This section would provide for selected extension of 
certain fiscal year 1997 military construction authorizations 
until October 1, 2001, or the date of the enactment of an Act 
authorizing funds for military construction for fiscal year 
2002, whichever is later.
Effective date (sec. 2704)
    This section would provide that titles XXI, XXII, XXIII, 
XXIV, and XXVI of this bill shall take effect on October 1, 
2000, 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

Joint use military construction projects (sec. 2801)
    The committee recommends a provision that would express the 
sense of Congress that the Secretary of Defense, when preparing 
the fiscal year defense budget request, should identify 
military construction projects suitable for joint use, specify 
in the budget request joint use military construction projects, 
and give priority to joint use military construction projects. 
The provision would also direct the Secretary to include in the 
budget request a certification by each secretary concerned that 
the service screened each construction project in the budget 
request for the feasibility for joint use. The provision would 
further require the Secretary of Defense to submit, not later 
than September 30 of each year, a report that included the 
number of military construction projects evaluated for joint 
use construction, when the project could be executed, and a 
list of the military construction projects determined to be 
feasible for joint use. The provision would also make certain 
conforming changes.
Exclusion of certain costs from determination of applicability of 
        limitation on use of funds for improvement of family housing 
        (sec. 2802)
    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 2825 (b) of title 10, United States Code, to authorize 
the secretary concerned to exclude certain costs from the 
counting against the limitation for housing improvement. The 
specific costs that would be excluded are the installation, 
maintenance and repair of communications, security or anti-
terrorism equipment required by the occupant in the performance 
of his duties. The provision would also exclude the cost of 
repairing or replacing the exterior of the unit or units if 
such repair or replacement is necessary to meet historic 
preservation standards.
    The committee directs that whenever the secretary concerned 
exercises this authority, the secretary shall submit a report 
to the congressional defense committees and wait 30 days prior 
to executing any project for which the exemptions apply. The 
report should include a description of the project, its 
purpose, and cost.
Replacement of limitations on space by pay grade of military family 
        housing with requirement for local comparability of military 
        family housing (sec. 2803)
    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 2826 of title 10, United States Code, to eliminate the 
limitation on space-by-grade requirement for family housing 
construction. The provision would authorize the secretary 
concerned to construct family housing units that are consistent 
with similar housing units constructed in the local area. The 
provision would also direct the secretary concerned to include 
the net square area when requesting the authorization for 
construction of military family housing units.
    The committee expects the secretary concerned to continue 
reporting as part of the military construction project data 
(DD1391) the net square area of each type family housing unit 
proposed for construction.
Modification of lease authority for high-cost military family housing 
        (sec. 2804)
    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 2828 (b)(4) of title 10, United States Code, to 
eliminate the $60,000 per year cap on the lease of an 
individual housing unit and to authorize the Secretary of the 
Army to enter into leases for eight housing units in the Miami 
area for no more than five years. The provision would further 
amend section 2828 (b) to authorize the Secretary concerned to 
adjust the maximum cost authorized for family housing leases 
based on the percentage that the national average monthly cost 
of housing differ during the two preceding fiscal years. The 
provision would authorize the Secretary of the Army to adjust 
the maximum amount of the eight family housing unit leases in 
the Miami area by the percent the annual average cost of 
housing for the Miami Military Housing Area exceeds the annual 
average cost for the same region for the fiscal year preceding 
the fiscal year.
Applicability of competitive policy to alternative authority for 
        acquisition and improvement of military housing (sec. 2805)
    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
Subchapter IV of chapter 169 of title 10, United States Code, 
to require that the Secretary concerned use competitive 
procedures when exercising the alternative authorities for the 
acquisition and improvement of military housing. The Secretary 
concerned could waive competitive procedures if he determines 
competition would be inconsistent with public interest and 
notifies theCongress in writing of such determination not less 
than 30 days before entering the agreement.

Provisions of utilities and services under alternative authority for 
        acquisition and improvement of military housing (sec. 2806)

    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 2872 of title 10, United States Code, to authorize the 
service secretaries to provide utilities and services to 
privatized housing units located on a military installation on 
a reimbursable basis. The payments received for such services 
would be credited to the appropriate account or working capital 
fund from which the cost of furnishing the utilities and 
services was paid.

Extension of alternative authority for acquisition and improvement of 
        military housing (sec. 2807)

    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 2885 of title 10, United States Code, to extend the 
authority to enter a contract for military housing 
privatization until February 10, 2004.

Inclusion of readiness center in definition of armory for purposes of 
        construction of reserve components facilities (sec. 2808)

    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 18232(3) of title 10, United States Code, to equate the 
term Readiness Center to the term Armory. The provision would 
also make certain conforming changes.

        SUBTITLE B--REAL PROPERTY AND FACILITIES ADMINISTRATION


Increase in threshold for reports to Congress on real property 
        transactions (sec. 2811)

    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 2662 of title 10, United States Code, to increase the 
reporting threshold to congressional defense committees for 
real property transactions from $200,000 to $500,000.

Enhancements to military lease authority (sec. 2812)

    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 2667 of title 10, United States Code, to authorize the 
secretary concerned to lease facilities that are under the 
control of that department and that are not excess to the needs 
of that department. The secretary concerned would be authorized 
to accept as compensation for the leases, either payment in-
kind or cash. The provision would clarify that in-kind 
consideration may be applied at any military installation and 
that it may take the following forms: maintenance, protection, 
alteration, repair, improvement, or restoration of any 
property; construction of new facilities for the department; 
provision of facilities for use by the department; base 
operating support services; and other services related to the 
activity that will occur on the leased property, as the 
secretary considers appropriate. In the instances where the 
payment in-kind payment is the construction or provision of new 
facilities with a value in excess of $500,000, the secretary 
would not be authorized to enter the lease until 30 days after 
the date on which a report on the facts of the lease is 
submitted to the congressional defense committees. The 
provision would further authorize the secretary concerned to 
use cash proceeds from leases for maintenance, protection, 
alteration, repair, improvements or restoration of property or 
facilities, construction or acquisition of new facilities, 
lease facilities, and facilities support. At least 50 percent 
of the cash payment received would be available for use only at 
the military installation at which the property is located. The 
provision would authorize the secretary concerned to construct 
or acquire facilities in excess of $500,000 only after he 
submits a report on the facts of the construction or 
acquisition of such facilities to the congressional defense 
committees and waits 30 days. The provision would require the 
Secretary of Defense to submit, not later than March 15 of each 
year, a report to the congressional defense committees 
providing an accounting of the rental receipts and a detailed 
explanation of all leases and amendments to existing leases. 
The provision would also authorize the secretary concerned to 
indemnify the leasee from any claim for personal injury or 
property damage, that results from the release of hazardous 
substance, pollutants or contaminants, petroleum, or unexploded 
ordnance as a result of Defense activities on the military 
installation at which the leased property is located.

Expansion of procedures for selection of conveyees under authority to 
        convey utility systems (sec. 2813)

    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 2688(b) of title 10, United States Code, to clarify 
that the secretary concerned may use procedures other than 
competitive procedures only under the circumstances specified 
in section 2304 (c) through (f) of title 10, United States 
Code.
    The committee believes that maximizing competition in the 
privatization of utility systems within the Department of 
Defense is essential to ensuring that the military receives the 
most efficient and effective service and to ensuring taxpayers 
derive the maximum value from the government's previous 
investment in these systems. However, the committee is 
concerned that the Department may be inadvertently creating 
barriers to competition. Specifically, the committee believes 
that the Department may not be giving potential offerors enough 
time to respond to its requests for proposals. This 
particularly affects the utilities required to obtain 
permission from their regulators in order to form teams or 
partnerships to respond to the Department's requirements. 
Providing insufficient time for regulated entities, therefore, 
has the effect of limiting competition. The Department should 
examine and adjust its existing timetables to ensure that 
potential competitors have adequate time to respond. 
Additionally, the committee believes that the Department's 
efforts to bundle systems or installations into a single 
solicitation for a large region may exclude entities that are 
only qualified to provide one type of service, or are limited 
to operating within a specific geographical area. The committee 
believes the Department should structure its solicitations in a 
way that allows interested entities to bid on parts of that 
which is being offered, as well as the entire package, thereby 
ensuring that all have a fair chance in the competition.
    While the committee supports the Department's competitive 
privatization efforts, it believes that the Department must be 
mindful of the impacts of these efforts upon public safety and 
the public interest in assuming a safe and effective network of 
utility systems among multiple users. The Department should 
take steps, either through reliance upon existing public 
utility regulatory mechanisms or through careful contract 
provisions and service oversight of privatization contracts, to 
protect public interests both within and without base 
installation boundaries. Further, the Department should 
consider the cost of protecting these public interests in the 
decision to privatize. Finally, the committee applauds the 
Department's efforts to work with industry, in particular the 
two-day, Utility Privatization Industry Forum. The committee 
directs the Department to build on that effort by taking action 
to eliminate barriers to full competition.

            SUBTITLE C--DEFENSE BASE CLOSURE AND REALIGNMENT


Scope of agreements to transfer property to redevelopment authorities 
        without consideration under the base closure laws (sec. 2821)

    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 2905(b)(4)(B)(i) of the Department of Defense Base 
Closure and Realignment Act of 1990 (part A of title XXIX of 
Public Law 101-510; 10 U.S.C. 2687 note) and section 
204(b)(4)(B)(i) of the Defense Authorization Amendments and 
Base Closure Realignment Act (title II of Public Law 100-526; 
10 U.S.C. 2687 note) to clarify that the seven-year period to 
account for the proceeds from any sale or lease of property 
received by the redevelopment authority begins at the date of 
the initial transfer of property.

                      SUBTITLE D--LAND CONVEYANCES


                        Part I--Army Conveyances


Land conveyance, Charles Melvin Price Support Center, Illinois (sec. 
        2831)

    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
the Secretary of the Army to convey, as public benefit, if 
qualified, or at fair market value, as determined by the 
Secretary, a parcel of real property consisting of 
approximately 752 acres, including improvements thereon, and 
known as the Charles Melvin Price Support Center to the Tri-
City Regional Port District of Granite City, Illinois, for the 
development of a port facility and for other public purposes. 
The property authorized for conveyance may include 158 military 
family housing units, but only if the Port Authority agrees to 
accord priority use to members of the armed services for the 
lease of the housing. The Secretary may include personal 
property of the Army at the Charles Melvin Price Support Center 
that the Secretary of Transportation recommends is appropriate 
for the development or operation of the port facility, and that 
the Secretary of the Army agrees is excess to the needs of the 
Army. The provision would authorize the Secretary to provide 
for an interim lease of the property to the Port District until 
such time it is conveyed by deed. As compensation for the 
interim lease, the Secretary may accept payment in-kind at less 
than fair market value if the Secretary determines that it is 
in the public interest.
    The provision would also authorize the Secretary to retain 
part of the parcel, not to exceed 50 acres, for the development 
of an Army Reserve Center. When the Secretary determines the 
acreage is no longer required, the Secretary shall transfer the 
acreage to the Port District. In determining the location of 
theArmy Reserve Center, the Secretary shall consider its impact 
on the Port District's use of the remainder of the property.
    The provision would further authorize the Secretary of the 
Army to require the Port District to lease to the Department of 
Defense or any other Federal Agency facilities. Any lease under 
this authority shall be made under terms and conditions 
satisfactory to the Secretary and the Port District. The agency 
leasing the facility shall provide for maintenance of the 
facility, as required by all Federal, State, and local laws and 
ordinances. At the end of the lease, the property would revert 
to the Port Authority. As a further condition of conveyance, 
the Port District would grant the Secretary of the Army an 
easement on the property conveyed to permit the Secretary to 
implement and maintain flood control projects. The Secretary 
shall be responsible for the maintenance of any flood control 
project built on the easement.

Land conveyance, Lieutenant General Malcolm Hay Army Reserve Center, 
        Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania (sec. 2832)

    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
the Secretary of the Army to convey, at fair market value, to 
the City of Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, a parcel of real 
property, including improvements, located at 950 Saw Mill Run 
Boulevard in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, and containing the 
Lieutenant General Malcolm Hay Army Reserve Center. The exact 
acreage and legal description of the real property would be 
determined by a survey satisfactory to the Secretary. The cost 
of the survey would be borne by the City.

Land conveyance, Colonel Harold E. Steele Army Reserve Center and 
        Maintenance Shop, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania (sec. 2833)

    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
the Secretary of the Army to convey, at fair market value, to 
the Ellis School, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, a parcel of real 
property, including improvements, located at 6482 Aurelia 
Street in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania and containing the Colonel 
Harold E. Steele Army Reserve Center and Maintenance Shop. The 
exact acreage and legal description of the real property would 
be determined by a survey satisfactory to the Secretary. The 
cost of the survey would be borne by the Ellis School.

Land conveyance, Fort Lawton, Washington (sec. 2834)

    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
the Secretary of the Army to convey, without consideration, to 
the City of Seattle, Washington, a parcel of real property at 
Fort Lawton, Washington, consisting of Area 500 and Government 
Way from 36th Avenue to Area 500. The purpose of the conveyance 
would be to include the property in Discovery Park, Seattle, 
Washington.

Land conveyance, Vancouver Barracks, Washington (sec. 2835)

    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
the Secretary of the Army to convey, without consideration, to 
the City of Vancouver, Washington, a parcel of real property, 
including any improvements, at Vancouver Barracks, Washington. 
The conveyance includes 19 structures known as the west 
barracks. The purpose of the conveyance would be to include the 
property as part of the Vancouver National Historic Reserve.

                       Part II--Navy Conveyances


Modification of land conveyance, Marine Corps Air Station, El Toro, 
        California (sec. 2851)

    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 2811 of the Military Construction Authorization Act for 
Fiscal Year 1990 and 1991 (division B of Public Law 101-189; 
103 Stat. 1650). The provision would change the authority to 
use the monetary consideration from construction of family 
housing at Marine Corps Air Station Tustin, California, for the 
repair of roads and development of facilities at Marine Corps 
Air Station, Miramar, California.

Modification of land conveyance, Defense Fuel Supply Point, Casco Bay, 
        Maine (sec. 2852)

    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 2839 of the Military Construction Authorization Act for 
Fiscal Year 1995 (division B of Public Law 103-337; 108 Stat. 
3065) to authorize the Secretary of Defense to replace electric 
utility service removed during environmental remediation. The 
provision would also authorize the Secretary, in consultation 
with the community, to improve the utility services and install 
telecommunications service, provided the community funds the 
cost of the improvements.

Modification of land conveyance authority, former Navy Training Center, 
        Bainbridge, Cecil County, Maryland (sec. 2853)

    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 1 of an Act to convey land in Cecil County, Maryland 
(Public Law 99-596; 100 Stat. 3349) to authorize the Secretary 
of the Navy to reduce the amount of consideration received from 
theState of Maryland by an amount equal to the cost of 
restoring the historic buildings on the property. The total amount of 
the reduction would not exceed $500,000.

Land conveyance, Naval Computer and Telecommunications Station, Cutler, 
        Maine (sec. 2854)

    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
the Secretary of the Navy to convey, without consideration, a 
parcel of real property, including improvements thereon, 
consisting of approximately 263 acres known as the Naval 
Computer and Telecommunications Station, Cutler, Maine, to the 
State of Maine, any political subdivision of the State of 
Maine, or any tax-supported agency in the State of Maine. The 
Secretary may require the recipient of the property to 
reimburse the Secretary for any environmental assessment or 
other studies required with respect to the conveyance of the 
property.

                 Part III--Defense Agencies Conveyance


Land conveyance, Army and Air Force Exchange Service property, Farmers 
        Branch, Texas (sec. 2871)

    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
the Secretary of Defense to convey at fair market value a 
parcel of real property, owned and purchased by the Army and 
Air Force Exchange Service, a non-appropriated fund 
instrumentality, located in Farmers Branch, Texas. As a 
condition of the conveyance, the provision would require cash 
payment as consideration and would require that the payment be 
processed according to the Federal Property and Administrative 
Services Act of 1949 (40 U.S.C. 485 (c)). The provision would 
waive section 2693 of title 10, United States Code, the 
provisions of the Federal Property Administrative Act of 1949 
(40 U.S.C. 471 et seq.), and section 501 of the Stewart B. 
McKinney Homeless Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. 11411). The 
provision would also direct the Secretary to submit a report on 
the conveyance to the congressional defense committees not 
later than one year after the conveyance.
    The committee does not intend the waivers of current law to 
become general policy, instead the waivers pertain to the 
unique aspect of the property authorized for conveyance. 
Specifically, the property is not located on a military base, 
the title of the property is held by a non-appropriated fund 
property, and no appropriated funds were used to acquire, 
construct, rehabilitate, or improve the property.

                       Subtitle E--Other Matters


Naming of the Army missile testing range at Kwajalein Atoll as the 
        Ronald Reagan Ballistic Missile Defense Test Site at Kwajalein 
        Atoll (sec. 2881)

    The committee recommends a provision that would name the 
Army missile testing range at the Kwajalein Atoll as the Ronald 
Reagan Ballistic Missile Defense Test Site at Kwajalein Atoll.

                        OTHER ITEMS OF INTEREST


Report on Naval Foundry and Propeller Center, Philadelphia, 
        Pennsylvania

    The committee is aware that the Secretary of the Navy is 
considering an increase above the recommended number of 
submarines in the Quadrennial Defense Review. Anticipating this 
future need, it is important to ensure that all the 
organizations providing support to the submarine force have 
sufficient resources to meet both current and potentially 
increased future requirements. As the only government facility 
capable of producing the highest quality silent propellers and 
related equipment for submarines, the Naval Foundry and 
Propeller Center, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, is an essential 
facility for support of the submarine fleet. Because of its 
unique capability, it is critical that the Center has 
sufficient facilities, equipment, and trained staff to meet the 
Navy's current and future requirements.
    The committee directs the Secretary of the Navy to submit, 
not later than March 1, 2001, a report to the congressional 
defense committees that analyzes the facility, equipment, and 
staffing requirements of the Naval Foundry and Propeller 
Center. This report should also include the funding levels 
needed in future budgets to provide the needed capabilities and 
capacity at the Center.

Report on requirement for Education Center at Fort Stewart, Georgia

    The committee is aware that the opportunity for continuing 
education while in the military is a valuable tool for 
enhancing recruiting and retention of highly motivated 
individuals. To maximize the available resources, several 
military installations have or are prepared to enter joint 
cooperative agreements with State or local university systems. 
The committee is aware that Fort Stewart, Georgia, has 
identified an opportunity for a joint cooperative agreement 
with the University System of Georgia to address the 
educational needs of the military personnel andfamily members 
stationed at the installation. However, the lack of adequate facilities 
precludes the full achievement of such an agreement. The committee is 
supportive of such innovative approaches to meeting the educational 
needs of our military personnel and directs the Secretary of the Army 
to study the requirement for and feasibility of funding and 
constructing an education center at Fort Stewart, Georgia. The study 
should also address the desirability of joint use of such facility by 
the local community and the cost sharing arrangements that should 
accompany such joint use. The Secretary should provide the results of 
the study to the Committee on Armed Services of the Senate by January 
15, 2001.

Study on commercial leases

    The committee recognizes that the Department of Defense 
(DOD) has made progress in reducing the number of commercial 
leases. However, the committee believes that a more aggressive 
approach to relocating activities from leased facilities to 
government-owned space would yield additional savings for the 
Department.
    The committee directs the Secretary of Defense to submit to 
the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the House of 
Representatives by April 1, 2001, a report that analyzes the 
relocation of activities from leased facilities to available 
DOD owned space in metropolitan areas that currently have 
vacant or underutilized DOD property. The metropolitan areas 
studied should include, but not be limited to, Philadelphia, 
Pennsylvania, and San Antonio, Texas.

Study regarding the location of the National Museum of the United 
        States Army

    The Military Construction Authorization Act, 1985, 
established the precedence that permits each service (to 
include the Marine Corps) to designate one museum at one 
location to be the official service museum. In response to this 
authority, the Department of the Navy and the Department of the 
Air Force have designated official museums. The Army and the 
Marine Corps have not yet specified a museum, although the 
committee understands that the Marine Corps is considering a 
location at the Marine Corps Base, Quantico, Virginia.
    The Chief of Staff of the Army initiated a National 
Military Museum of the United States Army site selection 
process in 1983. This process culminated in the selection of a 
site within the National Capitol Region. The proposed site was 
submitted for congressional approval in both the fiscal year 
1993 and fiscal year 1995. For reasons not related to the 
specific site, the Congress did not approve the procurement of 
the location. Since 1996, the Army has not made a concerted 
effort to identify or seek congressional approval for an Army 
museum in the National Capitol Region.
    The committee is aware that communities have an interest in 
hosting the National Military Museum of the United States Army 
and have dedicated resources toward that effort. The committee 
supports the establishment of a museum dedicated to honor the 
225-year history of the Army and believes that any further 
delay in selecting a site would not only be a disservice to the 
thousands of men and women who wear the Army uniform, but also 
to the communities eager to host the National Military Museum 
of the United States Army. The committee directs the Secretary 
of the Army to immediately initiate a new site selection 
process and provide a report to the congressional defense 
committees not later than one year after enactment of the 
National Defense Authorization Bill for Fiscal Year 2001. The 
report shall include the selected site, if one is judged 
appropriate, the site selection process, schedule for 
developing the National Military Museum for the United States 
Army, and funding sources.
 DIVISION C--DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY NATIONAL SECURITY AUTHORIZATIONS AND 
                          OTHER AUTHORIZATIONS

      TITLE XXXI--DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY NATIONAL SECURITY PROGRAMS

Atomic energy defense activities
    Title XXXI authorizes appropriations for the atomic energy 
defense activities of the Department of Energy for fiscal year 
2001, 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 six categories: national nuclear security 
administration; defense environmental restoration and waste 
management; defense environmental management privatization; 
other defense activities; Department of Energy Employees 
Compensation Initiative; and defense nuclear waste disposal.
    The budget request for the atomic energy defense activities 
totaled $13.1 billion, an 8.3 percent increase over the 
adjusted fiscal year 2000 level. Of the total amount requested: 
$4.6 billion was for weapons activities; $1.6 billion was for 
other nuclear security activities; $4.6 billion was for defense 
environmental restoration and waste management activities; $1.0 
billion was for defense facility closure projects; $540.1 
million was for defense environmental management privatization; 
$555.1 million was for other defense activities; $112.0 million 
was for defense nuclear waste disposal; $17.0 million was for a 
Department of Energy Employees Compensation Initiative; and 
$140.0 million was for the formerly utilized sites remedial 
action program.
    The committee recommends $12.8 billion for atomic energy 
defense activities, a decrease of $323.6 million to the budget 
request. The committee recommends $6.2 billion for the national 
nuclear security administration (NNSA), an increase of 37.2 
million to the budget request. The amount authorized for the 
NNSA is as follows: $4.7 billion for weapons activities, an 
increase of $78.8 million to the budget request; $847.0 million 
for defense nuclear nonproiferation, a decrease of $59.0 
million to the budget request; and $695.0 million for naval 
reactors, an increase of $17.4 million to the budget request. 
The committee further recommends $5.5 billion for defense 
environmental restoration and waste management, including 
defense facility closure projects, a decrease of $132.0 million 
to the budget request; $515.0 million for defense environmental 
management privatization, the amount of the budget request; 
$466.3 million for other defense activities, a decrease of 
$88.8 million to the budget request; $17.0 million for a 
Department of Energy Employees Compensation Initiative, the 
amount of the budget request; and $112.0 million for defense 
nuclear waste disposal, the amount of the budget request. The 
committee recommends no funding for the formerly utilized sites 
remedial action program, representing a decrease of $140.0 
million to the budget request.
    The following table summarizes the budget request and the 
committee recommendations:


National Nuclear Security Administration (sec. 3101)

    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
$6.2 billion for activities of the Department of Energy (DOE) 
National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA), an increase of 
$97.3 million to the budget request.

Weapons activities

    The committee recommends $4.6 billion for weapons 
activities, an increase of $78.8 million to the budget request. 
The amount authorized is for the following activities: $842.6 
million for directed stockpile work, an increase of $6.0 
million; $1.5 billion for campaigns, an increase of $447.1 
million; $1.5 billion for readiness in technical base and 
facilities, a decrease of $405.8 million; $115.7 million for 
secure transportation assets, the amount of the budget request; 
$448.2 million for construction, an increase of $34.0 million; 
and $221.6 million for program direction, a decrease of $2.5 
million.

                        Directed Stockpile Work

    In the directed stockpile work account, the committee 
recommends an increase of $6.0 million to the budget request 
for a cooperative research effort with the Department of 
Defense regarding defeating hard and deeply buried targets.

                               Campaigns

    In the campaigns account, the committee recommends an 
increase of $10.0 million to the budget request for the pit 
manufacturing readiness campaign to begin conceptual design 
activities for a pit production facility adequate to meet 
future national security needs; an increase of $477.1 million 
to the defense computing and modeling campaign to reflect the 
consolidation of all defense computing and modeling activities 
into a single program line item; a decrease of $20.0 million to 
the defense computing and modeling campaign to reflect delays 
in acquisition of the 100-trillion-operations-per-second 
computer platform; a decrease of $5.0 million to the defense 
computing and modeling campaign to slow the rate of growth in 
the Visual Interactive Environment Weapon Simulation (VIEWS) 
program; and a decrease of $15.0 million to the defense 
computing and modeling campaign to slow the rate of growth in 
university partnership activities. The authorized amounts for 
both the VIEWS and university partnerships programs represents 
an increase over fiscal year 2000 funding levels.
    The committee notes that the National Defense Authorization 
Act for Fiscal Year 1996 (Public Law 104-106) requires that the 
Nuclear Emergency Search Team remain a program function within 
the Office of Military Applications under the Office of Defense 
Programs. The committee further notes that the National Defense 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2000 (Public Law 104-65) 
directed the Secretary of Energy to slow the rate of growth in 
the Advanced Strategic Computing Initiative and Strategic 
Computing accounts. Finally, the committee is aware that the 
November 8, 1999, report of the Panel to Assess the 
Reliability, Safety, and Security of the U.S. Nuclear Stockpile 
stated that its ``paramount concern'' with the DOE stockpile 
stewardship program ``. . . is the need to begin work now on an 
adequate plutonium pit production manufacturing capability.'' 
The committee endorses this finding and directs the Secretary 
of Energy to begin conceptual design activities for a pit 
production facility with a capacity adequate to meet future 
national security needs immediately.

               Readiness in Technical Base and Facilities

    In the budget request for the readiness in technical base 
and facilities account, the committee recommends: an increase 
of $56.3 million to reflect the movement of the nuclear 
emergency search team and accident response group from the 
other defense activities emergency management account to the 
weapons activities account; and an increase of $15.0 million 
for the Kansas City, Pantex, and Y-12 plants to continue 
advanced manufacturing, modernization, infrastructure 
improvement, and skills retention efforts.

                              Construction

    In the construction account, the committee recommends an 
increase of $34.0 million to the budget request for continued 
preliminary design and engineering development activities in 
the accelerator production of tritium program.

                           Program Direction

    In the program direction account, the committee recommends 
a decrease of $2.5 million to the budget request.
    The committee recommends moving the nuclear emergency 
response programs from the other defense account into the 
weapons activities account. The amount authorized for program 
direction reflects an increase of $2.5 million to account for 
the salaries of those federal employees who will likewise be 
transferred.
    The committee directs that the proposed decrease to the 
program direction account be achieved through the 
reorganization and realignment of headquarters and field office 
roles and responsibilities. The committee believes that the 
performance ofthe Office of Defense Programs will be improved 
by eliminating duplicative efforts and by streamlining management 
control of DOE weapons activities.
    The committee continues to believe that the Office of 
Defense Programs is overstaffed. The committee notes that 
several independent assessments of the organizational structure 
of the Office of Defense Programs, dating back as far as 
calendar year 1997, have also concluded that the Office of 
Defense Programs would benefit from a realignment of 
headquarters and field organization personnel. The committee 
expects the Department to utilize the authority to make 
voluntary separation incentive payments authorized in the 
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2000 (Public 
Law 106-65) to fully implement the realignment recommendations 
described in the calendar year 1997 report by the Institute for 
Defense Analysis.

Budget Structure for Office of the Assistant Administrator for Defense 
                                Programs

    The committee commends the Office of Defense Programs for 
establishing a more detailed and transparent budget structure. 
The committee continues to believe that this new budget 
structure will greatly enhance the effectiveness of these 
programs and instill a higher degree of budgetary discipline in 
the Office of Defense Programs. The committee further believes 
that the new budget structure will also assist Congress in 
assessing the degree of integration among varied experiments, 
simulation, research, and weapons assessments activities 
carried out at the Department's weapons laboratories and 
production plants. The committee directs that future budget 
requests for weapons activities clearly identify the funding 
required for each campaign and each program element under the 
directed stockpile work and readiness in technical base and 
facilities accounts.

                   Advanced Simulation and Computing

    The committee continues to support the Advanced Simulation 
and Computing program, including the Advanced Strategic 
Computing Initiative (ASCI) and Stockpile Computing program. 
However, the committee believes that the Department has not 
fully integrated these programs with the experimental 
facilities and capabilities that are envisioned for the 
stockpile stewardship and management program. The committee 
remains concerned that the rate of growth in this program is 
not fully justified. The committee notes that the acquisition 
schedule for the 100-trillion-operations-per-second, ASCI-Blue 
computer to be located at the Lawrence Livermore National 
Laboratory has slipped by as much as two years, yet the budget 
request reflects no related decrease in funding to account for 
the delayed delivery of this machine.
    The committee is also concerned that the rate of growth in 
the Advanced Simulation and Computing program is taking 
resources away from other, equally important, programmatic 
requirements of the Office of Defense Programs. The committee 
notes that even at this reduced level of funding, the Advanced 
Simulation and Computing programs will experience significant 
growth in the level of funding over fiscal years 1998, 1999, 
and 2000 funding levels.
    The committee continues to support the utilization of the 
capabilities and facilities of the Pittsburgh Supercomputing 
Center to better meet the Department's supercomputing needs in 
lieu of planned acquisitions proposed within the Advanced 
Simulation and Computing program.

                 Technology Partnerships and Education

    Of the amounts authorized to be appropriated for campaigns, 
the committee recommends $10.0 million for the American 
Textiles Partnership (AMTEX) project. The committee recommends 
these funds in order to complete work on this partnership in 
fiscal year 2001. The committee notes the AMTEX project was 
projected to conclude in fiscal year 2000, but that the 
Department of Energy failed to obligate the full amount of 
funds authorized for the project in that fiscal year.

                           Tritium Production

    Of the funds available in the tritium readiness campaign 
account, the committee recommends $58.0 million for the 
Commercial Light Water Reactor program and $53.0 million for 
the Accelerator Production of Tritium (APT) program.
    The committee recommended an increase in the tritium 
production account to allow DOE to comply with the requirements 
of section 3134 of the National Defense Authorization Act for 
Fiscal Year 2000 (Public Law 106-65). The committee notes that 
the request was insufficient to complete preliminary design and 
engineering development of critical components of the APT 
technology, as required by section 3134 and the Secretary of 
Energy's December 22, 1998, tritium decision.
    The committee is disappointed that the Secretary of Energy 
failed to request adequate funds to implement the December 
1998, tritium decision and meet the requirements set forth in 
section 3134 of the National Defense Authorization Act for 
Fiscal Year 2000 (Public Law 106-65). The committee has reduced 
funding in the defense computing and simulation account to 
bring the Department into compliance with the Secretary's 
December 1998, tritium decision and the requirements set forth 
in section 3134 of the National Defense Authorization Act for 
Fiscal Year 2000.

                  Nuclear Weapons Emphasis and Effects

    Of the funds available for directed stockpile work, the 
committee recommends $5.0 million for a cooperative program 
with the Defense Threat Reduction Agency to re-establish a 
vigorous nuclear weapon effects test capability. The program 
shall emphasize the need to invest in all elements of nuclear 
weapon effects technologies, including basic phenomenology, 
analysis and modeling, radiation effects simulation, and 
hardening technologies.

               Defense Medical Devices Prototyping Pilot

    The committee recommends that, of the funds available for 
campaigns, up to $6.0 million be made available for the Defense 
medical devices prototyping pilot program. Such funds are 
available only for activities that support the national 
security missions of DOE and established missions of the 
National Institutes of Health (NIH). No weapons activities 
funds shall be available for any activity that is not carried 
out pursuant to a cooperative agreement between DOE and NIH. 
Any weapons activities funds utilized must be leveraged with at 
least equal funding from NIH.

Defense nuclear nonproliferation

    The committee recommends $847.0 million for defense nuclear 
nonproliferation, a decrease of $59.0 million to the budget 
request of $906.0 million. The amount authorized is for the 
following activities: $262.9 million for nonproliferation 
verification research and development, an increase of $30.0 
million; $308.1 million for arms control, a decrease of $100.0 
million; $224.5 million for fissile materials control and 
disposition, an increase of $1.1 million; and $51.5 million for 
program direction, the amount of the budget request.
    The committee notes that the Department of Energy Defense 
Nuclear Nonproliferation Program was formerly known as the 
nonproliferation and national security account during fiscal 
year 2000. Because DOE did not request these funds under 
separate budget accounts, as required by section 3251 of the 
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2000, 
(Public Law 106- 65), the committee has renamed and 
consolidated these accounts, including program direction, into 
a single account titled National Nuclear Security 
Administration to meet the statutory requirements.

               Fissile Materials Control and Disposition

    In the fissile materials control and disposition account, 
the committee recommends an increase of $11.0 million to the 
budget request to accelerate design activities for the mixed 
oxide fuel fabrication facility and a decrease of $9.9 million 
to reflect consolidation of all Defense Nuclear 
Nonproliferation program direction funds into a single account, 
consistent with the requirements of title 32 of the National 
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2000 (Public Law 106-
65).

Naval reactors

    The committee recommends $695.0 million for naval reactors, 
an increase of $17.5 million to the budget request for 
expedited decommissioning and decontamination activities at 
surplus facilities.

Safeguards and security activities

    The committee directs that all funds authorized to be 
appropriated pursuant to this section be managed exclusively by 
line programs within the NNSA.

Defense environmental restoration and waste management (sec. 3102)

    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
$5.5 billion for environmental management activities of the 
Department of Energy (DOE), excluding defense environmental 
management privatization and including defense facilities 
closure projects, for a net reduction of $132.0 million. The 
amount authorized is for the following activities: $1.1 billion 
for closure projects, the amount of the request; $930.1 million 
for site and project completion, a reduction of $40.0 million; 
$3.0 billion for post 2006 completion, a decrease of $80.0 
million; $246.0 million for technology development, an increase 
of $50.0 million; and $191.5 million for program direction, a 
decrease of $5.0 million. The committee also recommends a 
decrease of $57.0 million to account for available uncosted, 
unobligated prior year funds and funds to be deobligated from 
completed, prior year construction projects.
    The committee directs that future year requests for defense 
environmental restoration and waste management include the 
request for defense facility closure projects.

                          Post 2006 Completion

    In relation to the budget request for the Post 2006 
completion account, the committee recommends: an increase of 
$10.0 million to address planning, research, demonstration, 
andother requirements associated with modification of the Savannah 
River in-tank precipitation process; an increase of $10.0 million for 
the Columbia River Corridor Initiative at Hanford to continue reactor 
decontamination and decommissioning activities; a decrease of $25.0 
million in the defense contribution to the uranium decommission and 
decontamination fund; a decrease of $57.0 million to account for 
increased contractor efficiencies to be gained through contract 
management reforms and construction project management improvements; 
and a decrease of $18.0 million to reflect the movement of the 
Environmental Systems Research and Analysis program into the Science 
and Technology Development account.
    The committee recommends full funding for the F-canyon and 
H-canyon materials processing facilities.

                      Site and Project Completion

    In relation to the budget request for the site and project 
completion account, the committee recommends a decrease of 
$37.0 million to account for increased contractor efficiencies 
to be gained through contract management reforms and 
construction project management improvements and a decrease of 
$3.0 million to reflect the movement of the Environmental 
Systems Research and Analysis program into the Science and 
Technology Development account.

                   Science and Technology Development

    In relation to the budget request for the science and 
technology development account, the committee recommends an 
increase of $50.0 million for applied research and development 
activities. The amount authorized reflects the movement of the 
Environmental Systems Research and Analysis program into the 
Science and Technology Development account from the Post 2006 
and Site and Project Completion accounts.
    The committee supports the integration of industrial 
programs and university based programs into the Environmental 
Management technology focus areas. The committee understands 
that this approach will better link such research efforts with 
site needs. The committee believes that the Office of Science 
and Technology cannot meet its objectives without the active 
participation of industry and academia. The committee 
encourages the Office of Science and Technology to continue its 
inclusion of industry and universities in technology 
development and deployment activities.
    The committee notes that the Department's cleanup and waste 
management efforts will continue well into the 21st Century 
with costs anticipated to exceed $150.0 billion and much of the 
cleanup work scheduled to continue beyond fiscal year 2030. DOE 
must make meaningful investments in innovative science and 
technology in order to reduce costs, reduce safety and health 
risks, and develop solutions to problems for which there are 
currently no available or effective technologies.
    Over the past several years DOE has started to focus the 
environmental management research and development efforts to 
the cleanup requirements of the various sites and facilities. 
This effort has started to show significant progress in 
developing new technologies and making them available for 
cleanup and waste treatment and in substantially reducing the 
costs of those activities. In the past, DOE has utilized the 
research capabilities of Historically Black Colleges and 
Universities (HBCU)and Hispanic Serving Institutions (HSIs) 
with great success. The committee is supportive of these 
efforts and encourages the DOE to expand the research conducted 
at HBCUs and HSIs.
    While in many instances there are no technologies or 
inadequate technologies to treat accumulated waste or to clean 
up DOE sites and facilities, in many instances DOE has 
successfully adapted or incorporated existing technologies into 
the Environmental Management Program. For example, DOE has been 
able to adapt several new technologies from the oil industry 
and has had considerable success with horizontal drilling 
techniques devised by the oil industry. The committee is aware 
of several other technologies available to the oil industry 
such as macro-encapsulation technology that could possibly be 
used by the DOE Office of Environmental Management. The 
committee encourages DOE to take advantage of these and other 
technologies developed by the oil industry that could be 
helpful to DOE, as well as any other technologies already 
developed and utilized by industry.

                           Program Direction

    In relation to the program direction account, the committee 
recommends $354.9 million, a decrease of $5.0 million.

         Hazardous Materials Management and Emergency Response

    The committee recommends $5.9 million for the Hazardous 
Materials Management and Emergency Response training facility 
in Richland, Washington, to be offset by contributions from 
facility users.

                   Columbia River Corridor Initiative

    The committee supports the Columbia River Corridor 
Initiative to accelerate cleanup along the Hanford Reach of the 
Columbia River. The National Defense Authorization Act for 
Fiscal Year 2000 (Public Law 106-65) directed the 
AssistantSecretary of Energy for Environmental Management to establish 
a schedule by which the 100 square miles of the Hanford site that 
adjoin the Columbia River could be cleaned up on an accelerated 
schedule and proposed for delisting from the Environmental Protection 
Agency's National Priorities List. The committee notes that this 
schedule has not been submitted to Congress. The committee expects that 
this report will be provided not later than November 1, 2000.

   Use of Professional and Performance Insurance at DOE Cleanup Sites

    The committee directs the Secretary of Energy to report to 
the congressional defense committees, not later than February 
1, 2001, regarding the use of private insurers by contractors 
to the Department of Energy to underwrite professional and 
performance liability risks related to contracts administered 
by the Office of Environmental Management (EM). The report 
shall identify: (1) those contracts that include insurance 
requirements or accommodate insurance costs; (2) the costs and 
benefits for such insurance coverage, including the 
desirability of mandating such coverage in all EM cleanup 
contracts and an assessment of the prudence value of third 
party evaluation of contract objectives; (3) the costs to the 
U.S. Government of failure to require such coverage, including 
litigation and arbitration expenses and any delays meeting 
cleanup objectives; and (4) a comparison of the DOE contract 
requirements to those at commercial cleanup sites with similar 
coverage. The report shall further assess the desirability of 
utilizing private insurers or other entities to provide 
remediation guarantees for EM cleanup contracts, specifically 
for fixed price remediation projects.

   Report on Pilot Program To Use Prior Year Unobligated Balances To 
  Accelerate Cleanup of the Rocky Flats Environmental Technology Site

    The committee encourages the Secretary to Energy to use the 
authority provided by section 3176 of the National Defense 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2000 to accelerate closure of 
the Rocky Flats Environmental Technology Site (RFETS).

                   Safeguards and Security Activities

    The committee directs that all funds authorized to be 
appropriated pursuant to this section be managed exclusively by 
the Assistant Secretary for Environmental Management.

Other defense activities (sec. 3103)

    The committee authorizes $466.3 billion for other defense 
activities, a decrease of $88.8 million to the budget request. 
The reduction reflects a decrease of $50.0 million to account 
for available uncosted, unobligated prior year funds and funds 
to be deobligated from completed, prior year construction 
projects.

Intelligence

    The committee recommends $38.1 million for the Office of 
Intelligence, the amount of the budget request.

Counterintelligence

    The committee recommends $75.2 million for the Office of 
Counterintelligence, an increase of $30.0 million to the budget 
request.
    The committee directs that these funds be utilized to 
continue implementation of an enhanced computer security 
program at Department of Energy facilities, including cyber 
security measures such as intrusion detection, early warning, 
reporting, and analysis capabilities and a computer 
vulnerability assessment. The committee directs that priority 
be given to implementing such added computer security at the 
three nuclear weapons laboratories.

Security and emergency operations

                    Nuclear safeguards and security

    The committee recommends $124.4 million for safeguards and 
security, the amount of the budget request.

                        Security Investigations

    The committee recommends $33.0 million for security 
investigations, the amount of the budget request. The committee 
notes that of these funds, $20.0 million is authorized in line 
program accounts and is reflected as an offset to the Other 
Defense Activities account.

                          Emergency Management

    The committee recommends $37.3 million for emergency 
management, a decrease of $56.3 million to the budget request. 
The reduction reflects movement of the nuclear emergency search 
team and accident response group programs to the weapons 
activities account authorized in section 3101(a)(1) of this 
Act. No emergency management funds are authorized for these 
activities.

                           Program Direction

    The committee recommends $86.9 million for program 
direction, a decrease of $2.5 million to the budget request. 
This reduction reflects the movement of nuclear emergency 
response programs to the weapons activities account.

Independent oversight and performance assurance

    The committee recommends $14.9 million for independent 
oversight and performance assurance, the amount of the budget 
request.

Environment, safety and health-defense

    The committee recommends $99.1 million for environment, 
safety and health-defense, a decrease of $10.0 million to the 
budget request. The reduction would be taken from proposed 
increases in risk and health studies at Department of Energy 
defense nuclear facilities that do not directly support the 
national security missions of the Department and, therefore, 
are not appropriately funded in this account.

Worker and community transition

    The committee recommends $24.5 million for worker and 
community transition, the amount of the budget request.
    The committee endorses the Department of Energy's (DOE) 
decision to remove the requirement that management and 
operating contracts at DOE sites include provisions for 
conducting economic development activities in the communities 
surrounding such sites. The committee encourages DOE 
contractors to continue to be good corporate citizens by 
supporting community-based initiatives. The committee believes, 
however, that economic development activities of DOE 
contractors should not be used as a measure of performance or 
as a selection criteria for the award of contracts.

Office of Hearings and Appeals

    The committee recommends $3.0 million for the Office of 
Hearings and Appeals, the amount of the budget request.

Defense environmental management privatization (sec. 3104)

    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
$515.0 million for defense environmental management 
privatization projects, the amount of the budget request. The 
amount authorized is for the following projects: $450.0 million 
for the Tank Waste Remediation System Project, phase I 
(Richland); $65.0 million for the Advanced Mixed Waste 
Treatment project (Idaho); and $25.1 million for spent nuclear 
fuel dry storage (Idaho). The amount authorized is reduced by 
$25.1 million to reflect the use of prior year, uncosted 
balances in the defense environmental management privatization 
account.
    The committee is deeply concerned with the status of the 
Tank Waste Remediation System (TWRS) project. The committee 
understands that cost estimates for the construction portion of 
this project have increased from $3.2 billion to $6.4 billion, 
translating into a total estimated project cost increase from 
$6.9 billion to over $13.0 billion. The committee further 
understands that these cost estimates are based on a project 
design that is only 13 to 15 percent complete and, therefore, 
subject to additional change.
    The committee fully supports the TWRS project and believes 
that the technological approach proposed is viable and 
realistic. The committee also believes it is vitally important 
that this project proceed to full scale construction only when 
the Department of Energy has a high degree of confidence in the 
overall project cost and other facility requirements. The 
committee believes that the Secretary of Energy should not 
enter into a fixed price contract for this project until the 
contractor has, at a minimum, completed not less than 40 
percent of the project design activities.

Energy employees compensation initiative (sec. 3105)

    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
$17.0 million for the establishment of an energy employees 
compensation fund to compensate Department of Energy (DOE) 
contractor employees that have proven health or other medical 
problems that are directly related to their employment at a DOE 
nuclear facility.

Defense nuclear waste disposal (sec. 3106)

    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
$112.0 million for the Department of Energy fiscal year 2001 
defense contribution to the Defense Nuclear Waste Fund.

                SUBTITLE B--RECURRING GENERAL PROVISIONS


Reprogramming (sec. 3121)

    The committee recommends a provision that 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 
abovethe amount authorized for the program, until the Secretary 
of Energy submits a report to the congressional defense committees and 
a period of 30 days has elapsed after the date on which the report is 
received.

Limits on general plant projects (sec. 3122)

    The committee recommends a provision that 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 the congressional defense 
committees detailing the reasons for the cost variation if the 
cost of the project is revised to exceed $5.0 million.

Limits on construction projects (sec. 3123)

    The committee recommends a provision that 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 the amount authorized for the project or the most 
recent total estimated cost presented to the Congress as 
justification for such project. The provision would prohibit 
the Secretary of Energy from exceeding 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.

Fund transfer authority (sec. 3124)

    The committee recommends a provision that 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 and appropriated. 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 of 
the account, the amount of funds authorized by this Act that 
may be transferred between authorization accounts within the 
Department of Energy.

Authority for conceptual and construction design (sec. 3125)

    The committee recommends a provision that would limit the 
authority of the Secretary of Energy 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 construction design exceeds 
$600,000, the provision would require the Secretary to obtain a 
specific authorization to obligate such funds. If the estimated 
cost to prepare the conceptual design exceeds $3.0 million, the 
provision would require the Secretary to request funds for the 
conceptual design before requesting funds for construction. The 
provision would also provide an exception to these requirements 
in the case of an emergency.
    The committee directs the Secretary to submit to Congress a 
report on each conceptual design completed under this 
provision.

Authority for emergency planning, design, and construction activities 
        (sec. 3126)

    The committee recommends a provision that would permit the 
Secretary of Energy to perform planning and design with any 
funds available to the Department of Energy pursuant to this 
title, including those funds authorized for advance planning 
and construction design, 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.

Funds available for all national security programs of the Department of 
        Energy (sec. 3127)

    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize, 
subject to section 3121 of this Act, amounts to be appropriated 
for management and support activities and for general plant 
projects to be made available for use in connection with all 
national security programs of the Department of Energy.

Availability of funds (sec. 3128)

    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
amounts to be appropriated for operating expenses or for plant 
and capital equipment for the Department of Energy to remain 
available until expended. Program direction funds would remain 
available until the end of fiscal year 2003.

Transfer of defense environmental management funds (sec. 3129)

    The committee recommends a provision that 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 
2001 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.

          SUBTITLE C--NATIONAL NUCLEAR SECURITY ADMINISTRATION


Term of office of person first appointed as Under Secretary for Nuclear 
        Security of the Department of Energy (sec. 3031)

    The committee recommends a provision that would establish a 
fixed term of office for the first individual appointed as the 
Under Secretary for Nuclear Security at the Department of 
Energy. The individual shall be subject to removal by the 
President only for inefficiency, neglect of duty, or 
malfeasance in office.

Membership of Under Secretary for Nuclear Security on the Joint Nuclear 
        Weapons Council (sec. 3132)

    The committee recommends a provision that would designate 
the Under Secretary for Nuclear Security of the Department of 
Energy (DOE) to serve as the DOE representative on the Joint 
Nuclear Weapons Council.

Scope of authority of Secretary of Energy to modify organization of 
        National Nuclear Security Administration (sec. 3133)

    The committee recommends a provision that would limit the 
authority of the Secretary of Energy to reorganize, abolish, 
alter, consolidate, or discontinue any organizational unit or 
component of the National Nuclear Security Administration 
(NNSA).

Prohibition on pay of personnel engaged in concurrent service or duties 
        inside and outside National Nuclear Security Administration 
        (sec. 3134)

    The committee recommends a provision that would prohibit 
the use of any funds authorized to be appropriated or otherwise 
made available to the Department of Energy (DOE) by this or any 
other Act to pay the basic pay of an officer or employee of DOE 
who: (1) serves concurrently in a position in the National 
Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) and a position outside 
the NNSA; or (2) performs concurrently the duties of a position 
in the NNSA and the duties of a position outside the NNSA.
    The committee notes that this provision would not apply to 
detailees who are assigned to serve in position within the NNSA 
from other federal agencies, other DOE organizations, or 
private entities under a loaned executive program if such 
employees do not fulfill any of the duties of their permanent 
organization during the period of their detail.
    The provision prohibits any detailees from serving in 
enumerated positions specifically defined in title 32 of the 
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2000 (Public 
Law 106-65).

Organization plan for field offices of the National Nuclear Security 
        Administration (sec. 3135)

    The committee recommends a provision that would require the 
Under Secretary for Nuclear Security of the Department of 
Energy to develop an appropriate staffing and organization plan 
to carry out the activities of the National Nuclear Security 
Administration (NNSA). The plan would identify: (1) the roles 
and responsibilities to be assigned to each NNSA field 
organizational unit and the NNSA headquarters organization; (2) 
any modifications, downsizing, eliminations, or consolidations 
of field offices; (3) any modifications to headquarters and 
field office staffing levels that the Under Secretary 
determines are necessary to implement the plan; and (4) a 
schedule by which the plan could be implemented. The plan would 
be submitted to the congressional defense committees not later 
than March 1, 2001.

Future-years nuclear security program (sec. 3136)

    The committee recommends a provision that would require the 
Under Secretary for Nuclear Security to submit a future-years 
nuclear security program plan that would contain the estimated 
expenditures necessary to support the programs, projects, and 
activities of the National Nuclear Security Administration 
(NNSA), including the anticipated workload requirements at each 
site under the jurisdiction of the NNSA, for fiscal year 2001 
and the subsequent five-year period. The provision would 
require that the Administrator of the NNSA identify how funds 
authorized under each program element in the weapons activities 
account support the reliability and safety of the nuclear 
weapons stockpile. The provision would further require that the 
first report be submitted to Congress not later than November 
1, 2000.
    The committee notes that the Secretary of Energy was 
required by section 3135 of the National Defense Authorization 
Act for Fiscal Year 1997 (Public Law 104-201) and section 3253 
of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2000 
(Public Law 106-65) to provide a five-year budget plan, and 
that the Secretary failed to comply with such requirements. The 
committee further notes that the Secretary of Defense provides 
such future-year budget data to Congress with the President's 
budget request. The committee believes that such a plan will 
provide an important planning tool for the Secretary, the 
Administrator, and the Congress, and would serve as a 
baselineupon which the congressional defense committees can better 
evaluate succeeding budget submissions.

Cooperative research and development of the National Nuclear Security 
        Administration (sec. 3137)

    The committee recommends a provision that would establish 
cooperative research and development objectives for the 
Administrator of the National Nuclear Security Administration 
(NNSA) and require that such cooperative research and 
development be consistent with and support the missions of the 
National Nuclear Security Administration. The provision would 
establish a goal of obligating 0.5 percent of NNSA funds 
available during fiscal years 2001 and 2002 for cooperative 
research and development agreements, or similar cooperative, 
cost-shared research partnerships with non-federal 
organizations. The provision would further require the 
Administrator of the NNSA to submit a report to the 
congressional defense committees setting forth a recommendation 
as to the appropriate percentage goal levels. The provision 
would require that, beginning in March 2002, and no later than 
the end of March of each year thereafter, the Administrator 
report to Congress on whether the goals of this section have 
been met in the previous fiscal year. If the goals have not 
been met, the provision would require the Administrator to 
describe the actions he or she will take to achieve such goals 
and provide any legislative changes recommended to achieve 
them.

   SUBTITLE D--PROGRAM AUTHORIZATIONS, RESTRICTIONS, AND LIMITATIONS


Processing, treatment, and disposition of legacy nuclear materials 
        (sec. 3151)

    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 at the Savannah River 
site. The provision would further prohibit use of funds to 
begin decommissioning activities at the F-canyon facility, 
including studies and planning, until the Defense Nuclear 
Facilities Safety Board and the Secretary of Energy submit a 
report certifying that all materials currently present in the 
facility are safely stabilized and the requirements for the 
facility to meet future fissile materials disposition needs can 
be fully met utilizing the H-canyon facility. The provision 
would require the Secretary to submit to the Committees on 
Armed Services of the Senate and the House of Representatives a 
plan describing how all long-term chemical separations 
activities would be transferred from the F-canyon facility to 
the H-canyon facility beginning in fiscal year 2002. The report 
would be submitted not later than February 15, 2001.

Formerly Utilized Sites Remedial Action Program (sec. 3152)

    The committee recommends a provision that would prohibit 
the use of any funds authorized to be appropriated or otherwise 
made available to the Department of Energy by this or any other 
Act for travel by the Secretary of Energy or any employees of 
the Office of Secretary of Energy after March 1, 2001, unless 
or until the Secretary certifies to the congressional defense 
committees that the Department will not utilize Atomic Energy 
Defense funding to conduct treatment, storage, or disposal 
activities at sites designated as Formerly Utilized Sites 
Remedial Action Program (FUSRAP).
    The committee notes that the National Defense Authorization 
Act for Fiscal Year 2000 (Public Law 106-65) prohibits any 
Atomic Energy Defense funds authorized to be appropriated or 
otherwise made available to the Department of Energy for any 
fiscal year after fiscal year 1999 from being obligated or 
expended to conduct treatment, storage, or disposal activities 
at sites designated as FUSRAP sites. The committee continues to 
support the cleanup of FUSRAP sites in an expeditious, cost-
effective manner. The committee, however, does not support the 
use of scarce Atomic Energy Defense funds for this purpose.

Department of Energy Defense Nuclear Nonproliferation Program (sec. 
        3153)

    The budget request included $682.6 million for the Arms 
Control and Nonproliferation and Verification Research and 
Development programs of the DOE Defense Nuclear 
Nonproliferation Program under the National Nuclear Security 
Administration. While the committee considers the activities 
included in this account important to U.S. national security, 
the committee is concerned with the proposed increase of 25 
percent in funding over the fiscal year 2000 appropriated 
level. The committee believes this level of growth is 
unjustified. Therefore, the committee recommends $571.1 million 
for this account in fiscal year 2001, a decrease of $111.6 
million from the budget request, reflecting a net increase of 
$65.4 million over the fiscal year 2000 appropriated level.

                          Arms Control Program

    The budget request included $408.6 million for the programs 
contained within the Defense Nuclear Nonproliferation Program's 
Arms Control Program account. The committee notes that 
thisaccount was formerly included in the nonproliferation and national 
security account during fiscal year 2000. The committee recommends 
$308.0 million for fiscal year 2001, a reduction of $100.0 million.
    The budget request included $272.8 million for the Arms 
Control Operations Program within the Arms Control Program 
account. While the committee supports this request, the 
committee is concerned that DOE has not been funding a number 
of programs within the Arms Control Operations Program at 
levels intended by the Congress due to budgetary constraints in 
some of the other programs within the Arms Control Program. 
Therefore, the committee directs that the following programs 
within the Arms Control Operations Program receive no more than 
the following amount of funding: $144.8 million for the 
Material Protection, Control, and Accounting Program; $5 
million for the International Emergency Cooperation Program; 
$14.0 million for the Export Control Operations Program; $16.0 
million for the Spent Fuel Activities in Kazakhstan Program; 
$17.5 million for the Nuclear Cities Initiative (NCI); $22.5 
million for the Initiatives for Proliferation Prevention 
Program (IPP); $15.2 million for the Transparent and 
Irreversible Nuclear Reductions Program; and $37.6 million for 
other arms control program activities.

          Material Protection, Control, and Accounting Program

    The budget request included $144.8 million for the Material 
Protection, Control, and Accounting (MPC&A) Program. The 
committee supports this request, however, the committee is 
concerned with the findings of a recent General Accounting 
Office report on this program.
    Approximately half of the threat reduction funds spent to 
date by DOE have been expended by the MPC&A Program. In March 
2000, the GAO issued a report entitled ``Limited Progress in 
Improving Nuclear Material Security in Russia and the Newly 
Independent States.'' The report found that the MPC&A Program 
had spent $481.2 million dollars in Russia and the newly 
independent states since the program's inception in 1994. These 
funds were spent for a variety of MPC&A activities, including 
security training, improvements to weapons-usable nuclear 
materials transport vehicles, and have improved the security of 
approximately 70 percent of the total weapons-usable material 
at risk. Just seven percent of the weapons-usable material at 
risk for theft or diversion, however, has been protected by 
fully installed security systems.
    The committee is concerned that for almost half a billion 
dollars invested in this threat reduction work, the MPC&A 
Program has not made significant progress toward reducing the 
threat posed by unsecured weapons-usable nuclear materials in 
the former Soviet Union. Therefore, the committee recommends a 
provision requiring DOE to provide an annual report to the 
Senate and House Armed Services Committees on the MPC&A Program 
that describes the status of securing weapons-usable nuclear 
material identified by DOE as being at risk for theft and 
diversion that has received complete and integrated material 
protection, control, and accounting systems in Russia. The 
report should specifically describe: (1) the number of 
buildings and site locations with completed and integrated 
material protection, control, and accounting upgraded systems; 
(2) the total amount of highly-enriched uranium and plutonium 
secured to date in Russia under the auspices of the program; 
(3) the amount of weapons-usable nuclear material remaining 
that still requires complete and integrated material 
protection, control, and accounting systems; (4) the out year 
budget costs and planning estimated to secure the remaining 
material; and (5) the total cost to date and by fiscal year of 
the completed material protection, control, and accounting 
systems. This report for the previous fiscal year is due no 
later than January 1, each year during the lifetime of the 
program. The first report, covering fiscal year 2000 is due 
January 1, 2001.
    According to the March 2000 GAO report, little progress has 
been made in installing nuclear security systems in Russia's 
nuclear weapons complex, where over 90 percent of all the 
nuclear material in the former Soviet Union is located. This is 
primarily due to the reluctance of Russian officials to grant 
DOE access to buildings in the nuclear weapons complex. It is 
the committee's understanding that DOE is negotiating with 
Russia to gain better access in the nuclear weapons complex, 
but to date no agreement has been achieved.
    The committee believes obtaining an appropriate access 
policy is necessary to ensure that U.S. funding for this 
program achieves its intended purpose. Because the MPC&A 
Program has enjoyed good access at the Russian Navy sites 
utilizing a model that is acceptable to both parties, the 
committee recommends that this model be examined as an option 
for gaining access to the nuclear weapons complex. The 
committee believes that until such an access policy is agreed 
to, the MPC&A Program will be unable to adequately address the 
threat of unsecured weapons-usable nuclear materials in Russia. 
Therefore, the committee recommends a provision prohibiting the 
obligation of funds for any MPC&A Program projects in the 
Russian weapons complex after October 1, 2000, until an access 
policy is agreed to with the Russians and implemented by the 
Secretary of Energy. The committee requires the Secretary of 
Energy to notify the committee in writing that an access policy 
has been established and implemented prior to obligating funds 
for an MPC&A Program project in the Russian nuclear weapons 
complex.

Nuclear cities initiative

    The budget request included $17.5 million for the NCI, an 
increase of $10.0 million over the fiscal year 2000 
appropriated level. The committee supports this request. As 
part of its efforts to address the threat posed by diversion of 
former Soviet Union scientific expertise, DOE created the NCI 
in 1998 to work exclusively in Russia's closed cities to create 
jobs for displaced Russian workers in the nuclear complex, and 
to assist the Russian Federation in reducing the size of its 
nuclear weapons complex.
    Last year the committee included a provision prohibiting 
funds for the NCI from being obligated or expended until the 
Secretary of Energy certified to Congress that Russia had 
agreed to close some of its facilities engaged in work on 
weapons of mass destruction. The committee was disappointed by 
the certification provided by the Secretary of Energy pursuant 
to this provision. The evidence provided by the Secretary to 
support the certification failed to demonstrate that an 
agreement had been reached between the United States and the 
Russian Federation stating that Russia would close some of its 
facilities engaged in work on weapons of mass destruction, as 
the committee had intended.
    The committee continues to believe that a binding agreement 
should be concluded to ensure the U.S. taxpayer that their 
investment in this program is facilitating closure of some 
facilities of the Russian nuclear weapons complex, thereby 
effectively reducing this threat to U.S. national security. 
Therefore, the committee recommends a provision which 
reiterates its requirement that of the amounts authorized to be 
appropriated for the NCI Program, no funds may be obligated or 
expended for purposes of providing assistance under this 
program to more than three nuclear cities, and more than two 
serial production facilities in Russia in fiscal year 2001, 
until 30 days after the Secretary of Energy reports to the 
Senate and House Armed Services Committees, in writing, that a 
signed agreement has been reached between the U. S. Government 
and the Government of the Russian Federation that provides that 
Russia will close some of its facilities engaged in nuclear 
weapons assembly and disassembly work.
    The committee notes the similarity between the projects in 
the NCI and those of the IPP Program. Last year the committee 
imposed project review procedures for the IPP Program to 
improve the program management and effectiveness of IPP 
projects in Russia. Since those requirements were imposed, the 
IPP Program has been able to demonstrate to Congress an 
effective process for evaluating projects to identify those 
that have the greatest likelihood for success and to ensure 
that these projects are consistent with U.S. national security 
interests. Since the IPP and the NCI have similar objectives, 
the committee believes that a similar project review procedure 
should be instituted for NCI projects. Therefore, the committee 
recommends a provision requiring that no more than 50 percent 
of the funds made available for the NCI for fiscal year 2001 
may be obligated until after the Secretary of Energy 
establishes and implements project review procedures for 
projects under the NCI. These procedures must ensure that all 
scientific, technical, and commercial projects proposed under 
the NCI: will not enhance Russian military or weapons of mass 
destruction capabilities; are not inadvertently transferred or 
utilized for military purposes; are commercially viable; and 
have a commercial, industrial or other nonprofit entity 
partner. A report on the project review procedures established 
and implemented for NCI projects shall be submitted to the 
Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and House not later 
than January 1, 2001.

                  International Nuclear Safety Program

    The budget request included $20 million for the 
International Nuclear Safety Program. The committee supports 
this request, however the committee is troubled by the 
expanding scope of the program. The committee believes the 
program has inappropriately expanded beyond its mission of 
working to improve the safety of Soviet-designed reactors and 
upgrading the nuclear safety infrastructure of the countries 
where these reactors operate. In particular, the committee is 
concerned that program funds are being used to fund such items 
as environmental centers and DOE representative offices in 
Paris and Tokyo. Since the program has not yet completed its 
safety and training mission, the committee is concerned that 
its expanding scope has hampered the program from realizing its 
intended goal of nuclear safety. The committee believes that 
the program should refocus its efforts on addressing the most 
immediate safety concerns, such as providing fire doors for 
these facilities to prevent fires from spreading from area to 
area within these reactor facilities, and providing sufficient 
training to minimize human error, a lead cause of reactor 
accidents. The committee directs the funding authorized to be 
appropriated or otherwise made available for fiscal year 2001 
for the International Nuclear Safety program shall be available 
only for purposes of providing basic nuclear safety upgrades 
and training related to preventing nuclear operator error and 
improving the operational safety of Soviet designed nuclear 
reactors.

Long-Term nonproliferation initiative

    The budget request included $100.0 million for a new long 
term nonproliferation initiative proposed by the Secretary of 
Energy. The committee believes the case for this initiative has 
not been made by the DOE. Therefore, the committee does not 
authorize the $100.0 million requested for this initiative.
    The committee believes funding this initiative is 
premature. DOE requested $70.0 million of the initiative for 
long term nuclear fuel cycle cooperative research and 
development. The committee is concerned that to date the DOE 
has been unable to provide clear, fundamental program planning 
parametes necessary to ensure successful implementation, 
management, oversight, and accountability for the initiative. 
The DOE is unable to demonstrate clear program parameters in 
the initiative, such as how the initiative would be able to 
expend effectively the $70.0 million requested during fiscal 
year 2001. In addition, the initiative lacks any government-to-
government agreements with the Russians to indicate Russia's 
commitment to the initiative.
    The remaining $30.0 million in the request for the 
initiative consists of additional funding for ongoing programs 
within the Nonproliferation and National Security Account. The 
committee is concerned that requests for these ongoing programs 
were made not only through the Nonproliferation and National 
Security Account, but also under this initiative, and that 
these activities have been described as new initiatives by DOE. 
These activities are already being funded under existing 
programs. Therefore, the committee will not fund these 
activities under this new initiative.

       Nonproliferation and Verification Research and Development

    The budget request included $232.9 million for the 
Nonproliferation and Verification Research and Development 
Program. The committee strongly supports the ongoing work in 
this program and recommends an increase of $30.0 million over 
the budget request. The committee believes the vital 
technologies being developed and tested in this program play a 
critical role in detecting and deterring weapons of mass 
destruction proliferation, monitoring nuclear explosions, and 
detecting and responding to chemical and biological weapons 
attacks.
    It is the committee's understanding that the Secretary of 
Energy is concerned with the high emphasis on nonproliferation 
programs with Russia, while possible proliferation activities 
and threats from other countries of concern remain relatively 
understudied and unanalyzed. The committee concurs with the 
Secretary of Energy's concerns for the need for broader 
regional arms control research. Therefore, the committee 
directs the Secretary of Energy to utilize a portion of the 
amounts for this program to conduct evaluations of the 
technical capabilities of other geographic areas of concern to 
U.S. national security to develop and deliver weapons of mass 
destruction.

Modification of counterintelligence polygraph program (sec. 3154)

    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 3154 of the National Defense Authorization Act for 
Fiscal Year 2000 (Public Law 106-65) by authorizing the 
Secretary of Energy to waive the requirement that certain 
Department of Energy (DOE) employees and DOE contractor 
employees successfully pass a counterintelligence polygraph 
exam before such employees can be granted access to high-risk 
programs. The provision would allow the Secretary to waive this 
requirement for any individual for a period not to exceed 120 
days, if the Secretary determines that: (1) such a waiver is in 
the national security interests of the United States; (2) the 
covered employee has been granted a security clearance; and (3) 
the covered employee signs a written acknowledgment that the 
employment is conditional upon successfully passing a 
counterintelligence polygraph exam within 120 days of the date 
of signing such an acknowledgment. The provision would also 
allow the Secretary to waive this requirement for any 
individual who the Secretary determines: (1) has completed 
successfully a full-scope counterintelligence polygraph exam 
while employed with another federal agency; or (2) should not 
be examined by reason of treatment for a medical or 
psychological condition.

Employee incentives for employees at closure project facilities (sec. 
        3155)

    The committee recommends a provision that would provide 
incentives for retention and separation of federal employees at 
closure facilities of the Department of Energy (DOE) 
established pursuant to section 3143 of the National Defense 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1997 (Public Law 104-106). 
Incentives would include the accumulation of annual leave up to 
720 hours, lump sum retention allowances, authority to pay 
voluntary separation incentive payments (also referred to as 
buyouts), freeze the cost of and continue health benefits for 
employees who are either voluntarily or involuntarily 
separated, and authority to make temporary assignments of 
certain DOE employees to private sector organizations, on a 
non-reimbursable basis.
    The committee notes that, currently, only the Rocky Flats 
Environmental Technology and Ohio Field Office sites are 
designated as defense closure facilities, but that additional 
facilities may be so designated in the future if such sites 
meet the requirements established in section 3143 of the 
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1997 (Public 
Law 104- 106). The committee believes that incentives are 
needed to mitigate the anticipated high attrition rate of 
certain federal employees with critical skills. The committee 
expects the Department to use this authority to retain such 
critical skills during potentially disruptive reductions-in-
force at those sites designated to close prior to fiscal year 
2006.

                       SUBTITLE E--OTHER MATTERS


Extension of authority for appointment of certain scientific, 
        engineering, and technical personnel (sec. 3171)

    The committee recommends a provision that would extend 
excepted service hiring authority for up to 200 positions, 
originally authorized in the National Defense Authorization Act 
for Fiscal Year 1995 (Public Law 103-337). The committee 
understands that this provision would allow the Department of 
Energy to continue to compete more effectively for high quality 
employees with the specialized technical skills needed by the 
Department.

Updates of report on nuclear test readiness postures (sec. 3172)

    The committee recommends a provision that would require the 
Secretary of Energy to update the nuclear test readiness report 
established by section 3152 of the National Defense 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1996 (Public Law 104-106) on 
a biannual basis. The Secretary would be required to submit the 
first updated report to the congressional defense committees 
beginning on February 15, 2001. The reports would include a 
listing and description of those workforce skills and 
capabilities that are essential to carry out the missions of 
the site, a listing and description of the required 
infrastructure and physical plant that are essential to carry 
out the missions of the site, and an assessment of the 
readiness status of the workforce and infrastructure. The 
report would be submitted in both classified and unclassified 
form.

Frequency of reports on inadvertent releases of restricted data and 
        formerly restricted data (sec. 3173)

    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 3161 of the Strom Thurmond National Defense 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2000 (Public Law 106-65) by 
requiring the Secretary of Energy to report inadvertent 
releases of restricted data and formerly restricted data on a 
quarterly basis rather than 30 days after any such release.

Form of certifications regarding the safety or reliability of the 
        nuclear weapons stockpile (sec. 3174)

    The committee recommends a provision that would require the 
annual certification to the President regarding the safety and 
reliability of the U.S. nuclear stockpile be submitted in 
classified form.
    The committee notes that, beginning in 1996, the Department 
of Energy (DOE) weapons laboratory directors, the Commander in 
Chief of the U.S. Strategic Command, and the Nuclear Weapons 
Council have certified to the President on an annual basis that 
the U.S. nuclear deterrent is safe, effective, and reliable, 
and that there is no need to resume underground nuclear testing 
at this time. To date, these certifications have been submitted 
in unclassified form. The committee is concerned that should an 
issue arise in the future that would require a higher 
classification level, the current process might provide a 
disincentive to report such issues for fear of advertising a 
problem with the stockpile. The committee believes that any 
such disincentive to report fully issues regarding the 
condition of the U.S. nuclear stockpile should be removed. The 
committee further notes that the Panel to Assess the 
Reliability, Safety, and Security of the United States Nuclear 
Stockpile recommended in its November 8, 1999, report to 
Congress that such annual certification reports to the 
President be submitted in classified form.

Engineering and manufacturing research, development and demonstration 
        by plant managers of certain nuclear weapons production plants 
        (sec. 3175)

    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
the Secretary of Energy to establish a Plant Manager Research, 
Development and Demonstration (PMRDD) program to support 
innovative engineering and systems activities at the nuclear 
weapons production plants. The program would be limited to the 
Y-12 plant in Oak Ridge, Tennessee, the Kansas City plant in 
Kansas City, Missouri, and the Pantex plant in Amarillo, Texas. 
The program would be authorized at a level not to exceed two 
percent of the funds available for weapons activities at such 
plants.
    The committee anticipates that the PMRDD program would be 
used to explore viable tools and techniques for understanding 
and replacing sunset technologies and for developing more agile 
manufacturing techniques. The committee believes the creation 
of this program will support recommendations for addressing 
workforce problems at the production plants identified by the 
Commission on Retaining Nuclear Weapons Expertise (also known 
as the Chiles Commission), by assisting with recruiting and 
retention of outstanding engineers and craftsmen.

Cooperative research and development agreements for government-owned, 
        government-operated laboratories (sec. 3176)

    The committee recommends a provision that would modify the 
Stevenson-Wydler Technology Innovation Act of 1980 (15 
U.S.C.3710) to streamline the approval process for cooperative research 
and development agreements (CRADA) at government-owned, contractor-
operated (GOCO) facilities by authorizing federal agencies to 
substitute an annual strategic plan for individual joint work 
statements. The provision would further streamline the CRADA process 
for GOCO facilities by authorizing federal agencies to permit routine 
CRADAs to be negotiated and signed by GOCO employees, rather than 
federal employees.

Commendation of Department of Energy and contractor employees for 
        Exemplary Service in Stockpile Stewardship and Security (sec. 
        3177)

    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
the Secretary of Energy to award a certificate of commendation 
for meritorious service to current and former Department of 
Energy (DOE) employees, and current and former DOE contractor 
employees who worked in programs related to stewardship of the 
Nation's nuclear weapons stockpile.
    The committee notes that the dedication, intellect, and 
hard work of the scientists and craftsmen employed at DOE 
laboratories and manufacturing plants are essential to 
maintaining a credible U.S. nuclear deterrent. The committee 
further notes that former scientists and craftsmen at DOE 
laboratories, plants, and materials production sites were 
instrumental in ensuring that the United States prevailed 
during the Cold War. The committee recommends this provision in 
an effort to recognize the contributions of former employees at 
these facilities and to highlight the Nation's continued 
reliance on the capabilities of the skilled workers at DOE 
weapons laboratories and manufacturing plants. The committee 
commends these individuals for their continued service to the 
Nation and for the peace that they have helped to preserve.

                        OTHER ITEMS OF INTEREST


Department of Energy participation in the Interstate Technology 
        Reciprocity Council

    The committee commends the Department of Energy (DOE) and 
state environmental agencies for their cooperative efforts to 
accelerate the deployment of innovative technologies at DOE and 
Department of Defense cleanup sites. The committee notes that 
over 30 states have joined with the DOE Environmental 
Management program to form the Interstate Technology Regulatory 
Cooperation Working Group, which provides guidance documents, 
training, and other means to accelerate regulatory acceptance 
and implementation of advanced technologies that are capable of 
saving both time and money. The committee encourages DOE to 
continue its participation and support for this cooperative 
program.

Laboratory directed research and development

    The committee notes that the Laboratory Directed Research 
and Development (LDRD) funds available to the Department of 
Energy (DOE) laboratories were reduced by section 308 of the 
Energy and Water Development Appropriations Act for Fiscal Year 
2000, from the customary six percent to four percent for fiscal 
year 2000, and that the LDRD program was removed from the 
environmental management program. The committee directs the DOE 
to return the LDRD program to its full scope and to its full 
normal six percent funding level in fiscal year 2001.
    The committee further notes that this funding, in most 
instances, would be the only available source of basic funding 
for research and development (R&D) for the DOE laboratories. 
The January 27, 2000, external review of the LDRD program by 
the DOE Laboratory Operations Board found that ``. . . the LDRD 
programs are vital in recruiting, retaining, and integrating 
the best scientific talent into the laboratories and their 
mission programs'' and that the LDRD program at the DOE 
laboratories has won more R&D 100 awards than any other 
organization or program in the world.

Report on Post-closure employee benefits at closure project facilities

    The committee directs the Secretary of Energy to submit a 
report, not later than June 1, 2001, to the congressional 
defense committees detailing any plans for the transfer and 
post-closure administration of benefits for employees of 
Department of Energy contractors at closure project facilities 
established pursuant to section 3143 of the National Defense 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1997 (Public Law 104-106). 
The report shall include the following: (1) strategies to 
ensure that long-term employee and retiree benefits are 
consistent; in terms of cost and longevity, with such benefits 
for employees at other DOE facilities; (2) an analysis of the 
long-term funding required for the administration of pension 
and health benefits plans at each closure facility; (3) plans 
for transfer and post-closure administration of any DOE-funded 
pension plans at each closure facility; and (4) plans for the 
transfer and post closure administration of DOE-funded long-
term health benefits plans at each closure facility.
    The committee notes that, currently, only the Rocky Flats 
Environmental Technology and Ohio Field Office sites are 
designated as defense closure facilities, but that additional 
facilities may be so designated in the future if such sites 
meetthe requirements established in section 3143 of the 
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1997 (Public Law 
104-106).
          TITLE XXXII--DEFENSE NUCLEAR FACILITIES SAFETY BOARD

Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board (sec. 3201)
    The committee recommends $18.5 million for the Defense 
Nuclear Facilities Safety Board (DNFSB) for fiscal year 2001, 
the amount of the budget request.
    The committee notes that the National Nuclear Security 
Administration Act (Public Law 106-65), which established the 
National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) within the 
Department of Energy (DOE), does not repeal or amend the 
requirements of Chapter 21 of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954. 
The committee further notes that the independent oversight 
authority of the DNFSB related to health and safety matters at 
DOE and NNSA defense nuclear facilities was not changed by the 
National Nuclear Security Administration Act.
    The committee commends the DNFSB for its continuing efforts 
to foster positive change in the safety culture at DOE's 
defense nuclear facilities. The committee notes that the DNFSB 
is an independent technical body that continually assesses 
safety issues at DOE facilities and submits formal safety 
findings and recommendations to the Secretary of Energy, the 
Assistant Secretary of Energy for Environment, Safety and 
Health, and Congress. The committee believes that the external 
oversight provided by the DNFSB is comparable to or better than 
the external regulation that could be provided by another 
Federal agency, such as the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. As 
such, the committee believes that the DNFSB is the most cost-
effective means of ensuring continuous improvement of the 
safety culture at DOE nuclear facilities.
    The committee remains concerned that establishing a new, 
untested external regulation regime at DOE weapons facilities 
could have an adverse effect on U.S. national security 
interests. The committee is equally concerned that such a 
regime would draw scarce resources away from high priority, 
compliance-driven clean up actions and critical national 
security activities. As a result, the committee does not 
support any further move toward external regulation of DOE 
defense nuclear facilities. The committee notes that the 
Secretary of Energy has likewise concluded that the cost of 
implementing a new external regulation regime at DOE defense 
nuclear facilities would not be cost effective.
                 TITLE XXXIII--NAVAL PETROLEUM RESERVES

Minimum price of petroleum sold from the naval petroleum reserves (sec. 
        3301)
    The committee recommends a provision that would repeal the 
authority for the Secretary of Energy to sell oil from the 
naval petroleum reserves for less than full market value.
Repeal of authority to contract for cooperative or unit plans affecting 
        Naval Petroleum Reserve Numbered 1 (sec. 3302)
    The committee recommends a provision that would amend 
section 7426 of title 10, United States Code, by deleting 
language that authorized the Federal Government to contract for 
cooperative or unit plans in the administration of the Naval 
Petroleum Reserve Numbered 1 at Elk Hills. The committee notes 
that the United States interests to Naval Petroleum Reserve 
Numbered 1 at Elk Hills was sold to the private sector.
                TITLE XXXIV--NATIONAL DEFENSE STOCKPILE

National defense stockpile (secs. 3401-3402)
    The committee recommends a provision that would authorize 
the stockpile manager to obligate $75.0 million from the 
National Defense Stockpile Transfer Fund during fiscal year 
2001 for the authorized uses of funds under section 9(b)(2) of 
the Strategic and Critical Materials Stock Piling Act.
    The committee further recommends a provision that would 
increase the amount of revenues that could be achieved through 
the sale of unneeded materials from the national defense 
stockpile.

                        LEGISLATIVE REQUIREMENTS

                      Departmental Recommendations

    By letter dated March 6, 2000, the Acting General Counsel 
of the Department of Defense forwarded to the President of the 
Senate proposed legislation ``To authorize appropriations for 
fiscal year 2001 for military activities of the Department of 
Defense, to prescribe military personnel strengths for fiscal 
years 2000 and 2001, and for other purposes.'' The transmittal 
letter and proposed legislation were officially referred as 
Executive Communication 8129 to the Committee on Armed Services 
on March 6, 2000. Executive Communication 8129 is available for 
review at the committee. Senators Warner and Levin introduced 
this legislative proposal as S. 2481, by request, on April 27, 
2000.

                            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 2001.
    Vote: Adopted by a roll call vote of 19-1.
    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 2001.

                        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

    Our armed forces remain the best-trained, best-equipped and 
most capable fighting force in the world. This bill continues 
the bipartisan partnership between the Congress and the 
Administration to improve the quality of life for the men and 
women of our armed forces and their families, and to transform 
our military forces to ensure that they are capable of meeting 
all of the threats to America's security in the 21st Century.
    We have additional views on two issues addressed in the 
bill.
1. Vieques
    The Secretary of the Navy, the Chief of Naval Operations 
and others have testified before the Committee that there is no 
adequate substitute for live training by the Navy on the island 
of Vieques. Earlier this year, the President entered into an 
agreement with the Governor of Puerto Rico, which establishes 
an orderly process for what we all hope will be the resumption 
of such training. Under this agreement, we would provide $40 
million of economic assistance to the citizens of Vieques and 
transfer unneeded Department of Defense property on the western 
end of the island to the government of Puerto Rico with no 
strings attached. If a referendum on Vieques approves a 
resumption of live-fire training, an additional $50 million of 
economic assistance would be provided. If the referendum does 
not approve a resumption of training, Department of Defense 
property on the eastern end of the island would be transferred 
to the General Services Administration for disposal.
    As of the conclusion of the Committee mark-up, the 
government of Puerto Rico had lived up to its obligations under 
the agreement. The Navy training range on the Vieques has been 
cleared of protestors with the assistance of the government of 
Puerto Rico. Navy training exercises have now resumed on the 
island, with the use of inert ordnance as provided in the 
agreement.
    The Committee considered proposed legislation that would 
have been inconsistent with this agreement. In our view, these 
unilateral changes to the terms of the agreement, at a time 
when the government of Puerto Rico is living up to its 
obligations under the agreement, could have been perceived by 
some as a continuation of the kind of behavior that the Navy 
acknowledges got them into problems in Vieques in the first 
place. Such changes would have offended many citizens of 
Vieques and others throughout Puerto Rico, undermining the 
efforts of the Navy, and this Committee, to ensure the eventual 
resumption of live-fire training on Vieques. For this reason, 
we are pleased that the Committee did not adopt this proposal.
    Instead, the provision in the bill would authorize $40 
million of economic assistance, a referendum on the future of 
training on Vieques, and an additional $50 million of economic 
assistance if a resumption of live-fire training is approved--
all of which were requested by the President in accordance with 
the agreement. With regard to the other element of the 
agreement--the transfer of various lands to Puerto Rico under 
certain circumstances--the provision is silent, deferring 
congressional action until a later date. Finally, the provision 
in the bill would require a study of future requirements at 
Fort Buchanan and a moratorium on improvements at the facility 
until the study can be completed, but would not require the 
closure of Fort Buchanan or any other facility in Puerto Rico 
in the event of a negative vote on the referendum.
    Our preference is to fully implement the agreement between 
the President and the Governor of Puerto Rico at this time. 
However, avoiding unilateral changes to the terms of the 
agreement is the next best outcome.
2. Department of Energy Organization
    Last year, the National Defense Authorization Act for 
Fiscal Year 2000 contained provisions reorganizing the entire 
Department of Energy nuclear weapons complex by creating a new, 
``semi-autonomous'' National Nuclear Security Administration 
(NNSA) within the Department. These provisions, which were 
added in conference, were inconsistent with legislation passed 
in the Senate by a vote of 96-1 and went far beyond anything 
that was even considered by the House of Representatives.
    The Secretary chose to implement this legislation by ``dual 
hatting'' a number of key NNSA employees, authorizing them to 
serve concurrently in both NNSA positions and DOE positions 
outside NNSA. Although the provisions establishing the NNSA did 
not contain any provision prohibiting dual-hatting and the 
Secretary received a legal opinion concluding that such dual-
hatting was permissible, a number of Members of our Committee 
felt that this approach was inconsistent with the legislation. 
This bill responds to that perceived violation of the statute 
with provisions that would: (1) prohibit DOE from paying any 
NNSA officials who are ``dual-hatted'; and (2) prohibit the 
Secretary of Energy from changing the organization of the NNSA 
in any way.
    These are unprecedented restrictions on the ability of a 
Cabinet Secretary to manage his own Department, and undermine 
our ability to hold Secretary Richardson and his successors 
accountable for the activities of the Department of Energy.
    Dual-hatting is commonplace throughout the government and 
has been legally permissible since we repealed the Dual Office 
Holding Act of 1894 more than 35 years ago. We have required 
the NNSA to handle 18 separate functions, including program 
management, safeguards and security, emergency management, 
environment, safety and health operations, contracting, 
intelligence, counterintelligence, personnel, legal matters, 
legislative affairs, and public affairs, among others. We may 
want all of these positions to be staffed overnight, but that 
doesn't make it happen. During the transition period, somebody 
has to fill these positions, and dual-hatting was probably the 
most economical and effective approach for the Secretary to 
take.
    We are particularly concerned that the enactment of this 
provision would preclude the Department from creating a single 
Counter-Intelligence czar, who serves as both the head of the 
Department-wide Office of Counterintelligence and the Chief of 
Defense Nuclear Counterintelligence. We believe that this 
consolidation of responsibilities could actually clarify 
responsibilities and eliminate opportunities for buck-passing 
in a way that makes sense.
    In any case, the prohibition on reorganization is 
completely unnecessary in light of the express prohibition on 
dual-hatting. This provision would go far beyond its stated 
purpose of addressing dual-hatting, and prohibit the Secretary 
of Energy from even establishing, altering or consolidating any 
organizational unit, component or function of the NNSA.
    Last year, the President's Foreign Intelligence Advisory 
Board reported that the entire organization of the Department 
of Energy and its nuclear weapons complex had become 
``dysfunctional''. Much of this organization remains unchanged, 
despite its transfer to the new NNSA. Yet this provision would 
prohibit the Secretary from addressing the problem by, for 
example:
          reorganizing the NNSA to eliminate superfluous layers 
        of management and make the organization more efficient;
          reassigning functions from one component of NNSA to 
        another, to rationalize the structure of the new 
        Administration;
          creating new offices within NNSA to address emerging 
        problems or overarching needs of the new 
        Administration.
    In short, this provision not only fails to address the 
problem identified by its sponsors, it also undermines the 
ability of the Secretary of Energy to address many of the 
concerns that led to the enactment of last year's legislation 
in the first place. We believe that both of the DOE provisions 
should be deleted from the bill.

                                   Carl Levin.
                                   Chuck Robb.
                                   Ted Kennedy.
                                   Jack Reed.
                                   Mary L. Landrieu.
                                   Jeff Bingaman.

               ADDITIONAL VIEWS OF SENATOR JEFF BINGAMAN

    I support the Armed Services Committee markup of this 
year's National Defense Authorization bill since it provides 
the necessary resources to meet the nation's increasingly 
complex military missions while also supporting quality of life 
improvements for our men and women in uniform. The bill also 
contains important improvements in health benefits for the 
nation's veterans, including a comprehensive pharmacy benefit 
for Medicare-eligible beneficiaries with no enrollment fee or 
deductible. Although I believe much more needs to be done to 
honor our commitment to provide adequate health care to 
veterans, this bill contains an important step toward that 
goal.
    I am particularly pleased that this bill contains important 
measures honoring the nation's most heroic veterans. The bill 
contains a provision authorizing an honorarium for the 
survivors, or surviving spouses, of the Bataan Death March who 
were made to perform slave labor by the Japanese during World 
War II. The heroic efforts of those who served in the 
Phillippines during Bataan and Corregidor are legendary, but 
have never been fully compensated in the settlement of war 
claims. In 1952 the Japanese government agreed to provide 
compensation to American prisoners of war, but never 
compensated prisoners of war for their forced labor supporting 
the Japanese war effort. Claims for compensation have been 
under consideration by the courts for many years, but final 
settlement has not been reached. In the meantime, veterans of 
that campaign grow fewer as time passes and remain 
uncompensated for the sacrifices they made on behalf of the 
nation. This provision recognizes the importance of honoring 
those heroic veterans as an expression of the nation's 
gratitude. I will continue to support efforts to do so until 
this important gesture is enacted into law.
    The bill also looks toward the future as well as 
recognizing the past. This legislation contains about $8.0 
billion in funding for investment in science and technology 
research. This represents an increase of $446 million over the 
President's budget request and meets the funding goal for 
increased investment in future defense technologies that I 
proposed to the Committee two years ago. I am hopeful that the 
additional resources will be used to explore new technological 
concepts that can be used to maintain our edge over potential 
adversaries not only on the battlefield, but with respect to 
increasingly urgent requirements to protect the nation's 
infrastructure from various forms of terrorism including the 
use of weapons of mass destruction. In addition, increased 
investment in laser research might provide useful technologies 
that could meet future military objectives that could also 
minimize collateral damage.
    I remain concerned, however, that the bill does not provide 
all that could be done to support the most vital national 
security objectives with respect to non-proliferation and the 
strategic relationship between the United States and Russia. 
The President's budget, for example, requested $100 million to 
expand our efforts to control the threat of ``loose nukes'' 
finding their way into unfriendly hands. The ``Long-Term 
Nonproliferation Program for Russia'' included a request for 
funds that would prevent Russia from increasing its stockpile 
of plutonium separated from spent fuel from nuclear power 
plants by suspending reprocessing of spent fuel. It included 
funds to expand DOE's successful Materials, Protection, 
Control, and Accounting (MPC&A) program that has successfully 
implemented security regimes at dozens of Russian sites where 
nuclear materials are stored. The proposal also included funds 
to close nuclear warhead production facilities at Avangard and 
Penza-19 and to support displaced nuclear weapons workers to 
prevent them from seeking employment in unfriendly places.
    In addition, the bill reduces funding for the Russian-
American Observation Satellite (RAMOS) program, a cooperative 
technology demonstration project intended to enhance the 
ability to detect, characterize, and track theater range 
missiles that could be used against either country. I strongly 
believe that it is in our national security interest that 
Russian early warning capabilities be accurate, reliable, and 
effective. Misunderstandings or misperceptions of either 
nuclear power when under missile attack could lead to 
unanticipated and unintended conflict escalation that could 
decimate both countries. It's in our essential national 
interest, therefore, to work cooperatively to minimize the risk 
of such mistakes. In addition, since this program was initially 
authorized at the highest levels of both governments, it is 
important as a matter of building confidence and trust to 
support the original agreement underlying this program. The 
reduced RAMOS program contained in the bill calls for a 
restructured program that significantly reduces the benefits to 
both countries from those originally anticipated when the 
program was first agreed to.
    I am also disappointed to note that, although the bill 
contains substantial funding in support of the Department of 
Energy's Stockpile Stewardship Program, it does not contain 
certain key investments needed to ensure the future 
effectiveness of that program. As a strong supporter of the 
Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty, I believe that in order to 
achieve the non-proliferation goals of that international 
agreement, key investments must be made now in order to 
optimize our confidence in the nation's nuclear stockpile for 
the foreseeable future. The President's budget, for example, 
requested only a modest amount for the Microsystems and 
Engineering Sciences Application (MESA) project, that would 
invest in cutting edge nanotechnology research that would 
incorporate advanced microelectronic technologies into the 
refurbishment and sustainment of our nuclear stockpile. I 
believe significantly more funding is needed now in order to 
ensure that we have that capability in the future so that we 
will be more confident of the reliability of our nuclear 
stockpile in the absence of testing nuclear weapons. The bill 
contains no additional funding beyond the requested level for 
this high priority effort needed to support the nation's non-
proliferation goals while meeting nuclear stockpile reliability 
requirements.
    I am particularly concerned that the bill includes 
provisions restricting the authority of the Secretary of Energy 
to manage his own department by precluding him from directing 
any reorganization, consolidation, alteration, or other 
adjustments to components within the National Nuclear Security 
Administration (NNSA). The NNSA, although established as a 
``semi-autonomous agency'' within the Department of Energy, is 
still subject to the Secretary's authority under the 
legislation approved last year. Legislation contained in this 
year's bill would set a dangerous precedent that empowers the 
Congress to restrict cabinet members' authority in ways that 
could preclude greater efficiency or modernization needed to 
keep pace with changing political, economic, or technological 
environments. I urge my colleagues to reconsider this provision 
during the remaining steps in the legislative cycle.
    Finally, I am concerned that the provision in the bill 
regarding the agreement between the President and the Governor 
of Puerto Rico over disposition and use of Vieques island might 
have unintended results that could ultimately further 
complicate the Navy's need for realistic training. Given the 
difficulty of arriving at that agreement and the delicacy that 
pertains, I believe that any Congressional action that 
substantially alters that carefully crafted arrangement runs 
the risk of renewed confrontation and significant political 
consequences both here and in Puerto Rico.

                                                     Jeff Bingaman.

                    SENATOR McCAIN'S MINORITY VIEWS

    On most issues, I support the Committee's recommendations 
in the drafting of the Fiscal Year 2001 Defense Authorization 
bill. I voted against the bill, mostly because of what it does 
not do. I spelled out my concerns in a letter to the Chairman 
of the Senate Armed Services Committee on March 23, 2000, but 
was disappointed that the bill that emerged from the committee 
failed to address important reform issues.
    Last year, I was proud to stand with Senator Lott and 
Senator Roberts as we led the Senate in the passage of our 
legislation, the Soldiers', Sailors', Airmen's, and Marines' 
Bill of Rights Act of 1999.
    This landmark legislation made great strides in providing 
significant benefits to the entire Total Force. Specifically, 
we improved the military by: restoring military retirement 
benefits to a full 50 percent of base pay for 20-year retirees, 
directing a 4.8 percent pay raise effective last January, 
crafting pay table reform, implementing Thrift Savings Plan 
proposals, as well as other significant quality of life 
improvements. We can take pride in our efforts to take care of 
our men and women in uniform. Unfortunately, the final bill was 
missing a key provision that was stripped by our colleagues in 
the House of Representatives--food stamp relief for 
servicemembers and their families.
    I was very disappointed that the current year's 
authorization bill did not include legislation to provide a 
Special Subsistence Allowance to help the neediest families in 
the Armed Forces--numbering at least 12,000--who now require 
federal food stamp assistance. Earlier this year I again 
introduced legislation to eliminate the food stamp army. It was 
referred to the Committee on Armed Services. Despite my 
repeated urging that this critical issue be addressed, the 
Committee failed to act on the bill.
    We should have acted to eliminate the food stamp army--to 
do less is an affront to our most needy servicemembers and 
their families. It is unconscionable that the men and women who 
are willing to sacrifice their lives for their country have to 
rely on food stamps to make ends meet, and it is an abrogation 
of our responsibilities as Senators to let this reality go on 
without some sort of legislative remedy.
    One of the areas of greatest concern among military 
retirees and their families is the ``broken promise'' of 
lifetime medical care, especially for those over-age 65. While 
the Committee included some key health care provisions, they 
failed to meet what I think is the most important requirement, 
the restoration of this broken promise.
    Last year I was outspoken regarding reports that the 
aircraft carrier USS ENTERPRISE (CVN-65) deployed to the 
Persian Gulf undermanned by some 800 sailors. The Navy reports 
that it has increasing difficulty filling critical sea-going 
billets. Despite Congress' efforts, we are losing Air Force and 
Navy pilots to the commercial airlines faster than we can train 
them. The Army says that five of its 10 divisions lack enough 
majors, captains, senior enlisted personnel, tankers, and 
gunners. These Army reports corroborate the disturbingly low 
readiness ratings of the 1st Infantry Division and the 10th 
Mountain Division reported last year.
    The Committee, however, did spend a great deal of effort 
authorizing additional dollars for the many shipbuilding 
interests. For instance, the Committee added $460 million to 
build another amphibious assault ship, the LHD-8, which was not 
in the President's budget and for which the Navy has not even 
approved a procurement plan. The bill also boosted spending for 
the DDG-51 destroyer program by $144 million above the Navy's 
and the President's request.
    Finally--not to be outdone by the surface shipyards--the 
submarine shipbuilders received early authorization to procure 
the next 5 VIRGINIA class submarines, at a cost of $2.1 billion 
each, accelerating the authorization for the fifth boat by a 
full year from the Navy's current plan. In effect, the 
submarine shipbuilders have been given permission to continue 
the current non-competitive teaming arrangement, instead of 
allowing the market to determine whether only one shipyard is 
needed.
    I have noted that there has been a significant effort to 
fund items that were specifically included on the Service 
Chiefs' unfunded requirements list. However, every year, 
certain items are funded that are not on the lists and whose 
merits are questionable. In all my years serving on the House 
and the Senate Armed Services Committees, I recall no previous 
instances of one subcommittee chair transferring money to 
another subcommittee for the purpose of funding a special 
interest project. The defense bill transferred $3 million from 
the shipbuilding budget to the personnel budget to fund a new 
Navy ``Call Center'' in Cutler, Maine. I wonder why we can't 
use this same accounting method to fund improvements in the 
military retiree health care delivery system? Why not shift the 
moneyfrom the unrequested LHD-8 to pay for additional military 
health care improvements?
    When I put on my web site the lists of pork barrel projects 
that are added by members of Congress, I try not to include 
high priority programs and activities that are in the 
President's budget or are listed on the Service Chief's 
priority lists. However, I have become increasingly skeptical 
of these lists. These so-called ``wish lists'' have proven an 
effective means of ensuring that such funds are apportioned 
appropriately in terms of what is best for the national 
interest. There is, however, growing reason for concern that 
the process by which the wish lists are drafted is being 
politicized.
    This politicization has resulted in lists--especially this 
year's list from the Department of the Navy--of increasingly 
questionable merit. The Navy's fiscal year 2001 unfunded 
requirements list includes $1.2 billion for an amphibious 
aircraft carrier assault ship. Last year, the Navy did not even 
consider placing partial funding for the ship on their list 
and, furthermore, last year the Navy rejected a $500 million 
plus-up from the Senate. This is just one example of how 
Congress' political meddling has seriously impeded the 
military's ability to channel resources where they are most 
needed.
    I could continue in this vein, but it is sufficient to say 
that the military needs less money spent on pork and more money 
spent wisely to redress the serious problems caused by a decade 
of declining defense budgets. Those of us who have been 
criticized for sounding alarm bells about military readiness 
now have the empty satisfaction of seeing that there is more to 
maintaining a strong defense than a politician's history of 
falsely promising to do so.
    We must reform the bureaucracy of the Pentagon. With the 
exception of minor changes, our defense establishment looks 
just as it did 50 years ago. We must continue to incorporate 
practices from the private sector--like restructuring, 
reforming and streamlining'to eliminate duplication and 
capitalize on cost savings.
    More effort must be made to reduce the continuing growth of 
headquarters staffs and to decentralize the Pentagon's 
labyrinth of bureaucratic fiefdoms. Although nearly every 
military analyst shares these views, the Committee took great 
measures to increase the size of headquarters staffs, 
eliminating any incentive for the Pentagon to change its way of 
doing business with its bloated staffs and its outdated 
practices.
    More must be done to eliminate unnecessary and duplicative 
military contracts and military installations. Every U.S. 
military leader who has testified over the past decade has 
testified as to the critical need for further BRAC rounds. We 
can redirect from $4 to $7 billion per year by eliminating 
excess defense infrastructure. There is another $2 billion per 
year we can put to better purposes by privatizing or 
consolidating support and maintenance functions, and an 
additional $5.5 billion can be saved per year by eliminating 
``Buy America'' restrictions that only undermines U.S. 
competitiveness overseas. Despite these compelling facts, the 
Senate Armed Services Committee did not address any of these 
issues.
    I voted no on the passage of this bill because we can not 
continue with this ``business as usual'' mindset. We must 
reform the Department of Defense and we must not fall prey to 
the special interest groups that attempt to warp our 
perspective and misdirect our spending. We owe so much more to 
our men and women in uniform who defend our country. They are 
our greatest resource, and I feel they were woefully under 
represented. We must do better. The lives of our servicemembers 
and the national security of the United States are at risk.
                                                       John McCain.

                                  
