House Report 107-298 - DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE APPROPRIATIONS BILL, 2002 AND SUPPLEMENTAL APPROPRIATIONS, 2002

[House Report 107-298]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]

107th Congress Report
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
1st Session 107-298
_______________________________________________________________________

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE APPROPRIATIONS BILL, 2002 AND SUPPLEMENTAL
APPROPRIATIONS, 2002

__________

R E P O R T

of the

COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS

[to accompany H.R. 3338]

together with

ADDITIONAL VIEWS

November 19, 2001.--Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on
the State of the Union and ordered to be printed
C O N T E N T S

----------

DIVISION A--DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE APPROPRIATIONS BILL, 2002

Page
Bill Totals...................................................... 1
Committee Budget Review Process.................................. 4
Rationale for Committee Bill..................................... 4
Committee Recommendations by Major Category...................... 9
Active Military Personnel.................................... 9
Guard and Reserve Personnel.................................. 9
Operation and Maintenance.................................... 10
Procurement.................................................. 10
Research, Development, Test and Evaluation................... 11
Forces to be Supported........................................... 11
Department of the Army....................................... 11
Department of the Navy....................................... 11
Department of the Air Force.................................. 12
TITLE I. MILITARY PERSONNEL...................................... 15
Programs and Activities Funded by Military Personnel
Appropriations............................................. 15
Summary of Military Personnel Recommendations for Fiscal Year
2002....................................................... 15
Adjustments to Military Personnel Account.................... 17
End Strength Adjustments................................. 17
Program Growth........................................... 17
General Accounting Office Reductions..................... 17
Guard and Reserve Forces................................. 18
Full-time Support Strengths.............................. 18
Military Personnel, Army..................................... 19
Military Personnel, Navy..................................... 21
Military Personnel, Marine Corps............................. 23
Military Personnel, Air Force................................ 25
Reserve Personnel, Army...................................... 27
Reserve Personnel, Navy...................................... 29
Reserve Personnel, Marine Corps.............................. 31
Reserve Personnel, Air Force................................. 33
Realignment of Funds..................................... 35
National Guard Personnel, Army............................... 35
National Guard Personnel, Air Force.......................... 37
Ballistic Missile Range Safety Technology Program........ 39
TITLE II. OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE.............................. 41
Operation and Maintenance Overview........................... 43
Civilian Pay............................................. 43
Junior ROTC.............................................. 44
Government Purchase Card................................. 44
Headquarters Staff....................................... 45
Advisory and Assistance Services and Contract Workforce.. 45
Headquarters and Administrative Expenses................. 46
International Military Headquarters and Support of Other
Nations................................................ 46
A-76 Studies............................................. 46
Operation and Maintenance Budget Execution Data.......... 47
Operation and Maintenance Reprogrammings................. 47
0-1 Reprogramming Approval Requirement................... 48
Operation and Maintenance, Army.............................. 49
Electronic Maintenance System............................ 52
Camera Assisted Monitoring System--CAMS.................. 52
Mobile Kitchen Trailers Depot Maintenance................ 53
Communications Electronics............................... 53
Salute Our Services Pilot Program........................ 53
Mobility Enhancement Study............................... 52
OPTEMPO Training Resource Metrics........................ 52
Aberdeen Proving Ground A-76 Competition................. 54
Training Facilities...................................... 55
Transportation Infrastructure Analysis Center............ 55
Camouflage Nets.......................................... 55
Army Corrosion Prevention and Control Program............ 55
Controlled Humidity Preservation Program................. 55
Military Police School/MCTFT Joint Training.............. 56
Recruiting and Advertising............................... 56
Military Entrance Processing Station (MEPS).............. 56
Biocontainment Research Facility......................... 56
Classified Programs...................................... 57
Operation and Maintenance, Navy.............................. 57
NUWC Torpedo Depot Apprentice Program.................... 60
Naval Postgraduate School--CDTEMS........................ 60
Navy Learning Network Program CNET....................... 60
Manual Reverse Osmosis Desalinators...................... 61
Innovative Safety Management Pilot....................... 61
Naval Facilities Engineering Command..................... 61
Ship Depot Maintenance................................... 61
Computer Program Training................................ 61
Operation and Maintenance, Marine Corps...................... 62
Marine Corps Air-Ground Combat Center Twentynine Palms... 64
Waste Water Treatment Study.............................. 64
Joint Service NBC Defense Equipment Assessment and
Consolidation Program.................................. 64
Depot Maintenance--Radars................................ 64
Twentynine Palms MAGTF MOUT Training Facility............ 64
Training and Support Facilities.......................... 65
Operation and Maintenance, Air Force......................... 65
Active Duty Military Personnel Underexecution............ 68
CKU-5 Rocket Catapult PPI................................ 68
Classified Programs...................................... 68
Operation and Maintenance, Defense-Wide...................... 69
Defense-Wide Energy Sustainability Audits................ 71
DLAMP.................................................... 72
Defense Logistics Agency................................. 72
Legacy................................................... 72
Personnel Recovery Study................................. 72
Personnel and Family Support Programs.................... 72
Defense Acquisition University Distance Learning......... 73
Defense Threat Reduction Agency.......................... 73
Operation and Maintenance, Army Reserve...................... 73
Operation and Maintenance, Navy Reserve...................... 75
Operation and Maintenance, Marine Corps Reserve.............. 77
Operation and Maintenance, Air Force Reserve................. 79
Air Force Reserve Airlift Force Management............... 81
Operation and Maintenance, Army National Guard............... 81
Rural Access to Broadband Technology..................... 83
WMD/Counter-Drug Demonstration........................... 83
Information Technology Management Training............... 83
Joint Training and Experimentation Project............... 83
Early Responders Distance Learning Center................ 83
Consequence Management Training.......................... 84
Fort Billy F. Roberts, Alabama........................... 84
Missouri National Guard.................................. 84
Camp McCain, Mississippi................................. 84
Operation and Maintenance, Air National Guard................ 84
Rosecrans Memorial Airport............................... 86
Overseas Contingency Operations Transfer Fund................ 86
United States Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces.......... 86
Environmental Restoration, Army.............................. 86
Environmental Restoration, Navy.............................. 87
Environmental Restoration, Air Force......................... 87
Environmental Restoration, Defense-Wide...................... 87
Environmental Restoration, Formerly Used Defense Sites....... 87
Round Pond Marsh......................................... 87
Overseas Humanitarian, Disaster, and Civic Aid............... 87
Former Soviet Union Threat Reduction......................... 88
Quality of Life Enhancements, Defense........................ 88
Support for International Sporting Competitions, Defense..... 88
TITLE III. PROCUREMENT........................................... 89
Estimates and Appropriations Summary......................... 89
Special Interest Items................................... 91
Classified Annex......................................... 91
Army Transformation...................................... 91
Army Acquisition Program Reforms......................... 92
DOD Investments in Air Superiority....................... 93
Aircraft Procurement, Army................................... 94
Missile Procurement, Army.................................... 97
Patriot Advanced Capability--3 (PAC-3)................... 97
Procurement of Weapons and Tracked Combat Vehicles, Army..... 99
Wolverine Program Management............................. 101
Medical Evacuation Capability for Heavy Forces........... 101
Procurement of Ammunition, Army.............................. 102
Riverbank Army Ammunition Plant.......................... 104
Other Procurement, Army...................................... 104
Family of Medium Tactical Vehicles....................... 109
Tactical Unmanned Aerial Vehicle......................... 109
Aircraft Procurement, Navy................................... 109
V-22..................................................... 111
MH-60R Helicopter........................................ 111
Weapons Procurement, Navy.................................... 113
Trident II D-5 Missile................................... 113
Torpedo Industrial Base.................................. 113
Navy Area Ballistic Missile Defense Program.............. 114
Procurement of Ammunition, Navy and Marine Corps............. 116
Shipbuilding and Conversion, Navy............................ 118
Shipbuilding Program Management.......................... 118
SSGN Tactical Trident.................................... 119
DDG-51 Destroyer......................................... 120
LPD-17 Acquisition Strategy.............................. 120
Other Procurement, Navy...................................... 122
Procurement, Marine Corps.................................... 128
Innovative Stand-Off Door Breaching Munitions.......... 0128
Aircraft Procurement, Air Force.............................. 132
F-22..................................................... 133
C-17 Multiyear Procurement Contract...................... 134
C-40 Aeromedivac Aircraft................................ 134
Global Hawk High Altitude Endurance (HAE) Unmanned Aerial
Vehicle (UAV).......................................... 135
C-17 Modifications....................................... 135
C-5 Modifications........................................ 136
All Terrain Loader....................................... 136
Combat Search and Rescue................................. 136
Missile Procurement, Air Force............................... 139
GPS Advance Procurement.................................. 139
SBIRS High............................................... 140
Procurement of Ammunition, Air Force......................... 142
Other Procurement, Air Force................................. 144
Space Based IR Sensor Program............................ 144
Procurement, Defense-Wide.................................... 148
Transfers to Title IX.................................... 148
Advanced Seal Delivery System............................ 149
National Guard and Reserve Equipment......................... 152
UH-60 Blackhawk Helicopters.............................. 152
Bradley Fighting Vehicle ODS............................. 152
Reserve Component Automation System...................... 152
C-130J Aircraft.......................................... 153
Defense Production Act Purchases............................. 155
Information Technology....................................... 155
Financial Management Modernization Program............... 156
Critical Infrastructure Protection....................... 157
Defense Joint Accounting System.......................... 157
SPAWAR Information Technology Center..................... 157
Defense Travel Service................................... 157
Navy Marine Corps Intranet............................... 157
TITLE IV. RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST AND EVALUATION............. 161
Estimates and Appropriation Summary.......................... 161
Special Interest Items................................... 163
Information Assurance Testing............................ 163
Department of Energy Research............................ 163
Classified Annex......................................... 163
Aviation Requirement for Joint Tactical Terminal (JTT)... 163
Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, Army............. 164
Army Venture Capital Science and Technology Demonstration 170
Next Generation GPS/INS Navigation for Munitions......... 171
Distributed Common Ground System (DCGS).................. 172
Hepatitis C Project...................................... 172
Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, Navy............. 177
DD-21 Land Attack Destroyer.............................. 183
Rapid Retargeting........................................ 184
Combat Control System MK2................................ 185
Land Attack Technology................................... 185
Tactical Unmanned Aerial Vehicle......................... 186
Surveillance and Reconnaissance Support.................. 186
Distributed Common Ground System Joint Service Imagery
Processing System--Navy (JSIPS-N)...................... 186
Nursing Telehealth Applications.............................. 187
Bone Marrow Registry..................................... 187
Telemedicine............................................. 188
Joint Directed Attack Munition........................... 188
Lower Cost Precision Weapon Guidance Systems............. 188
Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, Air Force........ 193
Using ``Code Names'' for Unclassified Activities......... 193
Unmanned Combat Air Vehicle.............................. 197
Warfighter Rapid Acquisition Process..................... 198
Space Based Radar EMD.................................... 198
Next Generation Tanker................................... 198
Next Generation ISR Radar Sensor Development............. 198
Distributed Common Ground System (DCGS).................. 199
Information Hiding, Steganography and Digital
Watermarking........................................... 199
Lower Cost Precision Weapon Guidance Systems............. 199
Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, Defense-Wide..... 205
Transfers to Title IX.................................... 209
Advanced Concept Technology Demonstrations............... 209
Advanced Lithography Demonstration....................... 209
Commercial Joint Mapping Toolkit......................... 209
Center for the Commercial Deployment of Transportation
Technologies........................................... 210
Laser Plasma Point Source X-Ray Lithography.............. 210
National Environmental Education and Training Center..... 210
Ultra Light Weight Portable Power Source................. 210
Center for Nanosciences Innovation....................... 210
Spin Electronics Program................................. 210
Next Generation Supercomputer Capability................. 211
Strategy for Acquisition of Commercial Imagery........... 211
Unexploded Ordnance Detection and Cleanup................ 211
Operational Test and Evaluation, Defense..................... 216
Radio Frequency Vulnerability Analysis................... 216
TITLE V. REVOLVING AND MANAGEMENT FUNDS.......................... 219
Defense Working Capital Funds................................ 219
National Defense Sealift Fund................................ 219
Ready Reserve Force...................................... 219
TITLE VI. OTHER DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE PROGRAMS................... 221
Defense Health Program....................................... 221
Special Interest Items and Reprogramming................. 221
Military Medical Treatment Facility Optimization......... 223
Assessment of DoD and VA Health Care Systems............. 223
Nursing Pay Authority.................................... 223
Pre-Discharge One Exam Initiative........................ 224
MacDill Air Force Base Transition........................ 224
Credentialing............................................ 224
Health Care Centers of Excellence........................ 224
North Chicago Veterans Administration Medical Center and
Naval Hospital......................................... 225
Cervical Cancer Research Program......................... 225
Ovarian Cancer........................................... 225
International Medical Program Global Satellite System.... 226
DOD Mental Health Programs............................... 226
Government Computer Based Patient Records................ 226
Single National Pharmacy Manager......................... 226
Chemical Agents and Munitions Destruction, Army.............. 227
Drug Interdiction and Counter-Drug Activities, Defense....... 229
DoD Non-Traditional Activities Assessment................ 229
Tethered Aerostat Radar Systems.......................... 229
Office of the Inspector General.............................. 230
TITLE VII. RELATED AGENCIES...................................... 231
National Foreign Intelligence Program........................ 231
Introduction............................................. 231
Classified Annex......................................... 231
Central Intelligence Agency Retirement and Disability System
Fund....................................................... 231
Intelligence Community Management Account.................... 232
Payment to Kaho'olawe Island Conveyance, Remediation, and
Environmental Restoration Fund............................. 232
National Security Education Trust Fund....................... 232
TITLE VIII. GENERAL PROVISIONS................................... 235
Definition of Program, Project and Activity.................. 235
Pentagon Reservation Emergency Response Enhancements......... 236
Wage Credits................................................. 236
TITLE IX. COUNTER-TERRORISM AND DEFENSE AGAINST WEAPONS OF MASS
DESTRUCTION.................................................... 237
Chemical and Biological Defense Programs................. 241
Special Interest Items................................... 242
Counter-Terrorism and Operational Response Transfer Fund..... 242
Former Soviet Union Threat Reduction......................... 244
Ballistic Missile Defense................................ 245
Procurement, Ballistic Missile Defense Organization.......... 245
Proposed Transfer of Navy Area, MEADS and PAC-3.......... 246
Patriot Advanced Capability--3 (PAC-3)................... 246
Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, Ballistic Missile
Defense Organization....................................... 246
Ground Based Midcourse Defense Segment................... 248
Theater High Altitude Area Defense....................... 248
Navy Theater Wide........................................ 249
Arrow.................................................... 249
Navy Area................................................ 249
Space Based Laser........................................ 249
SBIRS Low................................................ 249
Program Structure and System Acquisition................. 250
Special Interest Projects................................ 251
Reprogrammings........................................... 251
BMDO Budget Justification Material....................... 252
Defense Against Chemical and Biological Weapons, Defense-Wide 252
Organization and Management of the Chemical and
Biological Defense Program............................. 253
Chemical/Biological Warfare Defense Study................ 254
DARPA Biological Warfare Defense Program................. 254
Defense Threat Reduction Agency.............................. 254
Unconventional Nuclear Warfare Defense................... 255
Radiation Hardened Electronics........................... 256
Arms Control Technology.................................. 257
Nuclear Test Monitoring.................................. 257
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES REPORTING REQUIREMENTS.................. 259
Changes in the Application of Existing Law................... 259
Appropriations Language.................................. 259
General Provisions....................................... 261
Appropriations Not Authorized by Law......................... 267
Transfer of Funds............................................ 269
Rescissions.................................................. 269
Statement of General Performance Goals and Objectives........ 270
Compliance With Clause 3 of Rule XIII (Ramseyer Rule)........ 270
Constitutional Authority..................................... 270
Comparison with the Budget Resolution........................ 271
Five-Year Outlay Projections................................. 271
Financial Assistance to State and Local Governments.......... 271

DIVISION B--FISCAL YEAR 2002 SUPPLEMENTAL APPROPRIATIONS

Chapter 1 (Agricultural Subcommittee)............................ 285
Chapter 2 (Commerce-Justice-State Subcommittee).................. 288
Chapter 3 (Defense Subcommittee)................................. 293
Chapter 4 (District of Columbia Subcommittee).................... 307
Chapter 5 (Energy and Water Development Subcommittee)............ 307
Chapter 6 (Interior Subcommittee)................................ 309
Chapter 7 (Labor-HHS-Education Subcommittee)..................... 310
Chapter 8 (Legislative Branch Subcommittee)...................... 315
Chapter 9 (Military Construction Subcommittee)................... 317
Chapter 10 (Transportation Subcommittee)......................... 318
Chapter 11 (Treasury-Postal Service Subcommittee)................ 323
Chapter 12 (VA-HUD-Independent Agencies Subcommittee)............ 325
Chapter 13 (General Provision)................................... 328

107th Congress Report
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
1st Session 107-298

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

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE APPROPRIATIONS BILL, 2002 AND SUPPLEMENTAL
APPROPRIATIONS, 2002

_______

November 19, 2001.--Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on
the State of the Union and ordered to be printed

_______

Mr. Lewis of California, from the Committee on Appropriations,
submitted the following

R E P O R T

together with

ADDITIONAL VIEWS

[To accompany H.R. 3338]

The Committee on Appropriations submits the following
report in explanation of the accompanying bill making
appropriations for the Department of Defense, and for other
purposes, for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2002.

DIVISION A--DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE APPROPRIATIONS BILL, 2002

Bill Totals

Appropriations for most military functions of the
Department of Defense are provided for in the accompanying bill
for the fiscal year 2002. This bill does not provide
appropriations for military construction, military family
housing, civil defense, or nuclear warheads, for which
requirements are considered in connection with other
appropriations bills.
The President's fiscal year 2002 budget request for
activities funded in the Department of Defense Appropriations
Bill totals
$319,397,116,000 in new budget (obligational) authority. The
amounts recommended by the Committee in the accompanying bill
total $317,474,089,000 in new budget authority. This is
$1,923,027,000 below the budget estimate and $18,958,935,000
above the sums made available for the Department of Defense for
fiscal year 2001.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Fiscal year 2001 funding includes funding provided in several
supplemental appropriations Acts, including P.L. 106-544, P.L. 107-20,
and amounts made available, as of October 22, 2001, from P.L. 107-38.

Committee Budget Review Process

During its review of the fiscal year 2002 budget, the
Subcommittee on Defense held a total of 16 hearings during the
period of March 2001 to July 2001. Testimony received by the
Subcommittee totaled 1,434 pages of transcript. Approximately a
third of the hearings were held in open session. Executive
(closed) sessions were held only when the security
classification of the material to be discussed presented no
alternative.

Rationale for Committee Bill

The Committee's action on the fiscal year 2002 Defense
Appropriations bill comes at a critical time in the Nation's
history.
The United States has been subjected to a vicious,
unprovoked assault, without comparison in the collective memory
of Americans and the world.
The U.S. military is now engaged in combat operations
overseas, while carrying out missions at home that were
unthinkable just months ago.
All arms of the Federal government are engaged in
protecting the American people, at home and abroad.
And as the Nation mourns, and struggles to defend freedom
across the world, it also turns to the task of rebuilding.
The Committee cannot adequately express the deep sense of
sorrow and the enduring commitment to humanity, to freedom, and
to justice which have been evidenced across the United States
since the morning of September 11th, 2001. But, through the
decisions rendered on this legislation--which provides the vast
majority of the appropriations for the Department of Defense
and the Intelligence Community--the Committee can provide those
who protect and defend America with the tools needed to
successfully prosecute the war on terrorism as well as defend
America's interests at home and around the world. It is with
this motivating principle that the Committee has worked its
will on this legislation.

Long-Standing Committee Concerns and Priorities

The attacks of September 11 and subsequent events have
focused the Nation's attention on the capabilities of our
defense and intelligence agencies. The Committee has long
expressed its concern over the state of the Nation's defenses
as the national security community has wrestled with many
difficult security challenges, such as the end of the Cold War,
the need to meet long-extant commitments overseas, and the
emergence of new threats and missions.
Since the fall of the Berlin Wall, the complex challenges
confronting the three Administrations which have held office--
and the seven Congresses which have convened over that period--
are well-known. The most prominent include managing the post-
Cold War military build-down; a dramatically different and
increasingly challenging threat environment; budgetary
constraints; and, finally, the need to reshape America's
defenses to meet global demands with a vastly downsized force.
These issues, along with many others, have animated the defense
debate for over a decade.
The Committee has not shirked from joining that debate. In
doing so, it has consistently advocated certain core
principles:
--Providing for the welfare of our soldiers, sailors,
airmen, Marines, and those Federal employees involved
in our defense and intelligence effort;
--Likewise, strong support for the other ``enablers''
of an effective military, such as robust training, the
provision of basic combat equipment, and the central
role of intelligence, strategic mobility, and the
leveraging of U.S. technology in areas such as
surveillance, global reach, precision strike, and the
effective networking of sensors and weapons;
--An insistence on strong program management and
budgetary controls;
--And finally, the belief that the Constitutional role
of the Congress, in particular ``the power of the
purse'', makes it an equal partner with the Executive
Branch in shaping the Nation's future security posture.
The Committee believes that broad Congressional support for
these priorities--and the need to provide the funding needed to
support them--have contributed in no small measure to what has
been a turnabout from the mid-1990's consensus regarding
defense. Along with support and leadership from within the
Executive Branch, the Committee believes there has been much
progress made in recent years by both the Intelligence
Community and the Department of Defense in attempting to
redefine their priorities to cope with new threats.

The Fiscal Year 2002 Defense Budget Request

Against this backdrop the Committee commends the new
Administration, which since assuming office has attempted to
build on this momentum. It did so first by elevating the level
of debate about these fundamental national security and defense
issues. The new senior leadership of the DoD conducted its
early, extensive, and admittedly controversial ``strategic
reviews''; they raised these issues in budget and policy
presentations before the Congress; and most recently, the DoD
issued its Quadrennial Defense Review just three weeks ago.
In his foreword to the Quadrennial Defense Review, the
Secretary of Defense described this as ``a crucial time of
transition to a new era.'' Even before the events of September
11th, the outlines of that ``new era'' were clear. The future
security environment would be marked by the existence of
lingering, largely conventional military threats--such as in
the Persian Gulf region, and Northeast Asia--and the growing
threat posed by other regional powers such as China. And the
future security environment would be increasingly marked by the
reality of new threats such as terrorism; weapons of mass
destruction (nuclear, radiological, chemical, and biological
weapons); ballistic missiles; information operations (computer
network exploitation and attack); and other unconventional,
``asymmetric'' threats to the United States.
The Committee concurs with this assessment, and
acknowledges the role of the senior leadership of the
Department of Defense for bringing these issues to the fore
upon assuming office earlier this year.
The President's amended DoD budget, submitted to Congress
in late June, comprises the Administration's initial effort to
tangibly address these problems. The Committee finds itself in
broad agreement with the following priorities, as laid out by
the Secretary of Defense and proposed in the amended budget
submission.
Those priorities begin with sustaining the force. The
budget proposed the largest increase in military pay in 15
years, other increases in benefits, and more than a 50 percent
increase in funding for the defense health care system.
The budget also proposed significant increases for those
accounts directly supporting readiness--training, spare parts
funding, depot maintenance, facilities maintenance and base
operations.
The budget contained a significant increase in funding for
intelligence and intelligence-related activities, including the
accelerated development and fielding of unmanned aerial
vehicles (UAVs) and so-called ``ISR'' assets (intelligence,
surveillance, and reconnaissance). It also proposed sizable
increases in support of certain key mission areas and new
technologies--such as Ballistic Missile Defense. The budget
also called for increases over current levels of over half-a-
billion dollars apiece in the essential areas of force
protection and information assurance/operations.
The Committee also notes several initiatives by the
Department, announced following the submission of the amended
budget, in which it also finds merit. Chief among them are
efforts to streamline and rationalize Departmental operations,
most importantly a concerted effort to reduce bureaucracy--
especially at the headquarters level. The Committee has long
called for ``more tooth, and less tail'', and believes steps in
this regard are long overdue.
Nonetheless, the budget submission still falls short in
many areas, notably by failing to address the persistent
shortfall in weapons procurement funding. The fiscal year 2002
budget also lacked the outyear details of a long-term, coherent
investment strategy for the Department. The Committee has
maintained for some time such a strategy is badly needed, and
long overdue. This is more important now than ever, given the
onset of new priorities--including those advocated by the
Administration in its budget, and those brought on with the
initiation of Operations NOBLE EAGLE and ENDURING FREEDOM--and
the need to address other lingering questions, such as the
correct course for weapons modernization and other investment
needs.

Other Issues Impacting Committee Consideration

As indicated above, the Committee has found much to support
in the President's budget proposal. However, the
recommendations brought forward by the Committee are of
necessity shaped by both the amount of funds available at this
point, as well as the need for additional resources targeted at
terrorism and other threats in the wake of the September
attacks.
The funding in this proposed Defese Appropriations bill,
over $317 billion, is a sizable increase over fiscal year 2001
levels. However, in the course of allocating funds among
Appropriations subcommittees (pursuant to the agreement
recently reached between the President and the joint leadership
of the Congress regarding the overall level of discretionary
appropriations for fiscal year 2002), the need to meet national
defense requirements in other appropriations bills has resulted
in the Defense Subcommittee being allocated some $1.9 billion
less in funding than proposed by the President in his amended
budget for the Defense Appropriations bill.
More importantly, the Committee has re-assessed the DoD and
intelligence community requirements following the September
11th attacks. The Committee recognizes that the vast majority
of unanticipated costs from the war on terrorism over the next
year will have to be dealt with through supplemental
appropriations. Nonetheless, the Committee believes it is
imperative that, within the existing allocation for the Defense
Appropriations bill, it also provide funding well in excess of
the President's budget in certain areas--especially those with
immediate and longer-term applicability to counter-terrorism
and other unconventional threats.

Major Recommendations in the Committee Bill

Accordingly, the Committee bill makes the following major
recommendations.
New Appropriations Title.--The Committee bill establishes a
new appropriations title--Title IX, Counter-Terrorism and
Defense Against Weapons of Mass Destruction--and provides
appropriations of $11,719,889,000 therein. The Committee takes
this action in order to consolidate funding for those programs
devoted to the protection of the United States homeland,
deployed American military forces, overseas U.S. interests, and
our allies from so-called non-traditional threats. This new
title, comprised of six appropriations accounts, includes all
funding in the bill for the Ballistic Missile Defense
Organization; the Cooperative Threat Reduction Program (Former
Soviet Union Threat Reduction); all Defense-Wide procurement
and research funding for defense against chemical and
biological weapons; and all funding for the Defense Threat
Reduction Agency. The Committee believes this will bring a
greater focus to the Department's efforts to deal with these
threats while empowering the senior leadership of the
Department of Defense and the Congress to more closely
scrutinize these important programs.
In addition, Title IX includes $1.67 billion, added over
the budget request, in a new appropriations account dedicated
to counter-terrorism activities and other unconventional
threats. By so doing, the Committee has created a rapid
response capability for the Secretary of Defense and the
Director of Central Intelligence to accelerate and augment
efforts against terrorism, weapons of mass destruction, the
chemical and biological threat, and so-called ``cyber-war''
capabilities (information operations and critical
infrastructure attacks).
Ballistic Missile Defense.--The Committee bill provides
$7.85 billion for those programs managed by the Ballistic
Missile Defense Organization, an increase of $2.7 billion over
fiscal year 2001 levels and $50 million less than approved by
the House during consideration of H.R. 2586, the National
Defense Authorization bill for fiscal year 2002. The Committee
approves the requested amounts for the Ground-Based Midcourse
Segment (formerly known as the National Missile Defense
program), as well as the proposed Pacific Test Bed. The
Committee also recommends additions over the budget of $155
million to enable the immediate and rapid fielding of the PAC-3
theater missile defense system. In most instances where the
Committee reduced funding below that requested in the budget,
it was done consistent with the provisions of the House-passed
Defense Authorization bill. However, the Committee does
recommend reducing funds and restructuring the development
program for the Space Based Infrared System-Low (SBIRS Low)
program, due to significant concerns over technical maturity,
system performance, and cost growth.
Intelligence and Intelligence-Related Activities.--The
Committee bill includes sizable increases over the budgeted
amounts in support of the classified programs within the
National Foreign Intelligence Program. The Committee also
provides funding to accelerate and enhance U.S. military
intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance (ISR)
capabilities, to include:
(a) Net increases over the budget for Unmanned Aerial
Vehicles (such as the Predator UAV), and increases in
UAV funding by nearly $200 million over fiscal year
2001 levels;
(b) For other ``low-density, high-demand'' ISR
assets, the Committee provides full funding for the
16th Joint STARS surveillance aircraft; funds two EP-3
Naval reconnaissance aircraft; and provides for the re-
engining and upgrade of four RIVET JOINT aircraft;
(c) The Committee's recommendation for networking of
ISR assets exceeds the Administration's request by
nearly $50 million, or an approximate 60 percent
increase, increasing funding for ISR networking by $127
million over the fiscal year 2001 level; and
(d) The Committee provides $354 million over the
budget request for the acquisition of two new testbed
aircraft and development of advanced radar technology,
in order to accelerate the development of a potential
JSTARS replacement platform as well as a new airborne
command and control aircraft.
Military Personnel and Defense Health Program.--The
Committee bill fully funds the proposed pay raise of 4.6
percent and targeted pay raises of at least 5 percent for every
service member. In addition, it fully funds the proposed
increases for Basic Housing Allowances in order to continue to
reduce service members out of pocket housing expenses from 15
percent to 11.3 percent. The Committee bill fully funds the
requested 50 percent increase for the Defense Health Program,
and also has increased military-related medical research and
other initiatives by nearly $700 million. The Committee also
has added $85 million over the request for procurement of a new
C-40 aeromedical evacuation aircraft.
Readiness Accounts.--In Title II of the Committee bill
(Operation and Maintenance), the Committee fully funds the
requested increases in spare parts and depot repair, base
operations and other readiness-related activities. The bill
also fully funds the budgeted increase of $537 million for
force protection measures aimed at protecting U.S. forces,
assets and facilities.
Strategic Mobility.--The Committee bill approves over $2.8
billion for the procurement of 15 C-17 airlifters, and provides
$180 million over the budget to support a heretofore unbudgeted
follow-on multiyear procurement of C-17's. The bill also
provides $150 million over the budget to procure a testbed
aircraft and begin development of a new aerial refueling tanker
aircraft, to accelerate replacement of the aging and
increasingly-limited KC-135.
Shipbuilding.--The Committee bill provides net additions to
the Navy shipbuilding account of over $790 million, including
procurement of an additional DDG-51 destroyer over the budgeted
level (the bill provides for four DDG-51's), and additions over
the budget of $463 million to begin conversion of four TRIDENT
ballistic missile submarines into the ``Tactical TRIDENT''
cruise missile platform. The bill also reduces proposed funding
for the next-generation DD-21 destroyer by $493 million,
reflecting a pending program restructure and deferral of full
scale engineering development.
Army Transformation and Acquisition Process Reform.--The
Committee bill fully funds the Army's proposed equipment
requirements for the Interim Brigade Combat Teams, establishes
a new ``venture capital fund'' to leverage Army investment in
cutting- edge technologies, and proposes targeted funding
reductions and restrictions in order to streamline Army
acquisition organization and procedures.
Defense Streamlining and Cost-Control Initiatives.--
Consistent with past Committee practice, and the DoD's renewed
effort to reduce unneeded bureaucracy, the Committee bill
includes a variety of actions to reduce spending for
administrative and overhead costs. The funds made available can
be shifted to accounts that more directly benefit the war
fighters. These cost-cutting measures include:
(a) Reductions of $242 million to headquarters staff,
as a first increment of the Secretary of Defense's
``Battle Against Bureaucracy'' to reduce these costs 15
percent below fiscal year 1999 levels;
(b) Similarly, the Committee bill recommends a 1.25
percent reduction in contracted workyears, including
contractor advisory and assistance services, rendering
$955 million in savings; and
(c) To institute proper controls and ensure fiscal
discipline, the Committee bill imposes a reduction of
$330 million against purchases made with the Government
Purchase Card, in order to correct past abuses as found
by the GAO.

Committee Recommendations by Major Category

Active Military Personnel

The Committee recommends a total of $70,039,322,000 for
active military personnel, a decrease of $710,900,000 below the
budget request. The Committee supports the budget request which
proposed a 4.6 percent pay raise for military personnel
effective January 1, 2002, and a targeted pay raise of at least
5 percent for every service member. The Committee also agrees
with the authorized end strength as requested in the
President's budget.

Guard and Reserve Personnel

The Committee recommends a total of $11,577,969,000, an
increase of $20,910,000 above the budget request for Guard and
Reserve personnel. The Committee has also included funds for
the proposed 4.6 percent pay raise and targeted pay increases
for enlisted and mid-grade officers. The Committee agrees with
the authorized end strength as requested in the President's
budget for the Selected Reserve.

OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE

The Operation and Maintenance appropriation provides for
the readiness of U.S. forces as well as the maintenance of
facilities and equipment, the infrastructure that supports
combat forces, and the quality of life of service members and
their families.
The Committee recommends $105,282,379,000, a net increase
of $8,392,605,000 above the fiscal year 2001 appropriated
amount. The Committee has supported improvements in funding for
flying hour programs, maintenance of real property, equipment
depot maintenance and base operations. The Committee has added
to the budget request a number of items critical to the welfare
and training readiness of service members and also items
contributing to the management efficiency of the services.
Finally, the Committee recommends reductions from the budget
request as a result of fact of life changes and management
actions the Department of Defense should undertake to
streamline its operations.

Procurement

The Committee recommends $60,190,124 for programs funded in
title III of the Committee bill, Procurement, a net decrease of
$250,173,000 below the fiscal year 2002 budget request.
Included in these totals is $501,485,000 for procurement of
National Guard and Reserve equipment, for which the
administration did not request funding.
Major programs funded in the bill include:
$305,691,000 for 20 UH-60 Blackhawk helicopters.
$281,460,000 for CH-47 Chinook modifications.
$898,561,000 for AH-64 Apache Longbow recapitalization.
$241,811,000 for 2,200 Hellfire missiles.
$389,755,000 for 3,890 Javelin missiles.
$138,044,000 for 35 MLRS launcher systems.
$460,779,000 for Bradley Fighting Vehicle industrial base
sustainment.
$100,000,000 for M1 Abrams modifications.
$102,152,000 for M1 Abrams System Enhancement Program
(SEP).
$395,802,000 for M1 Abrams upgrades.
$3,067,552,000 for 48 F/A-18E/F fighter aircraft.
$790,881,000 for 9 Marine Corps V-22 aircraft.
$208,202,000 for 2 Special Operations CV-22 aircraft.
$299,047,000 for 4 KC-130J aircraft.
$534,042,000 for 12 Trident II ballistic missiles.
$1,578,914,000 for 1 New Attack Submarine.
$3,786,036,000 for 4 DDG-51 Destroyers.
$370,818,000 for 1 ADC(X) ship.
$2,655,553,000 for 13 F-22 fighter aircraft.
$2,808,425,000 for 15 C-17 airlift aircraft.
$2,571,058,000 for ammunition for all services.
$794,557,000 for Ballistic Missile Defense Organization
programs (funded in Title IX).

Research, Development, Test and Evaluation

The Committee recommends $40,090,256,000 for programs
funded in Title IV of the Committee bill, Research,
Development, Test and Evaluation, a decrease of $7,339,177,000
from the fiscal year 2002 budget request. Major programs funded
in the bill include:
$111,560,000 for the Future Combat System (FCS).
$447,949,000 for the Crusader artillery program.
$816,366,000 for the Comanche helicopter.
$446,735,000 for V-22 Develoment
$1,436,770,000 for the Joint Strike Fighter program.
$881,556,000 for F-22 development.
$222,004,000 for B-2 development
$7,053,721,000 for Ballistic Missile Defense programs
(funded in Title IX).

Forces To Be Supported

department of the army

The fiscal year 2002 budget is designed to support active
Army forces of 10 divisions, 3 armored cavalry regiments, and
reserve forces of 8 divisions, 3 separate brigades, and 15
enhanced National Guard brigades (6 enhanced brigades will be
aligned under 2 AC/ARNG integrated division headquarters).
These forces provide the minimum force necessary to meet
enduring defense needs and execute the National Military
Strategy.
A summary of the major forces follows:

department of the navy

The fiscal year 2002 budget supports battle forces totaling
314 ships at the end of fiscal year 2002, two less than at the
end of fiscal year 2001. Forces in fiscal year 2002 include 18
strategic submarines, 12 aircraft carriers, 244 other battle
force ships, 1,563 Navy/Marine Corps tactical/ASW aircraft, 692
Undergraduate Training aircraft, 475 Fleet Air Training
aircraft, 328 Fleet Air Support aircraft, 405 Reserve aircraft,
and 518 in the pipeline.
A summary of the major forces follows:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fiscal year--
-----------------------------------------------
2000 2001 2002
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Strategic Forces................................................ 18 18 18
Submarines.................................................. 18 18 18
Other....................................................... 0 0 0
SLBM Launchers.................................................. 432 432 432
General Purpose................................................. 259 258 256
Aircraft Carriers........................................... 12 12 12
Surface Combatants.......................................... 116 116 116
Submarines (Attack)......................................... 56 55 54
Amphibious Warfare Ships.................................... 39 39 39
Combat Logistics Ships...................................... 34 34 33
Other....................................................... 11 11 11
Support Forces.................................................. 25 25 25
Mobile Logistics Ships...................................... 2 2 2
Support Ships............................................... 23 23 23
Mobilization Category A......................................... 16 15 15
Aircraft Carriers........................................... 1 0 0
Surface Combatants.......................................... 8 8 8
Amphibious Warfare Ships.................................... 2 1 1
Mine Warfare................................................ 5 6 6
Total Ships, Battle Force................................. 318 316 314
Total Local Defense/Misc Force............................ 177 166 165
Auxiliaries/Sea Lift Forces..................................... 143 132 131
Coastal Defense................................................. 14 14 14
Mobilization Category B......................................... 10 10 10
Surface Combatants.......................................... 0 0 0
Mine Warfare Ships.......................................... 10 10 10
Support Ships............................................... 0 0 0
Naval Aircraft:
Primary Authorized (Plus Pipe).............................. 4,100 4,115 4,101
Authorized Pipeline......................................... 477 362 518
Tactical/ASW Aircraft....................................... 1,685 1,699 1,563
Fleet Air Training.......................................... 468 480 475
Fleet Air Support........................................... 328 331 328
Training (Undergraduate).................................... 689 701 692
Reserve..................................................... 418 407 405
Naval Personnel:
Active:
Navy.................................................... 373,193 375,917 376,000
Marine Corps............................................ 173,321 172,600 172,600
Reserve:
Navy.................................................... 86,535 86,592 87,000
SELRES.................................................. 71,546 71,943 72,189
TARS.................................................... 14,989 14,649 14,811
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

department of the air force

The fiscal year 2002 Air Force budget is designed to
support a total active inventory force structure of 78 fighter
and attack squadrons and 45 in the guard and reserve, 4 guard
air defense interceptor squadrons and 11 bomber squadrons
including B-2s, B-52s, and B-1s. This year a new line has been
added to reflect the addition of 6 flight test units. The
Minuteman, Peacekeeper and ICBM forces remain constant at 605
active launchers and 550 missile boosters.
A summary of the major forces follows:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
FY 2000 Col/FY
End Strength 2001 PB FY 2001 PB FY 2002 PB
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Active Duty..................................................... 357,900 357,000 358,800
Reserve Component............................................... 180,386 182,300 183,100
Air National Guard.............................................. 106,678 108,000 108,400
Air Force Reserve............................................... 73,708 74,300 74,700
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

TITLE I

MILITARY PERSONNEL

Programs and Activities Funded by Military Personnel Appropriations

The President's fiscal year 2002 budget request continues
to make military personnel its first priority through increased
funding for military pay, housing allowances and overall
quality of life programs. The budget request proposed a 4.6
percent pay raise, effective January 1, 2002 for all military
personnel. The budget also proposed a targeted pay raise of at
least five percent for every service member and up to 10
percent for enlisted grades E-4 to E-9 and for mid-grade
officers. Fiscal year 2002 will be the third year the pay
structure for military personnel is being fundamentally
changed. In addition, the budget request increases the Basic
Allowance for Housing (BAH) in order to continue to reduce the
service members' out-of-pocket housing expenses from 15 percent
to 11.3 percent in fiscal year 2002.
The Committee supports the enhancements to military pay and
increased housing benefits for fiscal year 2002.

SUMMARY OF MILITARY PERSONNEL RECOMMENDATIONS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2002

Fiscal year 2001...................................... $75,847,740,000
Fiscal year 2002 budget request....................... 82,307,281,000
Fiscal year 2002 recommendation....................... 81,617,291,000
Change from budget request............................ -689,990,000

The Committee recommends an appropriation of
$81,617,291,000 for the Military Personnel accounts. The
recommendation is an increase of $5,769,551,000 above the
$75,847,740,000 appropriated in fiscal year 2001. These
military personnel budget total comparisons include
appropriations for the active, reserve, and National Guard
accounts. The following tables include a summary of the
recommendations by appropriation account. Explanations of
changes from the budget request appear later in this section.

[In thousands of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Change from
Account Budget Recommendation request
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Military Personnel:
Army..................................................... $23,626,684 $23,336,884 -289,800
Navy..................................................... 19,606,984 19,574,184 -32,800
Marine Corps............................................. 7,365,040 7,343,640 -21,400
Air Force................................................ 20,151,514 19,784,614 -366,900
--------------------------------------------------
Subtotal, Active....................................... 70,750,222 70,039,322 -710,900
==================================================
Reserve Personnel:
Army..................................................... 2,604,197 2,629,197 +25,000
Navy..................................................... 1,643,523 1,644,823 +1,300
Marine Corps............................................. 463,300 466,800 +3,500
Air Force................................................ 1,055,160 1,055,160 ...............
National Guard Personnel:
Army..................................................... 4,014,135 4,004,335 -9,800
Air Force................................................ 1,776,744 1,777,654 +910
--------------------------------------------------
Subtotal, Guard and Reserve............................ 11,557,059 11,577,969 +20,910
==================================================
Total, Title I......................................... 82,307,281 81,617,291 -689,990
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The fiscal year 2002 budget request includes an increase of
approximately 5,000 end strength for the active forces and a
slight increase of 300 end strength for the selected reserve
over fiscal year 2001 authorized levels.
The Committee recommends the following levels highlighted
in the tables below.

Overall Active End Strength

Fiscal year 2001 estimate............................. 1,382,417
Fiscal year 2002 budget request....................... 1,387,400
Fiscal year 2002 recommendation....................... 1,387,400
Compared with Fiscal year 2001........................ +4,983
Compared with Fiscal year 2002 budget request..... 0

overall selected reserve end strength

Fiscal year 2001 estimate............................. 864,356
Fiscal year 2002 budget request....................... 864,658
Fiscal year 2002 recommendation....................... 864,658
Compared with Fiscal year 2001.................... +302
Compared with Fiscal year 2002 budget request..... 0

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fiscal year 2002--
FY 2001 --------------------------------------------------
estimate Change from
Budget request Recommendation request
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Active Forces (end strength):
Army.................................... 481,000 480,000 480,000 ...............
Navy.................................... 375,917 376,000 376,000 ...............
Marine Corps............................ 172,600 172,600 172,600 ...............
Air Force............................... 352,900 358,800 358,800 ...............
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Total, Active Force................... 1,382,417 1,387,400 1,387,400 ...............
===================================================================
Guard and Reserve (end strength):
Army Reserve............................ 205,300 205,000 205,000 ...............
Navy Reserve............................ 86,592 87,000 87,000 ...............
Marine Corps Reserve.................... 39,558 39,558 39,558 ...............
Air Force Reserve....................... 74,358 74,700 74,700 ...............
Army National Guard..................... 350,526 350,000 350,000 ...............
Air National Guard...................... 108,022 108,400 108,400 ...............
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Total, Guard and Reserve.............. 864,356 864,658 864,658
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Adjustments to Military Personnel Account

Overview

End Strength Adjustments

The Committee recommends a personnel understrength
reduction of $324,200,000 to the budget request, as a result of
a General Accounting Office review of the fiscal year 2001
military personnel end strength levels. The General Accounting
Office has been examining the costs for military pay and
allowances to determine if the fiscal year 2002 requirements
are correct. It has concluded, based on current end strength
projections, that the active and Reserve components will begin
fiscal year 2002 with fewer military personnel on-board than
budgeted. In addition, actual data shows active military
personnel on-board, by grade mix, is different than what was
requested in last year's budget request. This means the fiscal
year 2002 pay and allowances requirements for personnel are
incorrect and the budgets are overstated. The Committee will
continue to monitor the Services' end strength levels as more
current data becomes available.

program growth

The Committee recommends a decrease of $160,100,000 to the
budget request for the following programs due to excessive
program growth. These reductions would maintain these programs
at last year's level of funding.

[Dollars in thousands]

Unemployment Compensation............................... -$8,400
Selective Reenlistment Bonus............................ -51,100
$30,000 Lump Sum Bonus.................................. -62,500
Critical Skills Accession Bonus......................... -13,100
Critical Skills Retention Bonus......................... -19,000
Loan Repayment Program.................................. -6,000
--------------------------------------------------------
____________________________________________________
Total............................................... -160,100

general accounting office reductions

The Committee recommends a reduction of $240,500,000 to the
budget request as a result of a General Accounting Office
review of the military personnel appropriations, as follows:
Variation between reported end strength and military
personnel paid. The Committee recommends a reduction of
$195,500,000 to the budget request due to an average monthly
variance between the number of personnel being reported on end
strength and the number of personnel actually being paid for
the active Army and Air Force. GAO's analysis has raised
concerns about the accuracy of the end strengths reported for
budgeting purposes. The end strengths are significantly
inflated, resulting in the Services' requesting more
appropriations funding than they actually need.
Individuals in Appellate Review. The Committee recommends a
reduction of $28,000,000 to the budget request due to
individuals who are on appellate leave review. These
individuals are not being paid and are unlikely to return to
duty, but are being counted in the services' end strength
figures used to base their budget requests.
Personnel who retire on September 30. The Committee
recommends a reduction of $17,000,000 to the budget request for
personnel who will retire on September 30, 2001, but will be
included in the fiscal year 2002 beginning personnel strength.
GAO also found that one-half a month's salary is also included
for these individuals in the fiscal year 2002 personnel
appropriations.

guard and reserve forces

The Committee recognizes that Guard and Reserve forces are
an essential part of the total force and contribute
significantly to a variety of active missions. The Committee's
recommendation for fiscal year 2002 continues its support of
the Guard and Reserve and recommends an increase of
$187,310,000 over the budget request for the personnel and
operation and maintenance accounts as shown below.

[Dollars in thousands]

Military Personnel...................................... +$34,810
Operation and Maintenance............................... +152,500
--------------------------------------------------------
____________________________________________________
Total............................................. +187,310

full-time support strengths

There are four categories of full-time support in the Guard
and Reserve components: civilian technicians, active Guard and
Reserve (AGR), non-technician civilians, and active component
personnel.
Full-time support personnel organize, recruit, train,
maintain and administer the Reserve components. Civilian
(Military) technicians directly support units, and are very
important to help units maintain readiness and meet the wartime
mission of the Army and Air Force.
Full-time support end strength in all categories totaled
150,313 in fiscal year 2001. The fiscal year 2002 budget
request is 147,237 end strength. The following table summarizes
Guard and Reserve full-time support end strengths:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
FY 2001 Change from
estimate Budget request Recommendation request
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Army Reserve:
AGR..................................... 13,106 13,108 13,108 ...............
Technicians............................. 7,094 7,094 7,094 ...............
Navy Reserve: TAR........................... 14,649 14,811 14,811 ...............
Marine Corps Reserve: AR.................... 2,261 2,261 2,261 ...............
Air Force Reserve:
AGR..................................... 1,336 1,437 1,437 ...............
Technicians............................. 9,730 9,818 9,818 ...............
Army National Guard:
AGR..................................... 22,974 22,974 22,974 ...............
Technicians............................. 24,728 23,957 23,957 ...............
Air National Guard:
AGR..................................... 11,170 11,591 11,591 ...............
Technicians............................. 22,547 22,772 22,772 ...............
Total:
AGR/TAR................................. 65,496 66,182 66,182 ...............
Technicians............................. 64,099 63,641 63,641 ...............
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

MILITARY PERSONNEL, ARMY

Fiscal year 2001 appropriation........................ $22,175,357,000
Fiscal year 2002 budget request....................... 23,626,684,000
Committee recommendation.............................. 23,336,884,000
Change from budget request............................ -289,800,000

The Committee recommends an appropriation of
$23,336,884,000 for Military Personnel, Army. The
recommendation is an increase of $1,161,527,000 above the
$22,175,357,000 appropriated for fiscal year 2001.

Program Recommended

The total amount recommended in the bill will provide the
following program in fiscal year 2002:

The adjustments to the budget activities for Military
Personnel, Army are shown below:

Budget Activity 2: Pay and Allowances of Enlisted Personnel:
1100 Special Pays/Loan Repayment Program................. -6,000
Other Adjustments:
2720 Personnel Underexecution............................ -104,300
2800 Variances in Personnel Strength Totals.............. -145,600
2805 Individuals in Appellate Review..................... -8,000
2810 End of Year Retirements............................. -5,000
2815 $30,000 Lump Sum Bonus.............................. -20,900

MILITARY PERSONNEL, NAVY

Fiscal year 2001 appropriation........................ $17,772,297,000
Fiscal year 2002 budget request....................... 19,606,984,000
Committee recommendation.............................. 19,574,184,000
Change from budget request............................ -32,800,000

The Committee recommends an appropriation of
$19,574,184,000 for Military Personnel, Navy. The
recommendation is an increase of $1,801,887,000 above the
$17,772,297,000 appropriated for fiscal year 2001.

Program Recommended

The total amount recommended in the bill will provide the
following program in fiscal year 2002:

The adjustments to the budget activities for Military
Personnel, Navy are shown below:

[In thousands of dollars]

Budget Activity 6: Other Military Personnel Costs:
5250 Unemployment Benefits................................ -1,200
Other Adjustments:
5615 Individuals in Appellate Review..................... -8,000
5620 End of Year Retirements............................. -5,000
5625 $30,000 Lump Sum Bonus.............................. -18,600

MILITARY PERSONNEL, MARINE CORPS

Fiscal year 2001 appropriation........................ $6,833,100,000
Fiscal year 2002 budget request....................... 7,365,040,000
Committee recommendation.............................. 7,343,640,000
Change from budget request............................ -21,400,000

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $7,343,640,000
for Military Personnel, Marine Corps. The recommendation is an
increase of $510,540,000 above the $6,833,100,000 appropriated
for fiscal year 2001.

Program Recommended

The total amount recommended in the bill will provide the
following program in fiscal year 2002:

The adjustments to the budget activities for Military
Personnel, Marine Corps are shown below:

Budget Activity 2: Pay and Allowances of Enlisted Personnel:
6700 Special Pays/Selective Reenlistment Bonuses......... -8,600
Budget Activity 6: Other Military Personnel Costs:
7900 Unemployment Benefits............................... -2,500
Other Adjustments:
8245 Individuals in Appellate Review..................... -4,000
8250 End of Year Retirements............................. -2,000
8255 $30,000 Lump Sum Bonus.............................. -4,300

MILITARY PERSONNEL, AIR FORCE

Fiscal year 2001 appropriation........................ $18,174,284,000
Fiscal year 2002 budget request....................... 20,151,514,000
Committee recommendation.............................. 19,784,614,000
Change from budget request............................ -366,900,000

The Committee recommends an appropriation of
$19,784,614,000 for Military Personnel, Air Force. The
recommendation is an increase of $1,610,330,000 above the
$18,174,284,000 appropriated for fiscal year 2001.

Program Recommended

The total amount recommended in the bill will provide the
following program in fiscal year 2002:

The adjustments to the budget activities for Military
Personnel, Air Force are shown below:

[In thousands of dollars]

Budget Activity 1: Pay and Allowances of Officers:
8750 Special Pays/Critical Skills Accession Bonus........ -13,100
8750 Special Pays/Critical Skills Retention Bonus........ -19,000
Budget Activity 2: Pay and Allowances of Enlisted Personnel:
9350 Special Pays/Selective Reenlistment Bonuses......... -42,500
Budget Activity 6: Other Military Personnel Costs:
10700 Unemployment Benefits............................... -4,700
Other Adjustments:
10965 Personnel Underexecution........................... -206,000
11020 Variances in Personnel Strength Totals............. -49,900
11030 Individuals in Appellate Review.................... -8,000
11040 End of Year Retirements............................ -5,000
11045 $30,000 Lump Sum Bonus............................. -18,700

RESERVE PERSONNEL, ARMY

Fiscal year 2001 appropriation........................ $2,473,001,000
Fiscal year 2002 budget request....................... 2,604,197,000
Committee recommendation.............................. 2,629,197,000
Change from budget request............................ +25,000,000

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $2,629,197,000
for Reserve Personnel, Army. The recommendation is an increase
of $156,196,000 above the $2,473,001,000 appropriated for
fiscal year 2001.

Program Recommended

The total amount recommended in the bill will provide the
following program in fiscal year 2002:

The adjustment to the budget activities for Reserve
Personnel, Army is shown below:

[In thousands of dollars]

Other Adjustments:
12020 Inactive Duty Training Shortfall................... 25,000

RESERVE PERSONNEL, NAVY

Fiscal year 2001 appropriation........................ $1,576,174,000
Fiscal year 2002 budget request....................... 1,643,523,000
Committee recommendation.............................. 1,644,823,000
Change from budget request............................ +1,300,000

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $1,644,823,000
for Reserve Personnel, Navy. The recommendation is an increase
of $68,649,000 above the $1,576,174,000 appropriated for fiscal
year 2001.

Program Recommended

The total amount recommended in the bill will provide the
following program in fiscal year 2002:

The adjustments to the budget activities for Reserve
Personnel, Navy are shown below:

Other Adjustments: [In thousands of dollars]
12860 Personnel Underexecution........................... -2,700
12870 ADT Fleet Support.................................. 4,000

RESERVE PERSONNEL, MARINE CORPS

Fiscal year 2001 appropriation........................ $448,886,000
Fiscal year 2002 budget request....................... 463,300,000
Committee recommendation.............................. 466,800,000
Change from budget request............................ +3,500,000

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $466,800,000
for Reserve Personnel, Marine Corps. The recommendation is an
increase of $17,914,000 above the $448,886,000 appropriated for
fiscal year 2001.

Program Recommended

The total amount recommended in the bill will provide the
following program in fiscal year 2002:

The adjustments to the budget activities for Reserve
Personnel, Marine Corps are shown below:

Other Adjustments: [In thousands of dollars]
13740 Personnel Underexecution........................... -1,400
13750 Active Duty for Special Work....................... 4,900

RESERVE PERSONNEL, AIR FORCE

Fiscal year 2001 appropriation........................ $971,024,000
Fiscal year 2002 budget request....................... 1,055,160,000
Committee recommendation.............................. 1,055,160,000
Change from budget request............................ ................

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $1,055,160,000
for Reserve Personnel, Air Force. The recommendation is an
increase of $84,136,000 above the $971,024,000 appropriated for
fiscal year 2001.

Program Recommended

The total amount recommended in the bill will provide the
following program in fiscal year 2002:

The adjustments to the budget activities for Reserve
Personnel, Air Force are shown below:

Budget Activity 1: Unit and Individual Training:]
13950 Pay Group A Training/Realignment of Funds.......... 12,500
Budget Activity 2: Other Training and Support:
14400 Administration and Support/Realignment of Funds.... -8,500
14550 Health Profession Scholarship/Realignment of Funds. -4,000

realignment of funds

The Committee recommends that $12,500,000 of Budget
Activity two funds for ``Reserve Personnel, Air Force'' be
realigned to Budget Activity one programs based on a General
Accounting Office review of previous years unexpended fund
balances and transfers between these budget activities.

NATIONAL GUARD PERSONNEL, ARMY

Fiscal year 2001 appropriation........................ $3,782,536,000
Fiscal year 2002 budget request....................... 4,014,135,000
Committee recommendation.............................. 4,004,335,000
Change from budget request............................ -9,800,000

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $4,004,335,000
for National Guard Personnel, Army. The recommendation is an
increase of $221,799,000 above the $3,782,536,000 appropriated
for fiscal year 2001.

Program Recommended

The total amount recommended in the bill will provide the
following program in fiscal year 2002:

The adjustment to the budget activities for National Guard
Personnel, Army is shown below:

Other Adjustments: [In thousands of dollars]
15355 Personnel Underexecution........................... -9,800

NATIONAL GUARD PERSONNEL, AIR FORCE

Fiscal year 2001 appropriation........................ $1,641,081,000
Fiscal year 2002 budget request....................... 1,776,744,000
Committee recommendation.............................. 1,777,654,000
Change from budget request............................ +910,000

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $1,777,654,000
for National Guard Personnel, Air Force. The recommendation is
an increase of $136,573,000 above the $1,641,081,000
appropriated for fiscal year 2001.

Program Recommended

The total amount recommended in the bill will provide the
following program in fiscal year 2002:

The adjustment to the budget activities for National Guard
Personnel, Air Force is shown below:

Other Adjustments: [In thousands of dollars]
16175 Ballistic Missile Range Safety Technology Project.. 910

ballistic missile range safety technology program

The Committee recommends an increase of $910,000 to the
budget request for the Ballistic Missile Range Safety
Technology (BMRST) program. The funds provided are for Active
Guard and Reserve (AGR) personnel assigned to the Air National
Guard Space Launch Execution Flight at the Eastern Test Range,
who support launch operations for continued range safety
certification.
TITLE II

OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE

The fiscal year 2002 budget request for programs funded in
Title II of the Committee bill, Operation and Maintenance, is
$106,788,645,000 in new budget authority, which is an increase
of $9,898,871,000 above the amount appropriated for fiscal year
2001.
The accompanying bill recommends $105,282,379,000 for
fiscal year 2002, which is an increase of $8,392,605,000 above
the amount appropriated for fiscal year 2001. As described
elsewhere in this report, these amounts reflect the amounts
provided in Title II of the Committee bill, after the movement
of $708,393,000 of funds budgeted in this Title to a new
appropriations title, Title IX.
These appropriations finance the costs of operating and
maintaining the Armed Forces, including the reserve components
and related support activities of the Department of Defense
(DoD), except military personnel costs. Included are pay for
civilians, services for maintenance of equipment and
facilities, fuel, supplies, and spare parts for weapons and
equipment. Financial requirements are influenced by many
factors, including force levels such as the number of aircraft
squadrons, Army and Marine Corps divisions, installations,
military personnel strength and deployments, rates of
operational activity, and the quantity and complexity of
equipment such as aircraft, ships, missiles and tanks in
operation.
The table below summarizes the Committee's recommendations.

OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE OVERVIEW

The Committee is heartened by the increased operation and
maintenance funding requested by the administration in the
fiscal year 2002 budget request. Substantial increases have
been requested for flying hours, depot maintenance, repair and
maintenance of real property, and base operations. The
Committee recommends an overall increase of $8,392,605,000
above the amount appropriated for fiscal year 2001. The
services' flying hour requirements to meet readiness training
goals are fully funded. Land forces readiness training funding
increased only slightly in the Army, and in fact the Army has
taken a calculated risk by decreasing operating tempo for home
station M1 Abrams Tank training from 800 to 730 miles. Marine
Corps funding requested for land forces reflects a slight
decrease as the Marine Corps chose not to sustain a fiscal year
2001 congressional increase.
The budget request supports a much improved funding
situation for the real property maintenance accounts. The
Committee fully supports the Department's request, providing an
increase of more than $700,000,000 above the fiscal year 2001
appropriated level, largely arresting the decline in facilities
readiness. Additionally, the Committee is concerned with the
lack of an overall Department of Defense standard in this area.
Many of the functions of the Department present serious
challenges to the application of standard commercial practices
or benchmarks. Facilities maintenance, however, should be an
area where the promulgation of a single standard is a
reasonable goal, and it is a goal that the Committee believes
should be pursued vigorously. The Committee understands that
the Department of Defense has implemented the Facilities
Sustainment Model (FSM), and that FSM data will support the
fiscal year 2003 budget request, providing the needed common
benchmark for assessing facilities maintenance across the
Department.
In Title II of the bill, the Committee has fully supported
the Department of Defense's requested increases in the flying
hour program, ship and aircraft depot maintenance, real
property maintenance, and base operations. These key accounts
have increased a total of nearly $6.8 billion above the fiscal
year 2001 appropriated level. The Committee supports the
requested increases, and has provided approximately $50,000,000
above the Department's request in depot maintenance and base
operations. The OPTEMPO training request for Army units is
fully supported. The Committee has provided each of the
services increased funding to support a number of critical
items that are key to training, operational readiness,
operational efficiency, and troop welfare. And the Committee
has recommended reductions from the budget request to reflect
fact of life changes, to curb growth in administrative areas,
to encourage streamlining, and to support the management
actions the Department of Defense should take to improve its
overall efficiency.

civilian pay

The Committee has fully funded the budget request for a 3.6
percent pay increase for civilian employees of the Department
of Defense. The Committee understands that the Department of
Defense may implement an increase in pay that is greater than
3.6 percent, and directs that any increase above 3.6 percent
will be paid from within funds available to the DoD.

JUNIOR ROTC

The Committee recommends an increase of $5,000,000 above
the budget request for the Junior ROTC program, to be provided
in the Operation and Maintenance accounts. The services are
slowly increasing the number of Junior ROTC units. In order to
accelerate the growth in Junior ROTC units, the Committee
recommends additional funding over the budget request to be
distributed as follows.

Army.................................................. $2,500,000
Navy.................................................. 930,000
Marine Corps.......................................... 370,000
Air Force............................................. 1,200,000

GOVERNMENT PURCHASE CARD

The Committee understands that the Department of Defense
purchase card program was designed to reduce the bureaucratic
processes and paperwork involved with making small purchases.
Cardholders can be authorized single-transaction limits of
$2,500, $25,000, or $100,000. In fiscal year 2000, the services
and defense agencies spent just over $5.5 billion using
purchase cards. Fiscal year 2001 data indicate that the rate of
spending using purchase cards is on the rise. However, the
simplified and streamlined procedures of the purchase card
program require close supervision and review by supervisors to
ensure that funds are expended for proper purposes.
In July of 2001, the General Accounting Office testified
before Congress on its review of the Government Purchase Card
Program. The GAO reviewed purchase card use in two Navy
organizations in San Diego, California. The GAO found weak
internal controls, including: (1) policies governing the
issuance of purchase cards were ineffective, leading to
proliferation of card holders; (2) employees were not
sufficiently trained on the use of the purchase card, and
employees did not follow established procedures; (3)
approximately 2,600 account numbers were compromised, a partial
list was found at a college library, and at least 30 accounts
received fraudulent charges; (4) internal reviews and audits
were ineffective; (5) efforts to maximize rebates were
ineffective; (6) easily pilferable items that were acquired
using purchase cards were often missing from organizational
property records; and (7) many items were purchased for
personal use, including laptop computers, clothing, an air
conditioner and jewelry.
The Committee is most concerned that supervisors who were
responsible to review and certify that purchases made with the
card were for proper purposes in many cases failed to fulfill
their responsibilities, thus allowing unnecessary and
fraudulent purchases to continue.
The accompanying bill includes a general provision that
reduces the total amount available in Operation and Maintenance
by $330,000,000 to reflect savings due to improved scrutiny and
supervision in determining appropriate purchases.

HEADQUARTERS STAFF

The Committee commends the Secretary of Defense for his
announced intentions to significantly reduce all headquarters
staff by 15 percent below fiscal year 1999 levels. The
Secretary's ``Battle Against Bureaucracy'' will further the
Committee's longstanding and continuing efforts to shift
Department of Defense resources from the bureaucracy to the
battlefield. As the Department of Defense undertakes an assault
against terrorism and initiates other activities to protect our
homeland, this restructuring will ensure that manpower and
resources are available for the task at hand. In support of the
Secretary's efforts to complete this reduction by 2003, the
Committee has reduced funding for management headquarters
civilian personnel as follows.

Army.................................................. $82,200,000
Navy.................................................. 51,100,000
Marine Corps.......................................... 4,000,000
Air Force............................................. 50,400,000
Defense Wide.......................................... 54,300,000

ADVISORY AND ASSISTANCE SERVICES AND CONTRACT WORKFORCE

The fiscal year 2002 Department of Defense budget request
would provide an increase of approximately $17,000,000 in
advisory and assistance (consultant) services. The Committee is
concerned by any action in the Department that devotes more
funding to administrative functions at the expense of critical
combat and combat support activities. In addition, the
Department of Defense Commercial Activities Report of August
2001 estimates that the fiscal year 2000 commercial and
industrial workforce totaled 1,203,000 civilian manpower
authorizations and contractor work-year equivalents. This
workforce was estimated to be 39 percent in-house Defense
Department civilians, and 61 percent contracted workforce. The
contractor workforce is expected to remain constant for fiscal
year 2001, at 732,000 work-year equivalents, whereas the DoD
civilian workforce is expected to decline by two percent. This
would seem to indicate a situation where the DoD is not
streamlining its administrative practices or eliminating
unnecessary and outdated functions, but merely transferring the
same functions from federal workers to contractors who arguably
have less loyalty and accountability to the organization, and
whose use can cause more disruption due to personnel turnover
than the federal workers they replaced.
The Committee believes that inadequate scrutiny is given to
requests for contract workyears, and that significant savings
can be achieved by making a thorough review of services
provided and the number of work years devoted to such services.
The Committee recognizes that contracting for certain functions
has worked well for the Department of Defense, enabling the
Department to obtain key services, such as equipment technical
support, engineering and automation services, and certain
unique capabilities. Many contractor services have proven to be
responsive when needed, and the contractor workforce is more
easily sized than the federal workforce. However, contractor
work-years, once established, tend to grow over time with
inadequate discipline in challenging requested support. The
Committee concludes that sufficient advisory and assistance
support is provided by sustaining the fiscal year 2001 level,
and that a 1.25 percent reduction in contractor work-years is
achievable without diminishing essential commercial and
industrial capabilities.
The accompanying bill includes a general provision that
reduces the total amount appropriated for contracted workyears,
including advisory and assistance services, by $955,000,000 of
which $898,000,000 is to be derived from Operation and
Maintenance. The Committee directs that none of the reduction
in contractor support shall be applied to activities that
directly support anti-terrorism, force protection, consequence
management or other similar counter terrorism efforts in
response to the attack of September 11, 2001.
The Committee directs the Secretary of Defense to submit a
report to the congressional defense committees not later than
June 30, 2002, which details by service and defense agency, and
further divided by service and agency major suborganization,
Federal Service Code Group, and appropriation account through
which contracted, the reductions in contractor workyear
equivalents made in order to achieve the efficiencies specified
in the general provision.

HEADQUARTERS AND ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENSES

The Committee recommends reductions of $54,000,000 below
the budget request for headquarters and administrative
activities as shown below. The Committee supports the effort of
the House Armed Services Committee to reduce administrative
expenses in favor of supporting war-fighting-unit training and
operations.

Army.................................................. $10,000,000
Navy.................................................. 30,000,000
Air Force............................................. 14,000,000

international military headquarters and support of other nations

The Committee recommends reductions of $44,000,000 below
the budget request as shown below, sustaining only slight
growth in this activity. The Committee supports the House Armed
Services Committee's actions in this regard. The amount of
growth included in the budget request seems unwarranted
considering remaining readiness and modernization shortfalls.

Army.................................................. $39,000,000
Air Force............................................. 5,000,000

a-76 studies

The Committee recommends reductions of $76,500,000 in
funding requested for A-76 studies as shown below. The
Committee shares the concerns of the House Armed Services
Committee regarding the cost of the studies, and the number of
studies planned to be accomplished. Additionally, the Committee
cautions against overly optimistic savings assumptions
considering the time required to accomplish the studies and the
frequently lengthy appeals process.

Army.................................................. $8,360,000
Navy.................................................. 53,560,000
Marine Corps.......................................... 1,000,000
Air Force............................................. 8,320,000
Defense-Wide.......................................... 5,260,000

operation and maintenance budget execution data

The Committee directs the Department of Defense to continue
to provide the congressional defense committees with quarterly
budget execution data. Such data should be provided not later
than forty-five days past the close of each quarter for the
fiscal year, and should be provided for each O-1 budget
activity, activity group, and subactivity group for each of the
active, defense-wide, reserve and National Guard components.
For each O-1 budget activity, activity group, and subactivity
group, these reports should include the budget request and
actual obligations; the DoD distribution of unallocated
congressional adjustments to the budget request; all
adjustments made by DoD during the process of rebaselining the
O&M accounts; all adjustments resulting from below threshold
reprogrammings; and all adjustments resulting from prior
approval reprogramming requests.
In addition, the Committee requires that the Department of
Defense provide semiannual written notifications to the
congressional defense committees which summarize Operation and
Maintenance budget execution to include the effect of
rebaselining procedures, other below threshold reprogrammings,
and prior approval reprogrammings. The Committee further
directs that the Department of Defense provide the House and
Senate Committees on Appropriations written notification 30
days prior to executing procedures to rebaseline Operation and
Maintenance accounts.

operation and maintenance reprogrammings

The Committee directs that proposed transfers of funds
between O-1 budget activities in excess of $15,000,000 be
subject to normal prior approval reprogramming procedures.
Items for which funds have been specifically provided in any
appropriation in the report using phrases ``only for'' and
``only to'' are Congressional interest items for the purpose of
the Base for Reprogramming (DD form 1414). Each of these items
must be carried on the DD1414 at the stated amount, or revised
amount if changed during conference or if otherwise
specifically addressed in the conference report. In addition,
due to continuing concerns about force readiness and the
diversion of Operation and Maintenance funds, the Committee
directs the Department of Defense to provide written
notification to the congressional defense committees for the
cumulative value of any and all transfers in excess of
$15,000,000 from the following budget activities and
subactivity group categories:

Operation and maintenance, Army

Land Forces: Divisions, Corps combat forces, Corps support
forces, Echelon above Corps forces, Land forces operation
support; Land Forces Readiness: Land forces depot maintenance.

Operation and maintenance, Navy

Air Operations: Mission and other flight operations, Fleet
air training, Aircraft depot maintenance; Ship Operations:
Mission and other ship operations, Ship operational support and
training, Intermediate maintenance, Ship depot maintenance.

Operation and maintenance, Marine Corps

Expeditionary Forces: Operational forces, Depot
maintenance.

Operation and maintenance, Air Force

Air Operations: Primary combat forces, Primary combat
weapons, Air operations training, Depot maintenance; Mobility
Operations: Airlift operations, Depot maintenance, Payments to
the transportation business area; Basic Skill and Advance
Training: Depot maintenance; Logistics Operations: Depot
maintenance.
Further, the Department should follow prior approval
reprogramming procedures for transfers in excess of $15,000,000
out of the following budget subactivities.

Operation and maintenance, Army

Depot maintenance.

Operation and maintenance, Navy

Aircraft depot maintenance,
Ship depot maintenance.

Operation and maintenance, Marine Corps

Depot maintenance.

Operation and maintenance, Air Force

Air Operations, Depot maintenance,
Mobility Operations, Depot maintenance,
Basic Skills and Advanced Training, Depot maintenance, and
Logistics Operations, Depot maintenance.

0-1 reprogramming approval requirement

The Committee is concerned about the Department's efforts
to undermine Congressional intent with regard to specific
program reductions taken in the Committee's report. While the
Committee does not object to the Department's common practice
of below threshold reprogramming to address pricing increases
(such as fuel, inflation, foreign currency, etc.) and emerging
requirements, the Committee does object when the Department
restores funding to programs that have been specifically
reduced by Congress as shown in annual Committee reports. The
Committee directs that all funding reductions to programs and
activities in Operation and Maintenance appropriations, other
than those related to pricing, are made with prejudice and
shall be so shown on DD Form 1414 for fiscal year 2002 and
subsequent fiscal years for Operation and Maintenance
appropriations. Increases to such programs and activities may
be requested from the congressional defense committees subject
to normal prior approval reprogramming procedures.

OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, ARMY

Fiscal year 2001 appropriation........................ $19,144,431,000
Fiscal year 2002 budget request....................... 21,191,680,000
Committee recommendation.............................. 21,021,944,000
Change from budget request............................ -169,736,000

The Committee recommends an appropriation of
$21,021,944,000 for Operation and Maintenance, Army. The
recommendation is an increase of $1,877,513,000 above the
amount appropriated for fiscal year 2001.

Program Recommended

The total amount recommended in the bill will provide the
following program in fiscal year 2002:

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

Budget Activity 1: Operating Forces:s of dollars]
250 M-Gator.............................................. 3,500
250 CAMS................................................. 10,000
250 Blister Guard Socks.................................. 1,000
250 10th Mountain Division ASL Containers................ 1,000
250 Hydration on the Move (Camelbak)..................... 1,500
650 Mobile Kitchen Trailers.............................. 5,000
650 Communications and Electronics....................... 10,000
650 Anniston Army Depot Apprenticeship Program........... 3,000
750 NTC Airhead.......................................... 1,500
750 Training Facilities Support.......................... 9,200
750 Salute Our Services Pilot Program.................... 3,000
Budget Activity 3: Training and Recruiting:
1850 DLI Dormitory Furnishings and Equipment............. 1,280
1850 Military Police MCTFT Joint Training................ 1,000
2050 Fort Bliss Desalination Plant Study................. 1,600
2400 Junior ROTC......................................... 2,500
Budget Activity 4: Administration and Servicewide Activities:
2750 Servicewide Transportation.......................... -10,000
2750 MTMC DRMEC Demo Project including RAPID............. 4,000
2800 Pulse Technology--Battery Management................ 5,000
2800 Pulse Technology--BATTCAVE.......................... 3,000
2850 Electronic Maintenance System Interactive Electronic
Maintenance Manual...................................... 4,000
2850 LOGTECH Center of Excellence in Logistics........... 1,000
3000 Administration...................................... -10,000
3050 Servicewide Communication (JCALS)................... -12,000
3100 Manpower Management (DCPS).......................... -6,400
3200 Other Servicewide Support........................... -9,000
3350 A-76 Process Aberdeen Proving Ground................ -2,000
3600 International Military Headquarters................. -39,000
Undistributed:
3710 Classified Programs................................. 10,794
3740 Memorial Events..................................... 350
3835 Repairs at Fort Baker............................... 1,000
3845 Defense Joint Accounting System..................... -12,500
3950 A-76 Studies........................................ -8,360
3970 Information Technology System, Army................. -20,000
3990 Headquarters Staff Reduction........................ -82,200
4000 Travel of Persons................................... -19,000
4010 Civilian Personnel Underexecution................... -16,000
4020 Mobility Enhancement Study.......................... 500
4040 WMD--Response Element Adv Lab Training.............. 2,000
4060 Camouflage Nets (for inefficient buying practices).. -10,000

electronic maintenance system

Electronic Maintenance System (EMS) Interactive Electronic
Technical Manuals (IETM), and associated vehicle computer
displays with Point-to-Point Wiring & Signal Tracing
significantly improves operational readiness and reduces the
total cost of ownership of U.S. Army tactical and combat war
fighting vehicles. In an effort to exploit the capabilities of
these systems the Committee recommends an increase of
$4,000,000 in Operation and Maintenance, Army.

camera assisted monitoring system--cams

The Committee recommends an additional $10,000,000 for
Operation and Maintenance, Army, only for a demonstration of
the capability and effectiveness of the Camera Assisted
Monitoring System (CAMS) baseline system. The Committee
believes that the application of CAMS technology will enhance
the capabilities of peacekeeping forces to conduct observation
missions.

mobile kitchen trailers depot maintenance

The Committee recommends an additional $5,000,000 in
Operation and Maintenance, Army, only for a rebuild program
which includes upgrade to the MKT-I configuration.

COMMUNICATIONS ELECTRONICS

The Committee recommends an additional $10,000,000 only for
depot maintenance of critical communications and electronics
systems that were not funded in the budget request, or
communications and electronics systems in the Army's
recapitalization program that were not funded in the budget
request. These communications and electronics systems include:
AN/TPQ-36/37 Firefinder Radar; AN/ASM-146/147 Electronic
Maintenance Shelters/Vans; AN/TSC-85/93 Tactical Satellite
Terminals; AN/PRC-126 Radio Sets; AN/TRC-170 Microwave
Terminals; AN/TLQ-17 Trafficjam systems; and AN/PPX-3
Interrogator Sets.

SALUTE OUR SERVICES PILOT PROGRAM

The Committee recommends an additional $3,000,000 in
Operation and Maintenance, Army only for a privately run United
States Army pilot program to improve family support services
for deployed personnel. This program should include an
interactive web based management system for deployed service
members and their loved ones, a mentoring program enlisting the
aid of spouses who have experienced a deployment, outreach
efforts to engage the business and corporate community in
partnerships with the military, and a mechanism for the various
service branches to share information regarding existing,
successful quality of life programs for possible
implementation.

MOBILITY ENHANCEMENT STUDY

The Committee recommends an additional $500,000 in
Operation and Maintenance, Army only for the conduct of a study
of potential improvements to railroad transportation support
for the National Training Center.

optempo training resource metrics

The Committee is troubled by the Army's fiscal year 2002
budget proposal to reduce the OPTEMPO training budget by
$300,000,000 compared to the established funding requirement.
This comes despite an overall increase of $2,047,249,000 in the
Army Operation and Maintenance budget request. For fiscal year
2002, the Army budgeted for 730 home-station tank training
miles (versus the established standard of 800 miles), and 14.0
helicopter flying hours per-crew-per-month (versus the
established standard of 14.5 hours), plus additional tank miles
for training at the National Training Center. The explanation
provided by the Army is that it has elected to ``assume risk''
in training and apply the resources to infrastructure
shortfalls that were incurred during the 1990s. The Army
leadership testified it plans to reevaluate the status of
training at mid-year and, if required, internally shift Army
funds from other O&M accounts to address any critical
shortfall.
The Committee views this proposal as another indication of
what now appears to be a dysfunctional OPTEMPO training
resource management process that no longer can be relied upon
to accurately justify budgetary requirements to Congress. There
has been a continuing disparity between the training resources
the Army claims it needs according to its ``tank mile'' and
``helicopter flying hour'' standards, and the training
resources it actually expends. In many years, the Army has
under-executed its 800-mile tank mile standard by more than 20
percent, while still reporting no great diminution in C-1 and
C-2 unit readiness status. Over the last several years, the
Army has spent literally billions of appropriated dollars for
non-OPTEMPO Operation and Maintenance activities that had been
originally justified to Congress (and appropriated) for OPTEMPO
training.
The Committee views the Army OPTEMPO training budget as a
top priority and is unwilling to tolerate this situation in
future years. At this point, the Committee is simply not
confident that it is being furnished with valid measures
against which to judge the adequacy of the Army OPTEMPO budget.
For fiscal year 2002, the Committee sees that it has little
choice but to rely upon the promise of the Army leadership to
make an ad hoc, subjective review of this situation halfway
through the fiscal year. The Secretary of the Army is directed
to provide a written report to the congressional defense
committees on the results of this review and the actions taken
by the Army to address any perceived shortfalls.
For the future, the Committee puts the Army on notice that
it will be expected to completely overhaul its OPTEMPO training
budget metrics to construct more precise and accurate
indicators of what a given level of budgetary investment will
achieve. Better OPTEMPO variables and standards must be
developed based on 21st Century training practices to
accurately estimate and project the cost of Army training (both
direct and indirect) to achieve a desired level of readiness.
Such revised standards should be workable, quantifiable, and
understandable. The Committee therefore directs the Army to
undertake a thorough review of the current training resource
metrics and directs the Secretary of the Army to submit a
report to the congressional defense committees by no later than
July 31, 2002 explaining how the Army plans to reform this
process. The Committee expects the Army to include in this
report a rebasing of its fiscal year 2003 OPTEMPO budget
request against its new OPTEMPO metrics, and to base all future
budget submissions on these new metrics.

ABERDEEN PROVING GROUND A-76 COMPETITION

The Committee recommends a reduction of $2,000,000 from the
amount requested for Operation and Maintenance, Army in the
Base Operations Support Account. In February 2000 the
Comptroller General upheld an appeal to an Army A-76
competition decision. The Army has failed to fully and promptly
implement the recommendations of the Comptroller General.

TRAINING FACILITIES

The Committee has provided $9,200,000 in Operation and
Maintenance, Army only for repair of the Fort Irwin--Goldstone
Road, installation of ``Deep Strike'' fiber optic cable to
China Lake and range/targetry upgrades to improve training at
the National Training Center.

TRANSPORTATION INFRASTRUCTURE ANALYSIS CENTER

The Committee is aware of the challenges posed by the
various threats to the critical domestic transportation
infrastructure and the potential impact to the national
warfighting capability. The Army is directed to study the
possible establishment of a Transportation Infrastructure
Analysis Center (TIAC) at Letterkenny Army Depot in
Pennsylvania. The TIAC would be dual missioned, to analyze the
United States critical transportation infrastructure, and to
prepare National Guardsmen for their warfighting mission of
identifying critical infrastructures for either protection or
interdiction.

CAMOUFLAGE NETS

The Committee recommends a reduction of $10,000,000 from
the amount requested for Operation and Maintenance, Army to
recapture the savings the Army has failed to realize over
several years due to illogical purchasing procedures for
lightweight camouflage nets. The Committee understands that due
to defective buying procedures, the Army believes it must
continue to purchase replacement nets designed in the 1970's
that are technically inferior to multi-spectral threat sensors,
less durable, weigh twice as much, and cost nearly twice as
much as other nets that are available to the Army. The
Committee is puzzled why the Army cannot rectify this situation
that not only wastes money, but also raises concerns about
force protection. The Committee expects the Army to take prompt
action to establish the preferred, more effective camouflage
nets on the appropriate supply schedules so that units can
purchase the new nets (to complete unit sets or as replacement
items for nets that become unserviceable), using unit operation
and maintenance funds. The accompanying bill includes a general
provision (Sec. 8141) to clarify any legal ambiguity for the
Army on this matter.

army corrosion prevention and control program

The Committee is aware of new technologies in the
prevention of corrosion which can significantly reduce
corrosion costs and improve readiness. Of the funds made
available in Operation and Maintenance, Army the Committee
directs that $2,000,000 be made available only for the Army
Corrosion Prevention and Control Program.

controlled humidity preservation program

The Committee understands that the Controlled Humidity
Preservation (CHP) Program enhances the long-term condition of
forward based equipment by protecting it from moisture induced
corrosion and electronic system degradation. New portable CHP
storage facilities offer greater flexibility through the
redeployment of the soft storage tunnel systems as experienced
by the US Army Materiel Command in Qatar and Italy, increased
operational efficiencies, and enhanced relocation possibilities
for CHP storage shelters as required to support the rapidly
changing needs of operational and regional commanders. The
Committee directs that of the funds available for Operation and
Maintenance, Army, $1,000,000 shall be available only for the
Controlled Humidity Preservation Program for the implementation
of portable CHP tunnel systems for forward based equipment,
vehicles, spare parts and weapons systems.

MILITARY POLICE SCHOOL/MCTFT JOINT TRAINING

The Committee recommends an additional $1,000,000 above the
budget request for use by the Military Police School to provide
for training by the Multijurisdictional Counterdrug Task Force
Training in support of Multijurisdictional Task Force
activities. The Committee commends the Army Military Police
School for the valuable training it provides to law enforcement
personnel in support of the counter-drug effort. However, the
Committee is aware that the capacity for training by the
Military Police School at Fort Leonard Wood is limited and
unable to meet the total demands of law enforcement. The
Multijurisdictional Counterdrug Task Force Training is ideally
suited to expand the course offerings provide by the Military
Police School.

recruiting and advertising

The Committee continues to support the Army's recruiting
and advertising campaign to ensure the Army achieves its
recruiting goals. The Committee directs that no less than
$6,600,000 of funds provided for Operation and Maintenance,
Army be used to maintain existing production efforts directed
toward certain audiences, including Hispanic recruits.

military entrance processing station (MEPS)

The Committee directs that of the funds provided for
Examining in Operation and Maintenance, Army that $20,000 be
used only for replacement of computers and computer upgrades at
the MEPS facility in Kansas City, Missouri.

Biocontainment Research Facility

The Committee is aware of the need of the United States
Department of Agriculture to establish a new high security
biocontainment laboratory on the East Coast to aid in its vital
clinical research to combat new biological threats such as the
West Nile virus that are spread by invasive species. The
Committee directs the Army Surgeon General to conduct a
coordinated review with the USDA and other Army commands that
have responsibility for biological warfare defense to determine
the benefits and research opportunities of establishing a
shared USDA-Army state-of-the-art, security level 3 (BL-3)
biocontainment facility. This review shall: (1) assess the need
to upgrade the biological research laboratory facilities for
both the USDA and the Army and how a BL-3 facility could
benefit the missions of both organizations; (2) assess the
opportunities and benefits of expanding the scientific research
relationships between the Army, the USDA, and the academic
community in the area of combating biological threats to the
United States populace and its food supply; and (3) define the
need, cost, critical design features, and possible construction
timetable to establish a new high security biocontainment
research facility at an academic institution. The Surgeon
General shall submit a report to the congressional defense
committees by no later than 180 days after enactment of this
Act on the results of this review.

Classified Programs

The Committee recommends $2,000,000 for the Expert Radar
Signature Solutions (ERADS) project.
The Committee recommends an additional $5,000,000 for the
Defense Language Program. The Committee directs these funds be
used to meet critical advanced language training requirements
for the Department of Defense and the Intelligence Community.
Further discussion of the Committee's recommendations is
contained in the Classified Annex.

OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, NAVY

Fiscal year 2001 appropriation........................ $23,419,360,000
Fiscal year 2002 budget request....................... 26,961,382,000
Committee recommendation.............................. 26,628,075,000
Change from budget request............................ -333,307,000

The Committee recommends an appropriation of
$26,628,075,000 for Operation and Maintenance, Navy. The
recommendation is an increase of $3,208,715,000 above the
amount appropriated for fiscal year 2001.

Program Recommended

The total amount recommended in the bill will provide the
following program in fiscal year 2002:

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

Budget Activity 1: Operating Forces:s of dollars]
4500 DSM-156 Missile Test Set Upgrade.................... 2,000
4600 NAVAIR CAT and RADCOM test system................... 10,000
5050 NUWC Torpedo Depot Apprentice....................... 2,000
5050 Improved Engineering Design Process................. 6,000
5550 Manual Reverse Osmosis Desalinators................. 1,500
5550 Naval Coastal Warfare Training Improvements......... 5,000
5950 Mark 45 Gun System Overhaul......................... 2,000
5950 Phalanx CIWS Units Overhaul......................... 3,000
6220 Innovative Safety Management........................ 5,000
6220 Northwest Environmental Resource Center............. 7,000
6220 NWS Seal Beach Detachment, Concord, Joint Use
Feasibility Analysis.................................... 1,500
6620 Excess Administrative Overhead...................... -1,500
Budget Activity 3: Training and Recruiting:
7000 ROTC Programs....................................... 2,200
7200 Naval Aviation Apprenticeship Program............... 2,000
7300 NPS CDTEMS.......................................... 4,000
7350 Distance Learning CNET.............................. 4,000
7350 Navy Learning Network Program CNET.................. 4,000
7350 Maintenance and Training Process CNET............... 3,000
7700 Junior ROTC......................................... 930
7700 Naval Sea Cadet Corps............................... 1,000
Budget Activity 4: Administration and Servicewide Activities:
8000 Administration...................................... -30,000
8000 Advanced Technology Information Support............. 2,000
8550 Naval Facilities Engineering Command................ -35,000
8550 Planning, Engineering and Design.................... -6,000
8550 NSW Carderock All Weather Cargo Transfer System..... 500
8550 Stainless Steel Sanitary Space System............... 5,000
8600 Acquisition and Program Management.................. -53,000
8600 SPAWAR ITC Operations............................... 9,000
8650 Configuration Management Information System......... 3,000
Undistributed:
9280 Classified Programs................................. 3,223
9415 Defense Joint Accounting System..................... -7,000
9490 A-76 Studies........................................ -53,560
9520 Enterprise Resource Planning........................ -33,000
9540 Information Technology System, Navy................. -20,000
9570 Navy Marine Corps Intranet.......................... -120,000
9580 Headquarters Staff Reduction........................ -51,100
9590 Travel of Persons................................... -12,000

NUWC TORPEDO DEPOT APPRENTICE PROGRAM

The Committee recommends $2,000,000 only to establish a
Torpedo Depot Maintenance Apprentice Program at the Naval
Undersea Warfare Center (NUWC).

NAVAL POSTGRADUATE SCHOOL--CDTEMS

The Committee recommends $4,000,000 only for the Office of
Naval Research to provide to the Naval Postgraduate School
Center for Defense Technology and Education for the Military
Services.

NAVY LEARNING NETWORK PROGRAM CNET

The Committee recommends $4,000,000 only for the Center for
Navy Education and Training for the continuation of the Navy
Learning Network Program.

MANUAL REVERSE OSMOSIS DESALINATORS

The Committee has provided an additional $1,500,000 for the
refurbishment of Manual Reverse Osmosis Desalinators (MROD). Of
the additional funds provided, $1,000,000 is to be used for
Navy surface fleet MROD refurbishment, and $500,000 is to be
used for Navy Aviation MROD refurbishment.

INNOVATIVE SAFETY MANAGEMENT PILOT

The Committee recognizes that there are initiatives
underway in the private sector that dramatically reduce the
incidence of workplace injuries and their related costs. The
Committee also recognizes that the Department of the Navy has
experienced high costs in the area of civilian workplace
injuries. The Committee therefore directs the Secretary of the
Navy to adopt for use in the workplace of civilian employees of
the Department of the Navy such work safety models used by
employers in the private sector that the Secretary considers as
being representative of the best work safety practices in use
by private sector employers. The Committee recommends an
additional $5,000,000 in Operation and Maintenance, Navy to
begin this initiative in fiscal year 2002.

NAVAL FACILITIES ENGINEERING COMMAND

The Committee is concerned that the budget justification
for the Naval Facilities Engineering Command has assumed
funding in its fiscal year 2001 adjusted baseline and its
fiscal year 2002 budget request that under traditional budget
justifications would not be included. The Committee has reduced
funding for the Naval Facilities Engineering Command
accordingly.

SHIP DEPOT MAINTENANCE

The Committee is aware that the ship depot maintenance
account has been underfunded in recent years. This underfunding
was caused by several factors, including a deficient
calculation that understated the requirement, underfunding of
the requirement that was identified, and the added costs
associated with high deployment levels. The Committee applauds
the Navy's recent effort to revise the maintenance calculation
to more adequately reflect the real requirement, and to fully
fund maintenance in the future. The Committee recognizes,
however, that the fiscal year 2002 budget may again lack the
necessary funds to fully implement them. The Committee expects
that the fiscal year 2003 budget and future year budgets will
include the funding necessary to support 100 percent of the
ship maintenance requirement. The Committee also directs the
Secretary of the Navy to provide with the fiscal year 2003
budget submission a plan to eliminate the maintenance backlog
that has accumulated as a result of previous underfunding, and
to incorporate necessary funds in future budgets to execute
that plan.

computer program training

The Committee directs that of the funds provided for
recruiting and advertising in Operation and Maintenance, Navy
that $15,000 be used only for a training plan to enhance
computer literacy and management skills for civilian employees
and naval recruiters at the Naval Recruiting District
Headquarters in Kansas City, Missouri.

OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, MARINE CORPS

Fiscal year 2001 appropriation........................ $2,778,758,000
Fiscal year 2002 budget request....................... 2,892,314,000
Committee recommendation.............................. 2,939,434,000
Change from budget request............................ +47,120,000

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $2,939,434,000
for Operation and Maintenance, Marine Corps. The recommendation
is an increase of $160,676,000 above the amount appropriated
for fiscal year 2001.

Program Recommended

The total amount recommended in the bill will provide the
following program in fiscal year 2002:

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

Budget Activity 1: Operating Forces:s of dollars]
10050 Extreme Cold Weather Clothing System............... 1,500
10050 Modular General Purpose Tent System................ 5,000
10050 Blister Guard Socks................................ 1,000
10050 Hydration on the Move (Camelbak)................... 1,500
10050 MOLLE.............................................. 7,500
10100 Log Improvement Initiative (Ground Supply Chain
Management)............................................. 3,000
10100 Syst Integration Environment Spt for VII MEF....... 2,000
10150 Depot Maintenance--Radar Systems................... 5,000
10200 Waste Water Treatment Study........................ 250
10200 Joint Service NBC Eqpt Assessment/Consolidation.... 4,000
10200 Twentynine Palms MAGTF MOUT Facility Planning and
Design.................................................. 1,500
10200 Training and Support Facilities.................... 16,900
10250 MAGTFTC Twentynine Palms........................... 2,600
Budget Activity 3: Training and Recruiting:
11300 Junior ROTC........................................ 370
Undistributed:
12060 Headquarters staff reduction....................... -4,000
12070 A-76 Studies....................................... -1,000

MARINE CORPS AIR-GROUND COMBAT CENTER TWENTYNINE PALMS

The Committee has provided an additional $2,600,000 in
Operation and Maintenance, Marine Corps only for the repair of
facilities that were damaged by severe wind, rain, and
flooding.

WASTE WATER TREATMENT STUDY

The Committee recommends an additional $250,000 in
Operation and Maintenance, Marine Corps only for a study of
waste-water collection and treatment, including the option of a
joint system to serve both Marine Corps Base Twentynine Palms,
and the City of Twentynine Palms.

joint service nbc defense equipment assessment and consolidation
program

The Committee recommends an additional $4,000,000 in
Operation and Maintenance, Marine Corps for the Joint Service
NBC Defense Equipment Assessment and Consolidation Program,
including expansion of the Consolidated Storage and Issue
Facility program.

Depot maintenance--radars

The Committee is aware that the Marine Corps has a backlog
of executable but unfunded depot maintenance requirements for
critical radar systems. The Committee recommends an additional
$5,000,000 in Operation and Maintenance, Marine Corps only for
depot level maintenance of radar systems.

twentynine palms magtf mout training facility

The Committee recommends an additional $1,500,000 in
Operation and Maintenance, Marine Corps only for the planning
and design for construction of a Military Operations on Urban
Terrain (MOUT) training facility at the MAGTF Training Center
at Twentynine Palms, California.

training and support facilities

The Committee recommends $7,400,000 in Operation and
Maintenance, Marine Corps for electrical distribution system
improvements at Marine Corps Logistics Base, Barstow,
California and $9,500,000 in Operation and Maintenance, Marine
Corps for electrical system, communications infrastructure and
other mission critical improvements at the MAGTF Training
Center, Twentynine Palms, California.

OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, AIR FORCE

Fiscal year 2001 appropriation........................ $22,383,521,000
Fiscal year 2002 budget request....................... 26,146,770,000
Committee recommendation.............................. 25,842,968,000
Change from budget request............................ -303,802,000

The Committee recommends an appropriation of
$25,842,968,000 for Operation and Maintenance, Air Force. The
recommendation is an increase of $3,459,447,000 above the
amount appropriated for fiscal year 2001.

Program Recommended

The total amount recommended in the bill will provide the
following program in fiscal year 2002:

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

Budget Activity 1: Operating Forces:s of dollars]
12850 Battle Lab Engineering and Tech Support............ 5,500
12850 Air Force Server Consolidation..................... 5,000
13200 Excessive management overhead...................... -10,000
Budget Activity 3: Training and Recruiting:
14600 IT Workforce Re-Skilling........................... 1,000
15150 Junior ROTC........................................ 1,200
Budget Activity 4: Administration and Servicewide Activities:
15350 CKU-5 Rocket Catapult PPI.......................... 2,000
15350 Aging Propulsion System Life Extension............. 3,000
15350 L-SMART Information System Logistics Opns.......... 5,000
15350 Acquisition Efficiencies........................... -25,000
15450 Servicewide Transportation......................... -20,000
15650 Administration..................................... -14,000
15700 Servicewide Communications......................... -8,000
15950 Other Servicewide Activities....................... -19,000
15950 Manufacturing Technology Assistance Pilot.......... 2,000
16100 William Lehman Aviation Center..................... 750
16350 International Support.............................. -5,000
Undistributed:
16450 Classified Programs................................ -24,532
16660 Defense Joint Accounting System.................... -7,000
16720 Travel of Persons.................................. -43,000
16750 Active Duty Military Personnel Underexecution
Support................................................. -75,000
16760 A-76 Studies....................................... -8,320
16810 Information Technology System, Air Force........... -20,000
16830 Headquarters Staff Reduction....................... -50,400

active duty military personnel underexecution

The Committee recommends a reduction of $75,000,000 below
the amount requested in Operation and Maintenance, Air Force
for operation and maintenance support to military personnel
based on continued military personnel underexecution.

cku-5 rocket catapult ppi

The Committee is concerned about the safety of pilots
flying with CKU-5 equipped ejection seats. In addition to funds
provided elsewhere the Committee recommends $2,000,000 in
Operation and Maintenance, Air Force only for subsystem and
system testing on the CKU-5 and ACES II ejection seat.

Classified Programs

The Committee recommends a reduction of $3,000,000 in U-2
operations due to the availability of fiscal year 2001
Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, Air Force funds
which should be transferred to Operation and Maintenance, Air
Force to offset this recommended reduction.
The Committee recommends an increase of $1,000,000 for the
Threat Representation and Validation project.
The Committee recommends an increase of $5,000,000 for the
continued support of the Eagle Vision systems for the Air
National Guard.
Further discussion of the Committee's recommendations is
contained in the Classified Annex.

OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, DEFENSE-WIDE

Fiscal year 2001 appropriation........................ $11,844,480,000
Fiscal year 2002 budget request....................... 12,518,631,000
Committee recommendation.............................. 12,122,590,000
Change from budget request............................ -396,041,000

The Committee recommends an appropriation of
$12,122,590,000 for Operation and Maintenance, Defense-Wide.
The recommendation is an increase of $278,110,000 from the
amount appropriated in fiscal year 2001.

Program Recommended

The total amount recommended in the bill will provide the
following program in fiscal year 2002:

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

Budget Activity 3: Training and Recruiting:llars]
17460 DAU--Distance Learning Travel Savings.............. -4,000
17460 DAU--Electronic Education for the Reserve Component
in both Classroom and Distributed Environments.......... 2,000
17460 DAU--National Defense University XXI............... 2,000
17460 DAU--Distance Learning............................. 3,000
17460 DAU--IT Organizational Composition Research........ 1,500
17480 DHRA--DLAMP........................................ -30,000
17510 DTRA--Transfer to Title IX......................... -1,246
Budget Activity 4: Administration and Servicewide Activities:
17750 AFIS--Pay Calculation and Utilities................ -300
17775 Civil Military Programs--Youth Development and
Leadership Program...................................... 750
17800 Classified Programs................................ -988
17900 DCAA--Program Growth............................... -7,400
17900 DCAA--Execution.................................... -5,000
17910 DCMA--Pay Calculation, Program Growth.............. -11,400
17910 DCMA--SPS Office Efficiencies...................... -1,000
18050 DISA............................................... -10,000
18150 DLA--Unemployment Compensation..................... -1,900
18150 DLA--Security Locks................................ 10,000
18150 DLA--Obsolete NSNs................................. -7,000
18300 DODEA--Utilities................................... -3,600
18310 Defense POW/Missing Persons Office--Personnel
Recovery Needs Assessment............................... 1,500
18320 DSCA--Budget Justifications........................ -4,900
18475 DSS--Improper Budget Adjustments................... -1,500
18500 DTRA--Transfer to Title IX......................... -258,597
18600 OEA--Philadelphia Naval Business Center
(Improvements).......................................... 5,000
18600 OEA--City of St. Louis SLAAP/ATCOM Redevelopment... 2,000
18600 OEA--Norton AFB.................................... 3,000
18600 OEA--Cecil Field................................... 4,000
18650 OSD--Program Growth................................ -19,400
18650 OSD--CTMA.......................................... 12,000
18650 OSD--ADUSD (MPP&R) Wearable Computers.............. 2,000
18650 OSD--CISA.......................................... 5,000
18650 OSD--Energy Sustainability Audits.................. 3,000
18820 JCS--Program Growth................................ -12,000
18860 WHS--Program Growth................................ -15,500
Undistributed:
19000 Legacy--CSS Alabama................................ 1,000
19000 Legacy--CSS Hunley................................. 900
19020 Impact Aid......................................... 30,000
19070 Headquarters Staff Reduction....................... -54,300
19160 Defense Joint Accounting System.................... -13,000
19240 A-76 Studies....................................... -5,260
19260 Information Technology System, Defense-Wide........ -20,000
19300 Reserve Component Joint Professional Military
Education............................................... 3,600

DEFENSE-WIDE ENERGY SUSTAINABILITY AUDITS

The Committee recommends $3,000,000 for the Secretary of
Defense to implement an aggressive energy conservation program
that performs energy and sustainability audits of facilities
throughout the services. The Committee provided funding in the
fiscal year 2001 supplemental appropriations act (Public Law
107-20) to perform these activities in areas of the Western
power grid and recommends funding in this legislation to expand
this designated effort to installations nation-wide.

DLAMP

The Committee is concerned about the significant growth and
costs of the Defense Leadership and Management Program (DLAMP).
The fiscal year 2002 budget of $60,600,000 is $15,200,000, or
33 percent higher than the fiscal year 2001 funding level, and
$39,100,000, or 200 percent, higher than the fiscal year 1999
funding level. Costs per student for participation in this
program are significantly higher than corresponding graduate
level courses offered in both public and private academia. In
addition, costs per participant for the rotational assignments
and the professional military education pillars of the program
have become prohibitive. The Committee notes that DLAMP has not
been audited by oversight groups, including DHRA's Chancellor
for Education and Professional Development, and a review is
needed of the program's mandatory provisions, structure,
curriculum, and delivery systems including the leasing of
facilities. Until the new administration seeks alternatives for
a more cost-effective program, the Committee has eliminated
funding for the rotational assignments and professional
military education pillars. In addition, the Committee directs
that the Department conduct a review to address these concerns
and report back to the congressional defense committees prior
to March 31, 2002.

defense logistics agency

The Committee directs the Defense Logistics Agency to
suspend any shipments of mercury to the Defense National
Stockpile Center Somerville Depot, until the completion of the
ongoing environmental impact study.

Legacy

The Committee encourages the Department to consider the
University of California's Western Center Museum at Diamond
Valley Lake, California, for funding under the Legacy program.

personnel recovery study

The Committee recommends an increase of $1,500,000 to the
budget request for the Defense POW/Missing Persons Office to
conduct a government wide interagency needs assessment in order
to define the components of a fully integrated national
personnel recovery architecture. The assessment should include
a consideration of service personnel, civilians and contract
personnel, and examine the possible consolidation of training
programs. The study should recommend a coordinated national
goal for personnel recovery, roles and responsibilities of each
department, agency or office, and present a detailed timeline
and cost analysis for reaching that goal. The Committee expects
the Defense POW/Missing Persons Office (DPMO) be the lead for
the assessment and to initiate the study using the Defense
personnel recovery program as the baseline, and directs that a
report be submitted by December 1, 2002.

personnel and family support programs

The Committee supports the wide variety of personnel and
family support programs funded in this bill, but is concerned
that insufficient attention by the Department and services to
the family need assessment process may be diminishing the
effectiveness of the programs. Family need assessments are
regularly used in resource allocation decisions by private
sector organizations and allow limited funds to be most
efficiently distributed to areas with the greatest need.
Current Department regulations and service practices are
inconsistent in the application of this valuable tool which
could enhance the delivery of needed programs to service
members and their families. The Committee concurs with a recent
GAO report on this issue and directs the Secretary of Defense
to include the following requirements in Departmental
regulations and guidance pertaining to the services' family
need assessments: (1) the use of benchmarks to define when
needs have increased or decreased; (2) the use of a plan to
determine how need assessment results will be prioritized; (3)
the use and integration of information on the type and capacity
of off base family support services; and (4) a consistent and
defined role for the results of family need assessment process
in supporting family programs' budget development and resource
allocation. The Committee further directs the Secretary to
report to the Committee on Appropriations by March 1, 2002, on
the adoption of appropriate regulations and the use of family
need assessments in formulating the fiscal year 2003 budget.

defense acquisition university distance learning

The Committee has included $3,000,000 for education and
expert consulting support to the Department of Defense
acquisition community on a continuous basis based on the model
Acquisition Center of Excellence established by the National
Reconnaissance Office. It should include elements of computer
based training, consulting support, and acquisition best
practices, and the use of Internet technology to provide these
services to the widest possible audience.

defense threat reduction agency

Funding for the Operation and Maintenance activities of the
Defense Threat Reduction Agency have been transferred to Title
IX of the bill.

OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, ARMY RESERVE

Fiscal year 2001 appropriation........................ $1,562,118,000
Fiscal year 2002 budget request....................... 1,787,246,000
Committee recommendation.............................. 1,788,546,000
Change from budget request............................ +1,300,000

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $1,788,546,000
for Operation and maintenance, Army Reserve. The recommendation
is an increase of $226,428,000 above the $1,562,118,000
appropriated for fiscal year 2001.

Program Recommended

The total amount recommended in the bill will provide the
following program in fiscal year 2002:

The adjustment to the budget activities for Operation and
maintenance, Army Reserve is shown below:

Other Adjustments: [In thousands of dollars]
20160 Food Sanitation Centers............................ 1,300

OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, NAVY RESERVE

Fiscal year 2001 appropriation........................ $978,946,000
Fiscal year 2002 budget request....................... 1,003,690,000
Committee recommendation.............................. 1,003,690,000
Change from budget request............................ ................

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $1,003,690,000
for Operation and maintenance, Navy Reserve. The recommendation
is an increase of $24,744,000 above the $978,946,000
appropriated for fiscal year 2001.

Program Recommended

The total amount recommended in the bill will provide the
following program in fiscal year 2002:

OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, MARINE CORPS RESERVE

Fiscal year 2001 appropriation........................ $145,959,000
Fiscal year 2002 budget request....................... 144,023,000
Committee recommendation.............................. 144,023,000
Change from budget request............................ ................

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $144,023,000
for Operation and maintenance, Marine Corps Reserve. The
recommendation is a decrease of $1,936,000 below the
$145,959,000 appropriated for fiscal year 2001.

Program Recommended

The total amount recommended in the bill will provide the
following program in fiscal year 2002:

OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, AIR FORCE RESERVE

Fiscal year 2001 appropriation........................ $1,903,659,000
Fiscal year 2002 budget request....................... 2,029,866,000
Committee recommendation.............................. 2,029,866,000
Change from budget request............................ ................

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $2,029,866,000
for Operation and maintenance, Air Force Reserve. The
recommendation is an increase of $126,207,000 above the
$1,903,659,000 appropriated for fiscal year 2001.

Program Recommended

The total amount recommended in the bill will provide the
following program in fiscal year 2002:

air force reserve airlift force management

The Committee recognizes the reliance the Air Force is
placing on reserve units, and joint reserve-active duty units,
for accomplishing many important airlift missions. As many
reserve units are scheduled to begin retiring C-141 aircraft in
fiscal year 2003, with no follow-on mission yet designated, the
Committee is concerned the Secretary of the Air Force has yet
to decide upon a follow-on mission for C-141 reserve units. The
Secretary is strongly urged to immediately designate a mission
for all Air Force Reserve units affected by the retirement of
the C-141, especially those units with a joint-service mission
requirement. The Committee further believes the Secretary
should consider the designation of active-associate (also known
as a reserve-associate) C-17 units, similar to the successful
MC-130E active-associate unit at Duke Field, Florida.
The Committee is further concerned that the Secretary has
yet to designate an Air Reserve Station or Stations for C-17s.
The C-17 is the most reliable, effective and efficient airlift
aircraft in the Air Force's fleet, and the Committee strongly
supports the acquisition of additional C-17s to fulfill current
and projected Air Force airlift mobility requirements.
Elsewhere in this report the Committee recommends substantial
funding for continued C-17 production, as well as initial
funding for a sizable follow-on purchase of C-17s beyond those
programmed.
The Committee believes March Air Reserve Base and Wright-
Patterson Air Force Base each clearly merit consideration for
the C-17 mission. In the House-passed fiscal year 2002 Military
Construction Appropriations bill, the Committee provided
funding for planning and site assessment of these two
facilities to provide the necessary preparation to support C-17
operations within the Air Force Reserve Command. The Committee
restates its support for transitioning these units to the C-17,
and strongly encourages the Air Force to designate these
installations for the C-17 follow-on mission.

OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, ARMY NATIONAL GUARD

Fiscal year 2001 appropriation........................ $3,333,835,000
Fiscal year 2002 budget request....................... 3,677,359,000
Committee recommendation.............................. 3,723,759,000
Change from budget request............................ +46,400,000

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $3,723,759,000
for Operation and maintenance, Army National Guard. The
recommendation is an increase of $389,924,000 above the
$3,333,835,000 appropriated for fiscal year 2001.

Program Recommended

The total amount recommended in the bill will provide the
following program in fiscal year 2002:

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

[In thousands of dollars]

Other Adjustments:
26810 Military Technicians Costing Model.................. 6,300
26900 Angel Gate Academy.................................. 3,000
26945 National Emergency and Disaster Information Center.. 2,000
26990 GAS Leased Vehicle Program.......................... 2,500
27000 Modular General Purpose Tents....................... 5,000
27010 Joint Training and Experimentation Program.......... 4,100
27020 Camp Gruber Regional Training Center................ 3,500
27030 Domestic Emergency and Terrorist Response Info
Center.................................................. 3,000
27040 Information Technology Management Training.......... 1,000
27060 Early Responders Distance Learning Training Center.. 4,000
27070 Rural Access to Broadband Technology................ 4,000
27080 WMD/Counter-Drug Demonstration...................... 8,000

Rural Access to Broadband Technology

The Committee recommends an increase of $4,000,000 to the
budget request only for the National Guard to demonstrate one
or more methods whereby a cooperative effort may accelerate the
deployment of broadband telecommunications in rural areas and
simultaneously reduce the costs of providing such
telecommunications to National Guard armories in the affected
region.

WMD/Counter-Drug Demonstration

The Committee recommends an increase of $8,000,000 to the
budget request only for the National Guard Bureau. These funds
are only for an in-service evaluation by the Northeast Counter
Drug Training Center of the CL-415 aircraft, an amphibious,
fixed-wing, multi-mission aircraft for emergency response
missions, counter-drug activities, search and rescue, utility
transport of equipment and personnel, large scale urban and
rural firefighting, and response to acts of domestic terrorism.

Information Technology Management Training

The Committee recommends an increase of $1,000,000 only for
development and delivery of courses of instruction in both
theory and application to educate defense technology managers
in collaborative work groups using an advanced technology
distance learning system with high-end computer workstations at
a rural education institution linked to supercomputing
capability.

Joint Training and Experimentation Project

The Committee recommends an increase of $4,100,000 above
the budget request only for the Joint Training and
Experimentation Project between the National Guard Bureau and
the California National Guard.

Early Responders Distance Learning Center

The Committee recommends an increase of $4,000,000 over the
budget request to Operation and Maintenance, Army National
Guard for the Early Responders Distance Learning Center in
Philadelphia at Saint Joseph's University for the ongoing
program in order to identify appropriate medical and community
response strategies to a chemical or biological event, and to
engage in the training of emergency medical, public and
hospital personnel for such an event.

consequence management training

The Committee recommends an increase of $3,500,000 over the
budget request to Operation and Maintenance, Army National
Guard to develop plans for implementing Consequence Management
sustainment training at Camp Gruber, Oklahoma. The National
Guard has existing training centers with infrastructure that
can be converted to joint collective training of Weapons of
Mass Destruction consequence management forces. The Committee
believes that research and evaluation is needed to determine
the curriculum, facility requirements, and customer base for
these National Guard training sites.

Fort Billy F. Roberts, Alabama

The Committee directs that of the funds provided for
Operation and Maintenance, Army National Guard for facilities
sustainment, restoration and modernization (SRM), $100,000 be
used only for roof repairs at the Fort Billy F. Roberts armory
in Haleyville, Alabama.

Missouri National Guard

The Committee directs that of the funds provided for
Operation and Maintenance, Army National Guard $400,000 be used
only to replace or upgrade computers, and for technology
enhancements to improve voice, data and video capabilities at
National Guard facilities located in Northwest Missouri.

Camp McCain, Mississippi

The Committee directs that of the funds provided for
Operation and Maintenance, Army National Guard for facilities
sustainment, restoration and modernization (SRM), $3,800,000 be
used only for improvements of Camp McCain Road and Greensboro
Road located inside and adjacent to the training site
boundaries, and $2,200,000 of the funds provided are for
unspecified minor construction projects at Camp McCain.

OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, AIR NATIONAL GUARD

Fiscal year 2001 appropriation........................ $3,474,375,000
Fiscal year 2002 budget request....................... 3,867,361,000
Committee recommendation.............................. 3,972,161,000
Change from budget request............................ +104,800,000

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $3,972,161,000
for Operation and maintenance, Air National Guard. The
recommendation is an increase of $497,786,000 above the
$3,474,375,000 appropriated for fiscal year 2001.

Program Recommended

The total amount recommended in the bill will provide the
following program in fiscal year 2002:

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

[In thousands of dollars]

Budget Activity 1: Operating Forces:
27650 Aircraft Operations/B-1B Operations................. 100,000
Other Adjustments:
28240 National Guard State Partnership Program............ 1,000
28250 Project Alert....................................... 3,800

rosecrans memorial airport

The Committee directs that of the funds provided for
Operation and Maintenance, Air National Guard for facilities
sustainment, restoration and modernization (SRM), $435,000 be
used only for replacement of existing gas lines, mains, valves
and fittings which are deteriorating throughout the facility,
and for roof repairs of the Aerial Port Facility located at
Rosecrans Memorial Airport in St. Joseph, Missouri.

OVERSEAS CONTINGENCY OPERATIONS TRANSFER FUND

Fiscal year 2001 appropriation........................ $3,938,777,000
Fiscal year 2002 budget request....................... 2,844,226,000
Committee recommendation.............................. 2,744,226,000
Change from budget request............................ -100,000,000

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $2,744,226,000
for the Overseas Contingency Operations Transfer Fund. The
recommendation is a decrease of $1,194,551,000 from the amount
appropriated for fiscal year 2001, reflecting primarily the
transfer of funds for the ongoing DoD operations in Southwest
Asia to the Services' accounts. The operations in Southwest
Asia are no longer considered to be contingency activities. The
funding in this paragraph provides for ongoing DoD operations
in Bosnia and Kosovo.

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES

Fiscal year 2001 appropriation........................ $8,574,000
Fiscal year 2002 budget request....................... 9,096,000
Committee recommendation.............................. 9,096,000
Change from budget request............................ ................

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $9,096,000 for
the United States Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces. The
recommendation is an increase of $522,000 from the amount
appropriated in fiscal year 2001.

ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION, ARMY

Fiscal year 2001 appropriation........................ $389,932,000
Fiscal year 2002 budget request....................... 389,800,000
Committee recommendation.............................. 389,800,000
Change from budget request............................ ................

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $389,800,000
for Environmental Restoration, Army. The recommendation is a
decrease of $132,000 from the amount appropriated in fiscal
year 2001.

ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION, NAVY

Fiscal year 2001 appropriation........................ $294,038,000
Fiscal year 2002 budget request....................... 257,517,000
Committee recommendation.............................. 257,517,000
Change from budget request............................ ................

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $257,517,000
for Environmental Restoration, Navy. The recommendation is a
decrease of $36,521,000 from the amount appropriated in fiscal
year 2001.

ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION, AIR FORCE

Fiscal year 2001 appropriation........................ $376,300,000
Fiscal year 2002 budget request....................... 385,437,000
Committee recommendation.............................. 385,437,000
Change from budget request............................ ................

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $385,437,000
for Environmental Restoration, Air Force. The recommendation is
an increase of $9,137,000 from the amount appropriated in
fiscal year 2001.

ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION, DEFENSE-WIDE

Fiscal year 2001 appropriation........................ $21,412,000
Fiscal year 2002 budget request....................... 23,492,000
Committee recommendation.............................. 23,492,000
Change from budget request............................ ................

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $23,492,000
for Environmental Restoration, Defense-Wide. The recommendation
is an increase of $2,080,000 from the amount appropriated in
fiscal year 2001.

ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION, FORMERLY USED DEFENSE SITES

Fiscal year 2001 appropriation........................ $231,499,000
Fiscal year 2002 budget request....................... 190,255,000
Committee recommendation.............................. 190,255,000
Change from budget request............................ ................

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $190,255,000
for Environmental Restoration, Formerly Used Defense Sites. The
recommendation is a decrease of $41,244,000 from the amount
appropriated in fiscal year 2001.

ROUND POND MARSH

The Committee is concerned about environmental
contamination around the area of Round Pond marsh adjacent to
Air Force Plant 51 in Rochester, New York. The Committee
directs that the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers take appropriate
action to ensure that there is no human health threat in the
pond.

OVERSEAS HUMANITARIAN, DISASTER, AND CIVIC AID

Fiscal year 2001 appropriation........................ $55,900,000
Fiscal year 2002 budget request....................... 49,700,000
Committee recommendation.............................. 49,700,000
Change from budget request............................ ................

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $49,700,000
for Overseas Humanitarian, Disaster, and Civic Aid. The
recommendation is a decrease of $6,200,000 from the amount
appropriated in fiscal year 2001.

FORMER SOVIET UNION THREAT REDUCTION

Fiscal year 2001 appropriation........................ $443,400,000
Fiscal year 2002 budget request....................... 403,000,000
Committee recommendation.............................. ................
Change from budget request............................ -403,000,000

Funding for the Former Soviet Union Threat Reduction
activities of the Department of Defense has been moved to title
IX.

QUALITY OF LIFE ENHANCEMENTS, DEFENSE

Fiscal year 2001 appropriations....................... $160,500,000
Fiscal year 2002 budget request....................... ................
Committee recommendation.............................. ................
Change from budget request............................ ................

The Department of Defense has requested substantial
increases in accounts supporting the sustainment, renovation
and modernization of real property assets. The Committee
applauds this long overdue attention to the maintenance of real
property, which contributes directly to the mission readiness
of military bases and the quality of life of service members.
Given the funding requested by the DoD and supported by the
Committee for real property maintenance, the Quality of Life
Enhancements, Defense Account is not required.

SUPPORT FOR INTERNATIONAL SPORTING COMPETITIONS, DEFENSE

Fiscal year 2001 appropriation........................ ................
Fiscal year 2002 budget request....................... $15,800,000
Committee recommendation.............................. 15,800,000
Change from budget request............................ ................

This appropriation funds the Support for International
Sporting Competitions, Defense for logistical and security
support for international sporting competitions (including pay
and non-travel related allowances only for members of the
Reserve Components of the Armed Forces called or ordered to
active duty in connection with providing such support). These
funds, to remain available until expended, are provided in
support of the 2002 Winter Olympic Games and Paralympics.
TITLE III

PROCUREMENT

ESTIMATES AND APPROPRIATIONS SUMMARY

The fiscal year 2002 budget request for programs funded in
Title III of the Committee bill, Procurement, totals
$60,440,297,000. The accompanying bill recommends
$60,190,124,000. The total amount recommended is a decrease of
$250,173,000 below the fiscal year 2002 budget estimate and is
$957,278,000 above the total provided in fiscal year 2001. The
table below summarizes the budget estimates and the Committee's
recommendations.

SPECIAL INTEREST ITEMS

Items for which additional funds have been provided as
shown in the project level tables or in paragraphs using the
phrase ``only for'' or ``only to'' in this report are
congressional interest items for the purpose of the Base for
Reprogramming (DD 1414). Each of these items must be carried on
the DD Form 1414 at the stated amount, or a revised amount if
changed during conference or if otherwise specifically
addressed in the conference report. These items remain special
interest items whether or not they are repeated in a subsequent
conference report.

CLASSIFIED ANNEX

Adjustments to classified programs are addressed in a
classified annex accompanying this report.

ARMY TRANSFORMATION

In its deliberations on the fiscal year 2001 Department of
Defense Appropriations bill, the Committee strongly supported
the vision outlined by the Army leadership to transform the
capabilities of the Army. Last year, the Congress appropriated
$1,800,000,000 above the budget request in order to jump start
Army transformation divided between Army procurement and Army
research and development programs. For example, $637,007,000
was added above the budget request for the Interim Armored
Vehicle (IAV) to provide the IBCTs with immediately required
capabilities, $200,000,000 was added above the budget request
to provide support equipment needed to field a second IBCT,
$614,041,000 was provided to continue development of the
Comanche Helicopter, and $105,000,000 was provided for the
Future Combat System.
This year, the Committee received testimony from the Army
leadership which reinforces the importance of continuing the
initiative begun last year. According to the Army leadership,
fielding the interim force fills the strategic gap between Army
heavy and light forces thereby ensuring that the Army is
responsive to the entire spectrum of operations. Similarly, in
the September 2001 Quadrennial Defense Review (QDR), the
Secretary of Defense commits the Department to a course of
transformation involving three main parts: exploiting research
and development to ensure that U.S. forces maintain a decisive
lead in technologies critical to transformation; advancing key
transformation initiatives that will enable the U.S. to both
deter conflict and conduct military operations; and
recapitalizing legacy forces to meet near-term challenges and
provide near-term readiness.
The Committee supports the vision expressed both by the
Army and the Secretary of Defense in the QDR. Accordingly, the
Committee fully supports those programs that the Army has
identified as critical to continuing transformation. For
example, the Committee has fully funded the Future Combat
System (FCS), which the Army has identified as its top science
and technology initiative, at $111,560,000. The Committee
recommends fully funding the Crusader program at $447,949,000,
and also provides $163,141,000 for the Abrams-Crusader Common
Engine (ACCE) program. The Committee continues to support the
Comanche program providing $816,366,000 for this purpose. The
Committee continues to support fielding of the Interim Armored
Vehicle (IAV) and has funded this program at the requested
amount of $662,600,000. The Committee also recommends increased
funding for the AH-64 Apache Longbow recapitalization program
providing $898,561,000 for this purpose, and has provided an
additional $131,176,000 above the budget to increase the fiscal
year 2002 acquisition of Blackhawk helicopters from 12 to 20.
In the Committee's view, the primary risks for this
initiative stem from the aggressive timetable that the Army has
set for itself. In this regard, the Committee is particularly
concerned that the Army's science and technology community may
not be able to identify, develop, and field new technologies as
rapidly as needed to support transformation. To address this
concern, the Committee has added a general provision, discussed
elsewhere in this report, which provides $50,000,000 to
establish a venture capital fund which will allow the Army to
leverage science and technology advances found the private
sector. In addition, the Committee has recommended measures to
streamline acquisition and program management based on the
review conducted by the Center for Naval Analyses.

ARMY ACQUISITION PROGRAM REFORMS

The system used by the Army to select, develop and procure
major weapons systems is not capable of delivering the new
systems required for Army transformation on the established
timetable. It is widely recognized that the Army must
significantly reform and streamline its requirements
generation, acquisition management, and resource allocation
processes to improve Army flexibility to fast-changing
circumstances. Acting on this long recognized need, the
Committee, in its report accompanying the fiscal year 2001 DoD
appropriations bill, required a thorough review of Army
acquisition practices to be conducted by the Center for Naval
Analyses. That report highlights numerous concerns, and made
thoughtful and far-reaching recommendations for improvements.
The issues raised can be grouped into three broad categories.
First, the report cites an unrealistic requirements
determination process to which there are too many contributors
and which does not facilitate the orderly prioritization of
requirements. As a result, too many requirements are approved
without adequate consideration of resource availability or
technical feasibility. The report concludes, ``As long as the
requirement stays on the books, there is a chance someone will
resource it, with or without the leadership's knowledge. This
is apparently the reason [the Army is unable] to actually
`kill' a program.'' The report is particularly critical of the
Training and Doctrine Command (TRADOC) System Managers (TSMs)
associated with the 16 branch schools in this regard.
The report is also highly critical of the number of
personnel that the Army assigns to this task. On this point,
the report states: ``Despite significant personnel reductions
over the past 10 years, the Army still requires nearly 2,200
people to do a job that the Department of the Navy does with
about 550, and the Air Force does with about 1,600. The
disparity does not appear to be related to the number of
systems each Department manages.''
Second, the report underscores difficulties faced by the
Army in its program budgeting practices. The report indicates
that the main characteristic of Army financial management--
instability--is brought about in large measure because of the
Army's inability to say ``no'' in the face of competing
demands. Consequently, the Army struggles to find and maintain
sufficient funding for those programs that are critical to the
Army's future. In addition to citing the Army's lack of
analytical resources for proper financial/budget analysis, the
CNA report finds that ``the Army and the Army staff are
currently fractionalized along branch lines with each branch
fighting to ensure that its program (or programs) is included
in the funding.'' The report concludes that ``If acquisition
programs, such as the Interim Armored Vehicle and the Future
Combat System, are deemed to be priority interests of the
Department of the Army, sustained stable funding, perhaps to
the detriment of other lower priority expenditures, will be
required for success.''
Third, the Army acquisition structure is essentially
composed of two competing organizations, the Assistant
Secretary of the Army (Acquisition Logistics and Technology)
(ASA(ALT)) and the Army Materiel Command (AMC), each with their
own separate chains of command. The CNA report indicates that
AMC ``is seen as having a negative impact on acquisition
efficiency because its four-star commanding general is in
direct competition with the four-star civilian equivalent * * *
for resources and influence. As one Army official stated,
`resources and acquisition are on both the AMC and PEO side--we
spend too much time arguing over turf.' '' In response, the CNA
report recommends substantially reducing, if not eliminating
altogether, the role of AMC in major systems acquisition.
The Committee recognizes that the Army is in the midst of a
serious effort to improve its requirements determination,
acquisition management, and resource allocation processes. The
Committee is particularly encouraged by the Army's internal
efforts to take the first step, which is to better integrate
responsibilities of the Army Secretariat and Army staff.
However, it appears that this effort may not pay sufficient
attention to the deeper issues pertaining to organization and
management within the major commands. Accordingly, the
Commission includes a new general provision, discussed
elsewhere in this report, which reduces funding for the Army
acquisition organizations by $37,200,000, prohibits TRADOC from
performing system management activities, and prohibits AMC from
performing acquisition program management functions.

dod investments in air superiority

Countering the air-to-air threat is an important element of
the air superiority problem. In addition, the US must be able
to effectively counter the surface-to-air missile (SAM) threat.
Increasingly, potential adversaries are turning to SAM systems
to counter US air dominance. SAM systems appeal to foreign
militaries not only based on their effectiveness, but also
based on their cost relative to standing up and maintaining a
modern air force. A modern air force requires heavy investment
in aircraft, weapons, and spare parts. In addition, an air
force requires highly trained pilots, sustained aircraft
maintenance, and ample fuel. The infrastructure to support
aircraft, in terms of air bases, depot facilities, and fuel
storage are costly to construct and operate and present ready
fixed targets to US bombers and cruise missiles. Modern SAM
systems avoid many of these issues.
The Committee also notes that SAM systems have proven
extremely difficult for the US to destroy as demonstrated by
our experience in Kosovo. In every conflict since Viet Nam, US
aircraft have sustained more losses from the ground than the
air. It is no wonder that ground based air defenses have become
the ``poor man's air force'' now and will likely remain that
way for the foreseeable future. Yet, there does not seem to be
a coordinated programmatic response to this threat, let alone
the kind of multi-billion dollar investment currently in place
to counter the threat from enemy aircraft. Given this
investment imbalance, the Committee directs the Secretary of
Defense to initiate a comprehensive study of the threat to US
aircraft and the programmatic response to counter this threat.
The Committee further directs that the Secretary of Defense
report the results of this study, including a specific
comparison of the programmatic investments (including funding
in then year dollars) to counter the air and the SAM threat.
The Committee directs that this report be provided to the
congressional defense committees no later than April 15, 2002.

AIRCRAFT PROCUREMENT, ARMY

Fiscal year 2001 appropriation........................ $1,571,812,000
Fiscal year 2002 budget request....................... 1,925,491,000
Committee recommendation.............................. 1,974,241,000
Change from budget request............................ +48,750,000

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

Committee Recommendations

EXPLANATION OF PROJECT LEVEL CHANGES

Program Recommended

The total program recommended in the bill will provide the
following in fiscal year 2002:

MISSILE PROCUREMENT, ARMY

Fiscal year 2001 appropriation........................ $1,320,681,000
Fiscal year 2002 budget request....................... 1,859,634,000
Committee recommendation.............................. 1,057,409,000
Change from budget request............................ -802,225,000

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

Committee Recommendations

EXPLANATION OF PROJECT LEVEL CHANGES

PATRIOT ADVANCED CAPABILITY-3 (PAC-3)

Procurement funding for the PAC-3 program has been moved to
``Procurement, Ballistic Missile Defense Organization'' in
title IX.

Program Recommended

The total program recommended in the bill will provide the
following in fiscal year 2002:

PROCUREMENT OF WEAPONS AND TRACKED COMBAT VEHICLES, ARMY

Fiscal year 2001 appropriation........................ $2,472,524,000
Fiscal year 2002 budget request....................... 2,276,746,000
Committee recommendation.............................. 2,252,669,000
Change from budget request............................ -24,077,000

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

Committee Recommendations

EXPLANATION OF PROJECT LEVEL CHANGES

Program Recommended

The total program recommended in the bill will provide the
following in fiscal year 2002:

WOLVERINE PROGRAM MANAGEMENT

The Army requested $48,592,000 to procure five additional
Wolverine Heavy Assault Bridge (HAB) systems. The Committee
recommends $17,000,000, a net reduction of $31,592,000 to
reflect both a reduction of $24,592,000 for the quantity of
systems purchased and $7,000,000 to reflect a change to the
management of the acquisition of this system as discussed
below.
The Army presently categorizes the Wolverine (HAB) program
as an ACAT II major acquisition program under the provisions of
DoD Regulation 5000.2. The Committee is concerned that this
ACAT II categorization is resulting in substantially inflated
costs due to the significant additional administrative overhead
charges that the Army requires for ACAT II programs versus ACAT
III programs (program management staff, STS charges, and more
extensive/costly system testing requirements). These added
administrative costs make the program less cost competitive
compared to the unit costs of other acquisition programs, and
may turn out to be the deciding factor as to whether this
program is supported by the Committee in the future. The
Committee believes this classification may be a case where the
momentum of a bureaucratic decision made in the past under
different circumstances has been allowed to stand even though
this program has been substantially changed. For instance,
while the Army indicates that the ACAT II regulation dictates
that extensive and costly testing be performed, the Committee
notes that over $326,000,000 has already been appropriated for
46 of these systems, that the milestone for the first unit
equipped was passed in February of 2001, that an additional
$48,600,000 is included in the fiscal year 2002 budget for five
more of these systems, and that the system has 80 percent
commonality with the Abrams SEP tank which has successfully
completed an exhaustive test regimen. The number of Wolverine
HAB systems to be acquired has also been reduced substantially.
It would appear that the requirements for additional ACAT II-
level testing for the HAB are incongruous with the fact that
the Army has proceeded well past the point of deciding whether
or not to acquire this system. Accordingly, the Committee
directs that the Secretary of Defense and the Secretary of the
Army review the need to continue administering this program at
the ACAT II level under the provisions of DoD Regulation
5000.2. The Committee recommends reducing the funding available
for this system by $7,000,000 to account for reclassifying this
system.

MEDICAL EVACUATION CAPABILITY FOR HEAVY FORCES

The Committee is concerned that, as the Army's remaining
heavy combat units are upgraded with Abrams SEP tanks and
Bradley A-3 fighting vehicles, the medical evacuation and en
route treatment capability remains inadequate. The current
ground evacuation platform appears incapable of keeping up with
this modernized force and lacks the protection necessary to
evacuate casualties from the close combat fight. The current
platform also lacks the capability of providing essential en
route medical treatment. The Committee directs the Army to
provide a report to the congressional defense committees by no
later than March 31, 2002 outlining how it plans to provide
survivable medical evacuation and improved medical treatment
capability to the soldiers of heavy combat units.

PROCUREMENT OF AMMUNITION, ARMY

Fiscal year 2001 appropriation........................ $1,220,516,000
Fiscal year 2002 budget request....................... 1,193,365,000
Committee recommendation.............................. 1,211,615,000
Change from budget request............................ +18,250,000

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

Committee Recommendations

EXPLANATION OF PROJECT LEVEL CHANGES

Program Recommended

The total program recommended in the bill will provide the
following in fiscal year 2002:

riverbank army ammunition plant

In the conference report accompanying the Department of
Defense Appropriations Act for fiscal year 2001, the conferees
included $3,000,000 only for the Riverbank Army Ammunition
Plant (AAP). The Committee is aware that the Army has not acted
to carry out the intent of this language. Recognizing both the
importance of this facility as well as emerging Army
requirements, the Committee directs that the Army allocate the
fiscal year 2001 funding of $3,000,000 only to prove-out the
deep-drawn cartridge case production line at Riverbank AAP.

OTHER PROCUREMENT, ARMY

Fiscal year 2001 appropriation........................ $4,497,009,000
Fiscal year 2002 budget request....................... 3,961,737,000
Committee recommendation.............................. 4,103,036,000
Change from budget request............................ +141,299,000

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

Committee Recommendations

EXPLANATION OF PROJECT LEVEL CHANGES

[In thousands of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Committee Change from
Budget request recommended request
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TACTICAL TRAILERS/DOLLY SETS................................. 3,723 4,723 1,000
Self Load/Offload Trailer (SLOT)......................... ............... ............... 1,000
FAMILY OF HEAVY TACTICAL VEHICLES (FHTV)..................... 157,633 165,633 8,000
Movement Tracking System (MTS) for Family of Heavy ............... ............... 8,000
Tactical Vehicles.......................................
SHF TERM..................................................... 16,951 0 -16,951
STAR-T Program Termination............................... ............... ............... -16,951
ARMY GLOBAL CMD & CONTROL SYS (AGCCS)........................ 8,622 13,622 5,000
AN/PSC-5 Spitfire, Radio P3I............................. ............... ............... 5,000
ACUS MOD PROGRAM............................................. 113,137 123,137 10,000
AN/UXC-10 TS-21 Blackjack Digital Facsimile.............. ............... ............... 10,000
COMMS-ELEC EQUIP FIELDING.................................... 3,412 8,412 5,000
Improved High Frequency Radio (Army Reserve)............. ............... ............... 5,000
INFORMATION SYSTEM SECURITY PROGRAM-ISSP..................... 42,244 45,244 3,000
Secure Terminal Equipment................................ ............... ............... 3,000
ALL SOURCE ANALYSIS SYS (ASAS) (TIARA)....................... 46,931 48,931 2,000
All Source Analysis System (ASAS) (Note: only for ............... ............... 2,000
procurement of the Intelligence Analysis Advanced Tool
Sets (IAATS) Communications Control Sets for ASAS.).....
JTT/CIBS-M (TIARA)........................................... 10,345 20,345 10,000
Joint Tactical Terminals (Note: only for procurement of ............... ............... 10,000
Joint Tactical Terminals.)..............................
TACTICAL UNMANNED AERIAL VEHICLE (TUAV)...................... 84,300 63,300 -21,000
Advanced procurement of TUAV............................. ............... ............... -21,000
TACTICAL EXPLOITATION SYSTEM/DCGS-A (TIARA).................. 26,168 33,668 7,500
Tactical Surveillance Systems (Transfer from Distributed ............... ............... 7,500
Common Ground System.)..................................
CI HUMINT AUTOMATED TOOL SET (CHATS) (TIARA)................. 1,492 2,492 1,000
CI HUMINT Automated Tool Set (CHATS) additional CHATS ............... ............... 1,000
units...................................................
SHORTSTOP.................................................... 5 2,005 2,000
Shortstop Integrated Logistics Support................... ............... ............... 2,000
NIGHT VISION, THERMAL WPN SIGHT.............................. 35,134 38,134 3,000
AN/PVS-6 (MELIOS)........................................ ............... ............... 3,000
MORTAR FIRE CONTROL SYSTEM................................... 16,785 20,785 4,000
Lightweight Laser Designation Rangefinder................ ............... ............... 4,000
MANEUVER CONTROL SYSTEM (MCS)................................ 6,839 5,439 -1,400
MCS Schedule Delay....................................... ............... ............... -1,400
AUTOMATED DATA PROCESSING EQUIP.............................. 146,885 156,335 9,450
Ammunition Automatic Identification Technology........... ............... ............... 4,000
NG Distance Learning Courseware.......................... ............... ............... 3,000
Automated Manifest System................................ ............... ............... 1,000
LAN Installation for Gauntlet FTX Site and Skidgell Hall ............... ............... 450
(Ft. Knox)..............................................
Regional Medical Distributive Learning Center............ ............... ............... 1,000
LAUNDRIES, SHOWERS AND LATRINES.............................. 23,232 28,232 5,000
Laundry Advanced System (LADS)........................... ............... ............... 5,000
LIGHTWEIGHT MAINTENANCE ENCLOSURE (LME)...................... 3,636 6,636 3,000
Lightweight Maintenance Enclosures....................... ............... ............... 3,000
COMBAT SUPPORT MEDICAL....................................... 16,731 21,731 5,000
Life Support for Trauma and Transport (LSTAT)............ ............... ............... 3,500
Portable Low-Power Blood Cooling and Storage Device...... ............... ............... 1,500
SCRAPER, EARTHMOVING, 7 1/2 CU YD............................ 7,230 17,230 10,000
Scraper.................................................. ............... ............... 10,000
DEPLOYABLE UNIVERSAL COMBAT EARTH MOVERS..................... 5,301 21,301 16,000
DEUCE.................................................... ............... ............... 16,000
FLOATING CRANE, 100-250 TON.................................. 0 15,000 15,000
Floating Crane 100-250 ton capacity...................... ............... ............... 15,000
GENERATORS AND ASSOCIATED EQUIP.............................. 59,768 63,268 3,500
2kW Military Tactical Generator.......................... ............... ............... 3,500
CTC INSTRUMENTATION SUPPORT.................................. 10,307 16,307 6,000
Deployable Force-on-Force Instrumented Range System...... ............... ............... 6,000
TRAINING DEVICES, NONSYSTEM.................................. 74,481 92,681 18,200
Advanced Aviation Institutional Training Simulator ............... ............... 5,000
(AAITS).................................................
COTS Mobile/Reconfigurable Target System................. ............... ............... 1,000
Deployable Range Training and Safety System (DTRSS) at ............... ............... 2,700
Ft. Bliss (ARNG)........................................
Deployable Range Training and Safety System (DTRSS) at ............... ............... 2,000
Ft. Hood (ARNG).........................................
Fire Fighting Training System............................ ............... ............... 2,500
Military Operations in Urban Terrain (MOUT) ............... ............... 5,000
Instrumentation-Ft. Wainwright..........................
INTEGRATED FAMILY OF TEST EQUIPMENT (IFTE)................... 52,397 65,397 13,000
Integrated Family of Test Equipment...................... ............... ............... 13,000
SPECIAL EQUIPMENT FOR USER TESTING........................... 16,400 31,400 15,000
Additional Target Acquisition Radar--Agile Multi Beam ............... ............... 12,000
(TARAMB) (Note: only to procure one additional TARAMB
air defense training system with required spares.)......
Special Equipment for User Testing (Note: only for ............... ............... 3,000
testing of high fidelity EW and SIGINT battlefield
assets during training exercises).......................
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Program Recommended

The total program recommended in the bill will provide the
following in fiscal year 2002:

family of medium tactical vehicles

The Committee fully supports the FMTV-A1 Competitive Rebuy
(CR) program which should produce a truck that is more capable
and less costly compared to the truck currently in production
and will also be in compliance with new EPA standards for truck
engines. The Committee understands that production of the FMTV-
A1 (CR) truck variant is scheduled to commence in March 2004, a
full seven months before the end of the production schedule for
the current A-1 variant. Given the substantial benefits to the
Army and the taxpayer presented under this program, the
Committee does not provide the required legislative authority
to extend the current multi-year contract authority for the A-1
truck variant.

Tactical Unmanned Aerial Vehicle

The Army requested $84,300,000 for procurement of the
Tactical Unmanned Aerial Vehicle (TUAV). The Committee has
provided $63,300,000, a reduction of $21,000,000 associated
with procurement of three air vehicles.
Subsequent to the budget submission, the Army revised its
plans with respect to the timeframes for significant decisions
associated with testing and procurement of the TUAV. The Army's
revised plan is to continue user testing in the Fall of 2001
and conduct initial operational test and evaluation (IOT&E) in
the Spring of 2002. The Milestone III procurement decision has
been moved to August of 2002. Prior to the Milestone III
decision, the Army plans to request authority for a low-rate
initial production (LRIP) III for six vehicles and a Production
I decision for three air vehicles is planned for the end of the
fiscal year.
The Committee has eliminated funding for the procurement of
the three air vehicles currently planned for the end of fiscal
year 2002. The Committee believes funds for procurement should
be requested after a Milestone III decision.
The Committee is supportive of the TUAV but believes the
Army's revised plan reflects an overly aggressive fielding
schedule based on a desire to get the TUAV in to the hands of
the warfighter. While the Committee does not oppose the Army's
approach, following such an aggressive schedule that includes
fielding multiple systems prior to completion of IOTE may lead
to increased costs due to potential re-design based on a post-
IOT&E review. Therefore, the Committee directs that funds
provided for the LRIP III of the TUAV may not be obligated or
expended until the TUAV successfully completes the planned AEC
assessment scheduled for 2001. Furthermore, the funds provided
for LRIP III of the TUAV may not be obligated or expended until
the Secretary of the Army certifies that the TUAV has been
adequately tested and justifies the initiation of the LRIP III
prior to completion of the IOT&E.

AIRCRAFT PROCUREMENT, NAVY

Fiscal year 2001 appropriation........................ $8,477,138,000
Fiscal year 2002 budget request....................... 8,252,543,000
Committee recommendation.............................. 8,084,543,000
Change from budget request............................ -168,000,000

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

Committee Recommendations

Explanation of Project Level Changes

V-22

The Navy requested $1,009,881,000 for the procurement of 12
V-22 aircraft. The Committee recommends $790,881,000 for 9
aircraft, a reduction of $219,000,000 and 3 aircraft. Earlier
this year the Marine Corps was provided with an additional two
MV-22 aircraft in the Fiscal Year 2001 Emergency Supplemental
Appropriations Act (Public Law 107-20).
In all, for fiscal year 2002 the Defense Department
requested a total of $2,100,918,000 in all appropriations
accounts for twelve MV-22 aircraft. The Committee recommends
$1,815,418,000 for eleven aircraft, a reduction of
$285,500,000. Of the amount recommended by the Committee,
$790,881,000 is for the procurement of nine MV-22 aircraft for
the Marine Corps, and $208,202,000 is for procurement and
modifications for two CV-22 aircraft for the U.S. Special
Operations Forces. This transfer of budgetary resources to the
CV-22 program will enable the Department to commence initial
operational testing on an accelerated basis as recommended
jointly by the Marine Corps and the Special Operations Command.
It is also the Committee's recommendation that until such a
time that the V-22 program has completed its program
restructure, and returned to flight status, the overall
production rate should be held to no more than 11 aircraft per
year.

MH-60R Helicopter

The Committee is concerned about the future direction of
the MH-60R multi-mission helicopter given recent schedule
delays and a significant program restructure. As the
cornerstone of the Navy's Helicopter masterplan to replace
aging SH-60B and SH-60F helicopters it is vital that the MH-60R
begin production as soon as practicable. It is the Committee's
sense that all opportunities should be taken to incorporate
COTS technology into the MH-60R program whenever possible for
all mission functions.
The Committee also directs the Department of the Navy to
submit a report to the House Appropriations Committee no later
than March 15, 2002, detailing the acquisition strategy for the
MH-60R's Advanced Low Frequency (ALFS) dipping sonar to
include: (1) a life cycle field support plan, (2) a pre-planned
product improvement plan, and (3) technology development plans
for a follow-on to the ALFS system.

Program Recommended

The total recommended in the bill will provide the
following program in fiscal year 2002.

WEAPONS PROCUREMENT, NAVY

Fiscal year 2001 appropriation........................ $1,461,600,000
Fiscal year 2002 budget request....................... 1,433,475,000
Committee recommendation.............................. 1,429,492,000
Change from budget request............................ -3,983,000

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

Committee Recommendations

Explanation of Project Level Changes

Trident II D-5 Missile

The Navy requested $559,042,000 for the procurement of 12
Trident II D-5 missiles. The Committee recommends $534,042,000,
a reduction of $25,000,000. The Committee is concerned that the
request for funds for the D-5 life extension program has been
made without the benefit of a rigorous requirement review or
systems engineering analysis to ensure that the proper
components are being acquired to extend the life of the D-5
missile inventory. The Committee therefore directs the
Department of the Navy to undertake these efforts using all
available design tools to efficiently structure a life
extension program to include the Naval Supply System Command's
Rapid Retargeting Technology program.

Torpedo Industrial Base

The Committee directs the Secretary of the Navy to provide
a report to Congress by January 15, 2002 on the Navy's plan for
maintaining and improving the nation's torpedo development and
production industrial base for both heavyweight and lightweight
weapons. The report shall discuss both the public and private
sector components of the torpedo industrial base including
infrastructure capacity, cumulative investment and planned
workload with specific budget and/or technical recommendations
for consideration. The report shall also discuss options for
increasing the production of lightweight torpedoes used by its
surface and air Anti-Submarine Warfare (ASW) capable forces to
economic production levels. This aspect of the report should
identify the required inventory levels of a capable ASW weapon
to provide the Navy (surface and air assets) with an ASW combat
capability against small diesel submarines in littoral waters.
In addition, the report should discuss the potential for
international sales of the MK 54.

NAVY AREA BALLISTIC MISSILE DEFENSE PROGRAM

Procurement funding for the Navy Area ballistic missile
defense program has been moved to ``Procurement, Ballistic
Missile Defense Organization'' in title IX.

Program Recommended

The total recommended in the bill will provide the
following program in fiscal year 2002.

PROCUREMENT OF AMMUNITION, NAVY AND MARINE CORPS

Fiscal year 2001 appropriation........................ $498,349,000
Fiscal year 2002 budget request....................... 457,099,000
Committee recommendation.............................. 492,599,000
Change from budget request............................ +35,500,000

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

Committee Recommendation

Explanation of Project Level Changes

Program Recommended

The total recommended in the bill will provide the
following program in fiscal year 2002.

SHIPBUILDING AND CONVERSION, NAVY

Fiscal year 2001 appropriation........................ $11,614,633,000
Fiscal year 2002 budget request....................... 9,344,121,000
Committee recommendation.............................. 10,134,883,000
Change from budget request............................ +790,762,000

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

Committee Recommendations

Explanation of Project Level Changes

Shipbuilding Program Management

The Committee is increasingly concerned about what it views
as a serious lack of programmatic and fiscal discipline with
respect to Naval shipbuilding programs. Specifically, it
appears that significant cost increases and schedule delays
have virtually become standard and accepted business practices
with regard to almost every shipbuilding program under the
Navy's management. Morever, recent poor cost and schedule
performance, as typified by the LPD-17 and New Attack Submarine
programs, seem to be tolerated by senior Navy leadership as a
norm. The Committee believes that the Navy has actually
compounded this problem by the establishment of the ``Prior
Year Shipbuilding Cost Account'' which requests new
appropriations to fund cost increases on previously
appropriated ships. While acknowledging the need to meet valid
cost growth demands, the Committee is concerned that this could
encourage a more aggressive claims posture on the part of
shipbuilders, while reducing the incentive for Navy program
managers to complete their programs within budgeted amounts.
The Committee is also dismayed that the Navy continues to
advocate the use of alternative financing mechanisms to
artificially increase shipbuilding rates, such as advanced
appropriations, or incremental funding of ships, which only
serve to decrease cost visibility and accountability on these
important programs. In attempting to establish advanced
appropriations as a legitimate budgeting technique, those Navy
advocates of such practices would actually decrease the
flexibility of future Administrations and Congresses to make
rational capital budgeting decisions with regard to
shipbuilding programs. Accordingly, the Committee bill includes
a new general provision (section 8150) which prohibits the
Defense Department from budgeting for shipbuilding programs on
the basis of advanced appropriations.
It is argued by some, including many in the Navy and the
shipbuilding industry, that the best way to improve the cost
performance of shipbuilding programs is simply to increase the
number of ships being built in any given year in order to enjoy
the benefits of economies of scale. However, the Committee
believes this is only part of the equation. Investment is also
needed in better cost estimating techniques, innovative design
and manufacturing technologies and competitive sub-vendor
strategies in a low rate production environment, all areas that
have not traditionally received strong attention or support
from the Navy. It should be noted that these lessons were
learned years ago by the aerospace industry, which remains
highly competitive internationally despite producing at vastly
reduced rates for the Defense Department.
The Committee will continue to work in partnership with the
Navy and the shipbuilding industry to provide adequate
resources to maintain the size of the fleet and keep the
industrial base economically sound. Towards that end, the
Committee has provided an additional $790,792,000 above the
fiscal year 2002 budget request for shipbuilding programs.
These funds will enable the Navy to exceed those production
rates requested in its fiscal year 2002 budget by procuring an
additional DDG-51 destroyer, accelerating the conversion and
overhaul of the CVN-69, and initiating a four submarine
Tactical Trident program instead of two as proposed by the
Navy. The Committee will also exercise its oversight
responsibilities to ensure that the continued recapitalization
of the fleet is accomplished in an efficient and cost-effective
manner.

SSGN Tactical Trident

The Navy requested $86,440,000 for the SSGN Tactical
Trident Program. The Committee recommends $549,440,000, an
increase of $463,000,000. The additional funds provided by the
Committee are for all the necessary expenses to initiate a four
submarine SSGN program to include an additional reactor core,
design, conversion planning, and long lead materials.
The Committee strongly endorses this effort to convert and
equip otherwise retiring Trident submarines as cruise missile
carriers. The Committee also believes that there exists a
substantial business and operational case for converting four
submarines to the SSGN configuration, instead of two as
proposed by the Navy. A two submarine SSGN program yields
deployment patterns that provide forward presence in only one
theater worldwide, and calls into question the cost-
effectiveness of the investment required which would provide
half the capability of a four submarine program for two-thirds
of the cost due to one time non-recurring design and fixed
costs. On the other hand, a four submarine SSGN program would
provide continuous presence in two theaters worldwide while
freeing up Navy assets for other missions such as theater
ballistic missile defense, intelligence and surveillance, and
homeland defense. It would also provide more opportunities for
experimentation and demonstration of alternative payloads. The
Committee therefore urges the Navy to complete the proper
program planning and budgeting to ensure that a four submarine
SSGN program is supported in the fiscal year 2003 budget
request.

DDG-51 Destroyer

The Navy requested $2,966,036,000 for three DDG-51
destroyers. The Committee recommends $3,786,036,000 for four
destroyers, an increase of $820,000,000 and one destroyer.
Recognizing the necessity of maintaining the size of the
surface combatant fleet in light of the pending DD-21 program
restructure and delay, the Committee recommends the continued
acquisition of DDG-51 destroyers.

LPD-17 ACQUISITION STRATEGY

The LPD-17 amphibious ship acquisition strategy needs to
aggressively incorporate life-cycle cost reduction as a major
program objective. In general, the use of composite materials
can be a major contributor to achieving this goal.
Specifically, composite fairwater components offer a much lower
life-cycle cost compared to metallic fairwaters, including the
ability to inspect shaft bearings and change out fairwaters
without dry-docking the ship. In order to ensure that this cost
reduction can be achieved in a timely manner the Committee
directs that the Department of the Navy use up to $5,000,000 of
fiscal year 2002 funds requested for Ship Outfitting in the
``Shipbuilding and Conversion, Navy'' appropriation account for
the design tooling and procurement of main propulsion shaft
rotating and non-rotating composite fairwaters for the LPD-17
lead ship.

Program Recommended

The total recommended in the bill will provide the
following program in fiscal year 2002.

OTHER PROCUREMENT, NAVY

Fiscal year 2001 appropriation........................ $3,557,380,000
Fiscal year 2002 budget request....................... 4,097,576,000
Committee recommendation.............................. 4,290,776,000
Change from budget request............................ +193,200,000

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

Committee Recommendations

Explanation of Project Level Changes

[In thousands of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Committee Change from
Budget request recommended request
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
OTHER NAVIGATION EQUIPMENT................................... 45,946 60,446 +14,500
MSC Force Protection Thermal Imaging Systems............. ............... ............... +7,500
Computer Aided Dead Reckoning Tracer (Note: funds are ............... ............... +7,000
only to procure and install AN/UYQ-70 computer aided
dead reckoning tracers on surface combatants.)..........
STRATEGIC PLATFORM SUPPORT EQUIP............................. 11,276 24,276 +13,000
Submarine Common Electronics Equipment Replacement (Note: ............... ............... +13,000
Funds are only for the procurement of AN/UYQ-70 family
equipment to modernize submarine combat systems.).......
ITEMS LESS THAN $5 million................................... 79,285 74,285 -5,000
CVN Smartship--Unjustified program growth................ ............... ............... -5,000
STANDARD BOATS............................................... 32,151 36,151 +4,000
25 Person Life Rafts..................................... ............... ............... +4,000
OPERATING FORCES IPE......................................... 27,522 24,822 -2,700
N88 Other Equipment...................................... ............... ............... -2,700
NUCLEAR ALTERATIONS.......................................... 121,105 121,105 0
RADAR SUPPORT................................................ 0 29,000 +29,000
MK-92 Radar Fire Control Upgrade......................... ............... ............... +5,000
SPS-73 Surface Search Radar.............................. ............... ............... +14,000
AN/SYS-2 Track Management System for FFG-7s.............. ............... ............... +10,000
SSN ACOUSTICS................................................ 113,016 122,016 +9,000
Non-propulsion Electronic system Modernization........... ............... ............... +9,000
UNDERSEA WARFARE SUPPORT EQUIPMENT........................... 4,263 9,263 +5,000
Carrier Tactical Surveillance Center (CV-TSC)............ ............... ............... +1,000
Surface Ship Torpedo Defense (Note: Funds include ............... ............... +4,000
$2,000,000 only for procurement of improved littoral
winch and tow cable capability.)........................
NAVY TACTICAL DATA SYSTEM.................................... 0 10,000 +10,000
Shore based AN/UYQ-70 display modernization.............. ............... ............... +10,000
COOPERATIVE ENGAGEMENT CAPABILITY............................ 77,133 87,133 +10,000
Low Cost Planar Array Antenna Production Transition...... ............... ............... +10,000
MINESWEEPING SYSTEM REPLACEMENT.............................. 8,903 11,903 +3,000
MCM Sea Bottom Mapping and Change Detection.............. ............... ............... +3,000
ID SYSTEMS................................................... 18,310 17,310 -1,000
Authorization Reduction.................................. ............... ............... -1,000
SURFACE IDENTIFICATION SYSTEMS............................... ............... 2,000 +2,000
Shipboard Advanced Radar Target ID (SARTIS).............. ............... ............... +2,000
TADIX-B...................................................... 0 14,300 +14,300
(Note: Only for procurement of additional JTTs).......... ............... ............... +14,300
NAVAL SPACE SURVEILLANCE SYSTEM.............................. 4,898 3,498 -1,400
Excessive Program Growth................................. ............... ............... -1,400
ITEMS LESS THAN $5 MILLION................................... 6,332 9,332 +3,000
Integrated Condition Assessment system Wireless Sensors ............... ............... +3,000
(ICAS) (Note: Only to procure the network capable
application processors demonstrated during the total
ship monitoring project to integrate with and enhance
the capabilities of current and future (ICAS
installations.).........................................
SHIP COMMUNICATIONS AUTOMATION............................... 121,242 127,242 +6,000
NAWCAD MSTIC Equipment Upgrades.......................... ............... ............... +2,000
Programmable Integrated Computer Terminal (Note: funds ............... ............... +4,000
are only for engineering modifications for expansion of
Programmable Integrated Communications Terminals
integration using SPAWAR initiatives and procurement of
terminals for the integrated Voice network Communication
project.)...............................................
COMMUNICATIONS ITEMS LESS THAN $5 million.................... 24,278 47,278 +23,000
Enhanced COTS ON-201 Secure Voice System Technology ............... ............... +4,000
(Note: only for procurement and installation of enhanced
COTS secure voice system technology production systems
in lead ships in the CG modernization program.).........
IT-21 Block 1 Upgrade C41SR Computing Equipment ............... ............... +9,000
Procurement (Note: Only for procurement of AN/UYQ-70
advanced tactical servers to support the IT-21 block 1
upgrade program.).......................................
Network-Based Shipboard Interior Secure Voice ............... ............... +10,00
Communications (Note: Only for AN/UYQ-70 secure voice
technology equipment for land based evaluation, ILS,
training, maintenance development and integration.).....
SATELLITE COMMUNICATIONS SYSTEMS............................. 198,143 210,143 +12,000
Digital Modular Radio.................................... ............... ............... +12,000
JEDMICS...................................................... 0 8,000 +8,000
JEDMICS Security Infrastructure (Note: Only for the ............... ............... +8,000
continued procurement and integration of the same
security solution implemented in 2000 and 2001, and its
extension into other logistics processes.)..............
NAVAL SHORE COMMUNICATIONS................................... 66,772 83,772 +17,000
Mini-DAMA Teminals (Submarines/Ships).................... ............... ............... +10,000
Definity G3 Network Upgrade (Note: Only to complete the ............... ............... +7,000
telecommunications switch upgrades at the San Diego
Naval Complex and the Bremerton, WA Naval Hospital.)....
INFO SYSTEMS SECURITY PROGRAM (ISSP)......................... 78,170 84,170 +6,000
Intelligent Agent Security Module (Note: Only for SBIR ............... ............... +3,000
Phase III.).............................................
Secure Terminal Equipment................................ ............... ............... +3,000
AEGIS SUPPORT EQUIPMENT...................................... 155,113 158,113 +3,000
COTS Emulators for NSWC Laboratories..................... ............... ............... +3,000
STRATEGIC MISSILE SYSTEMS EQUIP.............................. 205,094 205,094 0
Authorization Reduction.................................. ............... ............... -2,000
Smartship Upgrades....................................... ............... ............... +2,000
OTHER SUPPLY SUPPORT EQUIPMENT............................... 7,534 9,534 +2,000
Serial Number Tracking System (Note: Only to begin ............... ............... +2,000
integrating this technology into Navy supply and
maintenance applications.)..............................
TRAINING SUPPORT EQUIPMENT................................... 1,101 6,101 +5,000
Trident sonar Manuals-Data Management and Conversion..... ............... ............... +5,000
COMMAND SUPPORT EQUIPMENT.................................... 28,787 41,787 +13,000
Authorization Reduction.................................. ............... ............... -1,000
Advanced Technical Information System (ATIS)............. ............... ............... +1,500
SPAWAR Information Technology Center..................... ............... ............... +2,000
Man Over Board Indicator (MOBI).......................... ............... ............... +10,500
ENVIRONMENTAL SUPPORT EQUIPMENT.............................. 25,205 25,205 +32,705
(Note: Only for the planned collaborative Naval ............... ............... 7,500
Observatory/University Doppler Spectrometry Telescope
Program.)...............................................
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Program Recommended

The total recommended in the bill will provide the
following program in fiscal year 2002.

PROCUREMENT, MARINE CORPS

Fiscal year 2001 appropriation........................ $1,233,268,000
Fiscal year 2002 budget request....................... 981,724,000
Committee recommendation.............................. 1,028,662,000
Change from budget request............................ +46,938,000

This appropriation funds the procurement, delivery, and
modification of missiles, armaments, communication equipment,
tracked and wheeled vehicles, and various support equipment.

Committee Recommendations

EXPLANATION OF PROJECT LEVEL CHANGES

innovative stand-off door breaching munitions

Last year, Congress provided funds to the Marine Corps for
the Innovative Stand-Off Door Breaching Munition (ISOD). The
Committee recognizes that the Marine Corps will require non-
explosive fire from enclosure capability in order to operate
effectively in Military Operations on Urbanized Terrain (MOUT)
engagements. ISOD technology will enable forces engaged in the
urban battleground to breach doors and other similar structures
from a stand-off distance of up to 100 meters without exposing
Marines to direct hostile fire. The Committee is encouraged by
the Marine Corps' pursuit of this technology and supports the
Marine Corps' efforts to examine the broad application of ISOD
to both regular and special operations forces. The Committee
requests that the Marine Corps keep the Committee informed of
the progress of this initiative.

Program Recommended

The total program recommended in the bill will provide the
following in fiscal year 2002:

AIRCRAFT PROCUREMENT, AIR FORCE

Fiscal year 2001 appropriations....................... 7,583,345,000
Fiscal year 2002 budget request....................... 10,744,458,000
Committee recommendation.............................. 10,549,798,000
Change from budget request............................ -194,660,000

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

Committee Recommendations

EXPLANATION OF PROJECT LEVEL CHANGES

[In thousands of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Committee Change from
Budget request recommendation request
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
F-22 RAPTOR (AP-CY).......................................... 379,159 234,759 -144,400
Transfer funding for DMS................................. ............... ............... -111,400
Reduced requirement for AP based on DAB reduction of 3 ............... ............... -33,000
aircraft in FY 2003.....................................
C-17A (MYP).................................................. 2,875,775 2,808,425 -67,350
Transfer whole engine spares to C-17 ICS................. ............... ............... -18,600
TEPATS simulator......................................... ............... ............... +9,750
Transfer funds to AP for rate impact..................... ............... ............... -36,000
AF requested realignment from C-17 ICS................... ............... ............... -22,500
C-17A (MYP) (AP-CY).......................................... 228,100 431,000 +202,900
Rate impact funds........................................ ............... ............... +36,000
AF identified reduction in AP requirements............... ............... ............... -14,000
EOQ for second C-17 MYP.................................. ............... ............... +180,900
C-17 ICS..................................................... 441,163 482,263 +41,100
Transfer whole engine spares to ICS...................... ............... ............... +18,600
AF requested realignment to C-17 MYP line-item........... ............... ............... +22,500
C-130J....................................................... 221,809 0 -221,809
Transfer to Procurement, NGRE account.................... ............... ............... -221,809
JPATS........................................................ 228,409 270,409 +42,000
Additional aircraft...................................... ............... ............... +42,000
CIVIL AIR PATROL A/C......................................... 2,629 9,629 +7,000
Additional aircraft...................................... ............... ............... +7,000
C-40 Aeromedical Evacuation Aircraft......................... ............... 85,000 +85,000
EC-130H...................................................... 19,000 0 -19,000
Transfer Project Suter................................... ............... ............... -19,000
E-8C......................................................... 283,202 273,202 -10,000
Prior year pricing....................................... ............... ............... -10,000
HAEUAV (AP-CY)............................................... 33,500 0 -33,500
Advance procurement of Global Hawk HAE UAV............... ............... ............... -33,500
PREDATOR UAV................................................. 19,632 39,632 +20,000
Predator B--only for acquisition of two Predator B ............... ............... +20,000
turboprop and one Predabor B jet aircraft with spare
parts, to conduct of an evaluation of vehicle operation
in conjuncton with current Predator systems.............
B-2A......................................................... 11,858 25,358 +13,500
SATCOM................................................... ............... ............... +13,500
B-1B......................................................... 95,493 37,693 -57,800
Transfer to ANG O&M...................................... ............... ............... -57,800
F-117........................................................ ............... 27,620 +27,620
AF requested realignment of funds from classified line... ............... ............... +27,620
F-15......................................................... 212,160 237,160 +25,,000
F-15 engine E-kits....................................... ............... ............... +6,000
BOL IR................................................... ............... ............... +5,000
ALQ-135 Band 1.5......................................... ............... ............... +10,000
F-15 IFF for ANG NORAD alert mission aircraft............ ............... ............... +4,000
F-16......................................................... 231,962 236,962 +5,000
OBOGS.................................................... ............... ............... +3,000
ACES II upgrade.......................................... ............... ............... +2,000
T-38......................................................... 144,726 159,726 +15,000
Ejection seats........................................... ............... ............... +15,000
C-130........................................................ 57,936 59,936 +2,000
Modular Airborne Firefighting System for ANG............. ............... ............... +2,000
C-135........................................................ 231,066 175,066 -56,000
KC-135 reengine.......................................... ............... ............... -56,000
DARP......................................................... 195,045 199,045 +4,000
Procurement and installation of Theater Airborne Warning ............... ............... +4,000
System aircraft modification kits.......................
E-8.......................................................... 82,996 64,296 -18,700
Disapprove Spiral Development Modification based on ............... ............... -7,200
unclear program content.................................
Reduce funding for Vanguard mod based on lack of ............... ............... -5,000
justification...........................................
SATCOM transfer to R&D................................... ............... ............... -5,700
RVSM transfer to R&D..................................... ............... ............... -5,800
Joint Services Workstation (JSWS) and initial support for ............... ............... +5,000
Air Operations Center...................................
PREDATOR MODS................................................ 10,384 16,384 +6,000
Structured reliability and maintainability program and to ............... ............... +6,000
complete the conversion of Predator GCS to PC-based
architecture............................................
CLASSIFIED PROJECTS.......................................... 23,227 42,227 +19,000
Transfer Project Suter................................... ............... ............... +19,000
WAR CONSUMABLES.............................................. 44,369 49,369 +5,000
MALD..................................................... ............... ............... +5,000
Note: Committee designates MALD program as special
interest, including funds requested in budget.
MISC PRODUCTION CHARGES...................................... 324,986 329,986 +5,000
Air Combat Training Range Security....................... ............... ............... +5,000
CLASSIFIED PROGRAMS.......................................... 27,620 0 -27,620
AF requested realignment of funds........................ ............... ............... -27,620
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

f-22

The Air Force requested $2,658,153,000 to procure 13 F-22
aircraft. The Committee recommends $2,655,553,000, a net
reduction of $2,600,000. This adjustment includes a decrease of
$100,000,000 for tooling, a decrease of $14,000,000 for
ancillary equipment, and an increase of $111,400,000 for
redesign of obsolete parts.
The F-22 has recently received approval from the Office of
the Secretary of Defense to enter into low rate initial
production. However, based on continued growth in cost
estimates for the aircraft as well as continued delays in
testing, the Defense Acquisition Board (DAB) agreed to slow
down the planned production ramp. The fiscal year 2002 budget,
prepared before the DAB decision, includes a request for
$135,500,000 for tooling. The Air Force concedes that the new
production plan results in a reduced requirement for tooling,
though to date the Air Force does not have a revised tooling
estimate. Given the change in the production ramp, and the
availability of nearly $160,000,000 provided last year for
tooling, the Committee recommends a reduction of $100,000,000.
The Committee further recommends a reduction of $14,000,000
out of $61,900,000 requested for ancillary equipment. Ancillary
equipment includes items such as bomb racks, drop tanks, and
missile rails. These items are not necessarily procured on a
one for one basis with each aircraft, and they typically have
shorter lead times than a full-up F-22 aircraft. Ancillary
equipment should be budgeted lead time from need and the
committee accordingly recommends a reduction of $14,000,000.
The Committee is also concerned with a number of peculiar
budgeting practices in the F-22 program. For example, the Air
Force has budgeted cost reduction initiatives for future
aircraft as part of the cost of current year aircraft and
engines. Last year, this practice allowed cost reduction
initiatives to be ``traded away'' to pay for airframe cost
increases without budget displays showing the full change in
unit cost. Other issues involve ancillary equipment budgeted in
multiple line-items and DMS redesign efforts budgeted in
advanced procurement. The Committee has moved the DMS funding
from advanced procurement to the regular F-22 funding line. The
Committee directs the Air Force to carefully review the F-22
and other aircraft budget displays to resolve these and similar
issues in future submissions. The Committee encourages the OSD
and Air Force Comptroller organizations to more aggressively
review the details behind these budget displays to ensure they
conform with normal budgeting practices.

c-17 multiyear procurement contract

The Committee has provided an additional $180,900,000 for
procurement of economic order quantity (EOQ) parts associated
with initiation of a second C-17 multiyear contract (or
extension of the current contract). Recent mobility
requirements analyses have consistently established the need
for additional strategic airlift. The current C-17 multiyear
contract ends in fiscal year 2003, and the EOQ to initiate a
second contract would otherwise be required in fiscal year
2002. The Committee is disappointed that the Air Force did not
include these EOQ funds in its fiscal year 2002 request. The
Air Force has indicated that delaying a decision on a second
multiyear contract could add as much as $1,000,000,000 to the
cost of the program. The Committee strongly supports the need
for additional C-17 aircraft and has provided the requisite EOQ
funding. However, the Committee still insists that DoD provide
the customary multiyear budget documentation prior to contract
award. Accordingly, the Committee has included a new general
provision (Sec. 8151), which requires the submission of this
budget documentation at least 30 days prior to award of a C-17
contract. The provision also requires the Secretary of Defense
to certify that all other Title 10 requirements with regard to
a proposed multiyear procurement have been satisfied. The
Committee expects that a savings of up to 15 percent relative
to annual contracts will be achieved through the use of
multiyear contracting on this important program.

c-40 aeromedivac aircraft

In light of the recent terrorist attacks, the Committee
believes it is imperative to ensure the military has a modern
medical response capability. The Committee recommendation
includes an additional $85,000,000, over the amounts in the
budget request, only for a 737-700 aircraft to initiate
replacement of the aging fleet of C-9 AEROMEDIVAC aircraft.

Global Hawk High Altitude Endurance (HAE) Unmanned Aerial Vehicle (UAV)

The fiscal year 2002 budget included a total request of
$309,367,000 for the Global Hawk HAE UAV, an increase of
$142,616,000 over the fiscal year 2001 appropriation, not
including a supplemental appropriation. The Committee
recommends a total of $259,367,000 for the Global Hawk HAE UAV,
a reduction of $50,000,000 from the budget request and
$92,616,000 over the fiscal year 2001 appropriated level.
In addition, the Committee has provided a total increase of
$40,000,000 over the President's budget request for projects in
support of the current and future Global Hawk mission. The
Committee recommends a $10,000,000 increase for the Navy to
pursue the Broad Area Maritime Surveillance (BAMS) concept in
support of the Maritime Patrol and Reconnaissance (MPR) mission
and a $30,000,000 increase for the Air Force to pursue a modern
ELINT system, including the High Band Sub System (HBSS)
alternative from the terminated Joint SIGINT Avionics Family
(JSAF) program.
The Air Force requested $33,500,000 for advanced
procurement of the Global Hawk HAE UAV. The Committee
recommends no funding, a reduction of $33,500,000.
The $33,500,000 request was based on the Air Force plan to
purchase long lead items for two air vehicles scheduled for
delivery in fiscal year 2004. Prior to the 2004 delivery,
significant decisions must be made in 2002 and 2003. It is
unclear to the Committee if the planned advances in the program
will be sufficient to request or approve these decisions and
therefore the long lead request in fiscal year 2002 appears
premature.
The Committee supports Air Force plans to accelerate
production of the Block 10 variant Global Hawk aircraft. The
planned enhanced engine performance and sensor enhancements in
that aircraft offer significant increases in reconnaissance
capability. The Committee remains concerned, however, about the
lack of detailed information on the accelerated production
plan, and withholds its commitment to full scale production of
Block 10 aircraft prior to completion of initial operational
test and evaluation. The Committee directs the Air Force to
provide for the Committee a detailed plan for Block 10
production by December 1, 2001. Should the Air Force determine
that it is in the best interest of the government to order long
lead items prior to the completion of the initial operational
test and evaluation, the Committee would consider a
reprogramming request.

c-17 modifications

The Air Force requested $139,278,000 for C-17
Modifications. The Committee recommends $98,878,000, a
reduction of $40,400,000. This amount includes a reduction of
$33,400,000 for Large Aircraft Infrared Countermeasures
(LAIRCM) and $7,000,000 for cost savings in GATM modifications.
With regard to LAIRCM, the Committee notes that initiation of
the development program has been delayed until fiscal year
2002. Though the Committee supports the LAIRCM program, the
Committee has deferred production in recognition of the delays
in the development program.

c-5 modifications

The Air Force requested $103,214,000 for C-5 modifications.
The Committee recommends $12,714,000, a reduction of
$90,500,000. As conceived last year, the C-5 Avionics
Modernization Program (AMP) was based on a ``fly-before-buy''
acquisition strategy. Delays in the development program have
deferred the projected completion of flight testing until the
third quarter of fiscal year 2003. In keeping with the original
acquisition strategy, the Committee recommendation defers
initial production of the C-5 AMP modification by one year. The
Committee supports the need for C-5 avionics modernization.
However, it has been the Committee's experience that the
complexity of this type of modification has been consistently
underestimated by the government and contractors in the past
(the Air Force experience with the T-38 is a recent example).
Accordingly, the Committee believes that the Air Force's
original ``fly-before-buy'' acquisition strategy is prudent and
should be preserved.

all terrain loader

The Committee directs the Air Force, in full consultation
with the Army, to review the capability of current material
handling equipment to meet mission requirements for C-130
deployability, high volume, unimproved surface mobility,
austere airfield operations, and off-road transport. As the
Army moves toward a transformation force, it is critical that
sufficient material handling equipment be available to support
operations at austere airfields. The review should identify any
requirement gaps, anticipated equipment shortfalls, or other
limitations of current material handling equipment, and be
submitted to the Committee on Appropriations by March 31, 2002.

combat search and rescue

The Committee is aware of the increased expense and
decreased operational readiness associated with maintaining our
aging helicopter fleet. Last year the conferees noted Air Force
intentions to replace aging Combat Search and Rescue (CSAR)
helicopters with a new medium-lift aircraft with greater range
and speed. The Committee believes that the operational fielding
of replacement CSAR helicopters should be accelerated and
recommends the Air Force consider available ``fly-before-buy''
alternatives.

Program Recommended

The total program recommended in the bill will provide the
following in fiscal year 2002:

MISSILE PROCUREMENT, AIR FORCE

Fiscal year 2001 appropriations....................... $2,863,778,000
Fiscal year 2002 budget request....................... 3,233,536,000
Committee recommendation.............................. 2,918,118,000
Change from budget request............................ -315,418,000

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

Committee Recommendations

EXPLANATION OF PROJECT LEVEL CHANGES

gps advance procurement

The Air Force requested $23,760,000 for advance procurement
for modifications to GPS satellites. The Committee denies the
request. The use of advance procurement authority is a special
exception to the full funding policy reserved almost
exclusively for procurement of new production items. Such
authority is typically not extended to modifications. The
Committee is further dismayed with this particular request in
that many of the parts appear to be budgeted ahead of need.
Most of the requested parts have extremely short lead times (6
months) and would deliver well within fiscal year 2002. These
parts would ostensibly sit on the shelf until needed by a
modification that is not funded until fiscal year 2003.
Accordingly, the Committee recommends deferring purchase of
these parts until fiscal year 2003, in keeping with normal full
funding budgeting practices.

SBIRS HIGH

The Air Force requested $93,752,000 for advance procurement
for the entire production run of the Space Based Infrared
System (SBIRS) High satellite program. The Committee denies the
request. The Committee notes that the SBIRS High development
program is currently facing serious hardware and software
design problems. These problems are driving significant program
shortfalls in all years, reportedly totaling more than $500
million. A recent GAO report notes that sensor jitter and
inadequate infrared sensitivity as well as an issue of stray
sunlight have plagued the program and are driving cost
increases and schedule delays. Program officials have indicated
that there are currently unbudgeted payload redesign activities
and that schedule variances experienced to date portend serious
schedule impacts ahead. The program office also reports
``inconceivable software code growth'' with an ``overwhelming''
number of discrepancy reports in ground mission software. The
program is achieving ``at best \1/2\ of the estimated software
development productivity'' required to meet its schedule. Given
these issues, the Committee believes it is prudent to defer
satellite hardware procurement to provide additional time for
development. The Committee notes that this action in itself
will have no impact on projected launch dates given that these
satellites were being procured ahead of need under the existing
acquisition strategy. Likely slips in the development program
will also provide additional margin for the production program.
To address fiscal year 2002 development shortfalls, the
Committee has added $30,000,000 in the Research, Development,
Test and Evaluation, Air Force appropriations account for SBIRS
High.

Program Recommended

The total program recommended in the bill will provide the
following in fiscal year 2002:

PROCUREMENT OF AMMUNITION, AIR FORCE

Fiscal year 2001 appropriations....................... $647,808,000
Fiscal year 2002 budget request....................... 865,344,000
Committee recommendation.............................. 866,844,000
Change from budget request............................ +1,500,000

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

Committee Recommendations

EXPLANATION OF PROJECT LEVEL CHANGES

Program Recommended

The total program recommended in the bill will provide the
following in fiscal year 2002:

OTHER PROCUREMENT, AIR FORCE

Fiscal year 2001 appropriations....................... $7,763,747,000
Fiscal year 2002 budget request....................... 8,159,521,000
Committee recommendation.............................. 7,856,671,000
Change from budget request............................ -302,850,000

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

Committee Recommendations

EXPLANATION OF PROJECT LEVEL CHANGES

SPACE BASED IR SENSOR PROGRAM

The Air Force requested $54,347,000 for hardware for a
backup SBIRS mission control system. The Committee denies the
request. Software development for the SBIRS system has suffered
significant delays resulting in a 2 year slip in the initial
implementation (Increment 1). As noted in the SBIRS High
satellite discussion elsewhere in this report, according to the
GAO, the program continues to experience ``inconceivable
software code growth'' with an ``overwhelming'' number of
discrepancy reports in ground mission software. The program is
achieving ``at best \1/2\ of the estimated software development
productivity'' required to meet its schedule. Given these
software delays and the availability of an existing interim
backup ground station, the Committee recommendation defers
hardware procurement for the permanent backup ground system.

Program Recommended

The total program recommended in the bill will provide the
following in fiscal year 2002:

PROCUREMENT, DEFENSE-WIDE

Fiscal year 2001 appropriation........................ $2,346,258,000
Fiscal year 2002 budget request....................... 1,603,927,000
Committee recommendation.............................. 1,387,283,000
Change from budget request............................ -216,644,000

This appropriation funds the Procurement, Defense-Wide
activities of the Department of Defense.

Committee Recommendations

EXPLANATION OF PROJECT LEVEL CHANGES

transfers to title ix

Procurement funding for the Ballistic Missile Defense
Organization, the Defense Threat Reduction Agency, and for the
Defense-Wide chemical and biological defense programs has been
moved to title IX.

Advanced SEAL Delivery System

The Special Operations Command requested $33,439,000 for
procurement of Advanced Sea, Air, Land (SEAL) Delivery Systems
(ASDS) and $13,697,000 for Advanced Procurement for ASDS. The
Committee recommends $14,238,000 for procurement and no funds
for advance procurement.
The ASDS is a manned combatant mini-submarine used for the
clandestine delivery of Special Operations Forces personnel and
weapons. Once the ASDS is available it will provide a
significant improvement to the current capabilities of the SEAL
force but the first system has been plagued by excessive cost
overruns and schedule delays. Congress has needed to approve
reprogrammings to cover the increasing development cost in each
of the last four years and faces the same predicament in fiscal
year 2002. The first system has been delivered, but it still
does not meet noise requirements and its battery has not met
the endurance requirements for all missions. The Committee
supports the ASDS program, but believes it is premature to
procure additional ASDS systems prior to resolving the
outstanding issues and has deferred funding for the second
system. The Committee has also added $5,000,000 to the fiscal
year 2002 Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, Defense-
Wide budget to enable the Special Operations Command to resolve
the battery and noise issues.

Program Recommended

The total recommended in the bill will provide the
following program in fiscal year 2002.

NATIONAL GUARD AND RESERVE EQUIPMENT

Fiscal year 2001 appropriation........................ $100,000,000
Fiscal year 2002 budget request....................... ................
Committee recommendation.............................. 501,485,000
Change from budget request............................ 501,485,000

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

Committee Recommendations

The President requested $1,897,100,000 for National Guard
and Reserve Equipment throughout the Services' procurement
appropriations, for programs that the Committee has addressed
elsewhere in this report. In this appropriation, the Committee
recommends an increase of $501,485,000 for the procurement of
crucial aircraft, ground transportation, communications, and
training systems for the National Guard and Reserve. The
Committee is aware of the valuable contributions which are made
by National Guard and Reserve forces to the defense of our
Nation and realizes they are indispensable in the day-to-day
conduct of military operations both within the United States
and in every theater where U.S. troops are deployed. The
Committee is particularly proud and grateful to the thousands
of National Guardsmen and Reservists who have been activated to
participate in operations NOBLE EAGLE and ENDURING FREEDOM, our
nation's reponse to the tragic attack against our country which
occurred on September 11, 2001.

uh-60 blackhawk helicopters

The Army requested $174,515,000 for UH-60 Blackhawk
Helicopters for the Army National Guard in the Aircraft
Procurement, Army account. The Committee recommends the
requested amount elsewhere in this report, and further
recommends an additional $131,176,000 for the procurement of
eight UH-60L Blackhawk helicopters only for the A and D
Companies of the 158th Aviation Battalion, Army Reserve. The
Committee provided funding in fiscal year 2001 to establish two
Army Reserve Blackhawk Companies and is aware that eight
additional helicopters would fill out the required aircraft for
those units.

BRADLEY FIGHTING VEHICLE ODS

The Committee recommends $60,000,000 only for Bradley
Fighting Vehicle Base Sustainment to upgrade National Guard
Bradley fighting vehicles to the ODS (Operation Desert Storm)
configuration. This effort to improve survivability and remedy
operational deficiencies will significantly improve the combat
effectiveness of National Guard units.

Reserve Component Automation System

The Committee recommends $18,000,000 for the Reserve
Component Automation System, only to extend and improve
information technology infrastructure by upgrading to current
technologies and leveraging these improvements to support
traditional and emerging missions of the Reserve Components.

C-130J

The Committee recommends $226,909,000 for two C-130J
aircraft and associated support only for the Air National Guard
to be used solely for western states firefighting. The
Committee continues to be concerned about the numerous forest
fires, which have ravaged the western United States, and is
aware that National Guard units have played a key role in
fighting those fires.

Program Recommended

The total amount recommended in the bill will provide the
following in the fiscal year 2002:

DEFENSE PRODUCTION ACT PURCHASES

Fiscal year 2001 appropriation........................ $3,000,000
Fiscal year 2002 budget request....................... 50,000,000
Committee recommendation.............................. 50,000,000
Change from request................................... 0

The Defense Production Act (50 U.S.C. App. 2061 et seq.)
authorizes the use of federal funds to correct industrial
resource shortfalls and promote critical technology items which
are essential to the national defense. The Department requested
$50,000,000 for Defense Production Act purchases in fiscal year
2002. The Committee recommends $50,000,000, the amount of the
budget request.

INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY

The Department requested $15,723,424,000 for Information
Technology. The Committee recommends $15,890,024,000, an
increase of $166,600,000 as explained below:

[In thousands of dollars]

Operation and Maintenance, Army:
JCALS............................................... -12,000
Defense Joint Accounting System..................... -12,500
Information Technology Systems, Army................ -20,000
Operation and Maintenance, Navy:
SPAWAR ITC Operations............................... 9,000
Configuration Management Information System......... 3,000
Defense Joint Accounting System..................... -7,000
Enterprise Resource Planning........................ -33,000
Information Technology Systems, Navy................ -20,000
Navy Marine Corps Intranet.......................... -120,000
Operation and Maintenance, Air Force:
Air Force Server Consolidation...................... 5,000
L-SMART Information System Logistics Operation...... 5,000
Defense Joint Accounting System..................... -7,000
Information Technology Systems, Air Force........... -20,000
Operation and Maintenance, Defense-Wide:
Defense Joint Accounting System..................... -13,000
Information Technology Systems, Defense-Wide........ -20,000
ADUSD(MPP&R)--Wearable Computers.................... 2,000
DISA................................................ -10,000
Operation and Maintenance, Army National Guard:
Information Technology Management Training.......... 1,000
Early Responders Distance Learning Training Center.. 4,000
Rural Access to Broadband Technology................ 4,000
Operation and Maintenance, Air National Guard:
Project Alert....................................... 3,800
Other Procurement, Army:
Secure Terminal Equipment........................... 3,000
Automated Manifest System........................... 1,000
LAN Installation for Gauntlet FTX Site and Skidgell
Hall (Fort Knox).................................. 450
Ammunition Automated Identification Technology...... 4,000
NG Distance Learning Courseware..................... 3,000
Regional Medical Distributive Learning Center....... 1,000
Other Procurement, Navy:
JEDMICS Security Infrastructure..................... 8,000
DEFINITY G3 Network Upgrade......................... 7,000
Intelligent Agent Security Module................... 3,000
Secure Terminal Equipment........................... 3,000
Serial Number Tracking System....................... 2,000
SPAWAR Information Technology Center................ 2,000
Procurement, Marine Corps:
DPRIS Database...................................... 4,000
Other Procurement, Air Force:
Secure Terminal Equipment........................... 3,000
REMIS............................................... 4,000
Supply Asset Tracking System........................ 5,000
Procurement, Defense-Wide:
High Performance Computing Modernization Program.... 25,000
Information Technology Underexecution............... -4,000
SPS Schedule Slip................................... -4,400
National Guard and Reserve Equipment:
Reserve Component Automation System................. 18,000
Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, Army:
PASIS: Perpetually Assailable and Secure Information
Systems, Research, Training and Education......... 7,500
On--Line Contract Document Management............... 1,000
Applied Communications and Information Networking... 10,000
Army High Performance Computing Research Center..... 15,000
Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, Navy:
Distance Learning IT Center......................... 15,000
Document Automation of ICAS maintenance and other
Navy procedures in an XML format.................. 3,000
JEDMICS Enhancements................................ 7,000
JEDMICS Security.................................... 2,000
SPAWAR ITC Enterprise Management.................... 6,000
Intelligent Agent Security Module................... 5,000
Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, Air Force:
Information Assurance for Enabling Technologies..... 1,500
Worldwide Information Security Environment (WISE)... 13,000
GCSS (Enterprise Data Warehouse).................... 6,000
Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, Defense-
Wide:
Waterside/Landside Force Protection Planner......... 2,000
Advanced Distributed Learning Initiative............ 10,000
Financial Management Modernization Program--Transfer
to DWCF........................................... -60,000
Information Technology Superiority Study............ 1,000
Global Infrastructure Data Capture.................. 7,000
Protection of Vital Data............................ 7,000
Computer Science and Internet Degree Program........ 750
Integrated Command and Control System (IC2S)........ 1,500
Counter-Terrorism and Operation Response Transfer Fund:
Information Assurance, Critical Infrastructure
Protection and Information Operations............. 275,000
--------------------------------------------------------
____________________________________________________
Total............................................. 166,600

Financial Management Modernization Program

The Committee supports the Department's effort to modernize
its financial management system. A key part of that process is
ensuring that the Department has adequate oversight of all its
Financial Management Information Technology Systems. The
Committee has included a general provision to reinforce that
oversight.
The President's budget requested $100,000,000 in Research,
Development, Test and Evaluation, Defense-Wide to support the
Financial Management Modernization Program. Although the
majority of this work would be done in the Defense Working
Capital Fund, the Department decided to request all the funding
in this account. The Committee appreciates the intent, but
recommends funding $40,000,000 in Research, Development, Test
and Evaluation, Defense-Wide, and the balance in the Defense
Working Capital Fund to reflect the way the program will be
executed. Given the enormity of the task the Committee would
support expenses within the Working Capital Fund in excess of
the $60,000,000.

critical infrastructure protection

The failure of software that controls our critical
infrastructure (power, transportation, financial etc.) would
produce a crippling blow to our nation's security. The
Committee encourages the President to establish a Critical
Infrastructure Protection Program that addresses this threat.

Defense Joint Accounting System

The President's Budget requested $39,500,000 in the Defense
Working Capital Fund for the Defense Joint Accounting System
(DJAS). The Committee remains concerned that this may not be
the most effective solution for the Department's financial
management requirements. Section 391 of the Floyd D. Spence
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2001
required the Department to analyze the alternatives and to
report back to Congress on whether DJAS merits deployment. This
has not been done. The Committee therefore recommends
terminating the program, unless the Under Secretary of Defense
(Comptroller) determines that DJAS is an essential part of the
Department's Financial Management Modernization Strategy.

SPAWAR Information Technology Center

The Committee directs the Department of the Navy to
implement all DIMHRS development and integration efforts using
the enterprise concept of operations at the SPAWAR Information
Technology Center (SITC), and to continue enterprise level
reengineering and web-enabling of legacy systems, and portal
integration efforts, at the SITC.

DEFENSE TRAVEL SERVICE

The Defense Travel Service program has an unfortunate track
record of requesting more funding than it can execute. The
Committee has therefore reduced the budget request in Research,
Development, Test and Evaluation by $20,000,000. Should this
year be different and the Department be able to fully execute
this program, the Committee expects the Department to submit a
reprogramming request subject to normal, prior approval
reprogramming procedures.

navy marine corps intranet

The Navy Marine Corps Intranet is a promising idea.
However, to date the program's management and implementation
have proceeded in a manner that does not inspire confidence. It
remains to be seen whether the Department of the Navy can
overcome the program's inauspicious start and implement a
solution it can rely upon.
When the Navy decided to pursue the idea of outsourcing the
entire Navy information technology network, it did so without
conducting an analysis of the alternatives. In fact, in
response to congressional inquiries about the basis for the
decision, the Navy maintained that prior to the decision to
proceed with this initiative, no study was done and no briefing
paper prepared that recommended this option.
To avoid any delay or outside oversight, no business case
analysis was to be prepared, no new start notification was to
be provided to Congress and as new concerns were raised, the
Navy would argue that they did not apply in this case. This
approach reached its conclusion in the summer of 2000, when
Navy lawyers were forced to argue that the NMCI contract was
both a `new start' and `not a new start' depending on which
requirement the Department was trying to avoid. It was at this
point that the combined objections of Congress, OSD and OMB led
to a moderation of the Navy's position and a belated effort by
the Navy to comply with the Clinger-Cohen Act. An agreement was
reached between the Navy and OSD, and made law in the fiscal
year 2001 National Defense Authorization Act, to allow for an
initial fielding of 15 percent of the ``seats'' required
followed by a strategic pause. The Department was to conduct a
revised business case analysis, perform operational testing and
evaluation, comply with the Department's information assurance
architecture and gather user satisfaction data to determine if
the program should continue.
Despite the Memorandum of Agreement with OSD and the legal
requirements of the Authorization Act, the Navy then signed a
contract that did not incorporate these requirements. According
to the Navy, the contract was designed to implement NMCI as
quickly as possible and assumed no disruption in schedule. Over
the last year, however, the program has had several delays
unrelated to the oversight requirements. As a result, in one
year, NMCI has had a six month slip in its schedule for
fielding and testing the system.
The Committee observes new OSD and Navy leadership thus
find themselves in a situation where they cannot comply with
both the law and the contract as written. In addition, it is
still not clear that the NMCI proposal can obtain the
information assurance certification it would need to be fully
implemented. Under the Department's most recent proposal under
consideration, the key decision to proceed would occur in
January 2003 without the benefit of a completed business case,
without user satisfaction data, with contractor testing in lieu
of operational testing and with a much smaller test population
than originally expected. Although this may be the best
solution the Navy and OSD can design under these circumstances,
it is clearly not the best way to be making multibillion dollar
contract decisions. The Committee expects that the House and
Senate Armed Services Committees, as the authors of the
original law specifying the criteria for NMCI acquisition, will
re-examine the rules for continuing this program as part of the
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2002. At
this point in time, consistent with the actions of the House
Armed Services Committee, this Committee recommends a reduction
of $120,000,000 to the NMCI program.
The Committee believes that regardless of the outcome of
the review process, there is much to be learned by this
experience, and from the hard work of numerous individuals
involved in the day-to-day oversight, management and
implementation of the NMCI program. Nor should the difficulty
with implementing this particular program discourage others
from considering innovative options for managing information
technology networks.
Therefore, the Committee directs the Secretary of the Air
Force to conduct a study comparing different solutions to
managing an information technology network and to provide
recommendations on how a service or agency might implement
those solutions, including any lessons to be learned from the
NMCI effort.
TITLE IV

RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST AND EVALUATION

ESTIMATES AND APPROPRIATION SUMMARY

The fiscal year 2002 budget request for programs funded in
Title IV of the Committee bill, Research, Development, Test and
Evaluation, totals $47,429,433,000. The accompanying bill
recommends $40,090,256,000. The total amount recommended is a
decrease of $7,339,177,000 below the fiscal year 2002 budget
estimate and is $1,269,349,000 below the total provided in
fiscal year 2001. (As described elsewhere in this report, these
amounts reflect the amounts provided in Title IV of the
Committee bill, after the movement of $8,236,705,000 of funds
previously appropriated in this Title to a new appropriations
title, Title IX.) The table below summarizes the budget
estimate and the Committee's recommendations.

SPECIAL INTEREST ITEMS

information assurance testing

The Committee continues to be concerned about the security
of military systems with regard to information attack and
exploitation. The Committee has directed, in prior years, that
information assurance testing be included in the operational
tests of all newly acquired DoD systems. The Committee notes
that the changing tide of technology means that a system that
passes all tests today could be vulnerable to the newly
developed attacks of tomorrow. Therefore, it is vitally
important to conduct periodic testing of all DoD systems, both
old and new, to help ensure these systems are adequately
protected. Accordingly, the Committee directs that all DoD
systems receive periodic information assurance testing. The
Committee directs that the Director of Operational Test &
Evaluation develop a policy to implement the Committee's
direction and report on this policy and its implementation to
the congressional defense committees no later than February 1,
2002.

department of energy research

The Committee is concerned with the practices of the
Department of Energy when it does work for the Department of
Defense. The DoE, in entering into agreements with the DoD,
adds a surcharge above its normal overhead costs in order to
fund laboratory directed research and development that is
unrelated to the specific purpose for which funds were
appropriated in this Act. The House-passed Energy and Water
Development Appropriations Act, 2002 specifically prohibits DOE
from applying this surcharge against DoD funds. Consistent with
this prohibition, the Committee recommends reducing the
research and development funds provided to the Department of
Energy through DoD contracts by $20,000,000, divided among the
Services and Defense-Wide accounts. The Committee expects
individuals in DoD who issue contracts to ensure that the funds
they send to other agencies are used only for the purpose for
which they were appropriated.

CLASSIFIED ANNEX

Adjustments of the classified programs are addressed in a
classified annex accompanying this report.

Aviation Requirement for Joint Tactical Terminal (JTT)

The Committee understands that the Navy and the Air Force
have a requirement for an aviation-based radio that is
Integrated Broadcast Service (IBS) compliant. The Committee
directs the Navy and the Air Force to work together and by June
1, 2002, submit to the Committee a joint requirement and a
development and procurement strategy to meet the requirement.

RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST AND EVALUATION, ARMY

Fiscal year 2001 appropriation........................ $6,342,552,000
Fiscal year 2002 budget request....................... 6,693,920,000
Committee recommendation.............................. 7,115,438,000
Change from budget request............................ 421,518,000

This appropriation finances the research, development, test
and evaluation activities of the Department of the Army.

Committee Recommendations

EXPLANATION OF PROJECT LEVEL CHANGES

[In thousands of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Budget Committee Change from
request recommended request
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
DEFENSE RESEARCH SCIENCES....................................... 138,281 146,150 +7,869
Advanced Target Recognition using Nanotechnologies.......... .............. .............. 2,000
PASIS: Perpetually Assailable and Secure Information .............. .............. 7,500
Systems, Research, Training and Education..................
Scientific Problems with Military Applications.............. .............. .............. -1,631
UNIVERSITY AND INDUSTRY RESEARCH CENTERS........................ 69,147 77,347 +8,200
Center for Optics Manufacturing-Advanced Optics Program..... .............. .............. 3,000
Global Information Portal................................... .............. .............. 1,200
Thermal Fluid Design Tool................................... .............. .............. 2,000
Virtual Parts Engineering Research Center (Note: only for .............. .............. 2,000
expansion of Design Immersion System Environment)..........
SENSORS AND ELECTRONIC SURVIVABILITY............................ 25,797 28,797 +3,000
Passive Millimeter Wave Camera (Note: only for the purpose .............. .............. 3,000
of providing additional flight worthy PMMW imagers to
conduct flight tests in adverse weather, nap-of-the-earth
navigation scenarios, including flight demonstrations of
covert personnel location under the DoD's Personnel
Recovery/Extraction Aided by Smart Sensor (PRESS) ACTD
program)...................................................
AVIATION TECHNOLOGY............................................. 49,265 40,029 -9,236
National Rotocraft Tech Center.............................. .............. .............. -9,236
MISSILE TECHNOLOGY.............................................. 40,112 57,612 +17,500
Acceleration of Development and Testing for tactical missile .............. .............. 3,500
components.................................................
MEMS/GPS/IMU Integration (Note: only to accelerate and focus .............. .............. 10,000
efforts to significantly lower the cost and improve the
performance of guidance sets for precision/guided
munitions. Activities should focus on accelerated
development of high-g one-degree per hour IMU's, and
hardware/software development of ``ultra-deep GPS/INS
coupling'' to improve anti-jam performance at low cost.)...
Loitering Attack Munition for Aviation (LAM-A).............. .............. .............. 4,000
ADVANCED WEAPONS TECHNOLOGY..................................... 19,043 27,982 +8,939
Cooperative Micro-Satellite Experiment (CMSE)............... .............. .............. 8,000
Microelectro Mechanical Systems............................. .............. .............. 9,500
Miniature Detection Devices and Analysis Methods............ .............. .............. 1,850
Rapid Target Acquisition & Tracking System (RTATS).......... .............. .............. 2,000
Reduce programmed growth.................................... .............. .............. -12,411
MODELING AND SIMULATION TECHNOLOGY.............................. 20,579 28,579 +8,000
On-Line Contract Document Management........................ .............. .............. 1,000
Modeling, Simulation and Training Infrastructure & Community .............. .............. 7,000
Development................................................
COMBAT VEHICLE AND AUTOMOTIVE TECHNOLOGY........................ 82,441 86,441 +4,000
Combat Vehicle Transportation Technologies Program: Calstart/ .............. .............. 2,000
WestStart Electric Hybrid Technology.......................
Integration of Army Voice Interactive Device with an onboard .............. .............. 2,000
central processing unit (Note: only to continue integration
of AVID into the Smart Truck's voice activated central
processing computer.)......................................
CHEMICAL, SMOKE AND EQUIPMENT DEFEATING TECHNOLOGY.............. 3,561 11,561 +8,000
Thermobaric Warhead Development............................. .............. .............. 2,000
U.S. Army Center of Excellence in Biotechnology............. .............. .............. 6,000
WEAPONS AND MUNITIONS TECHNOLOGY................................ 35,549 65,549 +30,000
Cooperative Energetics Initiative........................... .............. .............. 2,000
Corrosion Measurement and Control........................... .............. .............. 5,000
Future Combat System Propellant and Survivability........... .............. .............. 4,000
Green Armaments Technology (GAT)............................ .............. .............. 7,500
Liquidmetal Alloy-Tungsten (LA-T) Armor Piercing Ammunition. .............. .............. 4,000
Multiple Explosively-Formed Penetrators..................... .............. .............. 2,000
Single Crystal Tungsten Alloy Penetrator.................... .............. .............. 4,000
Smart Coatings.............................................. .............. .............. 1,500
ELECTRONICS AND ELECTRONIC DEVICES.............................. 27,819 47,319 +19,500
Cylindrical Zinc Air Battery for Land Warrior System........ .............. .............. 1,500
Electronic Display Research................................. .............. .............. 5,000
Fuel Cell Power Systems..................................... .............. .............. 5,000
Improved High Rate Alkaline Cell............................ .............. .............. 1,000
Logistics Fuel Reformer..................................... .............. .............. 2,500
Low Cost Reusable Alkaline Manganese-Zinc................... .............. .............. 500
Polymer Extrusion/Multilaminate (Battery research).......... .............. .............. 3,000
Rechargeable Cylindrical Cell System........................ .............. .............. 1,000
NIGHT VISION TECHNOLOGY......................................... 20,598 23,598 +3,000
Dual band detector imaging technology....................... .............. .............. 3,000
COUNTERMINE SYSTEMS............................................. 16,689 22,689 +6,000
Acoustic Mine Detection..................................... .............. .............. 4,000
Integrated Countermine Testbed and Training Project......... .............. .............. 2,000
HUMAN FACTORS ENGINEERING TECHNOLOGY............................ 16,466 21,966 +5,500
MedTeams (Medical Error Reduction Research)................. .............. .............. 3,500
Soldier Centered Design Tools for the Army.................. .............. .............. 2,000
ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY TECHNOLOGY................................ 16,150 21,150 +5,000
Transportable Detonation Chamber Validation................. .............. .............. 5,000
Rangesafe Demonstration Program............................. .............. .............. 5,000
Duplicative Technology Research............................. .............. .............. -5,000
MILITARY ENGINEERING TECHNOLOGY................................. 42,850 60,850 +18,000
Climate Change Fuel Cell Program (Buydown).................. .............. .............. 7,000
DoD Fuel Cell Test and Evaluation Center.................... .............. .............. 6,000
Ft. George G. Meade Fuel Cell Demonstration................. .............. .............. 5,000
WARFIGHTER TECHNOLOGY........................................... 27,061 34,561 +7,500
Airbeam Manufacturing Process (lightweight transportable .............. .............. 1,000
military shelter technology)...............................
Center for Reliable Wireless Communications Technology for .............. .............. 1,000
Digital Battlefield (NDU)..................................
Combat Feeding (Note: Only to continue research on food and .............. .............. 2,500
fielding technologies to improve food quality to the
warfighter.)...............................................
Standoff Precision Aerial Delivery System (S/PADS).......... .............. .............. 3,000
MEDICAL TECHNOLOGY.............................................. 82,494 104,994 +22,500
Diabetes Project (Pittsburgh)............................... .............. .............. 6,000
Emergency Hypothermia for Advanced Combat Casualty and .............. .............. 3,000
delayed resuscitation......................................
Medical Area Network for Virtual Technologies............... .............. .............. 8,000
Osteoporosis Research....................................... .............. .............. 4,000
Speech Capable Personal Digital Assistant................... .............. .............. 1,500
DUAL USE SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY................................. 10,045 15,045 +5,000
Manufacturing RDE Center for Nanotechnologies............... .............. .............. 5,000
WARFIGHTER ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY.................................. 60,332 58,017 -2,315
Advanced Personal Navigation Technology MEMS INS/GPS .............. .............. 4,000
precision location information.............................
Metrology................................................... .............. .............. 1,500
Pneumatic Muscle Soft Landing Technology.................... .............. .............. 1,000
Force Projection Logistics.................................. .............. .............. -2,500
Portable Cooling System Development (Note: only for heat .............. .............. 1,000
actuated cooling for FCS apparel)..........................
Warfighter Advanced Technology.............................. .............. .............. -7,315
MEDICAL ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY..................................... 17,541 212,541 +195,000
Advanced Diagnostics and Therapeutic Digital Technologies... .............. .............. +2,500
Artificial Hip (Volumetrically Controlled Manufacturing).... .............. .............. 5,000
Biology, Education, Screening, Chemoprevention and Treatment .............. .............. 6,000
(BESCT) Lung Cancer Research Program.......................
Biosensor Research.......................................... .............. .............. 3,500
Blood Safety (Note: only for the continuation of the current .............. .............. 8,000
program to provide improved blood products and safety
systems compatible with military field use.)...............
Brain Biology and Machine................................... .............. .............. 4,000
Cancer Center of Excellence (Notre Dame).................... .............. .............. 3,000
Center for Integration of Medicine and Innovative .............. .............. 10,000
Technology--Computer-assisted minimally invasive surgery...
Center for Untethered Healthcare at Worcester Polytechnic .............. .............. 2,000
Institute..................................................
Comprehensive Neuroscience Center (Note: only for a public/ .............. .............. 8,000
private comprehensive program in neurosciences for DoD
medical beneficiaries in the areas of brain injury,
headache, seizures/epilepsy, and other degenerative
disorders. It shall be a coordinated effort among Walter
Reed Army Medical Center, the Uniformed Services University
of the Health Sciences, an appropriate non-profit medical
Foundation, and a primary health care center, with funding
management accomplished by the Uniformed Services
University of the Health Sciences.)........................
Continous Expert Care Network Telemedicine Program.......... .............. .............. 3,000
Controlling Mosquito and Tick Transmitted Disease........... .............. .............. 3,500
Disaster Relief and Emergency Medical Services (DREAMS)..... .............. .............. 8,000
Fragile X (Note: only to support an intervention study aimed .............. .............. 1,000
at finding effective methods of treatment--both
pharmacological and nonpharmacological--for the symptoms
and behavioral problems associated with Fragile X
Syndrome.).................................................
Hemoglobin Based Oxygen Carrier............................. .............. .............. 2,000
Hepatitis C................................................. .............. .............. 4,000
Joint U.S.-Norwegian Telemedicine........................... .............. .............. 2,000
Joslin Diabetes Research--eye care.......................... .............. .............. 6,000
Life Support for Trauma and Transport (LSTAT)............... .............. .............. 3,500
Secure Telemedicine Technology Program (Note: only for C .............. .............. 4,000
Suite of secure, Scalable, customizable and internet-based
telemedicine solutions able to be used with a variety of
operating platforms).......................................
Memorial Hermann Telemedicine Network....................... .............. .............. 1,000
Molecular Genetics and Musculoskeletal Research Program .............. .............. 9,000
(Note: only to continue the current Army program.).........
Monoclonal Antibodies, Massachusetts Biological Lab......... .............. .............. 2,000
Emergency Telemedicine Response and Advanced Technology .............. .............. 3,000
Program....................................................
National Medical Testbed (Note: the Committee provides .............. .............. 9,000
$4,000,000 only for for on-going programs, and $5,000,000
only for recipient Emergency/Trauma Care advanced
technology programs........................................
Neurofibromatosis Research Program (NF)..................... .............. .............. 25,000
Neurology Gallo Center-alcoholism research.................. .............. .............. 8,000
Neurotoxin Exposure Treatment Research Program (NETRP) .............. .............. 20,000
Parkinsons & neurological disorders........................
Polynitroxylated Hemoglobin................................. .............. .............. 1,000
Retinal Scanning Display Technology......................... .............. .............. 3,000
Saccadic Fatigue Measurement................................ .............. .............. 1,000
SEAtreat cervical cancer visualization and treatment........ .............. .............. 3,500
Smart Aortic Arch Catheter.................................. .............. .............. 1,000
Synchrotron Based Scanning Research (Note: only to continue .............. .............. 10,000
the current Army Synchrotron-based scanning program, to
begin protocol testing for delivery to patients and to
expand this service into the arena of proton telemedicine.)
U.S. Army Center of Excellence in Biotechnology............. .............. .............. 7,500
Veterans Collaborative Care Model Program................... .............. .............. 2,000
AVIATION ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY.................................... 44,843 36,545 -8,298
Aviation Advanced Technology (Note: only for Airborne Manned/ .............. .............. 3,000
Unmanned System Technology (AMUST) Wideband RF Network)....
Aviation Advanced Technology (Note: only for design, .............. .............. 5,000
development, test and demonstration of a turbo shaft engine
for use in UAVs)...........................................
Aviation Advanced Technology-Reduce programmed growth....... .............. .............. -16,298
WEAPONS AND MUNITIONS ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY....................... 29,684 39,684 +10,000
Low Cost Course Correction Technology....................... .............. .............. 5,000
SMAW-D Shoulder-Launched Multipurpose Assault Weapon & .............. .............. 5,000
Munitions Engineering Development..........................
COMBAT VEHICLE AND AUTOMOTIVE ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY............... 193,858 222,358 +28,500
Aluminum Reinforced Metal Matrix Composites for Track Shoes. .............. .............. 5,000
Combat Vehicle Research-Weight Reduction.................... .............. .............. 7,000
Electrochromatic Glass for Combat Vehicles (Note: only to .............. .............. 2,000
the National Automotive Center for research and development
of inorganic electrochromatic materials and processing for
combat vehicle smart, switchable windows.).................
Fuel Catalyst Research Evaluation........................... .............. .............. 500
Mobile Parts Hospital....................................... .............. .............. 7,000
Movement Tracking System (MTS) for Family of Heavy Tactical .............. .............. 2,000
Vehicles...................................................
NAC Standardized Exchange of Product Data (N-STEP) Combat .............. .............. 5,000
Vehicle Automotive Advanced Technology.....................
COMMAND, CONTROL, COMMUNICATIONS ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY............ 31,865 35,865 +4,000
Battlefield Ordnance Awareness.............................. .............. .............. 4,000
EW TECHNOLOGY................................................... 13,868 24,368 +10,500
Multi-functional Intelligence and Remote Sensor System...... .............. .............. 5,500
Shortstop (SEPS)............................................ .............. .............. 5,000
MISSILE AND ROCKET ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY.......................... 59,518 77,018 +17,500
Missile Recycling Program (Note: Only to transition the .............. .............. 5,000
AMCOM-developed Missile Recycling Capabilities (MRC)
technologies to the Anniston Munitions Center to establish
an organic MRC.)...........................................
Standoff NATO International Precision Enhanced Rocket .............. .............. 3,000
(SNIPER) Laser Guidance for 2.75 in. Rocket................
Volumetrically Controlled Manufacturing (VCM) Composites .............. .............. 3,500
Technology.................................................
Wide Bandwith Technology.................................... .............. .............. 6,000
LINE-OF-SIGHT TECHNOLOGY DEMONSTRATION.......................... 57,384 70,456 +13,072
Transfer from Missile Procurement, Army..................... .............. .............. 13,072
NIGHT VISION ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY................................ 37,081 56,581 +19,500
BUSTER Backpack UAV (Note: only for continued development of .............. .............. 7,000
the backpack unmanned autonomous sensor for surveillance
and target acquisition to enhance reconnaissance (BUSTER)
UAV).......................................................
Helmut Mounted Infa-Red Sensor System....................... .............. .............. 2,500
Night Vision Advanced Technology-Digital Fusion............. .............. .............. 7,000
Soldier Vision 2000 (through wall surveillance radar)....... .............. .............. 3,000
ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY TECHNOLOGY DEMONSTRATIONS................. 4,826 9,826 +5,000
Proton Exchange Membrane (PEM) fuel cell demonstration .............. .............. 5,000
(Note: only for the demonstration of domestically produced
PEM fuel cells on military facilities).....................
ARMY MISSILE DEFENSE SYSTEMS INTEGRATION (DEM/VAL).............. 19,491 37,491 +18,000
Advanced Warfare Environment (AWarE) (Note: only for .............. .............. 1,000
acquisition of commercial technology solutions for the
Advanced Warfare Environment (AWarE) Deployed Access to
imagery archives)..........................................
Micropower Devices for Missile Defense Applications......... .............. .............. 1,000
Reduce programmed growth.................................... .............. .............. -1,000
Super Cluster Distributed Memory Technology................. .............. .............. 4,000
THEL........................................................ .............. .............. 10,000
Thermionic Technology....................................... .............. .............. 3,000
TANK AND MEDIUM CALIBER AMMUNITION.............................. 32,986 51,000 +18,014
Conventional tank ammunition................................ .............. .............. -2,986
Global Positioning System Interference Suppression (GPS ISU) .............. .............. 1,000
TERM TM3.................................................... .............. .............. 5,000
XM 1007 Tank Extended Range Munition (TERM)................. .............. .............. 15,000
SOLDIER SUPPORT AND SURVIVABILITY............................... 17,482 14,000 -3,482
Reduce programmed growth.................................... .............. .............. -3,482
NIGHT VISION SYSTEMS ADVANCED DEVELOPMENT....................... 12,756 10,000 -2,756
Reduce programmed growth.................................... .............. .............. -2,756
ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY TECHNOLOGY DEM/VAL........................ 7,536 37,036 +29,500
Plasma Energy Pyrolysis (Note: only for the installation and .............. .............. 6,000
demonstration of an on-site operational Plasma Energy
Pyrolysis System at Anniston Army Depot at Anniston,
Alabama, for the demonstrated destruction of toxic and
hazardous waste streams generated on-site.)................
Commercializing Dual Use Technologies....................... .............. .............. 8,000
Environmental Cleanup Demonstration (Note: only to .............. .............. 5,000
demonstrate and validate new environmental cleanup
technology at Porta Bella).................................
Fort Ord Cleanup Demonstration Project...................... .............. .............. 4,000
Technology Development for unexploded ordnance in support of .............. .............. 4,000
military readiness (Note: only for the National Center for
Environmental Excellence to demonstrate and validate
technology to efficiently identify, characterize, and
neutralize unexploded ordnance to support military
readiness, promote humanitarian assistance activities, and
advance peacekeeping combat missions.).....................
Vanadium Technology Program................................. .............. .............. 2,500
AVIATION--ADV DEV............................................... 9,105 13,105 +4,000
Virtual Cockpit Optimization................................ .............. .............. 4,000
WEAPONS AND MUNITIONS--ADV DEV.................................. 31,670 35,670 +4,000
Precision Guided Mortor Munition............................ .............. .............. 4,000
LOGISTICS AND ENGINEER EQUIPMENT-ADV DEV........................ 7,456 8,456 +1,000
Man Tech-Cylindrical Zinc Batteries for Land Warrior System. .............. .............. 1,000
MEDICAL SYSTEMS--ADV DEV........................................ 15,506 16,506 +1,000
IMED Tools Rural Mobile Communications Platform............. .............. .............. 1,000
MEADS CONCEPTS-DEM/VAL.......................................... 73,645 0 -73,645
Transfer to Title IX--RDTE, BMDO............................ .............. .............. -73,645
AIRCRAFT AVIONICS............................................... 57,474 58,974 +1,500
Airborne Separation Video System (ASVS)..................... .............. .............. 1,500
COMANCHE........................................................ 787,866 816,366 +28,500
Transfer from Missile Procurement, Army..................... .............. .............. 28,500
EW DEVELOPMENT.................................................. 57,010 61,010 +4,000
ATIRCM/CMWS-Installed Systems Test Facility at CECOM........ .............. .............. 4,000
ALL SOURCE ANALYSIS SYSTEM...................................... 42,166 45,666 +3,500
All Source Analysis System (Note: only for the development .............. .............. 2,000
of the Intelligence Analysis Advanced Tool Sets (IAATS)
Communications Control Sets for ASAS)......................
ASAS Light.................................................. .............. .............. 1,500
COMMON MISSILE.................................................. 16,731 10,927 -5,804
Reduce programmed growth.................................... .............. .............. -5,804
JAVELIN......................................................... 492 5,492 +5,000
Javelin Pre-Planned Product Improvements.................... .............. .............. 5,000
TACTICAL UNMANNED GROUND VEHICLE (TUGV)......................... 0 3,000 +3,000
Viking Mine Clearing System................................. .............. .............. 3,000
NIGHT VISION SYSTEMS-ENG DEV.................................... 24,201 28,201 +4,000
Avenger Upgrade of First Generation FLIR (Only for the Navy .............. .............. 4,000
Center of Excellence in ElectroOptics Manufacturing to
finalize technology transfer and fabricate a pilot quantity
to validate manufacturing technology.).....................
AIR DEFENSE COMMAND, CONTROL AND INTELLIGENCE-ENG DEV........... 18,233 21,233 +3,000
Air Defense Alerting Device (ADAD) for Avenger.............. .............. .............. 3,000
AUTOMATIC TEST EQUIPMENT DEVELOPMENT............................ 11,582 13,582 +2,000
Integrated Family of Test Equipment......................... .............. .............. 2,000
AVIATION--ENG DEV............................................... 2,263 4,763 +2,500
CH-47 Cockpit Airbag System................................. .............. .............. 2,500
WEAPONS AND MUNITIONS--ENG DEV.................................. 7,046 21,046 +14,000
Common Remotely Operated Weapon Station (CROWS)............. .............. .............. 4,000
M795E1 155mm Extended Range, High Explosive Base Burner .............. .............. 3,000
Projectile.................................................
Shoulder-Launched Multipurpose Assault Weapon-Disposable .............. .............. 5,000
Confined Space.............................................
Small Arms Fire Control System II (MK-19 Grenade Launcher, M- .............. .............. 2,000
2, .50 Cal., .50 Cal. Sniper Rifle)........................
LOGISTICS AND ENGINEER EQUIPMENT--ENG DEV....................... 30,673 35,973 +5,300
Intelligent Power Management for Shelters and Vehicles...... .............. .............. 5,300
COMMAND, CONTROL, COMMUNICATIONS SYSTEMS--ENG DEV............... 122,644 132,644 +10,000
Applied Communications and Information Networking (Note: The .............. .............. 10,000
Committee commends CECOM for their aggressive
implementation of ACIN and recommends the Army work with
the ASD(C31) to ensure the applicability of the ACIN to the
overall DoD communications architecture.)..................
MEDICAL MATERIEL/MEDICAL BIOLOGICAL DEFENSE EQUIPMENT........... 8,228 10,228 +2,000
Cartledge Infuser........................................... .............. .............. 2,000
LANDMINE WARFARE/BARRIER--ENG DEV............................... 89,153 69,153 -20,000
Reduce programmed growth.................................... .............. .............. -20,000
ARTILLERY MUNITIONS--EMD........................................ 67,258 63,322 -3,936
Trajectory Correctable Munitions (TCM) Sense and Destroy .............. .............. 5,000
Armament Missile Engineering Development...................
Reduce programmed growth.................................... .............. .............. -8,936
ARMY TACTICAL COMMAND & CONTROL HARDWARE & SOFTWARE............. 50,887 58,887 +8,000
Next Generation Command and Control System (Note: only for .............. .............. 8,000
Advanced Warfare Environment 3-dimension display technology
to support Army's C2 modernization.).......................
PATRIOT PAC-3 THEATER MISSILE DEFENSE ACQUISITION............... 107,100 0 -107,100
Transfer to Title IX--RDTE, BMDO............................ .............. .............. -107,100
THREAT SIMULATOR DEVELOPMENT.................................... 16,011 18,011 +2,000
Threat Simulator Development-Anti Tank Guided Missile .............. .............. 2,000
Program....................................................
RAND ARROYO CENTER.............................................. 19,972 17,972 -2,000
Reduce FFRDC/CAAS........................................... .............. .............. -2,000
CONCEPTS EXPERIMENTATION PROGRAM................................ 33,067 35,067 +2,000
Battlelab Cooperative and Collaborative Research............ .............. .............. 4,000
Concepts Experimentation Program (Note: only for acquisition .............. .............. 6,000
of commercial licenses and integration support for
commercial geo-spatial distributed data visualization and
management network at Ft. Huachuca Army Battle Lab.).......
MANPRINT Analysis........................................... .............. .............. 2,000
Reduce programmed growth.................................... .............. .............. -10,000
ARMY TECHNICAL TEST INSTRUMENTATION AND TARGETS................. 34,259 35,009 +750
ACES........................................................ .............. .............. 750
SURVIVABILITY/LETHALITY ANALYSIS................................ 27,794 37,794 +10,000
Information Operations/Vulnerability and Survivability .............. .............. 10,000
Analysis (IOVSA)...........................................
DOD HIGH ENERGY LASER TEST FACILITY............................. 14,570 19,570 +5,000
Manufacturing of solid state laser diode arrays for the .............. .............. 5,000
Solid State Heat Capacity Laser............................
SUPPORT OF OPERATIONAL TESTING.................................. 89,047 94,047 +5,000
MATTRACKS................................................... .............. .............. 5,000
PROGRAMWIDE ACTIVITIES.......................................... 69,096 60,096 -9,000
Reduce programmed growth.................................... .............. .............. -9,000
TECHNICAL INFORMATION ACTIVITIES................................ 33,749 43,749 +10,000
Army High Performance Computing Research Center............. .............. .............. 15,000
Reduce programmed growth.................................... .............. .............. -5,000
MUNITIONS STANDARDIZATION, EFFECTIVENESS AND SAFETY............. 16,072 34,072 +18,000
Public Private Partnering Initiative........................ .............. .............. 15,000
Cryofracture Anti-personnel Mine Disposal System (Note: only .............. .............. 3,000
to continue current anti-personnel mine disposal program.).
DOMESTIC PREPAREDNESS AGAINST WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCT.......... 0 3,000 +3,000
WMD First Responder Training at the National Terrorism .............. .............. 3,000
Preparedness Institute.....................................
COMBAT VEHICLE IMPROVEMENT PROGRAMS............................. 195,602 168,141 -27,461
Combat Vehicle Improvement Programs......................... .............. .............. 5,000
Reduce programmed growth.................................... .............. .............. -32,461
AIRCRAFT MODIFICATIONS/PRODUCT IMPROVEMENT PROGRAMS............. 143,631 132,431 -11,200
Guardrail/Aerial Common Sensor termination of JSAF/LBSS..... .............. .............. -11,200
AIRCRAFT ENGINE COMPONENT IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM................... 13,017 17,017 +4,000
Universal Full Authority Digital Engine Control (FADEC)..... .............. .............. 2,000
VDVP and LOLA Equipped Fuel Delivery Unit................... .............. .............. 2,000
DIGITIZATION.................................................... 29,302 36,302 +7,000
Digitization (Note: only to conduct battalion level testing .............. .............. 2,000
of the digital intelligence situation mapboard.)...........
University XXI Effort--Digitization at Ft. Hood............. .............. .............. 5,000
RAPID ACQ PROGRAM FOR TRANSFORMATION............................ 23,593 0 -23,593
Reduction................................................... .............. .............. -23,593
OTHER MISSILE PRODUCT IMPROVEMENT PROGRAMS...................... 84,935 78,935 -6,000
Reduce programmed growth.................................... .............. .............. -6,000
TRACTOR CARD.................................................... 6,551 11,551 +5,000
Transfer from Missile Procurement, Army (IBCT Studies)...... .............. .............. 5,000
SECURITY AND INTELLIGENCE ACTIVITIES............................ 452 2,452 +2,000
Security & Intelligence Activities (Note: only for continued .............. .............. 2,000
development of information technology support at INSOCM's
Information Dominance Center.).............................
SATCOM GROUND ENVIRONMENT (SPACE)............................... 47,647 39,347 -8,300
STAR-T termination.......................................... .............. .............. -8,300
AIRBORNE RECONNAISSANCE SYSTEMS................................. 6,862 12,862 -6,000
Hyperspectral long-wave imager.............................. .............. .............. 6,000
DISTRIBUTED COMMON GROUND SYSTEMS (JMIP)........................ 85,242 72,742 -12,500
Transfer to Tactical Surveillance System and Guardrail .............. .............. -12,500
Modifications..............................................
END ITEM INDUSTRIAL PREPAREDNESS ACTIVITIES..................... 45,697 66,697 +21,000
MANTECH for Munitions....................................... .............. .............. 16,000
Totally Integrated Munitions Enterprise (TIME).............. .............. .............. 6,000
Laser Peening Technology for Aircraft and Ground Equipment.. .............. .............. 2,000
Rechargeable Bipolar Wafer Cell NiMH Battery for SINCGARS... .............. .............. 1,000
Femtosecond Laser........................................... .............. .............. 6,000
Reduced program growth...................................... .............. .............. -10,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

ARMY VENTURE CAPITAL SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY DEMONSTRATION

The Committee believes the Army must do much more to
improve its ability to exploit advanced technology in a timely
and efficient manner if it is to meet the ambitious timelines
it has established for transformation. The Army's
transformation plan is dependent on significant technological
advances in weapons, armor, communications and propulsion
systems, many of which will originate in the commercial
technology development sector. Private companies have outspent
the federal government in applied research for several years
now and are spending a large and growing share of the country's
basic research dollars. Unfortunately, while the Army
leadership has recognized the growing need to tap the
commercial technology sector, the Army R&D community appears to
be experiencing continuing difficulty in developing better
collaborative ties with the young, small, growth-oriented
companies that take risks and push innovation. This appears to
be due in part to the rigidity of traditional contracting
mechanisms as well as an acquisition culture that has little
concern for the business needs and methods of the commercial
world. The Committee sees little hope for the Army to deliver
the technological advances it promises without a major change
in the way it exploits commercial technology to use the
vitality, speed, and intellectual power of the U.S. commercial
sector to its maximum advantage.
The Committee believes that the recent experience of the
CIA, which has similar technological challenges, can be
instructive to the Army. The CIA established the not-for-profit
In-Q-Tel Corporation venture capital fund managed by personnel
experienced in venture capital, business and government who
identify and invest in early-stage companies that have a
concept, a plausible market, and a business plan to develop key
technologies important to the agency. This concept has yielded
some very promising results for the CIA and the Committee
believes the Army could benefit similarly from a well-
structured venture capital effort. The Committee, therefore,
has included a new general provision, Section 8145. which
provides $50,000,000 for the formation of a not-for-profit
corporation to oversee an Army venture capital fund established
under authority of 10 U.S.C. 2371. The purpose of this
corporation shall be to make equity investments in early-stage
companies developing technologies that are important to the
Army but also have potential to find commercial markets in the
longer term. The Committee will expect the Army to program
sufficient resources to continue this corporation at existing
or greater funding levels for the next six fiscal years. It is
the intention of the Committee that the Army model its venture
capital fund corporation on the Central Intelligence Agency's
In-Q-Tel Corporation. Further, it is the intention of the
Committee that this corporation report directly to the
Assistant Secretary of the Army (Acquisition Logistics and
Technology) on its operations.
To provide information necessary for oversight of this
fund, the Committee directs the Secretary of the Army to submit
the following reports to the congressional defense committees.
Not later than 90 days after the date of the enactment of this
Act, the Secretary of the Army shall submit a report on the
implementation of this initiative. In addition to a list of
actions the Army will take to initiate the corporation, this
report shall also list those technical problems that can best
be solved by quick identification of commercial-sector
technologies and the rapid transition of these technologies to
Army applications. Upon the formation of the corporation, the
Secretary of the Army shall submit a report on the formation of
the corporation, including a detailed description of the
corporation's members of the board, operating procedures, and
investment strategies. This report shall also describe measures
that the Army will take to develop and implement streamlined
acquisition procedures enabling the Army to develop and field
technologies identified by the venture capital fund
corporation. Not later than March 31 of each year, the
Secretary of the Army shall submit a report on the operations
of the corporation during the preceding fiscal year, including
a detailed description of the corporation's investments and
financial performance during such fiscal year.

Next Generation GPS/INS Navigation for Munitions

The Army requested $40,112,000 for missile technology
programs including continuation of the effort to develop
cheaper precision guidance systems using micro electro-
mechanical system (MEMS) technology. The Committee recommends
$57,612,000, for this program, a net increase of $17,500,000 of
which $10,000,000 is to accelerate the MEMS program as
discussed below.
The Committee is concerned that the Army has paid
insufficient attention to the projected cost of its precision
guided indirect fire munitions. The Committee cannot justify
artillery rounds costing $25,000 to $35,000 per round given the
number of rounds the Army needs for training and for the war
fight. At these costs, the Army will never be able to integrate
precision guided munitions into its warfighting doctrine and
tactics for anything more than ``silver bullet'' extraordinary
requirements. The Committee notes that the Army has undertaken
a promising ``MEMS IMU'' program aimed at gretly reducing the
cost of the high-g precision weapon guidance sets, which are
the biggest cost drivers for these weapons. The goal of this
program is to develop in the near term very inexpensive,
tactical-grade, high-g rugged, inertial measurement units using
micro electro-mechanical systems (MEMS) technology. In
addition, a companion effort to develop ultra-deep coupling
between GPS-IMU hardware and software holds great promise for
improving anti-jam capability.
The MEMS IMU program has the potential to bring precision
indirect fire munitions into a cost range that is affordable,
and can be readily transferred to the guidance sets of many
other precision weapons for all services as well. The Committee
has provided an additional $10,000,000 to accelerate and expand
this effort for FY 2002. This program should be given high
priority by the Army. The Committee will be disinclined to
appropriate large amounts for Army precision guided munitions
until this effort has concluded. The Committee also directs
that this program be fully coordinated with similar, but
smaller programs of the other services. The Committee expects
the Army to take the lead to develop a fully coordinated MEMS-
IMU/GPS development and manufacturing effort with the other
services in order to achieve the common goal of producing low
cost guidance sets for the full range of precision weapons as
soon as feasible.

Distributed Common Ground System (DCGS)

The Army requested $85,242,000 for the Distributed Common
Ground System (DCGS). The Committee recommends $72,742,000, a
reduction of $12,500,000. The Committee has transferred this
$12,500,000 to other related Army DCGS-related programs as
follows: Tactical Surveillance System, $7,500,000 and Guardrail
modifications, $5,000,000.
The Committee is very pleased with the Army's commitment to
the DCGS program and is encouraged by the fiscal year 2002
request which is a $77,421,000 increase over the fiscal year
2001 appropriated level.

Hepatitis C Project

The Committee has provided $4,000,000 to initiate an effort
at Walter Reed Medical Center and the Uniformed Services
University of the Health Sciences to better understand the
mechanisms behind high treatment failure rates for Hepatitis C
viral infections. This project should be conducted in
coordination with an appropriate non-profit medical foundation,
and should be focused on enhancing the health care of DoD
medical beneficiaries. It is anticipated that the program will
be a coordinated effort among all DoD medical treatment
facilities in the National Capital Region, with funding
management accomplished by the Uniformed Services University of
the Health Sciences.

Program Recommended

The total program recommended in the bill will provide the
following in fiscal year 2002:

RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST AND EVALUATION, NAVY

Fiscal year 2001 appropriation........................ $9,494,374,000
Fiscal year 2002 budget request....................... 11,123,389,000
Committee recommendation.............................. 10,896,307,000
Change from budget request............................ -227,082,000

This appropriation provides funds for the research,
development, test and evaluation activities of the Department
of the Navy and Marine Corps.

Committee Recommendations

Explanation of Project Level Changes

[In thousands of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Budget request Committee Change from
recommended request
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
DEFENSE RESEARCH SCIENCES................................. 389,829 382,829 -7,000
Program Growth Reduction.............................. .................. ............... -7,000
(Note: Of the funds made available, $250,000 only to .................. ............... (250)
study the feasibility of employing decommissioned USN
nuclear submarines to furnish electric power to
military installations.).............................
POWER PROJECTION APPLIED RESEARCH......................... 66,322 80,322 +14,000
Real World Based Immersive Imaging.................... .................. ............... +2,500
Hybrid Fiber Optic/Wireless System for Secure .................. ............... 2,000
Communications.......................................
Hyperspectral SAR (Note: Only for hyperspectral SARs .................. ............... +1,500
retro-reflectometers for alternative UAV
communications that includes an interrogator system
with special tracking optics and algorithms.)........
SAR for All Weather Targeting (Note: only for SAR all .................. ............... +3,000
weather precision targeting system to develop and
demonstrate UAV mounted high resolution SAR for all-
weather precision targeting.)........................
Integrated Biological Warfare Technology Platform..... .................. ............... +5,000
FORCE PROTECTION APPLIED RESEARCH......................... 117,072 125,937 +8,865
Modular Advanced Hull Form............................ .................. ............... +3,000
Center for Advanced Transportation Technology......... .................. ............... +2,000
3-Dimensional Printing Metal Working Technology....... .................. ............... +3,000
Battery Charging Technology........................... .................. ............... +865
COMMON PICTURE APPLIED RESEARCH........................... 83,557 88,645 +5,088
Authorization Reduction............................... .................. ............... -1,912
Battlespace Information Display Technology (Note: Only .................. ............... +3,000
for optical scanning displays for man wearable
portable wireless tactical systems.).................
Common Sensor Module (Note: Only for Common Sensor .................. ............... +4,000
Module using multiple modalities and sensor fusion to
track vehicles for identification and force
protection.).........................................
WARFIGHTER SUSTAINMENT APPLIED RESEARCH................... 71,294 96,894 +25,600
Formable Aligned Carbon Thermosets (FACTS)............ .................. ............... +2,000
Virtual Company Distributed Manufacturing............. .................. ............... +1,500
Combinatorial Materials Synthesis..................... .................. ............... +3,000
Wood Composite Technology............................. .................. ............... +3,000
Rhode Island Disaster Initiative...................... .................. ............... +3,000
Marine Mammal Research................................ .................. ............... +2,100
Advanced Fuel Additive Pilot (Note: only a pilot .................. ............... +2,000
demonstration blending bio-derived alcohols and
diesel fuel.)........................................
Automated Diode Array Manufacturing (Note: only to .................. ............... +3,000
develop an automated capability to test large area
diode arrays.).......................................
Dominant Batatlespace Command Initiative.............. .................. ............... +4,000
Printed Wiring Boards................................. .................. ............... +2,000
OCEAN WARFIGHTING ENVIRONMENT APPLIED RESEARCH............ 50,738 66,288 +15,550
Bioluminescence Truth Data Measurement and Signature .................. ............... +1,800
Detection............................................
South Florida Ocean Measurement Center................ .................. ............... +1,750
Multiple Intelligent Distributed Underwater Vehicle .................. ............... +4,000
and Sensing Technology...............................
Littoral Acoustic Demonstration Center................ .................. ............... +2,000
Oceanographic Sensors for Mine Countermeasures........ .................. ............... +6,000
POWER PROJECTION ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY...................... 76,410 133,510 +57,100
Aircraft Lightening Protection Applique System........ .................. ............... +3,000
Affordable Weapon Program............................. .................. ............... +10,000
Variable Delivery Pump/Variable Engine Nozzle......... .................. ............... +3,000
DP-2 Thrust Vectoring System.......................... .................. ............... +8,000
HEL--Low Aspect Target Tracking System................ .................. ............... +12,000
Thermobaric Warhead Development....................... .................. ............... +3,000
Magdalena Ridge Observatory........................... .................. ............... +12,000
Integrated Hypersonic Aeromechanics Tool (IHAT)....... .................. ............... +3,100
Vectored Thrust Ducted Propellor...................... .................. ............... +3,000
FORCE PROTECTION ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY...................... 85,297 140,297 +55,000
Littoral Support Craft................................ .................. ............... +19,000
Curved Plate Technology............................... .................. ............... +5,000
Advanced Waterjet--21................................. .................. ............... +3,000
Superconducting DC Homopolar Motor.................... .................. ............... +4,000
Project M (Note Of which not less than $2,000,000 .................. ............... +4,000
shall be for impact mitigation for MK V patrol craft)
Smartlink System...................................... .................. ............... +3,000
Real Time Fire and Smoke Prediction Tool.............. .................. ............... +2,000
Wireless Sensors for Total Ship Monitoring............ .................. ............... +4,000
Knowledge Projection for Fleet Maintenance............ .................. ............... +3,000
Direct Ship Service Fuel Cell......................... .................. ............... +3,000
AC Synchronous Propulsion Motor....................... .................. ............... +5,000
COMMON PICTURE ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY........................ 48,583 50,583 +2,000
National Cargo Tracking Program (Note: Funds are to be .................. ............... +2,000
managed by a non-profit corporation.)................
WARFIGHTER SUSTAINMENT ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY................ 57,685 75,185 +17,500
Authorization Reduction............................... .................. ............... -5,000
Low Volume Production Program......................... .................. ............... +3,500
National Center for Remanufacturing and Resource .................. ............... +2,000
Recovery.............................................
COTS Carbon Fiber Qualification Program............... .................. ............... +2,000
Distance Learning IT Center (Note: Only to continue .................. ............... +15,000
and expand the existing program).....................
MARINE CORPS ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY DEMONSTRATION (ATD)...... 51,310 61,810 +10,500
Mobile Counter-fire System............................ .................. ............... +5,000
C3RP (Note: Only to continue the existing program.)... .................. ............... +1,500
Marine Corps Future Logistics (Note: Only for .................. ............... +2,000
expansion of the Future Naval Capability
Expenditionary Logistics program)....................
Fast Refueling System (Note: Only for operational test .................. ............... +2,000
and evaluation, modifications, and procurement of the
fast refueling system. The Committee directs that the
Marine Corps shall make this system available to
other services desiring to evaluate its potential.)..
MEDICAL DEVELOPMENT....................................... 0 71,500 +71,500
Vectored Vaccine Research............................. .................. ............... +2,000
Medical Readiness Telemedicine Initiative Follow-on .................. ............... +9,000
(Note: Only for continued development of integrated
medical data transfer systems for operations in a
joint environment.)..................................
Optical Sensing System: Robot Eyes for the Advancement .................. ............... +3,000
of Military Medicine.................................
Rural Health.......................................... .................. ............... +8,000
Nursing Telehealth Applications....................... .................. ............... +3,000
National Bone Marrow Program.......................... .................. ............... +34,000
Teleradiology Program (Note: The Committee encourages .................. ............... +1,500
the Department to fund the Teleradiology program in
its fiscal year 2003 and subsequent budget requests.)
Mobile Integrated Diagnostic and Data Analysis System .................. ............... +2,000
(MIDDAS) (Note: only to complete MIDDAS transition to
a fully integrated and functional field prototype for
testing.)............................................
Minimally Invasive Surgical Technology Institute...... .................. ............... +2,000
Biomedical Research Imaging Core -CoH National Medical .................. ............... +5,000
Center (Note: Only for the Biomedical Research
Imaging Core related to bone marrow transplantation,
breast, and prostate cancer.)........................
Portable Production of Sterile Water for Intravenous .................. ............... +2,000
Solutions (Note: Only to conduct research and
continued development of a light-weight, hand-held,
portable, disposable and rugged device for production
of IV solutions.)....................................
JOINT EXPERIMENTATION..................................... 118,802 30,802 -88,000
Program Growth Reduction.............................. .................. ............... -88,000
WARFIGHTER PROTECTION ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY................. 17,678 28,178 +10,500
Damage Control Operational Concepts-Distributed Damage .................. ............... +2,000
Control Performance Evaluation.......................
Distributed Siimulation, Warfighting concepts to .................. ............... +6,000
future Weapon System Design (WARCON).................
Disaster Management and Humanitarian Assistance .................. ............... +2,500
Research (Note: Only for research, training,
education, and communication projects impacting
emergency response and preparedness in Latin America
and the Caribbean.)..................................
UNDERSEA WARFARE ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY...................... 56,303 58,803 +2,500
Multipulse Airgun System.............................. .................. ............... +2,500
MINE AND EXPEDITIONARY WARFARE ADVANCED TECHNOLGOY........ 48,279 51,279 +3,000
Ocean Modeling Research for Mine and Submarine Warfare .................. ............... +3,000
AVIATION SURVIVABILITY.................................... 25,572 37,572 +12,000
Modular Helmet and Display Development................ .................. ............... +4,000
JPALS................................................. .................. ............... +3,000
Two color Focal Plane Array for Tactical Aircraft .................. ............... +5,000
missile Warning (Note: Only for advanced development
through the Navy Center of Excellence in Electro-
Optics Manufacturing of 2-color focal plane arrays.).
STALL/SPIN INHIBITORS (h)................................. 50,000 0 -50,000
Authorization Reduction............................... .................. ............... -50,000
ASW SYSTEMS DEVELOPMENT................................... 12,922 16,922 +4,000
BEARTRAP.............................................. .................. ............... +4,000
SURFACE AND SHALLOW WATER MINE COUNTERMEASURES............ 135,284 142,484 +7,200
Remote Mine Hunting System--Program Management Support .................. ............... -1,500
Cost Growth..........................................
UUV Center of Excellence at NUWC...................... .................. ............... +8,700
SURFACE SHIP TORPEDO DEFENSE.............................. 4,818 19,318 +14,500
Tripwire Torpedo Defense (Note: $9,000,000 is only to .................. ............... ...............
complete development begun under SBIR N97-090 for
onboard sensors and signal processing; $500,000 is
only for the Distributed Engineering Center,
$3,000,000 is only for the anti-torpedo torpedo; and
$2,000,000 is only for associated components.).......
SHIPBOARD SYSTEM COMPONENT DEVELOPMENT.................... 288,382 104,000 -184,382
DD-21 Program Restructure............................. .................. ............... -188,382
Automated Maintenance Environment..................... .................. ............... +4,000
ADVANCED SUBMARINE SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT..................... 110,766 131,766 +21,000
Conformal Acoustic Velocity Sonar (CAVES)............. .................. ............... +3,000
Advanced Composite Sail Phase II...................... .................. ............... +8,000
MK 48 ADCAP Torpedo Improvements (Note: $10,000,000 is .................. ............... +10,000
only for MPP/ARCI SBIR phase 3 follow-on to develop a
torpedo APB).........................................
SHIP CONCEPT ADVANCED DESIGN.............................. 1,949 22,949 +21,000
Small Combatant Craft (Note: Only for acquisition, .................. ............... +12,000
test and evaluation of a high speed variable
freeboard planing craft, and related special warfare
high speed support craft and equipment.).............
Sealion Technology Demonstration--Situation Awareness .................. ............... +2,000
Module...............................................
Metallic Materials Advanced Development and .................. ............... +4,000
Certification Program................................
Document Automation of ICAS maintenance and other Navy .................. ............... +3,000
procedures in XML format.............................
SHIP PRELIMINARY DESIGN & FEASIBILITY STUDIES............. 14,922 9,922 -5,000
Authorization Reduction............................... .................. ............... -5,000
ADVANCED NUCLEAR POWER SYSTEMS............................ 175,176 173,076 -2,100
Authorization Reduction............................... .................. ............... -2,100
COMBAT SYSTEM INTEGRATION................................. 42,915 66,915 +24,000
Wideband Optically Multiplexed Beamforming .................. ............... +4,000
Architecture (WOMBAT)................................
Navy Common Command and Decision System (Note: Only .................. ............... +20,000
for SBIR Phase III follow-on efforts to develop
common command and decision functions for theater air
and missile defense.)................................
CONVENTIONAL MUNITIONS.................................... 22,299 24,299 +2,000
Insensitive Munitions/Green Energetics................ .................. ............... +2,000
MARINE CORPS GROUND COMBAT/SUPPORT SYSTEM................. 25,957 36,957 +11,000
Non-lethal and Urban Operations Weaponization .................. ............... +1,000
Technology...........................................
Nanotechnology-based response to chemical/biological .................. ............... +3,000
threats..............................................
Imaging System Upgrade Development (Note: Only for the .................. ............... +7,000
AN/TAS-4 night sight upgrade program through the Navy
Center of Excellence in Electro-Optics Manufacturing
to finalize technology transfer and fabricate a pilot
quantity to validate manufacturing technology.)......
COOPERATIVE ENGAGEMENT.................................... 74,231 112,331 +38,100
(Note; $15,000,000 is only for Enhanced Communications .................. ............... ...............
and Network Capacity Expansion; $14,000,000 is only
for Next Generation/Reduced Size CEC equipment;
$7,000,000 is only for Baseline 2.1B Support; and
$2,100,000 is only for Multi-level security for CEC.)
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION.................................. 46,117 50,117 +4,000
Naval Environmental Compliance Operations Monitoring.. .................. ............... +4,000
NAVY ENERGY PROGRAM....................................... 5,025 8,025 +3,000
Stationary PEM Fuel Cells............................. .................. ............... +3,000
NAVY LOGISTIC PRODUCTIVITY................................ 11,735 38,735 +27,000
Compatible Processor Upgrade (CPUP)................... .................. ............... +5,000
JEDMICS Enhancements.................................. .................. ............... +7,000
JEDMICS Security (Note: Only for the continued .................. ............... +2,000
procurement and integration of the same security
solution implemented in 2000 and 2001, and its
extension into other logistics processes.)...........
Collaborative Logistics Productivity Virtual Systems .................. ............... +8,000
Implementation Program...............................
Rapid Retargeting..................................... .................. ............... +5,000
SHIP SELF DEFENSE--DEM/VAL................................ 8,353 10,353 +2,000
Transportable Anti-intrusion Pontoon Barrier System... .................. ............... +2,000
LAND ATTACK TECHNOLOGY.................................... 130,993 173,193 +42,200
Naval Fires Network (Note: $25,200,000 is only for .................. ............... +39,200
rapid and evolutionary approaches to networking
sensors by transitioning the Naval Fires Network from
an experimental system to an afloat prototype;
$10,000,000 is only for development and fielding of
tactical dissemination module (TDM) prototypes and
integration of these prototypes with the Naval Fires
Network; and $4,000,000 is only for development of
shipboard training software applications.)...........
Advanced Medium Caliber Gun Demonstrator (Note: Only .................. ............... +3,000
to demonstrate an advanced gun design encompassing
modularity, scalability, compactness, and long-
range.)..............................................
SPACE AND ELECTRONIC WARFARE (SEW) ARCHITECTURE/ENGINE.... 32,259 39,259 +7,000
IT-21 Block 1 C41SR Computing Equipment Upgrade (Note: .................. ............... +7,000
Only to develop a common AN/UYQ--70 based solution
for the IT-21 block upgrade.)........................
OTHER HELO DEVELOPMENT.................................... 64,392 79,892 +15,500
SH-60 Laser Aim Scoring System (LASS)................. .................. ............... +2,000
High Tech Training in Support of DOD Legacy Parts .................. ............... +1,500
Solutions............................................
H-60 FLIR Mount (Note: Only for third party design of .................. ............... +3,000
the FLIR mount.).....................................
H-60 Helicopter Dynamic Component Life Cycle .................. ............... +3,000
Engineering Evaluation (Note: Only for an independent
third party engineering analysis to assess dynamic
component life cycle criteria and development of
component upgrades for life extension.)..............
MH-60S Airborne Mine Countermeasure Carriage, Stream, .................. ............... +6,000
Tow, Recovery System (CSTARS)........................
STANDARDS DEVELOPMENT..................................... 120,552 127,052 +6,500
Joint Service Metrology............................... .................. ............... +6,500
NAVY AREA MISSILE DEFENSE................................. 388,496 0 -388,496
Transfer to Title IX--RDTE, BMDO...................... .................. ............... -388,496
V-22A..................................................... 546,735 446,735 -100,000
Program Restructure................................... .................. ............... -100,000
AIR CREW SYSTEMS DEVELOPMENT.............................. 7,717 19,217 +11,500
Joint Helmet Mounted Cueing System (JHMCS)............ .................. ............... +5,000
SIIS Ejection System.................................. .................. ............... +1,500
Intensifier Tube Advanced Development................. .................. ............... +5,000
EW DEVELOPMENT............................................ 112,473 121,473 +9,000
LOCO-GPSI............................................. .................. ............... +4,000
IDECM................................................. .................. ............... +5,000
SC-21 TOTAL SHIP SYSTEM ENGINEERING....................... 355,093 56,500 -298,593
DD-21 Program Restructure............................. .................. ............... -305,093
Power Node Control Program............................ .................. ............... +2,500
Regional Electric Power Technology, Integration and .................. ............... +4,000
Leveraging Enterprises (REPTILE).....................
SURFACE COMBATANT COMBAT SYSTEM ENGINEERING............... 262,037 286,937 +24,900
Operational Readiness Testing System Network.......... .................. ............... +6,000
Aegis Peripheral Consolidation........................ .................. ............... +8,900
Aegis Tactical Display Upgrade........................ .................. ............... +10,000
AIRBORNE MCM.............................................. 52,041 61,041 +9,000
Remote Technical Assistance Program (RTASS)........... .................. ............... +4,000
CH-60S Untethered Airborne Mine Neutralization System. .................. ............... +5,000
SSN-688 AND TRIDENT MODERNIZATION......................... 43,706 68,706 +25,000
MPP/SPB/A-RCI Model for Tactical Control Information .................. ............... +25,000
Management and Net-centric Warfare (SSN-688 and
Trident Modernization) (Note: Only to continue SBIR
Phase III follow-on efforts to extend APB/MPP
technology insertion to enable submarines to achieve
Navy network-centric warfare objectives and to
accelerate development and extension of common
processing capabilities.)............................
SHIPBOARD AVIATION SYSTEMS................................ 16,375 19,875 +3,500
Aviation Shipboard Technology Initiative.............. .................. ............... +3,500
NEW DESIGN SSN............................................ 201,596 208,596 +7,000
Virgina Class SSN Combat System Technology Insertion/ .................. ............... +7,000
Refresh SBIR Phase III...............................
SHIP CONTRACT DESIGN/LIVE FIRE T&E........................ 130,388 131,388 +1,000
Titanium Watertight Door and Hatch Cover.............. .................. ............... +1,000
NAVY TACTICAL COMPUTER RESOURCES.......................... 3,836 52,836 +49,000
AN/UYQ--70 submarine common electronic equipment .................. ............... +8,000
replacement..........................................
AN/UYQ--70 tactical computer resources (Note: Only to .................. ............... +30,000
maintain, develop and implement technology refresh
capabilities to incorporate into the future AN/UYQ--
70 workstation/server production across surface,
submarine, and air platforms.).......................
Multi-level Security for Network-centric AN/UYQ-70 .................. ............... +4,000
(Note: Only to productize and integrate the COTS
network security product that has previously received
the NSA's B2 rating into the ultra thin client
architecture onboard the USS Coronado.)..............
Complementary high energy laser/missile for ship self- .................. ............... +7,000
defense..............................................
SHIP SELF DEFENSE--EMD.................................... 52,163 57,163 +5,000
AIEWS SBIR Phase III follow-on........................ .................. ............... +3,000
SEA RAM System Ordalt Upgrade......................... .................. ............... +2,000
MEDICAL DEVELOPMENT....................................... 5,455 7,455 +2,000
Navy Voice Interactive Device follow-on............... .................. ............... +2,000
DISTRIBUTED SURVEILLANCE SYSTEM........................... 34,711 42,711 +8,000
(Note: Only for acceleration of cable burial .................. ............... +8,000
capability, larger diameter cable, and surface ship
deployment.).........................................
INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT........................ 49,333 63,533 +14,200
SPAWAR ITC Enterprise Management...................... .................. ............... +6,000
Defense Software Productivity Initiative.............. .................. ............... +3,200
Secure Interactive Distributed Learing (SIDL)......... .................. ............... +2,000
Total Fleet Support System (Note: Only to reduce fleet .................. ............... +3,000
support costs by consolidating integrated call
centers in the Distance Support Anchordesk and Web
Portal.).............................................
MAJOR T&E INVESTMENT...................................... 41,804 43,804 +2,000
Navy Test and Evaluation Range and Airborne Telemetry .................. ............... +2,000
System Moderization--Sub Column Array and Receiver
Upgrade..............................................
STUDIES AND ANALYSIS SUPPORT--Navy........................ 6,679 4,679 -2,000
Authorization Reduction............................... .................. ............... -2,000
TECHNICAL INFORMATION SERVICES............................ 951 11,951 +11,000
Supply Chain Practices................................ .................. ............... +2,500
Commercialization of Advanced Technology (CAT) (Note: .................. ............... +6,000
Only to continue and expand the existing program.)...
Lean Pathways Project Expansion and Distance Learning .................. ............... +2,500
(Note: Funds are for a distance learning component.).
MANAGEMENT, TECHNICAL & INTERNATIONAL SUPPORT............. 21,628 18,628 -3,000
Program Growth Reduction.............................. .................. ............... -3,000
TEST AND EVALUATION SUPPORT............................... 277,414 274,500 -2,914
Authorization Reduction............................... .................. ............... -7,414
Safety and Survivability Study of Protective Pumice .................. ............... +2,500
Technology (Note: Only for Pumice Protective
Technology testing and development.).................
Collaborative Virtual Interactive Design Environment.. .................. ............... +2,000
SEW SURVEILLANCE/RECONNAISSANCE SUPPORT................... 12,693 17,893 +5,200
(Note: Only for projects in support of Time Critical .................. ............... +1,200
Strike.).............................................
(Note: Only for a limited demonstration of Radiant .................. ............... +4,000
Argon on F/A-18.)....................................
MARINE CORPS PROGRAM WIDE SUPPORT......................... 9,614 24,614 +15,000
CBIRF................................................. .................. ............... +6,000
Chemical-Biological Multi-Sensor Analyzer/Detector.... .................. ............... +2,000
Consequence Management Interoperability Services...... .................. ............... +7,000
TACTICAL CRYPTOLOGIC ACTIVITIES........................... 85,000 0 -85,000
Defense Cryptological Program Transfer................ .................. ............... -85,000
STRATEGIC SUB & WEAPONS SYSTEM SUPPORT.................... 43,322 46,822 +3,500
Radiation Hardened Electronics Application Program .................. ............... +3,500
(RHEAP)..............................................
F/A-18 SQUADRONS.......................................... 253,257 233,257 -20,000
Authorization Reduction............................... .................. ............... -20,000
FLEET TELECOMMUNICATIONS (TACTICAL)....................... 21,136 25,136 +4,000
Programmable Integrated Computer Terminal (Note: Funds .................. ............... +4,000
are only to combine the Integrated Voice Network and
the Programmable Integrated Communications Terminal
with the Digital Modular Radio.).....................
INTEGRATED SURVEILLANCE SYSTEM............................ 20,041 36,041 +16,000
Web centric ASW Net (WeCan) (Note: Only for continued .................. ............... +8,000
development of Web centric ASW (WeCan) for
collaborating planning, execution and follow-on
analysis for the common undersea picture, integration
of additional tactical decision aids, and expansion
to multi-warfare areas and domains.).................
IUSS (Note: Only for the IUSS Mission Planning .................. ............... +8,000
System.).............................................
AMPHIBIOUS TACTICAL SUPPORT UNITS......................... 24,387 29,387 +5,000
Supporting Arms Technology Insertion.................. .................. ............... +5,000
CONSOLIDATED TRAINING SYSTEMS DEVELOPMENT................. 22,407 25,607 +3,200
SEAT--Battle Force Tactical Training.................. .................. ............... +2,000
Tactical Communications On-Board Trainer for Battle .................. ............... +1,200
Force Tactical Training..............................
ELECTRONIC WARFARE (EW) READINESS SUPPORT................. 7,659 12,659 +5,000
Common High Bandwidth Datalink--CHBDL................. .................. ............... +5,000
HARM IMPROVEMENT.......................................... 13,630 33,630 +21,000
AARGM................................................. .................. ............... +21,000
SURFACE ASW COMBAT SYSTEM INTEGRATION..................... 28,119 24,219 -3,900
Authorization Reduction............................... .................. ............... -3,900
AVIATION IMPROVEMENTS..................................... 41,430 46,430 +5,000
Aircraft AGE Exploration Model Development............ .................. ............... +5,000
MARINE CORPS COMMUNICATIONS SYSTEMS....................... 104,835 126,835 +22,000
Surface Warfare Center--Ballon Upgrade for Sonobouys.. .................. ............... +1,500
AN/TPS-59(v)3 SLEP Slotted Waveguide Antenna.......... .................. ............... +10,000
Combined Arms Command and Control Training Upgrade .................. ............... +6,000
System (CACTUS)......................................
Mobile Electronic Warfare Support System (MEWSS) .................. ............... +4,500
specific emitter identification upgrade..............
INFORMATION SYSTEMS SECURITY PROGRAM...................... 20,942 25,942 +5,000
Intelligent Agent Security Module (Note: Only for SBIR .................. ............... +5,000
Phase III.)..........................................
NAVY METEOROLOGICAL AND OCEAN SENSORS-SPACE (METOC)....... 23,492 21,592 -1,900
Authorization Reduction............................... .................. ............... -1,900
TACTICAL UNMANNED AERIAL VEHICLES......................... 66,349 76,349 +10,000
(Note: Only for a prototype Maritime Patrol and .................. ............... +10,000
Reconnaissance (MPR) mission with advanced
surveillance sensor equipment on a Global Hawk HAE
UAV, to conduct experimentation, and examine concept
of operations for use in conjunction with other MPR
assets.).............................................
AIRBORNE RECONNAISSANCE SYSTEMS........................... 5,736 22,236 +16,500
EO Framing (Note: $3,000,000 only for precision .................. ............... +11,500
strike; $4,000,000 only for an integrated electronic
shutter, $2,500,000 only for zoom lens, $2,000,000
only for NRL core R&D on sensors to restore EO/IR
sensor research efforts to fiscal year 2001 levels as
originally requested by NRL. Secretary of the Navy is
directed to continue to fully support NRL core
research funding requirements.)......................
EP-3 (Note: $5,000,000 only for an EP-3 mission system .................. ............... +5,000
weight reduction initiative.)........................
MANNED RECONNAISSANCE SYSTEMS............................. 29,232 43,232 +14,000
(Note: $7,000,000 is only for Shared Reconnaissance .................. ............... +7,000
Pod (SHARP) test, deployment systems.)...............
(Note: $7,000,000 only to accelerate the introduction .................. ............... +7,000
of the Advanced Multiband Optical Surveillance System
(AMOSS) on special project aircraft.)................
DISTRIBUTED COMMON GROUND SYSTEMS......................... 4,467 9,467 +5,000
(Note: $4,000,000 only for acceleration of the PC .................. ............... +4,000
Digital Imagery Workstation Suite (DIWS) initial
operating capability.)...............................
(Note: $1,000,000 only for precision targeting)....... .................. ............... +1,000
NAVAL SPACE SURVEILLANCE SPACE ACTIVITIES................. 4,237 4,237 0
Excessive Program Growth.............................. 0 0 -2,500
SPAWAR Covert Communication and Information Transfer .................. ............... +2,500
(CCIT)...............................................
MODELING AND SIMULATION SUPPORT........................... 7,828 9,828 +2,000
Enhanced Modeling and Simulation Initiatives.......... .................. ............... +2,000
MARITIME TECHNOLOGY (MARITECH)............................ 20,065 34,065 +14,000
High Speed Cargo Craft................................ .................. ............... +4,000
Maritime Technology, Ship Design and Systems .................. ............... +10,000
Development Initiative...............................
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

DD-21 Land Attack Destroyer

The Navy requested $643,475,000 for continued development
of the DD-21 next generation destroyer. The Committee
recommends $150,000,000, a decrease of $493,474,000. The
Committee further recommends rescinding $40,000,000 of
previously appropriated fiscal year 2001 funds for the DD-21
program.
The DD-21 program was to be the Navy's attempt to develop
and field a multi-mission, land attack capable, next generation
destroyer with a substantially reduced crew size and life cycle
cost. It was originally scheduled to begin engineering and
manufacturing development with one design team in May of 2001.
The down-select to one team has been suspended indefinitely
pending a Defense Department program review, and what the
Committee understands will be a substantial program
restructure. Given the many uncertainties facing the program,
the Committee has recommended deferring the request to initiate
full-scale development of the DD-21. The $150,000,000 provided
for the program in fiscal year 2002 will enable the Navy to
continue risk reduction efforts and pursue some of the more
promising technologies being developed for the program such as
advanced hull forms, the multi-function radar, and the advanced
gun system.
In the report that accompanied the fiscal year 2001
Department of Defense Appropriations bill, the Committee
outlined its concerns regarding the DD-21 program. They
included: (1) the limited role of the Navy's science and
technology community and ship designers in program development;
(2) an acquisition strategy that hampered inclusion of small
and innovative defense companies in the program and; (3) a
logistics support plan that had profound implications for the
Navy's shore-based ship integrated logistics support
infrastructure.
These concerns remain, yet even more fundamental questions
regarding the program have emerged such as: (1) Is the Navy's
goal of a crew size no greater than 95 attainable or even
desirable? (2) Are procurement unit cost estimates realistic?
And most importantly, (3) Does the DD-21 truly qualify as a
``leap ahead'' system and to what degree does it contribute to
the transformation of U.S. naval forces in the twenty-first
century? The Committee believes that until such a time that
these questions have been fully answered by the Navy and the
Department of Defense, and a comprehensive program restructure
has been presented to Congress, it is prudent to defer the next
phase of the DD-21 program. Recognizing that this action will
ultimately delay construction of the DD-21 or its successor,
and the importance of maintaining the size of the surface
combatant fleet, the Committee has also recommended an increase
of $820,000,000 to the Navy's budget request for an additional
DDG-51 destroyer, for a total of four in fiscal year 2002.

Rapid Retargeting

The Committee is impressed with the Department of the
Navy's Rapid Retargeting program (RRT), a process that
addresses the obsolete designs of electronic systems. RRT has
provided the technology to eliminate obsolete components in
Navy systems and reduce multiple electronic modules into single
programmable designs. This process is also being employed to
replace many standard electronic modules with programmable COTS
components which reduces the requirement for shipboard sparing
requirements. The Committee believes that accelerated and
expanded use of RRT for all programs that are considering
service life extension programs could result in significant
cost savings for the Navy. The Committee therefore directs the
Assistant Secretary of the Navy for Research, Development, and
Acquisition to establish a process by which all Naval
acquisition programs that propose to make use of service life
extension programs or ``life of type'' component buys for
electronic systems and components make use of the Naval Supply
System Command's RRT design tool to structure their acquisition
and program planning. The Assistant Secretary of the Navy
should report to the Committee no later than February 15, 2002
on efforts to implement the RRT process.

Combat Control System MK2

The Committee is concerned that the development of the CCS
MK2 combat control system for nuclear and attack submarines is
taking place in an uncompetitive and closed environment that
endangers the optimal and rapid evolution of combat control
capabilities for the nation's submarine forces. The Committee
therefore directs that none of the funds made available for the
CCS-MK2 program in fiscal year 2002 be obligated until the
Department of the Navy submits a program acquisition plan to
Congress which details: (1) the complete use of fully open
system architectures in the future development of CCS-MK2, and
(2) a full and open competitive acquisition strategy for
subsequent versions of CCS-MK2. The Committee also directs that
the Navy form an independent program architecture review group
to perform a CCS-MK2 middleware migration study to determine
the best methods for modernizing and taking advantage of
commercial technologies for submarine combat control systems.

Land Attack Technology

The Navy requested $130,993,000 for Land Attack Technology.
The Committee recommends $173,193,000, an increase of
$42,200,000 over the budget request.
Naval Fires Network (NFN).--The Committee recommends a
total of $39,200,000 for Naval Fires Network (NFN). The
Committee directs that $25,200,000 is only for the rapid and
evolutionary approach to networking of ISR and other assets by
transitioning NFN from an experimental system to an afloat
prototype. This includes the installation of a prototype that
is similar to/same as NFN onboard the USS Lincoln and/or USS
Stennis. This funding will support the initiation of the rapid
development, installation and deployment of the prototype. The
Committee directs that $10,000,000 is only for the development
and fielding of the tactical dissemination module (TDM) and the
integration of TDM with the NFN prototype effort. The Committee
further directs that $4,000,000 is only for a deployable end-
to-end training system for NFN. In addition, the Committee
believes that the Navy must work with the Air Force with
respect to ongoing modeling and exercise support activities
that will assist the Air Force and Navy in modifying
reconnaissance ground stations and targeting processes to
engage time critical targets.

Tactical Unmanned Aerial Vehicle

The Navy requested $66,349,000 for the Tactical Unmanned
Aerial Vehicle. The Committee recommends $76,349,000, an
increase of $10,000,000 above the budget request.
Broad-Area Maritime Surveillance (BAMS).--The Committee
recommends $10,000,000 only for the development of a prototype
Maritime Patrol and Reconnaissance (MPR) mission with advanced
surveillance sensor equipment on a Global Hawk High Altitude
Endurance (HAE) Unmanned Aerial Vehicle (UAV) for
experimentation and for examining concepts of operation for use
in conjunction with other MPR assets. The Committee directs the
Navy to review and analyze results of previous maritime
surveillance experiments with the Global Hawk HAE UAV prior to
initiating BAMS. The Navy shall also submit a report no later
than June 30, 2002 that includes its evaluation of the previous
maritime surveillance experiments, the validity of the BAMS
approach for MPR, an initial concept of operations for use of
an HAE UAV as an adjunct to current MPR assets, and future year
plans, including budget requirements, for continued development
of the UAV approach to MPR.
Navy Unmanned Aerial Vehicle program.--The Committee
understands that the Navy has recently implemented a major
restructuring of the management structure for its UAV program.
The Committee is pleased that through this change, the Navy has
embraced the unique value of UAVs for intelligence,
surveillance, and reconnaissance missions. It is clear that
this restructuring may lead to further refinements of the U.S.
Naval Unmanned Aerial Vehicle Roadmap and execution of the
fiscal year 2001 and 2002 budgets. The Committee is supportive
of the Navy's efforts and is willing to consider changes as
necessary to implement a well-balanced UAV strategy. The budget
as requested and appropriated in this bill reflects the program
of record. Should the Navy desire to alter the program of
record it must seek prior approval from Congress.

Surveillance and Reconnaissance Support

The Navy requested $12,693,000 for SEW Surveillance and
Reconnaissance Support. The Committee recommends $17,893,000,
an increase of $5,200,000 above the budget request.
Tactical Exploitation of National Assets Program
(TENCAP).--The Committee recommends $4,000,000 for a limited
demonstration of RADIANT ARGON on an F/A-18. In addition, the
Committee recommends $1,200,000 for current and new projects in
support of Time Critical Strike (TCS).

Distributed Common Ground System

Joint Service Imagery Processing System--Navy (JSIPS-N)

The Navy requested $4,467,000 for the Distributed Common
Ground System. The Committee recommends $9,467,000, an increase
of $5,000,000 above the budget request.
The Navy has had under development two different systems
for the processing of imagery data from reconnaissance
aircraft: the Tactical Input Segment (TIS) and the Navy Input
Station (NAVIS) systems. Each of these systems uses a different
method of data decompression for imagery and each system meets
a set of requirements established by the Navy. However, each
system cannot, at this time, process data from both the SHARP
and ``legacy'' reconnaissance systems which means both of these
processing systems are required to take full advantage of the
Navy's tactical reconnaissance investment. Unfortunately, the
Navy does not have sufficient information on which of these
systems would provide the optimum level of imagery processing
for the F/A-18 SHARP and other ``legacy'' tactical
reconnaissance systems and has insufficient time to initiate a
new development program to merge these capabilities prior to
the first deployment of SHARP.
The Committee believes that at this time the best option is
for the Navy to continue development of both the TIS and NAVIS
systems for the processing of imagery from legacy tactical
reconnaissance systems as well as deployed F/A-18 SHARP and
directs the Navy to continue the development of these systems.
The Navy is directed to report to the Committee by December 1,
2001, on its plans to implement the Committee's direction.
It is apparent that in the future, maintaining two separate
systems to process imagery data is inefficient and expensive.
The Committee believes the Navy should initiate an effort to
either merge these two systems or cancel one of the development
programs in order to deploy a single imagery processing system.
Precision Targeting.--The Committee recommends $1,000,000
to address any requirements for processing commercial imagery
to support Time Critical Strike.

Nursing Telehealth Applications

The Committee recommends $3,000,000 only to initiate an
international effort by a consortium of military medical
technicians, educators, researchers, and domestic rural
healthcare providers to design and deliver a nurse training
curriculum to remote international locations with special
emphasis on emergency medical training and humanitarian relief.
This effort shall use modern information technology including
the Partnership for Peace Information Management System and be
led by a non-profit educational organization with demonstrated
expertise in delivering medical care to remote and under-served
areas.

Bone Marrow Registry

The Committee provides $34,000,000 to be administered by
the C. W. Bill Young Marrow Donor Recruitment and Research
Program, also known, and referred to, within the Naval Medical
Research Center, as the Bone Marrow Registry. This DoD donor
center has recruited 278,000 DoD volunteers, and provides more
marrow donors per week than any other donor center in the
Nation. Later this year, the 1,000th service member will donate
marrow through this donor center to save a life. The Committee
is aware of the continuing success of this national and
international life saving program for military contingencies
and civilian patients, which now includes 4,500,000 potential
volunteer donors, and encourages agencies involved in
contingency planning to include the C. W. Bill Young Marrow
Donor Recruitment and Research Program in the development and
testing of their contingency plans. DD Form 1414 shall show
this as a special congressional interest item, and the
Committee directs that all of the funds appropriated for this
purpose be released to the C. W. Bill Young Marrow Donor
Recruitment and Research Program within 60 days of enactment of
the fiscal year 2002 Defense Appropriations Act.

telemedicine

The Committee strongly endorses the Navy's model program in
conjunction with the University of California at San Diego, for
the telemedicine treatment of burn victims.

joint directed attack munition

The Navy requested $56,285,000 for development efforts
related to the Joint Direct Attack Munition (JDAM). The
Committee approves this amount including $12,200,000 requested
by the Navy for the JDAM Product Improvement Program (PIP). The
Committee designates this $12,200,000 for JDAM PIP as an item
of special congressional interest. Further, the Committee
directs that $4,800,000 of the JDAM PIP funds may only be used
for DAMASK.

lower cost precision weapon guidance systems

Thr Committee believes that all military services must put
priority on research activities aimed at developing miniature
electro-mechanical systems (MEMS) for use in precision weapon
guidance systems. This research holds much promise for
significantly reducing the unit cost of precision-guided
weapons through development of low cost inertial measurement
units. Given the substantial benefits to all military services,
the Committee views it as crucial that the services coordinate
their efforts to develop MEMS technology and related anti-jam
software upgrades to accelerate systems development and to
eliminate duplication of effort. The Committee believes the
Army MEMS-IMU/GPS program is the most mature and robust of the
various programs, and directs the Navy to ensure that its MEMS
guidance system development efforts are fully coordinated with
and complement the Army program.

Program Recommended

The total recommended in the bill will provide the
following program in fiscal year 2002.

RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST AND EVALUATION, AIR FORCE

Fiscal year 2001 appropriations....................... $14,138,244,000
Fiscal year 2002 budget request....................... 14,343,982,000
Committee recommendation.............................. 14,884,058,000
Change from budget request............................ +540,076,000

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

Using ``Code Names'' for Unclassified Activities

The Committee believes that, in its budget presentations to
the Congress, the Air Force should avoid using nondescriptive
code names for unclassified programs. The Committee finds that
program names like Pacer Crag (avionics upgrade for KC-135
aircraft), Seek Eagle (munitions separation testing), Chicken
Little (weapons effects testing), and Vanguard (Joint
Surveillance Targeting and Reconnaissance aircraft upgrades)
unnecessarily complicate Congressional review and oversight. A
similar practice involves the Air Force's use of numeric codes
when referring to Air Force appropriations in Congressional
hearings, briefings, questions for the record, as well as
meetings with Members of Congress. For example, Air Force
representatives refer to the Aircraft Procurement, Air Force
appropriation as ``3100 funding,'' a meaningless term to most
Members of Congress. Unfortunately, as long as these terms are
used extensively in internal Air Force deliberations, they will
likely continue to creep into Air Force communications with
Congress. The Committee encourages the Air Force to take
reasonable steps to reduce such sources of confusion.

Committee Recommendations

EXPLANATION OF PROJECT LEVEL CHANGES

[In thousands of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Committe Change from
Budget request recommendation request
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
DEFENSE RESEARCH SCIENCES.................................... 220,869 227,119 +6,250
Center for Astronomical Adaptive Optics.................. ............... ............... +4,000
Environmentally Sound Aircraft Coatings.................. ............... ............... +1,000
Center for Solar Geophysical Interactions at Mt. Wilson ............... ............... +750
Observatory.............................................
Coal based jet fuels..................................... ............... ............... +3,000
Focused Ion Beam System.................................. ............... ............... +1,500
Reduce mathematical and computer sciences to prior year ............... ............... -3,000
levels..................................................
Reduce electronics to prior year levels.................. ............... ............... -2,000
California Science Center................................ ............... ............... +1,000
MATERIALS.................................................... 77,164 88,664 +11,500
Metal Affordability Initiative........................... ............... ............... +4,500
Advanced silicon carbide crystal device technology....... ............... ............... +7,000
AEROSPACE VEHICLE TECHNOLOGIES............................... 97,465 100,715 +3,250
AFRL Tyndall............................................. ............... ............... +2,500
Advanced Comprehensive Engineering Simulator (ACES)...... ............... ............... +750
HUMAN EFFECTIVENESS APPLIED RESEARCH......................... 69,080 70,930 +1,850
UCAV funding consolidation............................... ............... ............... -1,400
Fatigue Countermeasure Research (Note: Only to conduct ............... ............... +1,250
laboratory studies at Brooks AFB to complete research on
the efficacy and safety of fatigue countermeasure
medications during military operations;.................
Rapid Detection of Biological Weapons of Mass Destruction ............... ............... +2,000
(Note: Only to design and develop probe kits to identify
Biological Weapons of Mass Destruction.)................
AEROSPACE PROPULSION......................................... 149,211 189,111 +39,900
Magnetic Bearing Cooling Turbine Technology (MBCT)....... ............... ............... +1,500
Pulse Detonation Engine.................................. ............... ............... +6,000
Engineering Tool Improvement Program..................... ............... ............... +2,600
PBO Membrane Fuel Cell................................... ............... ............... +2,000
Lithium ion battery aircraft, spacecraft, and handheld ............... ............... +2,000
applications............................................
Lithium ion battery technology for solid state lasers.... ............... ............... +1,000
IHPRPT................................................... ............... ............... +9,500
Jet Engine Test Cell Upgrade............................. ............... ............... +2,700
AFRL test stands (1D and 2A modernization at Edwards AFB) ............... ............... +12,600
Note: Only to retrofit and upgrade existing space and
aircraft engine test facilities to support reusable
launch vehicle and new propellant development programs.
AEROSPACE SENSORS............................................ 84,149 79,049 -5,100
HASC reduction........................................... ............... ............... -14,100
Adverse Weather Ballistic Imaging........................ ............... ............... +4,000
Advanced FT-IR Gas Analysis.............................. ............... ............... +2,000
Integration of Flexible Substances....................... ............... ............... +3,000
SPACE TECHNOLOGY............................................. 61,086 69,586 +8,500
Mixed Signal VLSI for Space Vehicle Comm Subsystems...... ............... ............... +2,500
Composite Cryogenic Fuel Tank............................ ............... ............... +4,000
Terabit.................................................. ............... ............... +2,000
DIRECTED ENERGY TECHNOLOGY................................... 36,678 31,978 -4,700
HASC reduction........................................... ............... ............... -5,700
Tactical/Operations Systems Simulator.................... ............... ............... +1,000
COMMAND CONTROL AND COMMUNICATIONS........................... 61,659 70,959 +9,300
HASC reduction........................................... ............... ............... -5,200
Simulation Based Acquisition Initiative.................. ............... ............... +6,500
Information Hiding, Steganography & Digital Watermarking ............... ............... +3,000
for Information Protection and Authentications Systems..
Assured Communications................................... ............... ............... +5,000
ADVANCED MATERIALS FOR WEAPON SYSTEMS........................ 32,748 45,248 +12,500
Technology Development Investment for Aging Aircraft..... ............... ............... +3,000
Handheld Holographic Radar Gun........................... ............... ............... +1,500
Vapor Growth Carbon Fiber (VGCF)......................... ............... ............... +1,000
Ceramic Matrix Composite for Engines..................... ............... ............... +2,000
Metal Affordability Initiative........................... ............... ............... +2,500
Plasma Enhanced Chemical Deposition Techniques........... ............... ............... +2,500
ADVANCED AEROSPACE SENSORS................................... 55,809 65,109 +9,300
UCAV funding consolidation............................... ............... ............... -2,700
Advanced Physical Vapor Transport........................ ............... ............... +1,500
Radar Target Modeling Thrust............................. ............... ............... +10,500
FLIGHT VEHICLE TECHNOLOGY.................................... 0 4,000 +4,000
AFRL Tyndall............................................. ............... ............... +4,000
AEROSPACE TECHNOLOGY DEV/DEMO................................ 26,269 27,869 +1,600
UCAV funding consolidation............................... ............... ............... -11,900
Access to space systems project.......................... ............... ............... +2,000
Aeronautical Systems Center.............................. ............... ............... +7,000
Affordable Combat Avionics Initiative.................... ............... ............... +2,500
3D Bias Woven Preforms................................... ............... ............... +2,000
AEROSPACE PROPULSION AND POWER TECHNOLOGY.................... 114,335 124,335 +10,000
Joint Expendable Turbine Engine (JETEC).................. ............... ............... +4,000
IHPRPT................................................... ............... ............... +6,000
CREW SYSTEMS AND PERSONNEL PROTECTION TECHNOLOGY............. 32,356 36,856 +4,500
Combat Automation Requirements Testbed................... ............... ............... +1,500
Head Mounted Technology.................................. ............... ............... +3,000
ELECTRONIC COMBAT TECHNOLOGY................................. 28,221 37,221 +9,000
IDAL C3NI................................................ ............... ............... +1,000
CLIRCM................................................... ............... ............... +8,000
BALLISTIC MISSILE TECHNOLOGY................................. 0 2,500 +2,500
GPS RANGE SAFETY......................................... ............... ............... +2,500
ADVANCED SPACECRAFT TECHNOLOGY............................... 52,528 59,528 +5,000
Scorpius................................................. ............... ............... +3,000
Next Generation Hybrid Orbital Manuever Vehicle.......... ............... ............... +2,000
CONVENTIONAL WEAPONS TECHNOLOGY.............................. 37,617 44,317 +6,700
UCAV funding consideration............................... ............... ............... -1,300
LOCAAS................................................... ............... ............... +8,000
ADVANCED WEAPONS TECHNOLOGY.............................. 43,758 52,738 +9,000
HASC reduction........................................... ............... ............... -5,000
GLINT.................................................... ............... ............... +10,000
Sodium wavelength laser.................................. ............... ............... +2,000
Manufacturing Analysis for the Advanced Tactical Laser... ............... ............... +2,000
C3I ADVANCED DEVELOPMENT..................................... 32,644 35,844 +3,200
Adaptive Information Protection Technologies............. ............... ............... +2,000
Note: For system protection philosophies through the ............... ............... ...............
exploration of the application of adaptive technology
using and modifying commercial off-the-shelf technology.
UCAV funding consolidation............................... ............... ............... -3,800
Information Hiding, Steganography & Digital Watermaking ............... ............... +5,000
for Information Protection and Authentications Systems..
UCAV......................................................... ............... 21,100 +21,000
UCAV funding consolidation............................... ............... ............... +21,000
NAVSTAR GLOBAL POSITIONING SYSTEM III........................ 78,358 66,358 -12,000
Poor execution. Large unobligated prior year balances ............... ............... -12,000
carried into current fiscal year........................
ADVANCED EHF MILSATCOM (SPACE)............................... 549,659 459,659 -90,000
Delay in start of EMD.................................... ............... ............... -90,000
POLAR MILSATCOM (SPACE)...................................... 18,724 13,724 -5,000
HASC reduction........................................... ............... ............... -5,000
NATIONAL POLAR-ORBITING OPERATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL............ 157,394 103,394 -54,000
Slip of EMD contract award to end of fiscal year 2002.... ............... ............... -54,000
INTEGRATED BROADCAST SERVICE (DEM/VAL)....................... 20,529 17,529 -3,000
HASC Reduction........................................... ............... ............... -3,000
INTERCONTINENTAL BALLISTIC MISSILE-DEM/VAL................... 44,484 51,484 +7,000
Northern Edge............................................ ............... ............... +7,000
WIDEBAND GAPFILLER SYSTEM (SPACE)............................ 96,670 99,370 +2,700
Transfer from OPAF for ``Development Lab'' Equipment. ............... ............... +2,700
Reduction for incremental funding and lack of budget
justification for 8 strings.............................
AIR FORCE/NATIONAL PROGRAM COOPERATION (AFNPC)............... 4,433 0 -4,433
HASC reduction........................................... ............... ............... -4,433
POLLUTION PREVENTION (DEM/VAL)............................... 2,688 0 -2,688
HASC reduction........................................... ............... ............... -2,688
B-1B......................................................... 194,507 152,307 -42,200
Transfer to ANG O&M...................................... ............... ............... -42,200
F-22 EMD..................................................... 865,464 881,556 +16,092
Transfer from F-22 squadrons............................. ............... ............... +16,092
NEXT GENERATION TANKER....................................... ............... 150,000 +150,000
767 Tanker Testbed Aircraft.............................. ............... ............... +120,000
Tanker mod development................................... ............... ............... +30,000
B-2 ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY BOMBER............................... 155,004 222,004 +67,000
Link 16/Center Display/Inflight Replanner................ ............... ............... +47,000
EGBU-28.................................................. ............... ............... +20,000
MULTI-MISSION C2 AIRCRAFT.................................... ............... 25,000 +25,000
Concept development...................................... ............... ............... +25,000
EW DEVELOPMENT............................................... 41,267 44,567 +3,300
Poor execution........................................... ............... ............... -10,000
PLAID.................................................... ............... ............... +13,300
EXTENDED RANGE CRUISE MISSILE (ERCM)......................... 40,235 0 -40,235
Air force delays in defining program..................... ............... ............... -40,235
SPACE BASED INFRARED SYSTEM (SBIRS) HIGH EMD................. 405,229 435,229 +30,000
Cost overruns............................................ ............... ............... +30,000
MILSTAR LDR/MDR SATELLITE COMMUNICATIONS (SPACE)............. 232,084 229,584 -2,500
Unjustified growth in satellite engineering.............. ............... ............... -9,000
Automated Comms Management System Satellite Planning..... ............... ............... +6,500
UAV RADAR SYSTEM TESTBED (C-37A)............................. ............... 50,000 +50,000
LIFE SUPPORT SYSTEMS......................................... 4,586 11,286 +6,700
ACES II P3I.............................................. ............... ............... +3,000
Crash Resistant Wall Style Troop Seat.................... ............... ............... +3,000
LESPA.................................................... ............... ............... +700
INTEGRATED COMMAND &; CONTROL APPLICATIONS (IC2A)............ 224 8,224 +8,000
NPLACE................................................... ............... ............... +4,000
AF Center for Acquisition Reengineering and Enabling ............... ............... +2,000
Technology..............................................
AF Production Line Engineering Activity.................. ............... ............... +2,000
NEXT GENERATION JSTARS TESTED................................ ............... 190,000 +190,000
767 Testbed Aircraft..................................... ............... ............... +190,000
EVOLVED EXPENDABLE LAUNCH VEHICLE PROGRAM (SPACE)............ 320,321 310,321 -10,000
Excessive SPO and FFRDC growth........................... ............... ............... -10,000
RDT&E FOR AGING AIRCRAFT..................................... 20,115 48,115 +28,000
Aging Wiring and Corrosion Treatment for Aging Aircraft.. ............... ............... +10,000
Aging Landing Gear Life Extension........................ ............... ............... +15,000
Aging Propulsion Systems Life Extension.................. ............... ............... +3,000
MAJOR T&E INVESTMENT......................................... 49,857 64,857 +15,000
Holloman High Speed Test Track Upgrade................... ............... ............... +4,000
Airborne Separation Video System (ASVS).................. ............... ............... +1,500
Laser Induced Surface Improvement (LISI)................. ............... ............... +2,000
Mariah II Hypersonic..................................... ............... ............... +7,500
INITIAL OPERATIONAL TEST & EVALUATION........................ 28,998 35,998 +7,000
AFOTECH.................................................. ............... ............... +7,000
TEST AND EVALUATION SUPPORT.................................. 396,583 393,283 -3,300
Large unobligated carryforward into current fiscal year.. ............... ............... -7,000
Generic Radar Target Generator (GRTG).................... ............... ............... +1,700
Enhanced Flight Termination System....................... ............... ............... +2,000
ROCKET SYSTEMS LAUNCH PROGRAM (SPACE)........................ 8,538 32,538 +24,000
Missile Technology Demonstration (MTD)-3B................ ............... ............... +6,000
Ballistic Missile Range Safety Technology Program........ ............... ............... +18,000
GENERAL SKILL TRAINING....................................... 309 0 -309
Program reduction........................................ ............... ............... -309
WARFIGHTER RAPID ACQUISITION PROCESS (WRAP) RAPID TRAN....... 30,247 30,247 ...............
Note: Tech-SAT 21 shall be a candidate for WRAP.
JOINT EXPEDITIONARY FORCE EXPERIMENT......................... 64,005 22,605 -41,400
Reduced scope to accommodate planning and operational ............... ............... -41,000
needs of Enduring Freedom and Noble Eagle...............
A-10 SQUADRONS............................................... 3,049 8,049 +5,000
A-10 Precision Engagement................................ ............... ............... +5,000
F-16 SQUADRONS............................................... 110,797 115,797 +5,000
Distributed Training Centers............................. ............... ............... +5,000
F-22 SQUADRONS............................................... 16,092 0 -16,092
Transfer to F-22 EMD..................................... ............... ............... -16,092
AF TENCAP.................................................... 10,811 10,811 ...............
GPS jammer detection and location system for transition ............... ............... +3,000
to an operational capability under Phase III effort.....
JOINT SURVEILLANCE AND TARGET ATTACK RADAR SYSTEM............ 147,859 243,359 +95,500
Poor prior year execution................................ ............... ............... -5,000
SATCOM transfer from APAF................................ ............... ............... +5,700
RVSM transfer from APAF.................................. ............... ............... +5,800
Accelerate MP-RTIP....................................... ............... ............... +89,000
USAF MODELING AND SIMULATION................................. 25,345 31,345 +6,000
STORM.................................................... ............... ............... +1,000
Intelligent Flight Control System Simulation Research ............... ............... +5,000
(including acquisition of advanced flight control
research equipment and related laboratory/support
equipment)..............................................
WARGAMING AND SIMULATION CENTERS............................. 5,033 9,033 +4,000
TACCSF................................................... ............... ............... +4,000
MISSION PLANNING SYSTEMS..................................... 16,904 19,904 +3,000
Powerscene............................................... ............... ............... +3,000
INFORMATION SYSTEMS SECURITY PROGRAM......................... 7,936 22,436 +14,500
Information Assurance for Enabling Technologies.......... ............... ............... +1,500
Worldwide Information Security Environment (WISE) (Note: ............... ............... +13,000
Only to continue ongoing information assurance efforts
using intelligent sensors/JAVA intelligent agents.).....
GLOBAL COMBAT SUPPORT SYSTEM................................. 48,911 54,911 +6,000
GCSS (Enterprise Data Warehouse) (Note: Only for GCSS-AF ............... ............... +6,000
to continue development of the EDW in support of the AF
maintenance data collection program.)...................
SPACELIFT RANGE SYSTEM (SPACE)............................... 65,097 75,197 +10,100
Space Integration Master Planning........................ ............... ............... +2,100
Note: Only to analyze future space requirements in
support of homeland defense
RSA Core Crew............................................ ............... ............... +8,000
DRAGON U-2 (JMIP)............................................ 32,804 25,804 -7,000
Dual data link new start................................. ............... ............... -7,000
ENDURANCE UNMANNED AERIAL VEHICLES........................... 190,237 172,737 -17,500
Demonstration at Berlin Air Show......................... ............... ............... -5,000
Program office growth.................................... ............... ............... -12,500
AIRBORNE RECONNAISSANCE SYSTEMS.............................. 77,766 81,785 +4,019
Termination of JSAF...................................... ............... ............... -36,381
JSAF Program Office...................................... ............... ............... -4,600
Modern ELINT system (HBSS) for Global Hawk HAE UAV....... ............... ............... +30,000
Theater Airborne Reconnaissance System (TARS)............ ............... ............... +15,000
MANNED RECONNAISSANCE SYSTEMS................................ 0 4,500 +4,500
Combat Sent Passive Airborne Ranging..................... ............... ............... +4,500
DISTRIBUTED COMMON GROUND SYSTEMS............................ 11,429 21,429 +10,000
NCCT..................................................... ............... ............... +10,000
SPACETRACK (SPACE)........................................... 32,591 23,691 -8,900
Space Based Surveilliance Concept Technology Development: ............... ............... -2,900
await results of AOA before development.................
Space Situational Awareness: excessive office standup.... ............... ............... -6,000
C-130 AIRLIFT SQUADRON....................................... 80,533 60,533 -20,000
Late EMD contract award.................................. ............... -20,000 -20,000
C-5.......................................................... 166,508 152,508 -14,000
1 year delay in RERP EMD, availability of prior year ............... ............... -14,000
funds...................................................
DEPOT MAINTENANCE (NON-IF)................................... 1,542 4,042 +2,500
Metrology................................................ ............... ............... +2,500
INDUSTRIAL PREPAREDNESS...................................... 53,782 61,782 +8,000
Advanced Low Observable Coatings......................... ............... ............... +6,000
Laser peening for F-16 engine............................ ............... ............... +2,000
PRODUCTIVITY, RELIABILITY, AVAILABILITY, MAINTAIN PRO........ 20,689 32,189 +11,500
Automated Nondestructive Inspection for Turbine Engine ............... ............... +6,500
Sustainment.............................................
Inspection Technology for Turbine Engines................ ............... ............... +5,000
JOINT LOGISTICS PROGRAM--AMMUNITION STANDARD SYSTEM.......... 106 0 -106
Program reduction........................................ ............... ............... -106
SUPPORT SYSTEMS DEVELOPMENT.................................. 24,221 30,221 +6,000
Center for aircraft and systems support.................. ............... ............... +6,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

unmanned combat air vehicle

The Air Force budget request for the Unmanned Combat Air
Vehicle (UCAV) is currently distributed across a number of Air
Force science and technology line-items. The Committee believes
that UCAV technology represents an important new technology
thrust. To elevate the visibility of the Air Force UCAV program
activities, schedule, and budget, the Committee has
consolidated all UCAV funding into a new line-item. The
Committee directs that future Air Force budgets be submitted
using this new line-item.

Warfighter Rapid Acquisition Process

The Committee commends the Air Force on its well-conceived
process for ensuring Congressional notification prior to
initiation of new start WRAP initiatives.

Space Based Radar EMD

The Air Force requested $50,000,000 for the Space Based
Radar (SBR) Engineering and Manufacturing Development (EMD)
program. The Committee recommends the full amount. Budget
justification for SBR clearly indicates that the requested
funds are not for EMD, but rather requirements development,
risk reduction, and concept definition. The Committee does not
approve the SBR program for EMD, and the Committee's funding
recommendation should not be interpreted as such.

NEXT GENERATION TANKER

The Committee is growing increasingly concerned about the
viability of the USAF tanker aircraft force. Tanker aircraft
are extremely critical force multipliers for the spectrum of
military operations. Currently, the tanker force structure
includes 136 KC-135E model aircraft with an average age of 43
years. The Committee finds it alarming that the KC-135E
aircraft spend an average of 428 days once admitted to depots
for programmed maintenance. Manufacturers are discontinuing
production of parts leading to a severely diminished supply of
spare and replacement parts. Further, the KC-135E does not meet
modern noise and navigation standards constraining their use in
optimum global airspace and air bases.
Addressing this problem, the Committee recommendation
includes an additional $30,000,000 to develop the necessary
modifications to convert a commercial 767 aircraft to a new
military tanker aircraft. The Committee has provided an
additional $120,000,000 to procure a 767 aircraft to serve as a
testbed for these efforts. The Air Force has indicated that a
767 tanker aircraft would offer increased offload capability
(the amount of fuel that can be provided to other airborne
aircraft), increased availability, increased reliability, and
lower support costs. The aircraft could also provide personnel
and cargo lift and serve as a potential host to sensors and
data links. To help finance this initiative, the Committee has
reduced $56,000,000 budgeted for two KC-135E reengine
modifications.

NEXT GENERATION ISR RADAR SENSOR DEVELOPMENT

The Committee recommendation includes a number of
initiatives to accelerate and enhance US military intelligence,
surveillance, and reconnaissance (ISR) capabilities. In
particular, the Committee sees great promise in the Multi-
Platform Radar Technology Improvement Program (MP-RTIP), which
is developing a new radar to support future incarnations of
JSTARS and Global Hawk as well as a potential NATO ground
surveillance aircraft. In addition, the Committee is supportive
of the Multi-Mission Command and Control Aircraft (MC2A)
concept advocated by the Chief of Staff of the Air Force. Such
an aircraft would combine the missions of multiple aircraft
such as JSTARS and AWACS, and serve as an airborne network
``server'' for a large variety of battlefield information
systems, initiatives fully consistent with US transformation to
network centric warfare.
To facilitate these efforts, the Committee has provided an
additional $89,000,000 to accelerate development of MP-RTIP.
The Committee has also provided an additional $190,000,000 to
procure a 767 testbed aircraft (with associated spares and
support equipment) for the MP-RTIP JSTARS configuration and
$50,000,000 to procure a C-37A testbed aircraft (with
associated spares and support equipment) to support a smaller
UAV configuration. Finally, the Committee has provided
$25,000,000 for the MC2A program to jumpstart concept
development for a future multi-mission aircraft. Given the
potential complexity of such a multi-mission aircraft, the
Committee believes that a spiral development approach is
appropriate. The Committee views the 767 MP-RTIP JSTARS as the
first ``spiral'' of the MC2A concept.

Distributed Common Ground System (DCGS)

The Air Force requested $11,429,000 for the Distributed
Common Ground System (DCGS). The Committee recommends
$21,429,000, an increase of $10,000,000 over the request.
The Committee recommends $10,000,000 only for rapid
development and deployment of ISR Battle Management and Network
Centric Collaborative Targeting (NCCT). Within this amount, up
to $4,000,000 is for ongoing modeling and exercise support
activities that will assist the Air Force and Navy in modifying
reconnaissance ground stations and targeting processes to
engage time critical targets.

Information Hiding, Steganography and Digital Watermarking

The Committee has provided a total of $8,000,000 for
Information Hiding, Steganography and Digital Watermarking
technologies to protect specialized encryption. The Committee
directs the Air Force to work with the National Security Agency
as it pursues this technology to ensure the most effective
application to the twin dilemmas of protecting information and
countering encryption.

lower cost precision weapon guidance systems

The Committee believes that all military services must put
priority on research activities aimed at developing miniature
electro-mechanical systems (MEMS) for use in precision weapon
guidance systems. This research holds much promise for
significantly reducing the unit cost of precision-guided
weapons through development of low cost inertial measurement
units. Given the substantial benefits to all military services,
the Committee views it as crucial that the services coordinate
their efforts to develop MEMS technology and related anti-jam
software upgrades to accelerate systems development and to
eliminate duplication of effort. The Committee believes the
Army MEMS-IMU/GPS program is the most mature and robust of the
various programs, and directs the Air Force to ensure that its
MEMS guidance system development efforts are fully coordinated
with and complement the Army program.

Program Recommended

The total program recommended in the bill will provide the
following in fiscal year 2002:

RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST AND EVALUATION, DEFENSE-WIDE

Fiscal year 2001 appropriation........................ $11,157,375,000
Fiscal year 2002 budget request....................... 15,050,787,000
Committee recommendation.............................. 6,949,098,000
Change from budget request............................ -8,101,689,000

This appropriation funds the Research, Development, Test
and Evaluation, Defense-Wide activities of the Department of
Defense.

Committee Recommendations

EXPLANATION OF PROJECT LEVEL CHANGES

[In thousands of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Change from
Budget request Recommended request
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
BASIC RESEARCH
DEFENSE RESEARCH SCIENCES.................................... 121,003 139,003 18,000
Ultra-Performance Nanotechnology Center.................. ............... ............... 3,000
Spin Electronics (Note: Transfer from University Research ............... ............... 15,000
Initiatives)............................................
UNIVERSITY RESEARCH INITIATIVES.............................. 240,374 248,374 8,000
Spin Electronics (Note: Transfer to Defense Research ............... ............... -15,000
Sciences)...............................................
National Security Training for non-traditional and ............... ............... 1,500
minority students (Note: Only to continue the program
funded in 2001.)........................................
Tropical Remote Sensing Applications and Resources....... ............... ............... 3,000
Center of Excellence in Bioinformatics................... ............... ............... 3,000
Advanced Power and Energy Program........................ ............... ............... 2,000
Desert Environmental Research (Only to continue the ............... ............... 3,000
existing University based GIS program to use sensor
technology, line distance sampling and spatial analysis
techniques to monitor the desert tortoise population in
support of expansion of the Fort Irwin National Training
Center.)................................................
Defense Commercialization Research Initiative............ ............... ............... 4,000
Focused Manufacturing Technologies (Note: Only for ............... ............... 2,000
advanced research to develop distributed precision
manufacturing technology.)..............................
Advanced Films and Coatings.............................. ............... ............... 1,500
MEMS Sensors for Rolling Element Bearings (Note: Only for ............... ............... 3,000
the development of a one chip solution for the
determination of temperature, vibration, strain and
angular rotation in a rolling element bearing.).........
GOVERNMENT/INDUSTRY COSPONSORSHIP OF UNIV RESEARCH........... 3,421 11,421 8,000
Semi-Conductor Research (Focus Center Research Program).. ............... ............... 8,000
CHEMICAL AND BIOLOGICAL DEFENSE PROGRAM...................... 39,066 0 -39,066
Transfer to Title IX..................................... ............... ............... -39,066
APPLIED RESEARCH
MEDICAL FREE ELECTRON LASER.................................. 14,660 24,660 10,000
Medical Free Electron Laser.............................. ............... ............... 10,000
HISPANIC SERVING INSTITUTIONS................................ 0 5,000 5,000
Hispanic Serving Institutions--RDT&E Project Grants...... ............... ............... 5,000
COMPUTING SYSTEMS AND COMMUNICATIONS TECHNOLOGY.............. 382,294 329,294 -53,000
Reuse Technology Adoption Program (Note: To include the ............... ............... 4,000
application of dynamic system testing and for modeling
systems architectures.).................................
Systems Engineering for Miniature Devices................ ............... ............... 3,000
DARPA Reduction.......................................... ............... ............... -60,000
EMBEDDED SOFTWARE AND PERVASIVE COMPUTING.................... 75,561 65,561 -10,000
DARPA Reduction.......................................... ............... ............... -10,000
BIOLOGICAL WARFARE DEFENSE................................... 140,080 0 -140,080
Transfer to Title IX..................................... ............... ............... -140,080
CHEMICAL AND BIOLOGICAL DEFENSE PROGRAM...................... 125,481 0 -125,481
Transfer to Title IX..................................... ............... ............... -125,481
TACTICAL TECHNOLOGY.......................................... 173,885 164,885 -9,000
DARPA Reduction.......................................... ............... ............... -9,000
MATERIALS AND ELECTRONICS TECHNOLOGY......................... 358,254 342,754 -15,500
DARPA Reduction.......................................... ............... ............... -24,000
Center for Integrated Technologies....................... ............... ............... 5,000
Center for Optoelectronics and Optical Communications.... ............... ............... 3,500
NUCLEAR SUSTAINMENT & COUNTERPROLIFERATION TECHNOLOGY........ 295,132 0 -295,132
Transfer to Title IX..................................... ............... ............... -295,132
ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT
EXPLOSIVES DEMILITARIZATION TECHNOLOGY....................... 8,815 11,815 3,000
Demilitarization and Destruction of Conventional ............... ............... 3,000
Ammunition and Chemical Warfare Agents (Note: Only to
investigate the use of photocatalysis to assist in the
destruction of explosives.).............................
SOL/LIC ADVANCED DEVELOPMENT................................. 8,799 10,799 2,000
Special Reconnaissance Capabilities...................... ............... ............... 2,000
COMBATING TERRORISM TECHNOLOGY SUPPORT....................... 42,243 60,243 18,000
Chemical/Biological Electrostatic Decontamination System ............... ............... 7,000
(Note: Only to complete prototype testing and evaluation
through the TSWG.)......................................
Historical Underground Exploitation (HUGE) (Note: Funds ............... ............... 2,000
are to be managed by a non-profit corporation.).........
Facial Recognition Access Control and Surveillance (Note: ............... ............... 2,000
Only for the development of a surveillance prototype,
utilizing facial recognition.)..........................
Blast Mitigation Testing................................. ............... ............... 3,000
Aerogel and Fiber Optic-Based Chem/Bio Detectors (Note: ............... ............... 4,000
Only to accelerate development of this technology)......
COUNTERPROLIFERATION ADVANCED DEVELOPMENT TECHNOLOGIES....... 89,772 0 -89,772
Transfer to Title IX..................................... ............... ............... -89,772
BALLISTIC MISSILE DEFENSE TECHNOLOGY......................... 132,890 0 -132,890
Transfer to Title IX, RDTE, BMDO......................... ............... ............... -132,890
ADVANCED AEROSPACE SYSTEMS................................... 153,700 128,700 -25,000
DARPA Reduction.......................................... ............... ............... -25,000
CHEMICAL AND BIOLOGICAL DEFENSE PROGRAM--ADV DEV............. 69,249 0 -69,249
Transfer to Title IX..................................... ............... ............... -69,249
SPECIAL TECHNICAL SUPPORT.................................... 11,019 13,019 2,000
Complex Systems Design................................... ............... ............... 2,000
ARMS CONTROL TECHNOLOGY...................................... 52,474 0 -52,474
Transfer to Title IX..................................... ............... ............... -52,474
GENERIC LOGISTICS R&D TECHNOLOGY DEMONSTRATIONS.............. 30,373 78,473 48,100
Silicon--28 Program...................................... ............... ............... 3,000
Computer Assisted Technology Transfer (CATT)............. ............... ............... 4,000
Sub-Micron CMOS and CMOS/SOS Lithography (Note: Only for ............... ............... 4,850
the Defense Microelectronics Activity.).................
Strategic Radiation Hardened Microelectronics (Note: Only ............... ............... 4,750
for the Defense Microelectronics Activity.).............
Center for Nanosciences Innovation....................... ............... ............... 10,000
Digital Electronic Warfare (Note: Only to maintain the ............... ............... 5,000
Product Improvement Program.)...........................
Diminishing Manufacturing Source Data Warehouse Solution ............... ............... 1,500
(Note: Only for the development and population of a
centralized DMS and obsolete parts data warehousing
system.)................................................
Optimizing Electronics for Advanced Controlled ............... ............... 6,000
Environment Systems (Note: Only to support resolving
thermal issues concerning electronics densification and
advanced electronics packaging.)........................
Spray Cooling Migration Program.......................... ............... ............... 9,000
STRATEGIC ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH PROGRAM..................... 69,376 73,376 4,000
Toxic Chemical Clean-up Criteria......................... ............... ............... 1,000
National Environmental Education and Training Center..... ............... ............... 3,000
ADVANCED ELECTRONICS TECHNOLOGIES............................ 177,264 194,264 17,000
DARPA Reduction.......................................... ............... ............... -8,000
Advanced Lithography Demonstration....................... ............... ............... 5,000
Laser Plasma Point Source X-Ray Lithography.............. ............... ............... 5,000
Novel crystal components for imaging and communications.. ............... ............... 7,000
MEMS at the Army Research Laboratory, Zahl Physical ............... ............... 8,000
Sciences Laboratory.....................................
ADVANCED CONCEPT TECHNOLOGY DEMONSTRATIONS................... 148,917 124,917 -24,000
ACTD--Reduction in Growth................................ ............... ............... -24,000
SENSOR AND GUIDANCE TECHNOLOGY............................... 203,095 202,095 -1,000
DARPA Reduction.......................................... ............... ............... -4,000
Large Millimeter Wavelength Telescope.................... ............... ............... 3,000
MARINE TECHNOLOGY............................................ 41,497 36,497 -5,000
DARPA Reduction.......................................... ............... ............... -5,000
CLASSIFIED DARPA PROGRAMS.................................... 142,395 137,395 -5,000
DARPA Reduction.......................................... ............... ............... -5,000
SOFTWARE ENGINEERING INSTITUTE............................... 21,091 23,091 2,000
Technical Insertion Demonstration and Evaluation Program ............... ............... 2,000
(TIDE) (Note: Only to be managed by the Defense Research
and Engineering Office of Science and Technology.)......
QUICK REACTION PROJECTS...................................... 25,000 35,000 10,000
Quick Reaction Projects.................................. ............... ............... -15,000
Challenge Program........................................ ............... ............... 25,000
JOINT WARGAMING SIMULATION MANAGEMENT OFFICE................. 45,065 48,065 3,000
WMD Attack-Effects-Response Assessment Capability at ............... ............... 3,000
JFCOM...................................................
DEMONSTRATION & VALIDATION
PHYSICAL SECURITY EQUIPMENT.................................. 33,543 46,543 13,000
Waterside/Landside Force Protection Planner (Note: Only ............... ............... 2,000
to develop a software package to provide a quantitative
assessment of risk.)....................................
Backscatter Mobile Truck System (Note: Only to test and ............... ............... 11,000
evaluate existing COTS systems capable of using both
backscatter and standard transmission X-ray technology.)
JOINT ROBOTICS PROGRAM....................................... 11,302 14,302 3,000
Tactical Unmanned Ground Vehicle Part I.................. ............... ............... 3,000
ADVANCED SENSOR APPLICATIONS PROGRAM......................... 15,780 26,780 11,000
Ocean Remote Sensing Program (Note: Only to complete the ............... ............... 4,000
Ocean Remote Sensing Program experiments to include
radar, lidar, passive optical imaging, and space-based
technologies to characterize and measure the ocean
environmental conditions in Mamala Bay.)................
Innovative Solid State Laser Technology Development ............... ............... 5,000
(Note: Only to continue the research initiative
conducted by OSD(C3I) to advance the use of continuously
pumped solid state lasers which operate in the mid-
infrared region.).......................................
Component Development for Active Sensors (Note: Only to ............... ............... 2,000
continue development of diode pumped laser materials
technology.)............................................
BALLISTIC MISSILE DEFENSE SYSTEM SEGMENT..................... 779,584 0 -779,584
Transfer to Title IX--RDTE, BMDO......................... ............... ............... -779,584
BALLISTIC MISSILE DEFENSE TERMINAL DEFENSE SEGMENT........... 968,180 0 -968,180
Transfer to Title IX--RDTE, BMDO......................... ............... ............... -968,180
BALLISTIC MISSILE DEFENSE MIDCOURSE DEFENSE SEGMENT.......... 3,940,534 0 -3,940,534
Transfer to Title IX--RDTE, BMDO......................... ............... ............... -3,940,534
BALLISTIC MISSILE DEFENSE BOOST DEFENSE SEGMENT.............. 685,363 0 -685,363
Transfer to Title IX--RDTE, BMDO......................... ............... ............... -685,363
CHEMICAL AND BIOLOGICAL DEFENSE PROGRAM--DEM/VAL............. 82,636 0 -82,636
Transfer to Title IX..................................... ............... ............... -82,636
BALLISTIC MISSILE DEFENSE SENSORS............................ 495,600 0 -495,600
Transfer to Title IX--RDTE, BMDO......................... ............... ............... -495,600
COALITION WARFARE............................................ 12,943 6,943 -6,000
Reduction................................................ ............... ............... -6,000
JOINT SERVICE EDUCATION AND TRAINING SYSTEMS DEVELOPMENT..... 0 13,000 13,000
Advanced Distributed Learning Initiative................. ............... ............... 10,000
ADL PROTOTYPE AT OSD Joint ADL Co-Laboratory............. ............... ............... 3,000
ENGINEERING & MANUFACTURING DEVELOPMENT
CHEMICAL AND BIOLOGICAL DEFENSE PROGRAM--EMD................. 159,943 0 -159,943
Transfer to Title IX..................................... ............... ............... -159,943
JOINT ROBOTICS PROGRAM--EMD.................................. 13,197 17,197 4,000
Tactical Unmanned Ground Vehicle Part II................. ............... ............... 4,000
FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT MODERNIZATION PROGRAM................... 100,000 40,000 -60,000
Transfer to DWCF......................................... ............... ............... -60,000
RDT&E MANAGEMENT SUPPORT
TECHNICAL STUDIES, SUPPORT AND ANALYSIS...................... 33,805 20,805 -13,000
Information Technology Superiority Study (Note: Only to ............... ............... 1,000
facilitate a joint industry-military dialog to be
conducted under the auspices of the National Defense
University and to develop pilot programs for effective
industry military interaction.).........................
Reduction................................................ ............... ............... -14,000
GENERAL SUPPORT TO C3I....................................... 21,061 22,561 1,500
UAV Integration into Civil Air-Space (Note: Only to ............... ............... 1,500
continue and accelerate the existing OSD program.)......
DEFENSE TRAVEL SYSTEM........................................ 29,955 9,955 -20,000
Reduction................................................ ............... ............... -20,000
CLASSIFIED PROGRAM USD(P).................................... 0 20,000 20,000
Classified............................................... ............... ............... 20,000
CHEMICAL AND BIOLOGICAL DEFENSE PROGRAM...................... 31,276 0 -31,276
Transfer to Title IX..................................... ............... ............... -31,276
CLASSIFIED PROGRAMS--C3I..................................... 56,653 28,653 -28,000
Intelligence Management.................................. ............... ............... -35,000
Global Infrastructure Data Capture....................... ............... ............... 7,000
PENTAGON RESERVATION......................................... 6,571 0 -6,571
Transfer to Title IX--RDTE, BMDO......................... ............... ............... -6,571
MANAGEMENT HEADQUARTERS--BMDO................................ 27,758 0 -27,758
Transfer to Title IX--RDTE, BMDO......................... ............... ............... -27,758
OPERATIONAL SYSTEMS DEVELOPMENT
COMMERCIAL OPERATIONS AND SUPPORT SAVINGS INITIATIVE......... 10,805 27,805 17,000
Aircraft Affordability Initiative........................ ............... ............... 17,000
INFORMATION SYSTEMS SECURITY PROGRAM......................... 414,844 422,594 7,750
Protection of Vital Data................................. ............... ............... 7,000
Computer Science and Internet Security Degree Program.... ............... ............... 750
DEFENSE IMAGERY AND MAPPING PROGRAM.......................... 115,209 144,409 29,200
To meet imagery library requirements for NAVOCEANO (SURF ............... ............... 5,000
EAGLE)..................................................
Commercial Joint Mapping Toolkit......................... ............... ............... 15,000
Geographic SAR Airborne Mapping System (GEOSAR)--(Note: ............... ............... 9,200
Only to complete GEOSAR program, to conduct
demonstration tests of the GEOSAR airborne mapping
system and to validate its products for priority
military use and civilian applications.)................
TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT....................................... 40,000 0 -40,000
JET...................................................... ............... ............... -5,000
Special Access Program................................... ............... ............... -35,000
MANNED RECONNAISSANCE SYSTEMS................................ 4,556 13,056 8,500
Combat Sent (Note: Only for Ultra Wideband Collector).... ............... ............... 4,000
Distributed Common Ground System only for Octagon 10..... ............... ............... 500
Combat Sent (Note: Only for Automated COMINT Search and ............... ............... 4,000
Collection.)............................................
INDUSTRIAL PREPAREDNESS...................................... 17,544 37,044 19,500
DLA Competitive Sustainment Initiative................... ............... ............... 4,500
Defense Supply Chain Management Program.................. ............... ............... 15,000
SPECIAL OPERATIONS INTELLIGENCE SYSTEMS DEVELOPMENT.......... 0 6,000 6,000
Solid state synthetic aperture radar..................... ............... ............... 6,000
SOF OPERATIONAL ENHANCEMENTS................................. 85,109 86,609 1,500
Integrated Command and Control System (IC2S)............. ............... ............... 1,500
SOF ACQUISITION.............................................. 252,334 299,684 47,350
Advanced Seal Delivery System............................ ............... ............... 5,000
Wireless Video Links for SOMROV.......................... ............... ............... 3,200
Surface Planning Wet Submersible (SPWS) (Note: For the ............... ............... 5,250
completion of the FY 01 initiated demonstration of the
SPWS and to procure additional SPWS for Special
Operations Forces and other military users in the
Department of Defense.).................................
Electronic Digital Compass System........................ ............... ............... 2,000
Spike Urban Warfare System............................... ............... ............... 8,000
Lightweight Counter Mortar Radar Program................. ............... ............... 3,000
Counterproliferation Analysis and Planning System........ ............... ............... 6,000
Mark V Computer Upgrade.................................. ............... ............... 1,000
SOCOM Rotary Wing UAV (Note: Only for Maverick and ............... ............... 7,900
Hummingbird systems, ground stations and spares to SOCOM
for testing and evaluation of rotary UAV system.).......
Dual Band Detector Imaging Technology.................... ............... ............... 5,000
Rebreather (Note: To develop state of the art military ............... ............... 1,000
closed-circuit rebreather applications.)................
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

transfers to title ix

Research, development, test and evaluation funding for the
Ballistic Missile Defense Organization, the Defense Threat
Reduction Agency, and all funding for the chemical and
biological defense programs requested under ``Research,
Development, Test and Evaluation, Defense-Wide'' has been moved
to title IX.

Advanced Concept Technology Demonstrations

The bill repeats language included in the Department of
Defense Appropriations Act, 2001 which prohibits the Department
from beginning any advanced concepts technology demonstrations
until 30 days after it has described those projects in a report
to the congressional defense committees. In order to avoid
delaying important projects, however, the Department may submit
its list of technology demonstrations prior to the beginning of
the new fiscal year.

Advanced Lithography Demonstration

The Committee recommends $5,000,000 only to use laser
plasma point-source x-ray lithography to build high performance
compound semiconductor processors and components for on-going
technology demonstrations in advanced military radar,
communications, and electronic warfare systems.

Commercial Joint Mapping Toolkit

The Administration requested $115,200,000 for the Defense
Imagery and Mapping Program (DIMAP), the Committee recommends
$144,409,000, an increase of $29,200,000 above the request.
Included in the $29,200,000 increase provided by the
Committee is $15,000,000 for the development of a common,
commercial technology-based joint mapping toolkit interface to
enhance and customize intelligence, navigation, and mission
planning functions. The Committee encourages NIMA to acquire
the Commercial Joint Mapping Toolkit based upon fair and open
competition and best value to the government.

Center for the Commercial Deployment of Transportation Technologies

Of the funds provided for Research, Development, Test and
Evaluation, Defense-Wide, $7,500,000 is available only for the
Center for the Commercial Deployment of Transportation
Technologies.

Laser Plasma Point Source X-Ray Lithography

The Committee recommends $5,000,000 only to continue the
development of laser plasma point source x-ray lithography
technology for economic production of advanced missile seekers,
digital battlefield systems, electronic warfare arrays and
radar modules.

National Environmental Education and Training Center

The Committee recommends $3,000,000 only to continue the
research, development and demonstration program devoted to
health and safety issues as they relate to the development and
introduction of environmental remediation technologies and to
the scrapping of obsolete U.S. Naval vessels in a manner
properly protective of environmental cleanup and shipyard
workers. The program shall continue to develop and evaluate
protection and safety methods and techniques necessary for the
safe conduct of ship scraping and the use and application of
environmental remediation technology and to transfer them to
field use.

Ultra Light Weight Portable Power Source

The Committee is aware of the development of an ultra light
weight portable power source. These small prototype power
devices weigh less than 100 grams per square meter and their
flexible nature allows soldiers to carry them in rolled or
folded shapes. Rapid deployment of the power source can be
achieved by simply unfolding, unrolling or inflating the power
material. By using an adhesive backing these power devices can
be integrated into a soldier's apparel and could provide a
portable power supply for night vision systems, satellite
communications, and other soldier functions that require power.
Accordingly, the Committee directs the Department to consider
the desirability, utility, and cost-effectiveness of funding
further research into these light weight portable power
devices.

Center for Nanosciences Innovation

The Committee recognizes that to realize the full potential
of nanoscience and technology, major and fundamental scientific
advances need to be made to isolate, detect, communicate and
manipulate individual atoms and molecules. Such advances will
lead to the ultimate level of performance in electronic,
chemical, biological and material systems. Accordingly, the
Committee has provided $10,000,000 to be executed by the
Defense Microelectronics Agency for the establishment of a
Center for Nanosciences Innovation to pursue defense
applications.

Spin Electronics Program

The Committee is aware that DARPA's spin electronics
program has the potential to produce a whole new generation of
electronic devices with performance far greater than what is
achievable with conventional electronics today. The Committee
is also aware that because spin electronics design and
manufacturing are compatible with existing semiconductor
infrastructures, it promises to reach maturation well ahead of
other known nanoelectronics technology approaches. Accordingly,
the Committee has transferred $15,000,000 from University
Research Initiatives to Defense Research Sciences to augment
existing planned spin electronics programs and to accelerate
development of this important new generation of electronics
technology.

next generation supercomputer capability

The Committee is concerned that several critical national
security technologies suffer from inadequate Department of
Defense (DoD) high-end supercomputing resources. These
technologies include cryptanalysis, operational weather
forecasting, dispersion of airborne contaminants, armor design,
design of large aircraft or ship structures, and studies of
weapons effects.
Over the last decade, declining markets, inequitable trade
practices, and limited DoD support, have severely weakened the
United States industrial base for high-end supercomputing.
Several reports conducted at the request of the DoD, have
clearly identified a number of issues that counsel immediate
attention and action to avoid an unacceptable prospect:
offshore reliance for critical supercomputing capability vital
to our national security.
The Committee directs the Secretary of Defense to submit by
July 1, 2002, a development and acquisition plan, including
budgetary requirements, for a comprehensive, long-range,
integrated high-end supercomputing program. The Secretary shall
direct the National Security Agency (NSA) to take the lead in
developing this plan in cooperation with DARPA, DoD's HPC
Modernization Program, NIMA, NRO, NNSA/ASCI, and NASA.

strategy for acquisition of commercial imagery

The Committee requests that the Director of the National
Imagery and Mapping Agency (NIMA) submit, by March 1, 2002, a
plan describing how NIMA intends to use commercial imagery to
meet validated non-high resolution imagery requests that have
been generated by the Services, Commanders-in-Chief of the
Unified and Specified Commands, and other DoD agencies.

unexploded ordnance detection and cleanup

The Committee continues to be greatly concerned about the
research effort into technologies which can better detect and
remove unexploded ordnance. Recent reports by the General
Accounting Office have estimated that cleanup costs of closed,
transferred, and transferring training ranges and other
formerly used defense sites could exceed $100 billion. In
addition to the significant financial obligation this poses to
the Department of Defense, unexploded ordnance on formerly used
defense sites poses an even greater danger to the public at
large. The budget request included $17,300,000 for Research,
Development, Test and Evaluation, Defense-Wide supporting
unexploded ordnance detection and cleanup. The Committee has
fully funded this request.

Program Recommended

The total recommended in the bill will provide the
following program in fiscal year 2002.

OPERATIONAL TEST AND EVALUATION, DEFENSE

Fiscal year 2001 appropriation........................ $227,060,000
Fiscal year 2002 budget request....................... 217,355,000
Committee recommendation.............................. 245,355,000
Change from budget request............................ +28,000,000

This appropriation funds the Operational Test and
Evaluation activities of the Department of Defense.

Committee Recommendations

explantion of project level changes

Radio Frequency Vulnerability Analysis

Of the funds provided for Operational Test and Evaluation
activities, the Committee directs that $4,000,000 be provided
to the office of Live Fire Test and Evaluation to fund the
continuation of a demonstration of technical devices
constituting a radio-frequency (RF) weapon that could be built
using commercial-off-the-shelf technology. Such a weapon would
be representative of an unconventional threat to civilian
electronic infrastructure, and shall be tested against a set of
infrastructure targets to determine vulnerabilities of such
targets to radio-frequency damage.

Program Recommended

The total recommended in the bill will provide the
following program in fiscal year 2002.

TITLE V

REVOLVING AND MANAGEMENT FUNDS

DEFENSE WORKING CAPITAL FUNDS

Fiscal year 2001 appropriation........................ $916,276,000
Fiscal year 2002 budget request....................... 1,951,986,000
Committee recommendation.............................. 1,524,986,000
Change from budget request............................ -427,000,000

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $1,524,986,000
for the Defense Working Capital Funds. The recommendation is an
increase of $608,710,000 above the amount appropriated for
fiscal year 2001.

NATIONAL DEFENSE SEALIFT FUND

Fiscal year 2001 appropriation........................ $400,658,000
Fiscal year 2002 budget request....................... 506,408,000
Committee recommendation.............................. 412,708,000
Change from budget request............................ -93,700,000

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

ready reserve force

The Defense Department requested $506,408,000 for the Ready
Reserve Force. The Committee recommends $412,708,000, a
decrease of $93,700,000. A reduction of $98,700,000 is
recommended due to the funding of MARAD program management in
the Committee's fiscal year 2002 Commerce, Justice, State and
Judiciary appropriations bill. The Committee also recommends
$5,000,000 only for the FASTSHIP initiative.
TITLE VI

OTHER DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE PROGRAMS

DEFENSE HEALTH PROGRAM

Fiscal year 2001 appropriation........................ $12,117,779,000
Fiscal year 2002 budget request....................... 17,898,969,000
Committee recommendation.............................. 18,277,403,000
Change from budget request............................ +378,434,000

This appropriation funds the Defense Health Program of the
Department of Defense.

SPECIAL INTEREST ITEMS AND REPROGRAMMING

The Committee notes that the operation and maintenance
portion of the Defense Health Program budget request is built
around seven budget activities including: in-house care,
private sector care, consolidated health support, information
management, management activities, education and training, and
base operations/communications. The Committee also notes with
concern that the typical pattern of budget execution for the
Defense Health Program has been to divert funding from the DoD
military medical treatment facilities (MTFs) to pay for the
increasing costs of contractor provided medical care. The
impact of this financial migration has seriously degraded the
ability of the DoD MTFs, which have inherent cost advantages,
to care for military personnel and their dependents. The
Committee also notes that the main reason for this migration,
unrealistic budget assumptions, has been addressed in the
fiscal year 2002 budget request which allows for realistic cost
growth for contractor provided care and pharmaceuticals.
To improve oversight of this account, the Committee directs
that the cumulative value of proposed transfers of funds in
excess of $15,000,000 between the activity groups noted above
be subject to normal, prior approval reprogramming procedures.
In addition, items for which funds have been specifically
provided using phrases ``only for'' and ``only to'' are
Congressional interest items for the purpose of the base for
Reprogramming (DD Form 1414). Each of these items must be
carried on the DD 1414 at the stated amount.

Committee Recommendations

EXPLANATION OF PROJECT LEVEL CHANGES

MILITARY MEDICAL TREATMENT FACILITY OPTIMIZATION

``The Committee bill provides $90,000,000 above the budget
request only to continue the initiative begun by the Committee
in the Fiscal Year 2001 Emergency Supplemental Appropriations
Act (Public Law 107-20) to finance service and facility
upgrades at military medical treatment facilities that can be
shown to both save money and improve medical care. Of these
funds, $30,000,000 shall be available to each military Surgeon
General for this purpose. The Committee expects the Surgeons
General of each service to select and administer these
optimization projects according to the standards and guidelines
specified in the House report accompanying the Fiscal Year 2001
Emergency Supplemental Appropriations Act.

Assessment of DoD and VA Health Care Systems

Section 8140 of the Committee bill appropriates $5,000,000
to support a joint assessment by the Secretaries of Defense and
Veterans Affairs that identifies and evaluates changes to
Department of Defense and Department of Veterans Affairs health
care delivery policies, methods, practices and procedures in
order to provide improved health care services at lower costs
to the taxpayers. This assessment shall include a detailed
independent review of options to collocate or share facilities
and care providers in areas where duplication and excess
capacity may exist, optimize economies of scale through joint
procurement of supplies and services, and partially or fully
integrate DoD and VA systems providing telehealth services,
computerized patient records, provider credentialing, surgical
quality assessment, rehabilitation services, administrative
services, and centers of excellence for specialized health care
services. The general provision requires that the statement of
work for this effort be authored jointly by each secretary and
that a comprehensive report to Congress be made on the
conclusions and recommendations of this effort no later than
March 1, 2002.

NURSING PAY AUTHORITY

The Committee recognizes that the Department of Defense
faces both a serious shortage of civilian registered nurses as
well as a high rate of turnover among these critical personnel.
Further, the Committee is aware that DoD often defaults into a
costly solution to this problem by hiring contractor nurses.
The lack of an adequate nursing staff reduces both the
responsiveness and effectiveness of the DoD military medical
treatment facilities. To address these problems, the Committee
directs the Secretary of Defense to delegate title 38 U.S.C.
pay and promotion authorities to the Surgeons General of the
Army, Navy and Air Force to enable the military departments to
fill nursing vacancies and retain required strength. In
addition, the Committee recommends a new general provision
(Sec. 8148) which extends title 38 U.S.C. authorities to the
hiring of personnel credentialed in certain medical or medical
related skills, but who do not otherwise have tenure in
competitive civil service.

PRE-DISCHARGE ONE EXAM INITIATIVE

The Committee is aware of software that allows one
examining physician to generate required service member
discharge forms to meet both Department of Defense and
Department of Veterans Affairs' requirements. The Committee
encourages the Department to examine such innovative ways to
reduce the requirement for departing service members to take
two separate discharge medical physicals.

MACDILL AIR FORCE BASE TRANSITION

The Committee is aware of the outstanding success of
MacDill 65, a demonstration program to deliver medical care to
military retirees age 65 and older. The Committee directs the
Department of Defense to ensure the smooth transition of the
participants from the MacDill 65 program into TRICARE for Life.
This transition should ensure no loss of coverage during this
transition period. Furthermore, the Committee expects the
Department of Defense to communicate fully with program
participants so that they understand how to register, and the
new benefits available to them under the TRICARE for Life
program.

CREDENTIALING

As a result of questions raised in recent press accounts
about the quality of military healthcare, together with the
findings in the subsequent report of the DoD Healthcare Quality
Initiatives Review Panel, the Committee believes that action
must be taken to improve oversight of the military healthcare
system. Therefore, the Committee directs that $2,000,000 of the
funds available under this heading be available only for a
pilot study to evaluate the merits of integrating the
Department of Defense Centralized Credentials Quality Assurance
System (CCQAS) with the Veterans Administration Professional
Review Program (VETPRO) credentials system.

HEALTH CARE CENTERS OF EXCELLENCE

The Report of the DoD Healthcare Quality Initiatives Review
Panel concludes that the Department of Defense should
aggressively pursue a program to designate Centers of
Excellence in order to improve the quality of medical care for
individuals requiring specialized, complex treatments. The
Committee directs that $2,000,000 of the funds available under
this heading be used only to design, test and evaluate models
for expanding health care Centers of Excellence.

NORTH CHICAGO VETERANS ADMINISTRATION MEDICAL CENTER AND NAVAL HOSPITAL

The Committee applauds the current resource sharing
agreement between the North Chicago VA Medical Center (NCVAMC)
and the Naval Hospital, Great Lakes, Illinois (NHGL). These two
institutions are within one mile of each other and offer
significant opportunities to share additional services and
facilities. The Navy is engaged in conducting an economic
analysis of the requirement for a modern facility to replace
the aging NHGL. The Veterans Administration has an underused
inpatient facility at the NCVAMC. The Secretary of the Navy and
the Secretary of the Veterans Administration are directed to
develop a plan to make the maximum use of the NCVAMC during the
interim period until the Navy constructs a facility to replace
the NHGL. The Secretary of the Navy shall consult with the
Secretary of Veterans Affairs when designing the replacement
facility. The Committee expects the replacement facility to be
designed and operated as a joint facility serving the health
care needs of the Navy and Veterans Affairs populations in the
North Chicago area.

CERVICAL CANCER RESEARCH PROGRAM

The Committee notes that the report accompanying the House
version of the fiscal year 1995 Department of Defense
Appropriations bill (House Report 103-562) and the report
accompanying the House version of the fiscal year 2001
Department of Defense Appropriations bill (House Report 106-
644) both provided clear direction to the Assistant Secretary
of Defense (Health Affairs) to established a systematic
program, in coordination with the National Cancer Institute, to
foster the early detection and prevention of cervical cancer
including research into a vaccine for the Human Papillomavirus
(HPV) found in 50 percent of cervical cancers. Given the
accomplishments of the Department of Defense in its medical
research and development efforts, the Committee strongly urges
DoD to move forward in fiscal year 2002 with its efforts to
implement past congressional directives. The Assistant
Secretary of Defense (Health Affairs) shall report to the House
Committee on Appropriations not later than March 31, 2002
detailing the progress made in establishing this research
program.

OVARIAN CANCER

The Committee believes that increased emphasis on ovarian
cancer research is urgently needed as 13,900 women die from
this disease annually. The disease is curable if detected
early, unfortunately little is known about the disease and only
25 percent of cases are diagnosed in the early stages.
Recognizing the superior nature of the grants that have been
funded by the Defense Health Program, the Committee strongly
urges DoD to use the additional $12,000,000 provided for this
program to continue the DoD Ovarian Cancer Research Program
under the auspices of the Peer Reviewed Medical Research
Program. The Committee believes that this program should
operate in coordination with the National Cancer Institute's
Specialized Programs of Research Excellence in ovarian cancer.

INTERNATIONAL MEDICAL PROGRAM GLOBAL SATELLITE SYSTEM

The committee recommends $4,000,000 in the Defense Security
Cooperation Agency to prove the International Medical Program
Global Satellite System (IMPGSS) integrated development and
delivery concept in at least two countries. The Committee
further recommends that the Telemedicine and Advanced
Technology Research Center at Fort Detrick, Maryland manage the
program.

DoD MENTAL HEALTH PROGRAMS

The Committee strongly encourages the Department of Defense
to consult with the National Institute of Mental Health and the
Department of Veterans Affairs to take concrete steps to
strengthen its mental health programs. Such efforts should
include a program that would collect epidemiological data on
new onset psychosis in the military, including the creation of
a system to link DoD and VA data. This effort should also seek
to determine predictors of vulnerability to psychosis given the
stress of basic training. This effort should seek to create a
linkage (termed critical intervention) that would prevent
patients from ``falling between the cracks'' in between
discharge from DoD and entry into the VA. To accomplish this
objective, DoD should adopt case management psychology-
education oriented intervention to ensure continuity of
treatment, reduce duration of untreated psychosis, and reduce
the proportion of these people who have a second episode. This
effort should also determine the possibility of assessing the
impact of the intervention and reduction in duration of
untreated psychosis on the medium to long-term illness outcome.

GOVERNMENT COMPUTER BASED PATIENT RECORDS

The Committee is disappointed in the inability of the
Department of Defense to work with the Department of Veterans
Affairs in developing information technology that would be used
to transfer and share medical records of military health
beneficiaries, as detailed in a recent, critical report by the
General Accounting Office. The Committee has increased funding
for the Government Computer-based Patient Record program for
the last two years because it believes the sharing of medical
data between DoD and VA will improve patient care and reduce
administrative expense. Unfortunately, the Department of
Defense has consistently failed to follow congressional
directives and to adequately support this promising new
technology. The Committee has once again added funds to the
budget for GCPR, and expects the Assistant Secretary of Defense
for Health Affairs to actively manage the program. The
Committee expects the additional funds to be utilized by the
Department of Defense in a manner that carries out stated
congressional intent, and not diverted into efforts tangential
to the primary goal of the GCPR program of sharing medical data
among DoD, VA, and their respective commercial contractors.

SINGLE NATIONAL PHARMACY MANAGER

The Committee is aware that the Department of Defense is in
the preliminary stages of seeking a single national contractor
for pharmacy benefits to provide retail and mail order pharmacy
services for the 8.5 million beneficiaries enrolled in the DoD
health care programs. While the Committee strongly supports and
encourages the Department of Defense to improve the efficiency
of services for its beneficiaries, the Committee is also
concerned that this measure could have a negative impact on the
overall level of competition in the pharmacy industry.
Accordingly, the Committee directs that the Assistant Secretary
of Defense (Health Affairs) provide a report to the House
Committee on Appropriations 60 days prior to a solicitation of
bids for a single national pharmacy benefits manager which
presents the business case for this approach, the estimated
effect that this program will have on the competitive
environment in the pharmacy industry, and the effect that this
proposal will have on mid- and small-sized pharmacies.

CHEMICAL AGENTS AND MUNITIONS DESTRUCTION, ARMY

Fiscal year 2001 appropriation........................ $980,100,000
Fiscal year 2002 budget request....................... $1,153,557,000
Committee recommendation.............................. $1,093,057,000
Change from budget request............................ -60,500,000

This appropriation funds the Chemical Agents and Munitions
Destruction activities of the Department of the Army.

Program Recommended

The total amount recommended in the bill will provide the
following in the fiscal year 2002:

DRUG INTERDICTION AND COUNTER-DRUG ACTIVITIES, DEFENSE

Fiscal year 2001...................................... $869,000,000
Fiscal year 2002 request.............................. 820,381,000
Committee recommendation.............................. 827,381,000
Change from the budget request........................ +7,000,000

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

Committee Recommendations

The Department of Defense requested $820,381,000 for Drug
Interdiction and Counter-Drug Activities. The Committee
recommends $827,381,000, an increase of $7,000,000.

EXPLANATION OF PROJECT LEVEL CHANGES

[In thousands of dollars]

Young Marines................................................. +2,000
National Counter-narcotics Training Center Hammer............. +2,000
Caper Focus................................................... +5,000
Southwest Anti-Drug Border States Initiative.................. +5,000
National Interagency Civil-Military Institute................. +4,000
Multi-jurisdictional Counter-drug Task Force Training......... +4,000
Southwest Border Fence........................................ +6,700
Indiana National Guard Counter-drug Activities................ +2,000
Kentucky National Guard Counter-drug Activities............... +3,400
Tennessee National Guard Counter-drug Activities.............. +1,000
Nevada National Guard Counter-drug Activities................. +2,000
New York National Guard Counter-drug Port Initiative.......... +1,000
Peru Support.................................................. -7,200
Counter-drug Tanker Operations................................ -1,000
Colombia Airborne Surveillance................................ -3,500
Research, Development, Test, and Evaluation................... -4,000
LEA OCONUS Support............................................ -3,000
Tethered Aerostat Radar Program............................... -12,400

DOD NON-TRADITIONAL ACTIVITIES ASSESSMENT

The Committee is aware that the Department of Defense is
considering a significant change in its approach to Drug
Interdiction and Counter-drug missions in conjunction with its
assessment of ``non-traditional'' activities. The Committee has
been strongly supportive of the contributions the Department
has made to the national and international effort to curtail
the production, transportation, and use of illegal drugs and is
aware that many of the Department's missions could not be
conducted by any other Agency. The Committee directs the
Secretary of Defense to submit a report to the congressional
defense committees advising them of any plans to alter its
current counter-drug and drug interdiction programs 30 days in
advance of any reorganization initiative in the area proposed
to be implemented during the fiscal year 2002.

TETHERED AEROSTAT RADAR SYSTEMS

The budget request included $42,941,000 for Tethered
Aerostat Radar Systems. The Committee recommends $33,641,000, a
reduction of $12,400,000 in this account and an addition of
$3,000,000 provided to the Air Force in Section 8136 of the
General Provisions. The Committee is concerned that the
reporting requirement and the obligation restrictions in House
Report 106-644 have not been followed and that the
Administration has yet to determine the management
responsibility and corresponding funding allocations for these
important systems. The Committee has deferred fiscal year 2002
procurement funding for the Aerostat modernization program
except for the purchase of replacement Aerostats until such a
determination has been made. The Committee directs that the
Secretary of the Air Force reestablish the Morgan City,
Louisiana Aerostat site using the funding provided in Section
8136.

OFFICE OF THE INSPECTOR GENERAL

Fiscal year 2001 appropriation........................ $147,545,000
Fiscal year 2002 budget request....................... 152,021,000
Committee recommendation.............................. 152,021,000
Change from budget request............................ ............

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $152,021,000
for the Office of the Inspector General, the amount proposed in
the budget. The recommendation is an increase of $4,476,000
above the amount appropriated for fiscal year 2001.
TITLE VII

RELATED AGENCIES

NATIONAL FOREIGN INTELLIGENCE PROGRAM

Introduction

The National Foreign Intelligence Program consists of those
intelligence activities of the government, which provide the
President, other officers of the Executive Branch, and the
Congress with national foreign intelligence on broad strategic
concerns bearing on U.S. national security. These concerns are
stated by the National Security Council in the form of long-
range and short-range requirements for the principal users of
intelligence.
The National Foreign Intelligence Program budget funded in
the Department of Defense Appropriations Act consists primarily
of resources for the Central Intelligence Agency, Defense
Intelligence Agency, National Reconnaissance Office, National
Security Agency, National Imagery and Mapping Agency,
intelligence services of the Departments of the Army, Navy and
Air Force, Intelligence Community Management Staff, and the CIA
Retirement and Disability System Fund.

Classified Annex

Because of the highly sensitive nature of intelligence
programs, the results of the Committee's budget review are
published in a separate, detailed and comprehensive classified
annex. The intelligence community, Department of Defense and
other organizations are expected to fully comply with the
recommendations and directions in the classified annex
accompanying the fiscal year 2002 Defense Appropriations bill.

CENTRAL INTELLIGENCE AGENCY RETIREMENT AND DISABILITY SYSTEM FUND

Fiscal year 2001 appropriation........................ $216,000,000
Fiscal year 2002 budget request....................... 212,000,000
Committee recommendation.............................. 212,000,000
Change from budget request............................ ................

This appropriation provides payments of benefits to
qualified beneficiaries in accordance with the Central
Intelligence Agency Retirement Act of 1965 for Certain
Employees (P.L. 88-643). This statute authorized the
establishment of a CIA Retirement and Disability System
(CIARDS) for a limited number of CIA employees and authorized
the establishment and maintenance of a fund from which benefits
would be paid to those beneficiaries.

Committee Recommendations

The Committee recommends $212,000,000 for the Central
Intelligence Agency Retirement and Disability Systems Fund
(CIARDS). The recommendation is the same as the budget request
and is $4,000,000 below the amount appropriated in fiscal year
2001.

INTELLIGENCE COMMUNITY MANAGEMENT ACCOUNT

Fiscal year 2001 appropriation........................ $148,631,000
Fiscal year 2002 budget request....................... 152,776,000
Committee recommendation.............................. 144,929,000
Change from budget request............................ -7,847,000

This appropriation provides funds for the activities that
support the Director of Central Intelligence (DCI) and the
Intelligence Community.

Committee Recommendations

The Administration requested $152,776,000 for the
Intelligence Community Management Account. The Committee
recommends $144,929,000, a decrease of $7,847,000 from the
amount requested and $3,702,000 below the amount appropriated
under this heading in fiscal year 2001. Of the amount
appropriated under this heading, $34,100,000 is for transfer to
the Department of Justice for operations at the National Drug
Intelligence Center (NDIC). Details of adjustments to this
account are included in the classified annex accompanying this
report.

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

Fiscal year 2001 appropriation........................ $60,000,000
Fiscal year 2002 budget request....................... 25,000,000
Committee recommendation.............................. 25,000,000
Change from budget request............................ ................

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $25,000,000
for the Payment to Kaho'olawe Island Conveyance, Remediation,
and Environmental Restoration Fund, the amount proposed in the
budget. The recommendation is $35,000,000 below the amount
appropriated for fiscal year 2001.

NATIONAL SECURITY EDUCATION TRUST FUND

Fiscal year 2001 appropriation........................ $6,950,000
Fiscal year 2002 budget request....................... 8,000,000
Committee recommendation.............................. 8,000,000
Change from budget request............................ ................

The National Security Education Trust Fund was established
to provide scholarships and fellowships to U.S. students to
pursue higher education studies abroad and grants to U.S.
institutions for programs of study in foreign areas and
languages.

Committee Recommendations

The Committee recommends $8,000,000 for the National
Security Education Trust Fund. The recommendation is the same
as the request and $1,050,000 more than the amount appropriated
in fiscal year 2001.
TITLE VIII

GENERAL PROVISIONS

Title VIII of the accompanying bill includes 155 general
provisions. Most of these provisions were included in the
Department of Defense Appropriations Act for fiscal year 2001
and many have been included in the Defense Appropriations Act
for a number of years.
Actions taken by the Committee to amend last year's
provisions or new provisions recommended by the Committee are
discussed below or in the applicable section of the report.

Definition of Program, Project and Activity

For purposes of the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit
Control Act of 1985 (Public Law 99-177) as amended by the
Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Reaffirmation Act
of 1987 (Public Law 100-119) and by the Budget Enforcement Act
of 1990 (Public Law 101-508, the following information provides
the definitions of the term ``program, project, and activity''
for appropriations contained in the Department of Defense
Appropriations Act. The term ``program, project, and activity''
shall include the most specific level of budget items,
identified in the Department of Defense Appropriations Act,
2002, the accompanying House and Senate Committee reports, the
conference report and the accompanying joint explanatory
statement of the managers of the Committee in Conference, the
related classified reports, and the P-1 and R-1 budget
justification documents as subsequently modified by
Congressional action.
In carrying out any Presidential sequestration, the
Department of Defense and agencies shall conform to the
definition for ``program, project, and activity'' set forth
above with the following exceptions:
For Military Personnel and Operation and Maintenance
accounts the term ``program, project, and activity'' is defined
as the appropriations accounts contained in the Department of
Defense Appropriations Act.
The Department and agencies should carry forth the
Presidential sequestration order in a manner that would not
adversely affect or alter Congressional policies and priorities
established for the Department of Defense and the related
agencies and no program, project, and activity should be
eliminated or be reduced to a level of funding which would
adversely affect the Department's ability to effectively
continue any program, project and activity.

Pentagon Reservation Emergency Response Enhancements

A new General Provision (Sec. 8147) has been included which
provides $10,000,000 to support facility improvements and
equipment purchases to augment the capabilities of local
government emergency response units responsible for the
protection of the Pentagon Reservation and surrounding military
and federal facilities. The Committee wishes to commend the
tireless and skillful efforts exhibited by all federal, state
and local personnel who responded to the unprecedented attack
on the Pentagon on September 11, 2001. This incident
highlighted certain areas identified by emergency responders
where capabilities should be upgraded to further strengthen
their ability to respond to any future attack or disaster. The
Committee expects these funds to support equipment purchases
for bomb disposal and chemical containment, personal chem/bio
protection, emergency communications, emergency power systems,
medical equipment, and high priority security systems. These
funds are also available to provide the federal share for
facility improvements as determined by the Secretary of
Defense.

Wage Credits

The budget submission proposed amending language carried in
the Military Personnel appropriations paragraphs, as well as a
new general provision (section 8125 of the Committee bill), in
order to end payments of Social Security wage credits by the
Department of Defense. The past two Administrations have
maintained that actuarial data regarding military retirees make
it feasible to end DoD's payment of these service wage credits.
The Committee notes that legislation similar to that
proposed in the budget was taken up and approved by the
Committee on Ways and Means last year (H.R. 4857). The
Committee also notes, and restates, the direction of the
Committee on Ways and Means regarding reconciliation of any
amounts due the Social Security and Hospital Insurance trust
funds by the Department of Defense. The Secretary of Defense is
directed to report to the Congress on this issue not later than
90 days following enactment of the fiscal year 2002 Defense
Appropriations Act. The report shall include the
Administration's position on the issue of reconciling payments,
if needed; and its intention to comply with this direction, to
include proposing an amended budget submission, request for
supplemental appropriations, or funding as needed in the fiscal
year 2003 Defense Appropriations budget submission.
TITLE IX

COUNTER-TERRORISM AND DEFENSE AGAINST WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION

The Committee bill establishes a new appropriations title--
Title IX, Counter-Terrorism and Defense Against Weapons of Mass
Destruction. In this title the Committee recommends
appropriations of $11,719,889.000, an increase of
$1,309,325,000 over the budget request for similar programs,
and consolidates these funds into six new appropriations
accounts, as described below.
In his foreword to the recently released Quadrennial
Defense Review, the Secretary of Defense described this as ``a
crucial time of transition to a new era.'' A new era--marked by
the reality of new threats such as terrorism; weapons of mass
destruction (nuclear, chemical, and biological weapons) and
ballistic missiles; information operations (computer network
exploitation and attack); and other unconventional and so-
called ``asymmetric'' threats to the United States.
The Committee has expressed similar concerns over the last
several years and is gratified that the Department now appears
prepared to make a sustained and major commitment to address
these new threats. The test will come over the next several
years to see if the Department will actually shift the required
resources to counter these threats in a way that does not
shortchange other necessary conventional capabilities that will
still be required in the 21st Century.
The Committee has therefore consolidated the funding of the
major Defense-wide programs specifically designed to meet these
new threats into a new Title IX to give them the visibility and
attention they require, and to aid in the future tracking of
resources for these activities. Programs and activities
included in this title are those which are centrally managed
under the Office of the Secretary of Defense or other Defense-
Wide activities. This includes all funding for the Ballistic
Missile Defense Organization; the Cooperative Threat Reduction
Program (Former Soviet Union Threat Reduction); all Defense-
Wide procurement and research funding for defense against
chemical and biological weapons; and all funding for the
Defense Threat Reduction Agency.
In addition, the Committee also proposes adding
$1,670,000,000 over the budget request for a new appropriations
account--the Counter-Terrorism and Operational Response
Transfer Fund. Through this initiative, the Committee has
created a rapid response capability for the Secretary of
Defense and the Director of Central Intelligence to accelerate
and augment efforts against terrorism, weapons of mass
destruction, the chemical and biological threat, and so-called
``cyber-war'' capabilities (information operations and critical
infrastructure attacks).
In keeping with the Administration's stated emphasis on
countering these 21st century threats, the Committee believes
that its proposal to consolidate funding to meet these
challenges in Title IX can only buttress the growing need for,
and importance of, these programs in U.S. defense planning,
policy, and budgeting. The Committee also expects this to bring
a greater focus to the Department's efforts to deal with these
threats; simplify program management and budgeting; and empower
the senior leadership of the Department of Defense and the
Congress to more closely scrutinize these important programs.
The Committee directs that all future budget proposals and
supporting exhibits be submitted to Congress in this new
format.

Program Recommended

The total amount recommended in the bill will provide the
following in the fiscal year 2002:

chemical and biological defense programs

The President's budget requested $996,440,000 for chemical
and biological defense programs in Procurement, Defense-Wide
and Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, Defense-Wide.
The Committee recommends $1,539,940,000, in two accounts in
title IX (Counter-Terrorism and Operational Response Transfer
Fund and Defense against Chemical and Biological Weapons,
Defense-Wide.) This is an increase of $543,500,000 over the
budget request.
Although the Department of Defense's Chemical and
Biological Defense Program is focused primarily on defending US
troops in a theater conflict, recent events have made
abundantly clear that the difference between `national' and
`theater' defense is as irrelevant in chemical and biolgical
warfare as it is in missile defense. The Committee therefore
recommends a series of increases over the budget request, in
recognition of the fact that the research, equipment and
training conducted by DoD is as important to the protection of
American citizens as it is for the protection of our troops and
our worldwide interests.
The Committee notes that proposed funding will directly
address the threat posed by the use of anthrax against civilian
targets. In addition, the Committee recognizes this is just one
of the many threats we may face over the next few years and
thus has funded programs that are intended to address the broad
spectrum of chemical and biological threats that an adversary
may choose to use in the future (such as smallpox, sarin,
plague, or ebola).
Of the additional funds provided over the budget request,
$213,500,000 is for additional research to find vaccines,
antidotes and antibiotics to treat a broad spectrum of threats,
as well as funding for the next generation of detectors and
protective equipment. The largest increase is to accelerate
promising research into finding post-exposure treatment for
diseases for which there is currently no known cure. Another
$85,000,000 over the budget request is provided to immediately
increase the Department's stockpile of vaccines, antidotes and
antibiotics required to respond to a chemical or biological
attack.
The Committee also includes $145,000,000 over the budget
request for additional chemical and biological training for our
troops, for domestic response exercises involving both military
and civilian authorities, and to provide additional training to
DoD medical personnel to assist them in the rapid diagnosis and
treatment of the full range of potential biological and
chemical threats. Additionally, the Committee provides
increases over the budget request totaling $100,000,000 for
chemical and biological defense equipment, such as masks,
protective shelters, detectors and decontamination equipment to
ensure that our military is adequately equipped to meet the
growing challenge. With any biological attack the key to saving
lives is discovering the event as quickly as possible. With
this distinction in mind, the Committee has provided increased
funding for biological pathogen detectors, both fixed and
mobile, to provide the early warning that is critical to
effective mitigation and treatment.

special interest items

Items for which additional funds have been provided as
shown in the project level tables or in paragraphs using the
phrases ``only for'' or ``only to'' in this report are
congressional interest items for the purpose of the Base for
Reprogramming (DD Form 1414). Each of these items must be
carried on the DD Form 1414 at the stated amount, or a revised
amount if changed during conference or if otherwise
specifically addressed in the conference report. These items
remain special interest items whether or not they are repeated
in a subsequent conference report.

COUNTER-TERRORISM AND OPERATIONAL RESPONSE TRANSFER FUND

Fiscal year 2001 appropriation........................ ................
Fiscal year 2002 budget request....................... ................
Committee recommendation.............................. $1,670,000,000
Change from budget request............................ +1,670,000,000

This appropriation funds additional counter-terrorism and
operational response activities of the Department of Defense.

Committee Recommendation

The Committee proposes additions to the budget request
totaling $1,670,000,000 for a new appropriations account--the
Counter-Terrorism and Operational Response Transfer Fund.
With the onset of Operations NOBLE EAGLE and ENDURING
FREEDOM--and the persistence of real and credible threats to
Americans and our national interests, both at home and abroad--
the Committee believes it is imperative to rapidly accelerate
efforts on the part of the Intelligence Community and the
Department of Defense in the war against terrorism and other
21st century threats. Accordingly, the Committee proposes
$1,670,000,000 over the amounts requested in the budget, in
this new appropriations account.
Citing the bill language proposed by the Committee, these
funds are provided:
``For urgent enhancements to intelligence and military
capabilities in order to prosecute Operation ENDURING FREEDOM;
to discover, infiltrate, and deter terrorist groups; to protect
against terrorist attacks that might employ either conventional
means or weapons of mass destruction, and to prepare against
the consequences of such attacks; to deny unauthorized users
the opportunity to modify, steal, inappropriately disclose, or
destroy sensitive military intelligence data or networks, and
to accelerate improvements in information networks and
operations.''
The Committee bill expressly provides that of the amounts
provided in this new appropriation, $451,000,000 is made
available to the Director of Central Intelligence for
classified programs funded under the National Foreign
Intelligence Program. The Committee bill also provides for the
transfer of $10,000,000 to the Department of Justice, only for
enhanced terrorism-related financial and money laundering
investigative operations to be carried out by the National Drug
Intelligence Center. The Committee notes that, in providing
this additional funding for the National Foreign Intelligence
Program, it is providing the resources needed to implement many
of the new recommendations approved in the House-passed
Intelligence Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2002 (H.R.
2883).
Similarly, $1,219,000,000 is made available to the
Secretary of Defense for a variety of high priority
initiatives, including classified programs. From within this
amount, $474,000,000 is for the acceleration of critically
needed response, training, procurement, and research programs
for defense against chemical and biological agents. Another
$275,000,000 of DoD funds are designated specifically for so-
called ``cyber-war'' enhancements--to strengthen Defense and
intelligence community efforts in the areas of computer system
and information network operations, by funding for information
assurance, information operations, and critical infrastructure
protection programs. (Details regarding these programs are
cited later in this section.)
Details regarding other programs funded under this
appropriation are addressed in the classified annex to this
report.
The bill language proposed by the Committee will enable the
Director of Central Intelligence and the Secretary of Defense
to flexibly manage these funds from a central transfer account,
similar to the Overseas Contingency Operations Transfer Fund.
The Committee also directs that within 90 days of enactment,
the Secretary of Defense and the Director of Central
Intelligence shall each provide to the Congress a classified
report specifying the projects and accounts to which funds
provided in this Act are to be transferred.
The table below shows details regarding the additional
$474,000,000 provided for Department of Defense chemical and
biological response, training, procurement and research
programs.

Chemical and Biological Defense Programs

Recommended
($ thousands)
Military Nuclear, Biological, Chemical (NBC) Training
and Equipment....................................... $156,000
(Operation and Maintenance, Army.................... 25,000)
(Operation and Maintenance, Navy.................... 25,000)
(Operation and Maintenance, Marine Corps............ 10,000)
(Operation and Maintenance, Air Force............... 25,000)
(Operation and Maintenance, Defense-Wide............ 20,000)
(Procurement, Defense-Wide.......................... 51,000)
Biological Warfare Pathogen Detection (fixed and mobile) 34,000
(Procurement, Defense-Wide.......................... 34,000)
Chemical-Biological Defense Equipment R&D............... 10,000
(Research, Development, Test and Evaluation,
Defense-Wide...................................... 10,000)
Antibiotics (Stockpile/Research, Development, Test and
Evaluation)......................................... 75,000
(Research, Development, Test and Evaluation,
Defense-Wide...................................... 40,000)
(Operation and Maintenance, Defense-Wide............ 35,000)
Vaccines (Stockpile/Research, Development, Test and
Evaluation)......................................... 100,000
(Research, Development, Test and Evaluation,
Defense-Wide...................................... 50,000)
(Operation and Maintenance, Defense-Wide............ 50,000)
Domestic Response Exercises............................. 30,000
(Operation and Maintenance, Defense-Wide............ 30,000)
DARPA--Biological Post-Exposure Treatment............... 59,000
(Research, Development, Test and Evaluation,
Defense-Wide...................................... 59,000)
Chemical-Biological Medical Training.................... 10,000
(Defense Health Program............................. 10,000)
TOTAL............................................. 474,000

The table below shows details regarding the additional
$275,000,000 provided for Department of Defense information
assurance, information operations and critical infrastructure
protection programs.

Information Assurance Programs

($ thousands)
Attack Sensing, Warning and Response--DoD Network
Protection.......................................... $70,000
(Operation and Maintenance, Defense-Wide............ 5,000)
(Procurement, Defense-Wide.......................... 26,000)
(Research, Development, Test and Evaluation,
Defense-Wide...................................... 39,000)
Information Assurance/Computer Network Defense.......... 37,500
(Other Procurement, Army............................ 10,000)
(Other Procurement, Navy............................ 10,000)
(Procurement, Marine Corps.......................... 3,500)
(Other Procurement, Air Force....................... 10,000)
(Procurement, Defense-Wide.......................... 4,000)
Cyber Warning Information Network....................... 11,300
(Operation and Maintenance, Defense-Wide............ 9,800)
(Research, Development, Test and Evaluation,
Defense-Wide...................................... 1,500)
Global Information Grid Enterprise Sensor Grid.......... 12,800
(Procurement, Defense-Wide.......................... 9,000)
(Research, Development, Test and Evaluation,
Defense-Wide...................................... 3,800)
Theater C4I Coordination Centers........................ 16,400
(Operation and Maintenance, Defense-Wide............ 16,400)
IAVA Vulnerability Management........................... 16,000
(Procurement, Defense-Wide.......................... 16,000)
Secure Wired and Wireless............................... 19,600
(Research, Development, Test and Evaluation,
Defense-Wide...................................... 19,600)
Joint Reserve Virtual Information Operations............ 5,700
(Operation and Maintenance, Army.................... 1,400)
(Operation and Maintenance, Navy.................... 1,000)
(Operation and Maintenance, Marine Corps............ 400)
(Operation and Maintenance, Air Force............... 1,400)
(Operation and Maintenance, Defense-Wide............ 1,500)
Coalition Interoperability and Operations............... 26,000
(Procurement, Defense-Wide.......................... 20,000)
(Research, Development, Test and Evaluation,
Defense-Wide...................................... 6,000)
Information Assurance/Information Technology Training... 8,900
(Operation and Maintenance, Army.................... 2,000)
(Operation and Maintenance, Navy.................... 1,700)
(Operation and Maintenance, Marine Corps............ 600)
(Operation and Maintenance, Air Force............... 1,400)
(Operation and Maintenance, Defense-Wide............ 3,200)
Public Key Infrastructure............................... 30,800
(Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, Army... 7,500)
(Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, Navy... 7,500)
(Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, Air
Force............................................. 7,500)
(Research, Development, Test and Evaluation,
Defense-Wide...................................... 8,300)
Armament Systems Networks--Information Assurance Center. 4,000
(Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, Army... 4,000)
Networking Monitoring for Insider Threat................ 16,000
(Procurement, Defense-Wide.......................... 16,000)
TOTAL............................................. 275,000

FORMER SOVIET UNION THREAT REDUCTION

Fiscal year 2001 appropriation........................ --
Fiscal year 2002 budget request....................... --
Committee recommendation.............................. $403,000,000
Change from budget request............................ +403,000,000

This appropriation funds the Former Soviet Union Threat
Reduction activities of the Department of Defense.
The President's budget requested $403,000,000 for this
activity in title II, Operation and Maintenance, a decrease of
$40,400,000 from last year. The Committee has moved this
program to title IX and recommends fully funding the
President's request.

ballistic missile defense

The President's budget requested $8,289,278,000 for
programs managed by the Ballistic Missile Defense Organization
in fiscal year 2002, an increase of $3,102,122,000 over the
amount provided in fiscal year 2001. This request was divided
among several accounts including Research, Development, Test
and Evaluation, Defense-Wide; Research, Development, Test and
Evaluation, Army; Research, Development, Test and Evaluation,
Navy; Missile Procurement, Army and Weapons Procurement, Navy.
To reflect the importance of the ballistic missile defense
programs, the Committee has consolidated the request into two
new appropriation accounts: Research, Development, Test and
Evaluation, Ballistic Missile Defense Organization and
Procurement, Ballistic Missile Defense Organization.
For all Ballistic Missile Defense Organization activities,
funded in these two new accounts, the Committee recommends
$7,848,278,000, an increase of $2,661,122,000 over the fiscal
year 2001 level, and a net decrease of $441,000,000 from the
budget request.
The Committee also recommends rescinding from funds
appropriated in fiscal year 2001 $73,800,000 for long lead
items for a ground-based radar, which are no longer required
under the Administration's proposal.

PROCUREMENT, BALLISTIC MISSILE DEFENSE ORGANIZATION

Fiscal year 2001 appropriation........................ --
Fiscal year 2002 budget request....................... --
Committee recommendation.............................. $794,557,000
Change from budget request............................ +794,557,000

This appropriation funds the procurement activities of the
Department of Defense Ballistic Missile Defense Organization.
The President's budget requested $676,574,000 for this
activity in Missile Procurement, Army and $6,983,000 in Missile
Procurement, Navy, an overall increase of $321,456,000 over
last year. The Committee has transferred these programs to
title IX and recommends $794,557,000, an increase of
$111,000,000 over the President's request.

Committee Recommendations

explanation of project level changes

proposed transfer of navy area, meads and pac-3

The President's budget proposed transferring the Navy Area,
Medium Extended Air Defense System (MEADS) and PATRIOT (PAC-3)
ballistic missile defense programs to the Navy and Army
respectively. The Committee is concerned that these programs
would be transferred to their respective Services with
significant near-term funding shortfalls that the Services
would have to somehow address. In addition, neither MEADS nor
Navy Area is a mature program. MEADS has just begun its risk
reduction effort and the Navy area program is experiencing
significant schedule delays and cost overrun problems. While
the Committee supports the Department's objective of eventually
migrating mature programs from the Ballistic Missile Defense
Organization to the Services for programming and budgeting, it
does not support transferring these programs this year. The
Committee agrees with the House Armed Services Committee
direction that the Department should develop a set of criteria
to use to determine when a program is ready to transfer to the
Services.

patriot advanced capability--3 (pac-3)

The President's budget proposed $676,574,000 in Missile
Procurement, Army for 72 PAC-3 missiles. The PAC-3 is designed
to defeat short and medium range ballistic missiles, the type
of missiles that potential adversaries have already deployed in
large numbers. The PAC-3's hit to kill technology makes it
particularly suitable for destroying missiles carrying weapons
of mass destruction, which will be vital to protecting the
ports and airfields essential to the Nation's force projection
strategy. It is also effective against cruise missiles, fixed
wing aircraft and helicopters. During developmental testing the
PAC-3 proved very effective, destroying its target nine times
in ten attempts. It is also the only ``next-generation''
ballistic missile defense program ready for production and,
equally important, it may be the only system ready for
production for several years.
Therefore, the Committee recommends $787,574,000 in
Procurement, Ballistic Missile Defense Organization, an
increase of $110,000,000. Of this amount $95,000,000 is only to
purchase additional missiles in fiscal year 2002 and to
increase the production capability to 30 missiles per month. In
addition, $15,000,000 is to purchase critical components for
future PAC-3 missiles where the long-term availability of that
component is in doubt. Complementing this acceleration in PAC-3
procurement, the Committee has also recommended an increase of
$44,000,000 in PAC-3 research and development funding,
discussed elsewhere in this report.

RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST AND EVALUATION, BALLISTIC MISSILE DEFENSE
ORGANIZATION

Fiscal year 2001 appropriation........................ --
Fiscal year 2002 budget request....................... --
Committee recommendation.............................. $7,053,721,000
Change from budget request............................ +7,053,721,000

This appropriation funds the research, development, test
and evaluation activities of the Department of Defense
Ballistic Missile Defense Organization.
The President's budget requested $7,605,721,000 for this
activity in Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, Army;
Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, Navy and Research,
Development, Test and Evaluation, Defense-Wide, an increase of
$2,780,666,000 over last year. The Committee has moved these
programs to title IX and recommends $7,053,721,000, a decrease
of $552,000,000 from the President's request.

Committee Recommendations

EXPLANATION OF PROJECT LEVEL CHANGES

ground based midcourse defense segment

The most significant shift in the President's budget has
been in the Ground Based Midcourse Defense Segment (formerly
known as National Missile Defense). The plan under the previous
administration was to begin construction this year of a radar
in Shemya, Alaska and silos to hold 20 interceptors (to be
expanded later to 100 silos) as soon as the program had two
successful intercepts. This was a high-risk endeavor because it
depended on fielding a missile that was only in its earliest
stage of testing. In addition, the realism of the testing
program was questioned in both the Coyle and Welch Panel
studies. The proposal in this year's budget properly shifts the
focus from fielding to testing and the proposed funding
increases directly address the problems identified in those
reports.
The President's budget requested $3,230,725,000 for the
Ground Based Midcourse Defense Segment (an increase of
$1,377,198,000 over last year's funding level), of which
$786,485,000 is for the construction of a Pacific Test Bed.
While current tests only include launching from Vandenberg AFB
and intercepting from Kwajalein, the new test bed would provide
multiple launch and intercept sites and would permit multiple
simultaneous engagements, longer range intercepts and more
realistic engagement geometries. The Committee fully supports
the President's budget request for this program and provides
$3,230,725,000 for the Ground Based Midcourse Defense Segment,
fully funding the system and test bed.

theater high altitude area defense

The President's budget proposed $922,481,000 for the
Theater High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) program. The
Committee recommends $744,481,000, which is a decrease of
$178,000,000 from the President's request and an increase of
$203,483,000 from fiscal year 2001. This program has only
recently reestablished itself after a series of delays and test
failures caused primarily by poor quality control and a rush to
accelerate the program. The Committee believes that the
original schedule the Department built in response to those
lessons was a prudent approach for this program. Undue
acceleration of this program runs the risk of returning to what
the previous Secretary of Defense referred to as a ``rush to
failure''. The budget also proposes buying 10 missiles, whose
design has not been tested, to be available for additional
testing or as a contingency capability. While the Committee
supports robust testing, the Committee believes that a
commitment this year to a THAAD ``contingency capability'' is
premature. Meanwhile, the same amount of money would acquire
many more proven PAC-3 missiles. The Committee therefore defers
providing the $210,000,000 for a THAAD contingency capability,
but provides $32,000,000 over the budgeted amounts for four
additional THAAD missiles to be available to support additional
testing. As discussed earlier in this report, the Committee has
provided an increase of $155,000,000 to accelerate fielding of
the more mature PAC-3 theater defense system.

navy theater wide

The President's budget proposed $596,000,000 for the Navy
Theater Wide program. The Committee recommends $500,000,000,
which is a decrease of $96,000,000 from the President's request
and an increase of $43,628,000 from fiscal year 2001. The Navy
Theater Wide program is scheduled to begin intercept testing in
2002. The Department has not decided whether to continue this
program beyond testing or to pursue one of several alternative
missile designs instead. Therefore, the Committee believes it
is inappropriate to buy five contingency missiles before the
missile has been tested and before the Department has committed
to this solution.

arrow

The President's budget originally proposed $45,699,000 for
the ARROW program but revised its recommendation to $65,699,000
after the budget was submitted. The Committee recommends
$65,699,000, and increase of $20,000,000 over the budget
submission, to accommodate the revised request.

navy area

The President's budget proposed $388,496,000 for the Navy
Area program. The Committee supports the President's request
which is an increase of $118,944,000 over fiscal year 2001.

space based laser

The President's budget requested $170,000,000 for the Space
Based Laser. The Committee recommends $50,000,000, a reduction
of $120,000,000 similar to reductions in the House passed
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2002.

sbirs low

The Ballistic Missile Defense Organization requested
$385,000,000 for the Space Based Infrared System (SBIRS) Low
satellite program. The Committee denies this request.
SBIRS Low, as currently envisioned, will consist of
approximately 30 satellites cross-linked and cross-cued to
provide fuzed sensor support for ballistic missile defense. The
program represents an enormous technical challenge and is,
according to one DoD official, the highest risk satellite
program in DoD. This risk is compounded by a desire to field
the full constellation as soon as possible to support ambitious
missile defense fielding goals.
The Committee is concerned by markedly negative trends in
cost, schedule, and performance estimates for the final SBIRS
Low configuration. For example, in just this past year, the
government estimate for the amount of software needed to
support the program has grown from 900 thousand lines of code
to over 3 million. In addition, projections of spacecraft
weight have gone ``through the roof'' (actual numbers are
contract sensitive). Finally, in just one year, the total
program life cycle cost estimate has grown from $10 billion
(estimated last year) to over $23 billion (current estimate).
The Committee is concerned that given the immaturity of the
SBIRS Low concept, this most recent cost estimate does not
capture the full breadth of risks to be faced by the program.
The true program cost could be significantly higher.
Last year, officials within DoD recognized the potential
problems in the program and directed the Ballistic Missile
Defense Organization to conduct a study on the cost
effectiveness of SBIRS Low compared to a series of ground and
sea based alternatives. Though the study was due last March and
preliminary findings were briefed throughout DoD this summer,
the study has not yet been officially released. The Committee
understands that the study indicates that ground based radars
not only provide a viable alternative to a space based system,
but also provide this capability at significantly lower cost
and risk. In addition, the prospect of building more ground
based radars provide a graceful expansion of capability, if
needed, based on changes in the threat or an evolving US
strategy. Reliance on SBIRS Low, on the other hand, requires
deployment of the full 30 satellite constellation, with all the
risks and upfront investment this entails, regardless of threat
or strategy. Finally, the Committee is concerned with the
effectiveness of SBIRS Low with respect to target
discrimination, a key sensor requrement for missile defense.
The Committee believes that current plans for SBIRS Low
represent a potential ``rush to failure'' which could take the
country down a path of maximum cost and risk with marginal
payoff relative to ground based alternatives. A premature
reliance on such a high risk approach puts our missile defense
plans at risk. The Committee believes a more prudent missile
defense sensor strategy is to place near- and mid-term emphasis
on ground based radars. Because of high cost and low technical
maturity, a space based system appears to be more appropriate
as a far-term option.
Consequently, the Committee recommends taking SBIRS Low off
an acquisition track, and returning these efforts to a
sustained and deliberate technology development track. The
Committee denies funding for SBIRS Low, and instead provides
$250,000,000 in a new line item entitled ``Satellite Sensor
Technology'', only to reduce risk and mature technologies for
future space sensor applications for missile defense. In
addition, the Committee recommendation provides $75,000,000 in
a new line-item entitled, ``Ground Sensor Technology'', only
for algorithm development and radar risk reduction. Given the
limited resources available for large space constellations, the
Committee further recommends that the Department consider
making a long term choice between a space based infrared system
and a space based radar. Both represent enormous national
investments, and it is highly questionable whether DoD can
afford both systems.

program structure and system acquisition

The President's budget proposes moving all ballistic
missile defense programs into Research, Development, Test and
Evaluation Defense-Wide, grouping them primarily into 5 large
program elements and eventually buying and fielding these
systems using RDT&E appropriations. The Department's intent is
to be able to explore new technologies without an official
requirements document and without committing to buy a specific
number of systems, as would be required with a major defense
acquisition program. This approach is currently used by the
Department for technology demonstrations where prototypes are
developed in limited quantity as a proof of concept. However,
to acquire entire systems under RDT&E would violate fiscal
policy, undermine basic program management principles and
ignore the distinction between appropriations. Therefore, the
Committee retains the Department's proposed structure for those
technologies that have not yet demonstrated a suitable
prototype. However, the Committee directs that funding for a
program's EMD activities, and beyond, be budgeted in a separate
program element; the program be designated a major defense
acquisition program and be subject to the requirements of
Milestone II and III or their equivalents. As the law requires,
the actual acquisition of the hardware would be done with
procurement funding. Consistent with this guidance the
Committee has moved the Theater High Altitude Area Defense
program into its own program element.

special interest projects

Within each program element, the Committee has identified
several special interest projects for purposes of
reprogrammings and budget justification material. They are as
follows:
Terminal Defense Segment: MEADS and ARROW;
Midcourse Defense Segment: Ground-based Midcourse,
Pacific Test Bed and Navy Theater Wide;
Boost Defense Segment: Sea-based Boost, Airborne Laser,
Space Based Laser and Space Based Interceptor;
Sensors Segment: Satellite Sensor Technology, Ground
based Sensors and RAMOS.
The Committee directs that funding for each of these
special interest projects be identified separately and used as
the basis for any reprogramming and in the presentation of the
budget justification books.
The Committee directs the Cost Analysis Improvement Group
and the Director, Operational Test and Evaluation to continue
to report on these programs.

reprogrammings

The President's budget proposes grouping the major missile
defense systems into five large program elements, in part to
provide more flexibility in the movement of funding between
programs. This structure has the awkward effect of permitting
an unlimited movement of funds between programs, but only in
very limited circumstances and combinations. For example, under
the President's budget proposal a cost overrun in the Theater
High Altitude Area Defense program could be covered quickly,
without notifying Congress or requesting a reprogramming, but
only if the funding was taken from the ARROW program. Instead
of this approach, the Committee recommend a distinct set of
reprogramming guidelines for ``Research, Development, Test and
Evaluation, Ballistic Missile Defense Organization'' that
provides a greater level of flexibility than for other RDT&E
accounts, but without the artificial constraints imbedded in
the budget proposal. The Committee directs that the Director,
Ballistic Missile Defense Organization may, during the course
of fiscal year 2002, transfer up to $10,000,000 between any
program elements or special interest projects. Any realignment
of funds beyond that level requires a prior approval
reprogramming. All other financial management rules, such as
those regarding new starts and congressional interest items
still apply. The Committee directs the Under Secretary of
Defense (Comptroller) to amend the Financial Management
Regulations accordingly and to report back to the Committee
when this has been done.

bmdo budget justification material

The Committee is concerned about the level of information
provided in this year's budget justification material. In
addition to the material currently provided, the Committee
directs the Department to submit the following information as
part of its future budget requests.
For each program element and project: the funding
appropriated in the previous year and the expected requirement
for the next six years, by year.
For special interest projects and new starts: a detailed
schedule (including contract awards, decision points, test
events and hardware/software deliveries) at least through the
stage of testing the prototype whose performance will form the
basis for deciding whether or not to begin developing the
system as a major defense acquisition program.
For those programs that are already major defense
acquisition programs: a detailed schedule (including contract
awards, decision points, test events and hardware/software
deliveries), the number of systems to be acquired, the expected
performance, the unit cost, and the cost to completion for the
program.
In addition, the Department should present an overall
timeline for its future architecture highlighting when each
system in that architecture will go into production as well as
a comparable threat timeline indicating which threat systems
are expected to be deployed and in what quantities.

DEFENSE AGAINST CHEMICAL AND BIOLOGICAL WEAPONS, DEFENSE-WIDE

Fiscal year 2001 appropriation........................ ................
Fiscal year 2002 budget request....................... ................
Committee recommendation.............................. $1,065,940,000
Change from budget request............................ +1,065,940,000

This appropriation funds the Defense Against Chemical and
Biological Weapons activities of the Department of Defense.
The President's budget requested $647,731,000 for this
activity in Research, Development, Test and Evaluation,
Defense-Wide, and $348,709,000 in Procurement, Defense-Wide.
The Committee has moved these programs to title IX and
recommends $1,065,940,000, an increase of $69,500,000 over the
President's overall request.

Committee Recommendations

EXPLANATION OF PROJECT LEVEL CHANGES

Organization and Management of the Chemical and Biological Defense
Program

The Committee believes the current management structure of
the Department of Defense Chemical and Biological Defense
Program is deeply flawed. The multitude of bureaucratic layers
and ad hoc organizations that were created for this program
have led to bureaucratic infighting among the Services and
chronic inaction on important questions pertaining to
requirements generation, funding allocations, program
execution, and funds management. Given the growing importance
of this activity, the Committee believes the Department must
make it a priority to redesign and streamline the organizations
managing Chemical and Biological Defense in line with proven
and established DoD management processes. The Committee
strongly recommends at a minimum the following steps for the CB
Defense Program:
Materiel Management.--Establish a Joint Program Executive
Office (JPEO) under Army executive agency reporting to the Army
Acqusition Executive and the Defense Acquisition Executive for
materiel management and acquisition.
Direct the services to provide acquisition qualified
officers and government civilians to manage programs within the
JPEO, including reserve component officers.
Designate the Army as the executive agent for funds
management.
Requirements Generation.--Direct use of the Joint
Requirements Oversight Council (JROC) and JROC process for
establishing, validating and prioritizing joint CB Defense
Program requirements.
The Secretary of Defense shall report to the congressional
defense committee no later than 60 days after enactment on its
plan to reorganize, streamline, and elevate the priority of the
Chemical and Biological Defense Program.

chemical/biological warfare defense study

The Committee recommends $1,000,000 over the budget request
for the purpose of conducting a study of the chemical and
biological warfare defense programs. The Committee directs that
in its evaluation of these programs, the Department use an
existing tool to assess the relative merit of competing
chemical/biological warfare defense programs and submit a
report on the results of this study to the congressional
defense committees no later than July 30, 2002.

darpa biological warfare defense program

The Committee directs that the DARPA biological warfare
defense program shall not be included in the program guidance
and program evaluation directives of the preceding two
paragraphs.

DEFENSE THREAT REDUCTION AGENCY

Fiscal year 2001 appropriation........................ ................
Fiscal year 2002 budget request....................... ................
Committee recommendation.............................. $806,471,000
Change from budget request............................ +806,471,000

This appropriation funds the activities of the Defense
Threat Reduction Agency.
The President's budget requested $437,378,000 for this
activity in Research, Development, Test and Evaluation,
Defense-wide, $24,625,000 in Procurement, Defense-Wide and
$259,843,000 in Operation and Maintenance, Defense-Wide. The
Committee has moved these programs to title IX and recommends
$806,471,000, an increase of $84,625,000 over the President's
request.

Committee Recommendations

EXPLANATION OF PROJECT LEVEL CHANGES

Unconventional Nuclear Warfare Defense

The recent attacks on September 11, 2001 vividly
demonstrate the need to greatly expand governmental efforts to
develop and field systems that can defend against threats posed
by weapons of mass destruction. One of the most unsettling and
dangerous threats to the homeland is the possibility of nuclear
terrorism using unconventional delivery methods, e.g., delivery
other than by missile or military aircraft. The Committee
believes that a substantial base of capabilities exists within
the Department of Defense and the Department of Energy for
dealing with the unconventional nuclear threat (UNT), but these
resources are not effectively organized and optimized.
The Committee commends the recent work of the Defense
Science Board Task Force on Unconventional Nuclear Warfare
Defense that analyzed these capabilities and devised a strategy
to materially improve the DoD's ability to detect, identify,
respond, and prevent unconventional nuclear attacks by
national, sub-national, or terrorist entities. To implement
this initiative, the DSB Task Force recommended that the
Defense Threat Reduction Agency and the National Nuclear
Security Administration jointly pool their technology and
resources to develop a program to deploy, test, and demonstrate
nuclear protection systems at four different U.S. military
installations around the world.
The Committee concurs with this recommendation, and has
provided $50,000,000 to implement such an initiative at one
installation operated by each military service. The Committee
expects these installations to be varied in nature and
geography (e.g. a port, an airbase, an installation with high
security assets and high ground traffic) to develop and
demonstrate applications and techniques to meet a wide variety
of circumstances. The Committee would expect that these
installations turn into permanent technology integration test-
beds with the goal that vetted technology would be deployed to
critical military and civilian installations. These projects
shall be managed similar to the Department's advanced concept
technology demonstration (ACTD) procedure to (1) provide an
integrated sensor text-bed network for base/force protection;
(2) leverage law enforcement, DoD force protection, and DOE
technology; and (3) integrate if/where possible, other types of
chemical/biological/explosives sensors into the network.
Emphasis shall be on demonstrating existing technology that can
be deployed quickly.
In addition, the Committee has provided $25,000,000 to the
Defense Threat Reduction Agency only to develop and execute a
nuclear threat R&D response program. Funds shall be used to
improve such items as:
--Active neutron and gamma interrogation systems;
--Gamma imaging;
--Unattended remote monitoring systems;
--Better and more affordable radiation detectors;
--Portable forensics;
--Perimeter networks of sensors with remote processing
capability
--Render safe R&D.
The Committee believes that this new initiative can only be
successful if all relevant agencies actively and vigorously
participate. The Committee expects the Secretary of Defense to
immediately initiate high-level efforts to oversee the
execution of Memoranda of Understanding between DTRA, NNSA, and
other agencies such as FBI, DoJ, and CIA where appropriate. The
Committee expects that this program will be programmed and
adequately financed in the FY 2003-2008 POM process.
The Committee directs the Secretary of Defense to submit a
classified report to the congressional defense committees
within 180 days of enactment of this Act, explaining the sites
selected, the roles and missions of the different non-DoD
agencies, the technology test-bed deployment schedules, the
plan for deploying vetted technology, the RDT&E project plan,
and future fiscal year funding requirements.

Radiation Hardened Electronics

The Committee strongly supports the Department of Defense's
initiatives to advance strategic radiation hardened digital
CMOS microelectronics technology and production capability at
the two remaining domestic suppliers of upper radiation
hardened microelectronics. Of the funds provided, the Committee
directs that not less than $17,000,000 in program element
602715BR and $50,000,000 requested for ``Domestic Radiation
Hardened Electronics'' in the Defense Production Act be used to
advance technology and fabrication capability only for
established suppliers currently manufacturing upper radiation
hardened microelectronic components in their own domestic
fabrication facilities who have a demonstrated history and
capability of supplying these components to the Department of
Defense in support of strategic programs. The Committee also
supports the USD(A&T) strategy and funding requirements, stated
July 18, 2001, to preserve this competitive supplier base and
directs the military services and defense agencies to align
their investment strategies to support this critical strategic
capability.

arms control technology

The Committee recommends an increase of $4,875,000 in Arms
Control Technology only for innovative technologies and
equipment, as part of the effort to ensure compliance with arms
control, which is to be used only for the continuation of an
industry-based research program for developing systems using
advances in solid state nuclear detectors, processing
electronics, analysis software, chemical detection and
identification technology, and combination nuclear/chemical/
biological technology.

nuclear test monitoring

The Committee understands that the Defense Threat Reduction
Agency intends to spend $6,500,000 in PE0603711BR for basic
seismic research and applied seismic research to address only
Air Force operational nuclear test monitoring requirements; and
in addition $9,800,000 in operation and maintenance for nuclear
test monitoring operation and maintenance. The Committee
supports this action and directs that within this total
$2,500,000 shall be available only for peer reviewed applied
seismic research and $4,000,000 shall be available only for
peer reviewed basic seismic research.
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES REPORTING REQUIREMENTS

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

Changes in the Application of Existing Law

Pursuant to clause 3(f)(1) of rule XIII of the Rules of the
House of Representatives, the following statements are
submitted describing the effect of provisions in the
accompanying bill which directly or indirectly change the
application of existing law.
Language is included in various parts of the bill to
continue on-going activities which require annual authorization
or additional legislation, which to date has not been enacted.
The bill includes a number of provisions which place
limitations on the use of funds in the bill or change existing
limitations and which might, under some circumstances, be
construed as changing the application of existing law.
The bill includes a number of provisions, which have been
virtually unchanged for many years, that are technically
considered legislation.
The bill provides that appropriations shall remain
available for more than one year for some programs for which
the basic authorizing legislation does not presently authorize
each extended availability.
In various places in the bill, the Committee has earmarked
funds within appropriation accounts in order to fund specific
programs and has adjusted some existing earmarking.
Those additional changes in the fiscal year 2002 bill,
which might be interpreted as changing existing law, are as
follows:

appropriations language

Language has been deleted in ``Military Personnel, Army'',
``Military Personnel, Navy'', ``Military Personnel, Marine
Corps'', and ``Military Personnel, Air Force'' which would
eliminate the payment of the Social Security Military Wage
Credit for service members.
Language has been amended in ``Operation and Maintenance,
Army'' which changes the amount provided for emergency and
extraordinary expenses, and the amount for transfer to the
National Park Service for infrastructure repair and
improvements at Fort Baker. Language has been deleted which
provided funds by transfer from the National Defense Stockpile
Transaction Fund.
Language has been amended in ``Operation and Maintenance,
Navy'' which changes the amount provided for emergency and
extraordinary expenses; and deletes language which provided
funds by transfer from the National Defense Stockpile
Transaction Fund.
Language has been amended in``Operation and Maintenance,
Air Force'' which changes the amount provided for emergency and
extraordinary expenses and the amount of the grant to Florida
Memorial College for minority aviation training. Language has
been deleted which provided funds by transfer from the National
Defense Stockpile Transaction Fund.
Language has been amended in ``Operation and Maintenance,
Defense-Wide'' which provides $750,000 for a grant for the
Youth Development and Leadership program and the STARBASE
program; earmarks $1,500,000 only for continuation of the
Middle East Regional Security Issues program; changes the
amount provided for emergency and extraordinary expenses;
deletes the amount provided for expenses relating to certain
classified activities; and prohibits the consolidation of
appropriations liaison offices with OSD and services'
legislative liaison offices.
The appropriations paragraph ``Former Soviet Union Threat
Reduction'' was moved to title IX of this bill, and the proviso
on disposal of nuclear submarines has been deleted.
The appropriations account ``Quality of Life Enhancements,
Defense'' has been deleted.
A new appropriations paragraph has been included, ``Support
for International Sporting Competitions, Defense'' which
provides $15,800,000 in support of the 2002 Winter Olympics.
Language has been amended in ``Other Procurement, Army''
which changes the number of passenger motor vehicles required
for physical security of personnel and the number of vehicles
for replacement only.
Language has been deleted in ``Shipbuilding and Conversion,
Navy'', concerning incremental funding authority for the LHD-1
Amphibious Assault Ship, and language concerning the LPD-17
program.
Language has been amended in ``Other Procurement, Navy''
which changes the number of passenger motor vehicles required
for physical security of personnel, the number of vehicles for
replacement only, and changes the price limitation applicable
to passenger vehicles.
Language has been amended in ``Procurement, Marine Corps''
which changes the number of passenger motor vehicles for
replacement.
Language has been deleted in ``Aircraft Procurement, Air
Force'' which provided the authority to lease aircraft and
equipment.
Language has been amended in ``Other Procurement, Air
Force'' which changes the number of passenger motor vehicles
for replacement only, the number of vehicles purchased for
physical security of personnel, and changes the price
limitation applicable to passenger vehicles.
Language has been amended in ``Procurement, Defense-Wide''
which changes the number of passenger motor vehicles required
for replacement only, the number of vehicles required for
physical security of personnel and changes the price limitation
applicable to passenger vehicles.
Language has been amended in ``National Guard and Reserve
Equipment'' that provides funds only for the procurement of
eight UH-60 helicopters for the Army Reserve, and provides
funds for the procurement of C-130J aircraft to be used solely
for western states firefighting.
Language has been deleted in ``Defense Production Act
Purchases'' which specified that the funds provided were only
for microwave power tubes and the wireless vibration sensor
supplier initiative.
Language has been deleted in ``Research, Development, Test
and Evaluation, Navy'' concerning Special Operation Forces
requirements for the V-22 aircraft.
Language has been included in ``National Defense Sealift
Fund'' which provides funds for necessary expenses to maintain
and preserve a U.S.-flag merchant fleet.
The appropriations paragraph for ``National Defense Airlift
Fund'' has been deleted which provided funds for transfer to
the C-17 program.
Language has been amended in ``Defense Health Program'',
earmarking $20,000,000 only for HIV/AIDS prevention programs.
Language has been deleted in ``Chemical Agents and
Munitions Destruction, Army'' concerning the conveyance of a
Cyclone II Custom Pumper truck to the Umatilla Indian Tribe.
Language has been amended in ``Intelligence Community
Management Account'' which earmarks $28,003,000 for the
Advanced Research and Development Committee.

General Provisions

Section 8005 has been amended which increases the level of
general transfer authority for the Department of Defense.
Section 8008 has been amended to delete language providing
multiyear procurement authority for Javelin missile; Bradley
Fighting Vehicle; DDG-51 Destroyer; and UH-60 aircraft; and
adds multiyear authority for C-17 aircraft.
Section 8009 has been amended with regard to reporting
requirements for Humanitarian and Civic Assistance costs.
Section 8013 has been amended to delete language which
prohibited the use of appropriated funds for supplemental
education assistance for Army enlistments of less than three
years, except for combat arms.
Section 8032 has been amended to change the number of staff
years that may be funded for defense studies and analysis by
Federally Funded Research and Development Centers.
Section 8043 has been amended to include language that
waives the $100,000 limitation on investment item unit costs
for expenses related to certain classified activities.
Section 8045 has been amended to include language which
extends the availability of funds available for covert actions
and agent operations until September 30, 2003.
Section 8055 has been amended to include language which
rescinds $441,578,000 from the following programs:
(Rescissions)
2000 Appropriations:
Former Soviet Union Threat Reduction: Fossil Fuel
Energy Plants..................................... $32,000,000
Other Procurement, Navy:
Joint Tactical Terminals........................ 14,300,000
Submarine Support Equipment..................... 2,000,000
Aircraft Procurement, Air Force: JTCTS.............. 8,500,000
Other Procurement, Air Force: Joint Tactical
Terminals......................................... 20,000,000
2001 Appropriations:
Former Soviet Union Threat Reduction: Fossil Fuel
Energy Plants..................................... 32,000,000
Aircraft Procurement, Army:
CH-47 Mods...................................... 16,000,000
Guardrail....................................... 6,000,000
Procurement of Ammunition, Army: RADAM.............. 27,400,000
Other Procurement, Army:
STAR-T Termination.............................. 9,900,000
Teleoperating Kits.............................. 5,945,000
Joint Tactical Terminals........................ 10,000,000
PEPS............................................ 2,900,000
Aircraft Procurement, Navy: JTCTS................... 8,600,000
Weapons Procurement, Navy: JSOW..................... 35,000,000
Other Procurement, Navy:
Joint Tactical Terminals........................ 6,000,000
Shipboard IW Exploit............................ 3,000,000
Naval Space Surveillance........................ 1,000,000
Submarine Support Equipment..................... 3,000,000
JTCTS........................................... 1,600,000
Procurement, Marine Corps: STAR-T Termination....... 1,000,000
Aircraft Procurement, Air Force:
JTCTS........................................... 1,300,000
F-15............................................ 18,000,000
Procurement of Ammunition, Air Force: JDAM.......... 5,800,000
Other Procurement, Air Force:
MILSATCOM (GBS TIP)............................. 13,100,000
JTCTS........................................... 3,700,000
Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, Army:
STAR-T Termination.............................. 3,300,000
MPIM............................................ 3,000,000
STARSTREAK...................................... 10,000,000
Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, Navy:
Naval Space Surveillance........................ 1,000,000
Fixed Surveillance System....................... 4,000,000
SURTASS......................................... 5,000,000
JTCTS........................................... 8,800,000
DD-21........................................... 40,000,000
Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, Air
Force:............................................
JSAF Termination................................ 18,100,000
Integrated Broadcast Service.................... 3,000,000
ERCM............................................ 39,633,000
Joint Ejection Seat............................. 7,500,000
JTCTS........................................... 6,200,000
Defense Health Program: Integrated Cancer Research
Program........................................... 4,000,000

Note: Section 1306 of the House-passed National Defense Authorization
Act for Fiscal Year 2002 prohibits the Department from spending any
funds appropriated in any year for the refurbishment of fossil fuel
energy plants in the Former Soviet Union. According to the Department
there is $32,000,000 in both fiscal year 2000 and fiscal year 2001 that
is solely for this purpose and would be available for rescission should
this language stand in conference. Consistent with the actions of the
House, the Committee recommends rescinding these funds.

Section 8061 has been amended to include language which
permits the Secretary of Defense to adjust the Pentagon
Reservation Maintenance Revolving Fund limitation due to
changes in economic assumptions.
Section 8064 has been amended to restrict domestic source
requirements to only ball and roller bearings.
Section 8069 has been included prohibiting the transfer of
programs from the Department of Defense without Congressional
authorization.
Section 8070 has been amended to include an exemption from
prior notification requirements, and a requirement for
quarterly reporting, for any covered activities, operation or
operations initiated as a result of the national emergency
proclaimed by the President as a result of the terrorist
attacks of September 11, 2001.
Section 8071 has been amended to include language
concerning exposure fees with respect to loan guarantees.
Section 8074 has been amended concerning the ``Former
Soviet Union Threat Reduction'' which has been moved to title
IX of this bill.
Section 8084 has been amended which reduces funds available
in ``Operation and Maintenance, Navy'' by $245,000,000 to
reflect a Navy Working Capital Fund cash balance and rate
stabilization adjustment.
Section 8085 has been amended which reduces funds available
in several operation and maintenance accounts by a total of
$527,000,000, to reflect fuel pricing re-estimates and rate
stabilization adjustments.
Section 8093 has been amended which reduces funds available
for military personnel and operation and maintenance accounts
by a total of $200,000,000 due to favorable foreign currency
fluctuations.
Section 8094 has been amended which prohibits funds for the
Department of the Navy to be used to develop, lease or procure
the T-AKE class of ships unless the main propulsion diesel
engine and propulsors are manufactured in the United States.
Section 8099 has been amended to include language
concerning refunds from the use of the Government travel card
and the Government Purchase Card.
Section 8100 has been amended to improve oversight of
financial management information technology systems.
Section 8107 has been amended which provides $10,000,000
for ``Operation and Maintenance, Defense-Wide'' only for a
grant to the United Service Organizations Incorporated.
Section 8108 has been amended to change the amount
available for adjusting the cost-sharing agreement between the
Department of Defense and the Israeli Department of Defence.
Section 8111 has been amended to reflect the name change of
the Ground Based Midcourse Defense Segment (formerly National
Missile Defense).
Section 8113 has been amended to provide authority for the
Department of Defense to participate in the opening celebration
of the Pacific Wing of the National D-Day Museum.
Section 8116 has been amended which requires the transfer
of funds to the Department of Energy for Fossil Energy Research
and Development within 30 days after enactment of this Act.
Section 8117 has been amended which reduces funds available
in operation and maintenance accounts by $955,000,000 for
efficiencies in the contractor work force.
Section 8118 has been included which allows funds
appropriated in operation and maintenance for depot maintenance
and repair available to complete projects begun with funds
appropriated in prior year Defense Acts.
Section 8119 has been included to provide for a negotiated
settlement for a request for equitable adjustment for the C-17
program.
Section 8120 has been included to allow modifications for
correct operation of satellites procured in fiscal year 1997
and 1998.
Section 8121 has been included which allows for the
transfer of $680,000,000 to fund increases in the cost of prior
year shipbuilding programs.
Section 8122 has been included which provides the Secretary
of Defense with authority to transfer appropriated funds within
the ``Shipbuilding and Conversion, Navy'' appropriations
account.
Section 8123 has been included which earmarks $56,000,000
of ``Operation and Maintenance, Navy'' funds for costs
associated with the refitting, necessary force protection
upgrades, and repair of the U.S.S. Cole.
Section 8124 has been included which allows the Secretary
of the Navy to pay any and all claims arising out of the
collision involving the U.S.S. Greeneville and the Ehime Maru
from funds available in ``Operation and Maintenance, Navy''.
Section 8125 has been included which allows that the
additional Social Security wage credit for uniformed service
members shall not be granted after fiscal year 2001.
Section 8126 has been included which reduces funds
available in operation and maintenance accounts by $230,000,000
to reflect face-of-life changes in utilities costs.
Section 8127 has been included which reduces funds
available to several Operation and Maintenance accounts by
$797,919,000 in order to reduce excess funded carryover.
Section 8128 has been included which earmarks $2,500,000
from ``Operation and Maintenance, Air Force'' only for a grant
for the repair, restoration, and preservation of the Lafayette
Escadrille Memorial.
Section 8129 has been included which prohibits funds
provided in this or any other Act be used by the Secretary of
the Interior to remove a World War I memorial from the Mojave
National Preserve.
Section 8130 has been included which provides $6,000,000
for ``Operation and Maintenance, Navy'' only for a grant for
the preservation of the U.S.S. Alabama as a museum and
memorial.
Section 8131 has been included which provides $5,000,000
for ``Operation and Maintenance, Navy'' only for a grant for
the preservation of the U.S.S. Intrepid as a museum and
memorial.
Section 8132 has been included which provides $6,000,000
for ``Operation and Maintenance, Air Force'' only for a grant
for the relocation of the Fairchild Air Force Base Elementary
School within the boundary of Fairchild Air Force Base.
Section 8133 has been included which provides $5,000,000
for ``Operation and Maintenance, Navy'' only for a grant to the
Central Kitsap School District in Washington State for a
special needs learning center.
Section 8134 has been included which provides $10,000,000
for ``Operation and Maintenance, Defense-Wide'' only for a
grant to the City of San Bernardino, California.
Section 8135 has been included which provides authority
under the Formerly Utilized Sites Remediation Action Program
for the cleanup of radioactive contamination and waste at the
Shpack Landfill site located in Massachusetts, and the Shallow
Land Disposal Area located in Pennsylvania.
Section 8136 has been included which provides $3,000,000 to
reestablish the Tethered Aerostat Radar System at Morgan City,
Louisiana.
Section 8137 has been included which prohibits the
establishment of an independent operation test bed system and/
or the transfer of certain UAV's from the Navy to the Joint
Forces Command.
Section 8138 has been included which waives the O&M
investment limitation for certain classified activities funded
in fiscal year 2001.
Section 8139 has been included which reduces $330,000,000
of funds available for Operation and Maintenance accounts to
reflect a savings attributable to improved scrutiny and
supervision in determining purchases to be made using
Government purchase cards.
Section 8140 has been included which earmarks $5,000,000
for a joint Department of Defense and Veterans Affairs study to
assess possibilities for reduced duplication of effort, and
increased joint use of facilities and equipment.
Section 8141 has been included which clarifies the use of
funds provided in Operation and Maintenance accounts for the
purchase of ultralightweight camouflage net systems.
Section 8142 has been included which enacts into law
provisions of title XXIX of H.R. 2586, the Fort Irwin Military
Land Withdrawal Act of 2001.
Section 8143 has been included which reduces by
$333,000,000 Operation and Maintenance, and Research,
Development, Test and Evaluation accounts for service
obligations to the Pentagon Reservation Maintenance Revolving
Fund.
Section 8144 has been included which reduces funds
available in ``Operation and Maintenance, Army'' by $37,200,000
to reflect efficiencies in Army acquisition management
practices.
Section 8145 has been included which earmarks $50,000,000
of ``Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, Army'' funds
only for the purpose of establishing a venture capital fund for
Army Science and Technology projects.
Section 8146 has been included which provides $10,000,000
to ``Operation and Maintenance, Defense-Wide'' only for
facility improvements at the 910th Airlift Wing at the
Youngstown-Warren Regional Airport.
Section 8147 has been included which provides $10,000,000
to support facility improvements and equipment purchases to
augment the capabilities of local government emergency response
units responsible for the protection of the Pentagon
Reservation and surrounding military and federal facilities.
Section 8148 has been included which extends title 38
U.S.C. pay and promotion authority for new hire civil service
nursing personnel.
Section 8149 has been included which waives certain fiscal
year 2001 financial reporting requirements for the Departments
of the Army and Navy.
Section 8150 has been included which prohibits the
Department to acquire ships for the Navy through the use of
incremental funding amounts or advanced appropriations.
Sec. 8151 has been included which provides $20,000,000 to
``Aircraft Procurement, Air Force'' only for the C-5 avionics
modernization program.
Sec. 8152 has been included which provides $10,000,000 to
``Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, Air Force'' only
to develop an Integrated Medical Information Technology System
Initiative. Recent reports of the National Academy of Sciences
and the President's Information Technology Advisor Committee
highlight the importance of Information Technology to the
transformation of health care. The Committee is pleased that
the Air Force Medical Service (AFMS) has recognized the need to
adapt recent developments in Information Technology to its
system and directs that the AFMS, in partnership with the
University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, develop an Integrated
Medical Information Technology System Initiative. The Committee
recommends $10,000,000 for this initiative to demonstrate the
application of advanced health information technology through
the National Medical Teleconsultation Project (NMTP) and the
Enterprise Health Information Management Project (EHIMP)--two
distinct medical integration challenges identified by the AFMS.
The NMTP will validate the system's ability to handle
transmissions of detailed individual patient data and the EHIMP
will validate its ability to standardize and integrate
disparate data. These projects will serve as `models' for
subsequent deployment throughout broader DoD helath care
delivery networks.
Sec. 8153 has been included which provides $6,000,000 to
``Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, Army'' only for
laser vision correction devices for the Walter Reed Army
Medical Center.
Section 8154 has been included which allows the Secretary
of the Air Force to enter into a multiyear procurement contract
for C-17 aircraft.
Sec. 8155 has been included which provides that any
reference in a provision of titles I through IX to ``this
Act'', shall be treated as referring only to the provision of
this division.
A new title IX ``Counter-Terrorism and Defense Against
Weapons of Mass Destruction'' has been added which includes
several new appropriations accounts.
Language has been added to create a new appropriations
transfer account titled ``Counter-Terrorism and Operational
Response Transfer Fund''.
Language has been added to create a new appropriations
account titled ``Procurement, Ballistic Missile Defense
Organization''. A proviso has been included which waives the
``Bona Fide Need'' rule for components of the PAC-3 missile.
Language has been added to create a new appropriations
account titled ``Research, Development, Test and Evaluation,
Ballistic Missile Defense Organization''. A proviso has been
included which waives provisions of 15 USC 638(f)(1)(C). A
second proviso has been included which rescinds $73,800,000
from fiscal year 2001 procurement funds.
Language has been added to create a new appropriations
account titled ``Defense Against Chemical and Biological
Weapons, Defense-Wide''.
Language has been added to create a new appropriations
account titled ``Defense Threat Reduction Agency''. A proviso
has been included which earmarks funds to field and demonstrate
counter-weapons of mass destruction technology at US military
facilities.

Appropriations Not Authorized By Law

Pursuant to clause 3(f)(1) of rule XIII of the Rules of the
House of Representatives, the following table lists the
appropriations in the accompanying bill which are not
authorized by law:

[In thousands of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appropriations
Agency/program Last year of Authorization in last year of Appropriations
authorization level authorization in this bill
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Military Personnel, Army...................... 2001 (\1\) 22,175,357 23,336,884
Military Personnel, Navy...................... 2001 (\1\) 17,772,297 19,574,184
Military Personnel, Marine Corps.............. 2001 (\1\) 6,833,100 7,343,640
Military Personnel, Air Force................. 2001 (\1\) 18,174,284 19,784,614
Reserve Personnel, Army....................... 2001 (\1\) 2,473,001 2,629,197
Reserve Personnel, Navy....................... 2001 (\1\) 1,576,174 1,644,823
Reserve Personnel, Marine Corps............... 2001 (\1\) 448,886 466,800
Reserve Personnel, Air Force.................. 2001 (\1\) 971,024 1,055,160
National Guard Personnel, Army................ 2001 (\1\) 3,782,536 4,004,335
National Guard Personnel, Air Force........... 2001 (\1\) 1,641,081 1,777,654
Operation and Maintenance, Army............... 2001 19,280,381 19,144,431 21,021,944
(By transfer--National Defense Stockpile). 2001 (50,000) (50,000) 0
Operation and Maintenance, Navy............... 2001 23,766,610 23,419,360 26,628,075
(By transfer--National Defense Stockpile). 2001 (50,000) (50,000) 0
Operation and Maintenance, Marine Corps....... 2001 2,826,291 2,778,758 2,939,434
Operation and Maintenance, Air Force.......... 2001 22,395,221 22,383,521 25,842,968
(By transfer--National Defense Stockpile). 2001 (50,000) (50,000) 0
Operation and Maintenance, Defense-Wide....... 2001 11,740,569 11,844,480 12,122,590
Operation and Maintenance, Army Reserve....... 2001 1,561,418 1,562,118 1,788,546
Operation and Maintenance, Navy Reserve....... 2001 978,946 978,946 1,003,690
Operation and Maintenance, Marine Corps 2001 144,159 145,959 144,023
Reserve......................................
Operation and Maintenance, Air Force Reserve.. 2001 1,903,859 1,903,659 2,029,866
Operation and Maintenance, Army National Guard 2001 3,182,335 3,333,835 3,723,759
Operation and Maintenance, Air National Guard. 2001 3,468,375 3,474,375 3,972,161
Overseas Contingency Operations Transfer Fund. 2001 4,100,577 3,938,777 2,744,226
United States Court of Appeals for the Armed 2001 8,574 8,574 9,096
Forces.......................................
Environmental Restoration, Army............... 2001 389,932 389,932 389,800
Environmental Restoration, Navy............... 2001 294,038 294,038 257,517
Environmental Restoration, Air Force.......... 2001 376,300 376,300 385,437
Environmental Restoration, Defense-Wide....... 2001 21,412 21,412 23,492
Environmental Restoration, Formerly Used 2001 231,499 231,499 190,255
Defense Sites................................
Overseas Humanitarian, Disaster, and Civic Aid 2001 55,900 55,900 49,700
Quality of Life Enhancements, Defense......... 2001 10,500 160,500 0
Support for International Sporting 2001 0 0 15,800
Competition, Defense.........................
Aircraft Procurement, Army.................... 2001 1,550,012 1,571,812 1,974,241
Missile Procurement, Army..................... 2001 1,320,681 1,320,681 1,057,409
Procurement of Weapons & Tracked Combat 2001 2,436,324 2,472,524 2,252,669
Vehicles, Army...............................
Procurement of Ammunition, Army............... 2001 1,179,916 1,220,516 1,211,615
Other Procurement, Army....................... 2001 4,235,719 4,497,009 4,103,036
Aircraft Procurement, Navy.................... 2001 8,394,338 8,477,138 8,084,543
Weapons Procurement, Navy..................... 2001 1,443,600 1,461,600 1,429,492
Procurement of Ammunition, Navy and Marine 2001 487,749 498,349 492,599
Corps........................................
Shipbuilding and Conversion, Navy............. 2001 12,826,919 11,614,633 10,134,883
Other Procurement, Navy....................... 2001 3,380,680 3,557,380 4,290,776
Procurement, Marine Corps..................... 2001 1,212,768 1,233,268 1,028,662
Aircraft Procurement, Air Force............... 2001 9,923,868 7,583,345 10,549,798
Procurement of Ammunition, Air Force.......... 2001 646,808 647,808 866,844
Missile Procurement, Air Force................ 2001 2,863,778 2,863,778 2,918,118
Other Procurement, Air Force.................. 2001 7,711,647 7,763,747 7,856,671
Procurement, Defense-Wide..................... 2001 2,278,408 2,346,258 1,387,283
National Guard and Reserve Equipment.......... 2001 0 100,000 501,485
Defense Production Act Purchases.............. 2001 0 3,000 50,000
Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, 2001 5,568,482 6,342,552 7,115,438
Army.........................................
Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, 2001 8,715,335 9,494,374 10,896,307
Navy.........................................
Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, 2001 13,779,144 14,138,244 14,884,058
Air Force....................................
Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, 2001 10,681,652 11,157,375 6,949,098
Defense-Wide.................................
Operational Test and Evaluation, Defense...... 2001 192,060 227,060 245,355
Defense Working Capital Funds................. 2001 916,276 916,276 1,524,986
National Defense Sealift Fund................. 2001 388,158 400,658 412,708
Defense Health Program........................ 2001 11,480,123 12,117,779 18,277,403
Chemical Agents & Munitions Destruction, Army:
Operation and maintenance................. 2001 600,000 600,000 728,520
Procurement............................... 2001 105,700 105,700 164,158
Research, development, test, and 2001 274,400 274,400 200,379
evaluation...............................
Drug Interdiction and Counter-Drug Activities, 2001 869,000 869,000 827,381
Defense......................................
Office of the Inspector General............... 2001 147,545 147,545 152,021
CIA Retirement & Disability System Fund....... 2001 216,000 216,000 212,000
Intelligence Community Management Account..... 2001 137,631 148,631 144,929
Transfer to Dept of Justice............... 2001 (27,000) (34,100) (34,100)
Payment to Kaho'olawe Island Conveyance, 2001 25,000 60,000 25,000
Remediation, and Environmental Restoration
Fund.........................................
National Security Education Trust Fund........ 2001 6,950 6,950 8,000
Sec. 8005..................................... 2001 (2,000,000) (2,000,000) (2,500,000)
Sec. 8022..................................... 2001 0 8,000 8,000
Sec. 8038..................................... 2001 24,000 24,000 19,000
Sec. 8041..................................... 2001 3,000 3,000 3,362
Sec. 8055..................................... 2001 0 -546,980 -441,578
Sec. 8084..................................... 2001 0 -800,000 -245,000
Sec. 8085..................................... 2001 0 -705,000 -527,000
Sec. 8093..................................... 2001 0 -856,900 -200,000
Sec. 8099..................................... 2001 0 5,000 8,000
Sec. 8107..................................... 2001 0 7,500 10,000
Sec. 8139..................................... 2001 0 0 -330,000
Sec. 8134..................................... 2001 0 10,000 10,000
Sec. 8115..................................... 2001 0 2,000 2,000
Sec. 8116..................................... 2001 0 2,000 2,000
Sec. 8117..................................... 2001 0 -71,367 -955,000
Sec. 8127..................................... 2001 0 -92,700 -797,919
Sec. 8126..................................... 2001 0 0 -230,000
Sec. 8136..................................... 2001 0 0 3,000
Sec. 8132..................................... 2001 0 0 6,000
Sec. 8144..................................... 2001 0 0 -37,200
Sec. 8130..................................... 2001 0 0 6,000
Sec. 8131..................................... 2001 0 0 5,000
Sec. 8133..................................... 2001 0 0 5,000
Sec. 8143..................................... 2001 0 0 -333,000
Sec. 8146..................................... 2001 0 0 10,000
Sec. 8147..................................... 2001 0 0 10,000
Sec. 8151..................................... 2001 0 0 20,000
Sec. 8152..................................... 2001 0 0 10,000
Sec. 8153..................................... 2001 0 0 6,000
Counter-Terrorism and Operational Response 2001 (\2\) (\2\) 1,670,000
Transfer Fund................................
Former Soviet Union Threat Reduction.......... 2001 (\2\) (\2\) 403,000
Ballistic Missile Defense Organization-- 2001 (\2\) (\2\) 794,557
Procurement..................................
Ballistic Missile Defense Organization--RDT&E. 2001 (\2\) (\2\) 7,053,721
Ballistic Missile Defense Organization--FY2001 2001 (\2\) (\2\) -73,800
Rescission...................................
Defense Against Chemical & Biological Weapons, 2001 (\2\) (\2\) 1,065,940
Def-Wide.....................................
Defense Threat Reduction Agency............... 2001 (\2\) (\2\) 806,471
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The FY2001 National Defense Authorization Act (P.L. 106-398) authorizes $75,801,666,000 for military
personnel.
\2\ Funds for these programs were authorized in other accounts.

Transfer of Funds

Pursuant to clause 3(f)(2) of rule XIII of the Rules of the
House of Representatives, the following is submitted describing
the transfer of funds provided in the accompanying bill.

transfers

Language has been included in ``Operation and Maintenance,
Army'' which provides for the transfer of $1,000,000 to the
``National Park Service'' for improvements at Fort Baker.
Language has been included in ``Overseas Contingency
Operations Transfer Fund'', which provides for the transfer of
funds out of this account to other appropriation accounts.
Language has been included in ``Environmental Restoration,
Army'' which provides for the transfer of funds out of and into
this account.
Language has been included in ``Environmental Restoration,
Navy'' which provides for the transfer of funds out of and into
this account.
Language has been included in ``Environmental Restoration,
Air Force'' which provides for the transfer of funds out of and
into this account.
Language has been included in ``Environmental Restoration,
Defense-Wide'' which provides for the transfer of funds out of
and into this account.
Language has been included in ``Environmental Restoration,
Formerly Used Defense Sites'' which provides for the transfer
of funds out of and into this account.
Language has been included in ``Drug Interdiction and
Counter-Drug Activities, Defense'' which transfers funds to
other appropriations accounts of the Department of Defense.
Language has been included in ``Intelligence Community
Management Account'' which provides for the transfer of funds
to the Department of Justice for the National Drug Intelligence
Center.
Twelve provisions (Sections 8005, 8006, 8015, 8038, 8041,
8063, 8075, 8110, 8116, 8121, 8122, 8123) and title IX contain
language which allows transfers of funds between accounts.

Rescissions

Pursuant to clause 3(f)(2) of rule XIII of the Rules of the
House of Representatives, the following table is submitted
describing the rescissions recommended in the accompanying
bill:

Former Soviet Union Threat Reduction 2000/2002.......... $32,000,000
Other Procurement, Navy 2000/2002....................... 16,300,000
Aircraft Procurement, Air Force 2000/2002............... 8,500,000
Other Procurement, Air Force 2000/2002.................. 20,000,000
Former Soviet Union Threat Reduction 2001/2003.......... 32,000,000
Aircraft Procurement, Army 2001/2003.................... 22,000,000
Procurement of Ammunition, Army 2001/2003............... 27,400,000
Other Procurement, Army 2001/2003....................... 28,745,000
Aircraft Procurement, Navy 2001/2003.................... 8,600,000
Weapons Procurement, Navy 2001/2003..................... 35,000,000
Other Procurement, Navy 2001/2003....................... 14,600,000
Procurement, Marine Corps 2001/2003..................... 1,000,000
Aircraft Procurement, Air Force 2001/2003............... 19,300,000
Procurement of Ammunition, Air Force 2001/2003.......... 5,800,000
Other Procurement, Air Force 2001/2003.................. 16,800,000
Procurement, Defense-Wide 2001/2003..................... 73,800,000
Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, Army 2001/
2002................................................ 16,300,000
Research Development, Test and Evaluation, Navy 2001/
2002................................................ 58,800,000
Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, Air Force
2001/2002........................................... 74,433,000
Defense Health Program 2001/2002........................ 4,000,000

Statement of General Performance Goals and Objectives

Pursuant to clause 3(c)(4) of rule XIII of the Rules of the
House of Representatives, the following is a statement of
general performance goals and objectives for which this measure
authorizes funding:
The Committee on Appropriations considers program
performance, including a program's success in developing and
attaining outcome-related goals and objectives, in developing
funding recommendations.

Compliance with Clause 3 of Rule XIII (Ramseyer Rule)

In compliance with clause 3(e) of rule XIII of the Rules of
the House of Representatives, changes in existing law made by
the bill, as reported, are shown as follows (existing law
proposed to be omitted is enclosed in black brackets, new
matter is printed in italic, existing law in which no change is
proposed is shown in roman):

SECTION 8156 OF THE DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 2001

Sec. 8156. In addition to the amounts provided elsewhere in
this Act, the amount of $10,000,000 is hereby appropriated for
``Operation and Maintenance, Army'' and shall be available to
the Secretary of the Army, notwithstanding any other provision
of law, only to be provided as a grant to the City of San
Bernardino, California[, contingent on the resolution of the
case ``City of San Bernardino v. United States'', pending as of
July 1, 2000, in the United States District Court for the
Central District of California (C.D. Cal. Case No. CV 96-
8867)].

Constitutional Authority

Clause 3(d)(1) of rule XIII of the Rules of the House of
Representatives states that:

Each report of a committee on a bill or joint
resolution of a public character, shall include a
statement citing the specific powers granted to the
Congress in the Constitution to enact the law proposed
by the bill or joint resolution.

The Committee on Appropriations bases its authority to
report this legislation from Clause 7 of Section 9 of Article I
of the Constitution of the United States of America which
states:

No money shall be drawn from the Treasury but in
consequence of Appropriations made by law * * *

Appropriations contained in this Act are made pursuant to
this specific power granted by the Constitution.

Comparison With the Budget Resolution

Clause 3(c)(2) of rule XIII of the Rules of the House of
Representatives requires an explanation of compliance with
section 308(a)(1)(A) of the Congressional Budget and
Impoundment Control Act of 1974 (Public Law 93-344), as
amended, which requires that the report accompanying a bill
providing new budget authority contain a statement detailing
how that authority compares with the reports submitted under
section 302 of the Act for the most recently agreed to
concurrent resolution on the budget for the fiscal year from
the Committee's section 302(a) allocation. This information for
Division A of the accompanying bill follows:

[In millions of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
302(b) allocation-- This bill--
---------------------------------------------------------------
Budget Budget
authority Outlays authority Outlays
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Discretionary................................... $299,860 $293,941 $317,207 $308,873
Mandatory....................................... 282 282 282 282
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Note.--The table above shows the bill being technically in excess of its current 302(b) suballocation. The
excess occurs because the Committee has not been allocated an additional 302(a) allocation, as described in
section 218 of H. Con. Res. 83 (the Concurrent Resolution on the Budget for Fiscal Year 2002), to accommodate
the President's $18.5 billion Defense budget amendment. This bill is within planning suballocations that have
been developed to implement the overall discretionary spending levels of the bipartisan budget agreement for
fiscal year 2002.

In compliance with section 308(a)(1)(B) of the
Congressional Budget and Impoundment Control Act of 1974
(Public Law 93-344), as amended, the following table contains
five-year projects associated with the budget authority
provided in Division A of the accompanying bill.
(Millions)
Budget Authority........................................ 317,489
Outlays:
2002................................................ 212,791
2003................................................ 65,984
2004................................................ 20,286
2005................................................ 7,550
2006 and beyond..................................... 6,083

Financial Assistance to State and Local Governments

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

DIVISION B--FISCAL YEAR 2002 SUPPLEMENTAL APPROPRIATIONS

Division Highlights

This Division includes a total of $20 billion in
supplemental appropriations, to be allocated from amounts made
available in Public Law 107-38, the Emergency Supplemental
Appropriations Act for Recovery from and Response to Terrorist
Attacks on the United States, FY 2001. This Act provided a
total of $40 billion in response to the tragic events of
September 11, 2001. Of the $40 billion, $10 billion was
available for obligation immediately, another $10 billion was
available for obligation 15 days after the Director of the
Office of Management and Budget submitted to the House and
Senate Committees on Appropriations a proposed allocation and
plan for the use of the funds, and $20 billion was available
only after a subsequent appropriations Act allocated those
funds in law. This Division allocates this final $20 billion of
emergency funding.
Included in this Division is $7.3 billion for Department of
Defense programs for national security operations. The
remaining funds address high priority needs relating to
recovery efforts, homeland security, and public health. The
Department of Justice is appropriated $1.5 billion, including
$538.5 million for the Federal Bureau of Investigation for its
investigation into the attacks and $409.6 million for the
Immigration and Naturalization Service for border security. The
Department of Health and Human Services is appropriated nearly
$2 billion for public health activities.
The Committee also recommends that the Department of Labor
receive $1.5 billion to assist workers who were dislocated by
the attacks. A total of $1.5 billion is recommended for airline
security, including $1 billion, financed by user fees, for the
screening of passengers and property on passenger aircraft. The
Federal Emergency Management Agency is provided $4.9 billion to
help victims of the attacks, remove debris from the World Trade
Center site, and assist with rebuilding critical
infrastructure.
The remaining funds provide for additional security at
Federal facilities, increased transportation security, improved
protections against bioterrorism, and other activities directly
related to the attacks of September 11th and their aftermath.

CHAPTER 1

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Office of the Secretary

The Committee recommends $4,582,000 for the Office of the
Secretary for the following purposes:
$3,425,000 for increased costs for security
guards and for other one-time security requirements at
the following locations:
$30,000 for the George Washington
Carver Center, Beltsville, MD.
$1,143,750 for the National
Information Technical Center, Kansas City, MO.
$957,500 for the National Finance
Center, Information Technology Building, New
Orleans, LA.
$846,250 for the National Finance
Center, TANO Building, New Orleans, LA.
$447,500 for the Office of the Chief
Information Officer, Natural Resources Research
Center, Ft. Collins, CO.
$461,000 for the Office of Procurement and
Property Management to perform security assessments for
the Department, and for on-site security oversight and
support during the Olympic ceremonies.
$115,000 for security requirements of the
Kansas City Management Office of the Farm Service
Agency.
$581,000 for security requirements of the
rural development offices in St. Louis, MO.

Agriculture Buildings and Facilities and Rental Payments

The Committee recommends $2,875,000 for security measures
at headquarters facilities in the Washington, D.C. area,
including increased guard services, design and first phase of
installation of public address system, and design and first
phase of installation of window blast protection covering.

Agricultural Research Service

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

The Committee recommends $5,635,000 for security measures
at the following locations: $98,000 for Newark, DE; $3,227,000
for Plum Island, NY; $1,650,000 for Ames, IA; $100,000 for East
Lansing, MI; $150,000 for Ft. Detrick, MD; $260,000 for
Laramie, WY; and $150,000 for security assessments at foreign
locations.

Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

The Committee recommends a total of $8,175,000. For
security measures, the Committee recommends $3,175,000 in the
specified amounts for the following locations: $315,000 for
Riverdale, MD; $1,788,000 for Mission, TX; $461,000 for
Phoenix, AZ; and $611,000 for Otis, MA. The Committee also
recommends $5,000,000 to establish an APHIS biosecurity staff.

BUILDINGS AND FACILITIES

The Committee recommends $14,081,000 for the National
Veterinary Services Laboratories (NVSL) in Ames, IA. NVSL is
the main diagnostic laboratory for national animal disease
control and eradication programs. Facilities currently occupied
by NVSL are grossly inadequate. Currently, diagnostic testing
for animal diseases such as bovine spongiform encephalopathy
(BSE), anthrax, e. coli, and salmonella are conducted in
alocation that creates a potential public health risk should security
procedures fail.
The Committee's recommendation would finance the relocation
of laboratories to the main NVSL campus where a higher level of
safety and security can be provided. In addition, the
recommended funding would complete the physical security
countermeasure installation, and would enhance security guard
service.

Food Safety and Inspection Service

The Committee recommends a total of $9,800,000 as follows:
$900,000 for security measures at St. Louis, MO and Alameda,
CA; and $8,900,000 to finance a bioterrorism initiative in
order to expand the agency's capability to detect and respond
to bacterial and chemical agents contaminating the food supply.

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

The Committee recommends $104,350,000 for activities of the
Food and Drug Administration.
The Committee recognizes the important role that FDA plays
in protecting the public health by ensuring the availability of
safe and effective drugs, vaccines, blood products, medical
devices, and animal health products, and by ensuring a safe
food supply. The Committee believes that a combination of
public health and law enforcement responsibilities requires
agency involvement in a number of aspects of the preparedness
for and response to a terrorist act and that both civilian and
military sectors of the population are served by FDA's mandate,
thus broadening further the scope of its antiterrorism
activities.
The Committee recognizes FDA's need for special assistance
in order to hire quickly a large number of personnel and
expects the Office of Personnel Management to be fully
supportive of this effort. Also, the Committee directs the FDA
to use delegated hiring authority, quick hire, and any
contracting services available to bring people on board quickly
and with the proper security clearance.
The Committee believes these funds will enable FDA to
greatly accelerate its efforts to deal with any potential
bioterrorism incident and expects these funds will be used for
three major efforts. First, $34,600,000 to speed the
development of new bioterrorism tools by accelerating the
availability of medical products (drugs, vaccines, and devices)
necessary to public health preparedness for the intentional use
of biological, chemical, or nuclear agents. This amount
provides for 152 new hires for this effort. Second, $61,000,000
to increase safety of our imported foods by providing for
increased inspections of imported food products. The additional
resources will allow the FDA to hire 410 more inspectors, lab
specialists and other compliance experts, in addition to
allowing the FDA to invest in new technology and scientific
equipment to detect select agents. Third, $8,750,000 and 3 FTE,
to increase physical security and provide for increased guard
services, improved security systems, and physical barriers at
the entrances to buildings and parking lots.
Recommendations by activity: The Committee recommends that
of the total amount provided for new bioterrorism tools: (1)
$11,100,000 and 25 FTE shall be for the Center for Drug,
Evaluation and Research and related field activities in the
Office of Regulatory Affairs; (2) $16,800,000 and 102 FTE shall
be for the Center for Biologics, Evaluation and Research and
related field activities in the Office of Regulatory Affairs;
(3) $1,500,000 and 13 FTE shall be for the Center for Devices
and Radiological Health and related field activities in the
Office of Regulatory Affairs; (4) $4,800,000 and 8 FTE shall be
for the National Center for Toxicological Research; and,
$400,000 and 8 FTE shall be for the Office of Chief Counsel
within the Office of the Commissioner. Of the total amounts
provided for the safety of imported foods: (1) $44,500,000 and
395 FTE shall be for the Center for Food Safety and Applied
Nutrition and related field activities in the Office of
Regulatory Affairs; and, (2) $1,500,000 and 15 FTE shall be for
the Center for Animal Drugs and Feeds and related field
activities in the Office of Regulatory Affairs. The amount for
physical security totals $8,750,000 and 3 FTE: $300,000 and 3
FTE shall be for the Office of Facilities within the Office of
Management and Systems and $8,450,000 shall be for the Other
Rent and Rent-Related Activities.
Further, the Committee recognizes the importance of acting
quickly in cases of emergency. Up to $3,000,000 may be
reallocated to respond to a public health emergency, with after
the fact notification of the Committee.

INDEPENDENT AGENCIES

Commodity Futures Trading Commission

The Committee recommends $6,495,000 for the Commodity
Futures Trading Commission (CFTC). These resources are required
to ensure that CFTC has adequate resources on-hand to address
basic disaster recovery needs for the Commission's New York
regional office, which was formerly located in the World Trade
Center. Efforts will focus on requirements for re-establishing
a working office, including space, information technology,
equipment, and additional staff reassigned from the District of
Columbia to New York to ensure continued market oversight.

CHAPTER 2

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

General Administration

ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW AND APPEALS

The Committee recommendation includes $3,500,000 to cover
additional adjudication expenses of the Executive Office for
Immigration Review resulting from the enforcement of
immigration laws in response to the terrorist attacks on
September 11, 2001.

Legal Activities

SALARIES AND EXPENSES, GENERAL LEGAL ACTIVITIES

The Committee recommendation includes $12,500,000 for
General Legal Activities for the coordination of international
legal activities, the provision of expert legal advice on
issues related to terrorism prosecution, and for the Office of
the Special Master to administer compensation to the victims of
the September 11, 2001 attacks.

SALARIES AND EXPENSES, UNITED STATES ATTORNEYS

The Committee recommendation includes a total of
$68,450,000 for the United States Attorneys to establish anti-
terrorism task forces, investigate and prosecute those involved
in the recent terrorist attacks, and renovate offices and
equipment damaged in the southern district of New York.

SALARIES AND EXPENSES, UNITED STATES MARSHALS SERVICE

The Committee recommendation includes $11,100,000 for the
United States Marshals Service for expansion of the witness
protection safe sites to accommodate the influx of witnesses
associated with the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks; for
emergency equipment, travel, vehicles, and overtime to produce,
protect and secure witnesses; and for protective details for
members of the Federal judiciary.

Federal Bureau of Investigation

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

The Committee recommendation includes $538,500,000 to cover
the extraordinary expenses incurred by the Federal Bureau of
Investigation in the investigation of the September 11, 2001
terrorist attacks, and in the detection, prevention and
investigation of future terrorist incidents. The Committee
recommendation includes $105,000,000 for continued
implementation of Trilogy; $63,966,000 for information
assurance needs; $7,404,000 to hire additional language
translators; $35,289,000 for the National Infrastructure
Protection Center; $74,543,000 for surveillance and
counterterrorism needs and wireless intercepts; $13,372,000 for
computer analysis response teams; and $11,278,000 for DNA
analysis and systems. The FBI is also encouraged to review the
Legal Attache program and establish additional Legal Attache
offices as necessary.

Immigration and Naturalization Service

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

The Committee recommendation includes a total of
$409,600,000, including $165,857,000 to increase the number of
inspectors and Border Patrol agents across the United States
northern border; $23,454,000 to enhance intelligence
capabilities and upgrade information technology capabilities,
including the student visa tracking system; $17,069,000 for
investigations and detention and removal needs; and $10,200,000
to fund joint terrorism task forces above the request.

Office of Justice Programs

JUSTICE ASSISTANCE

The Committee recommendation includes a total of
$400,000,000 for counterterrorism assistance to State and local
governments. This includes $45,000,000 for emergency response
communications technologies and equipment for Northern
Virginia; $20,000,000 for the Capitol Wireless Integrated
Network in the Washington Metropolitan Area; $15,000,000 for a
chemical sensor program within the Washington, D.C. subway
system; and $9,800,000 for an aircraft for counterterrorism and
other required activities for the City of New York. The amounts
provided for counterterrorism general equipment grants shall be
made available only in accordance with an appropriate State
plan.

STATE AND LOCAL LAW ENFORCEMENT ASSISTANCE

The Committee recommendation includes $17,100,000 for a
grant to the Utah Olympic Public Safety Command for security
equipment, infrastructure, personnel, and other related costs
for the 2002 Winter Olympics, including the Paralympics and
related events. Funding would be provided under the Department
of Justice's Edward Byrne Memorial State and Local Law
Enforcement Program.

CRIME VICTIMS FUND

The Committee recommendation includes $68,100,000 for the
Crime Victims Fund to provide grants for counseling and other
programs for the victims of the September 11, 2001 terrorist
attacks, as well as their families and crisis responders.
Grants will go to government and private organizations
providing services to victims residing in New York, New Jersey,
Virginia, Massachusetts, and other States as needed.

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

OPERATIONS AND ADMINISTRATION

The Committee recommendation includes $750,000 for
necessary security upgrades of the United States Foreign
Commercial Service overseas offices.

Export Administration

OPERATIONS AND ADMINISTRATION

The Committee recommendation includes $1,756,000 for the
Critical Infrastructure Assurance office project matrix, and
for additional resources to monitor dual use efforts.

National Telecommunications and Information Administration

PUBLIC TELECOMMUNICATIONS FACILITIES, PLANNING AND CONSTRUCTION

The Committee recommendation includes $8,250,000 to restore
public broadcast facilities destroyed with the World Trade
Center. In addition, language is included providing a waiver
for matching requirements.

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

OPERATIONS, RESEARCH, AND FACILITIES

The Committee recommendation includes $750,000 for
licensing and enforcement of commercial satellite remote
sensing.

Departmental Management

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

The Committee recommendation includes $8,636,000 for the
Department of Commerce's domestic security upgrades. The
Committee recommendation consolidates funding for specific
Commerce bureaus under this account.

THE JUDICIARY

Supreme Court of the United States

CARE OF THE BUILDING AND GROUNDS

The Committee recommendation includes a total of
$10,000,000 to enhance security at the Supreme Court building.

Courts of Appeals, District Courts, and Other Judicial Services

COURT SECURITY

The Committee recommendation includes a total of
$21,500,000 to enhance security at federal court facilities.
The recommendation provides $4,000,000 to reimburse the United
States Marshals Service for 106 supervisory deputy marshals
responsible for coordinating security in each of the 94
judicial districts and the 12 judicial circuits. A full-time
supervisor for court security is needed at the local level to
coordinate protection of judges both on- and off-site, oversee
the courthouse security program, and ensure that emergency
response procedures for chemical/biological, terrorist or other
attacks are in place. The recommendation also provides
$17,500,000 million for increased Court Security Officer hours
required to maintain the current level of security at federal
court facilities for the remainder of the fiscal year.

DEPARTMENT OF STATE AND RELATED AGENCY

RELATED AGENCY

Broadcasting Board of Governors

INTERNATIONAL BROADCASTING OPERATIONS

The Committee recommendation includes $9,200,000 for
operational costs of surrogate radio broadcasting by Radio Free
Europe/Radio Liberty to the people of Afghanistan in languages
spoken in Afghanistan, including transmission costs.

BROADCASTING CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS

The Committee recommendation includes $10,000,000 for
capital requirements associated with the establishment of
surrogate broadcasting by Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty to
the people of Afghanistan in languages spoken in Afghanistan.

RELATED AGENCIES

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

The Committee recommendation includes $1,301,000 for
response and recovery activities to reconstruct the office and
files that were destroyed as a result of the attack and to
provide technology and telecommunications in both the temporary
and permanent locations.

Securities and Exchange Commission

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

The Committee recommendation includes $20,705,000 for
disaster recovery needs for the Commission's New York regional
office. This amount will support the acquisition of new office
space, equipment and information technology; the detailing of
additional staff to New York to monitor securities markets;
implementation of security upgrades; and other recovery needs.

Small Business Administration

DISASTER LOANS PROGRAM ACCOUNT

The Committee recommendation includes $140,000,000 for
additional disaster loans in response to the September 11, 2001
terrorist attacks. These funds will support an estimated
additional $600,000,000 in low interest loans for affected
entities.

GENERAL PROVISIONS--THIS CHAPTER

The Committee recommendation includes section 201, allowing
non-profit organizations and non-depository financial
institutions to receive economic injury loans from the Small
Business Administration (SBA), and to enable the SBA to adjust
the definition of a small business to reflect business profiles
in affected areas.
The Committee recommendation includes section 202, enabling
the SBA to raise the aggregate cap on loans to a single
borrower for businesses directly impacted by the September 11,
2001 terrorist attacks.
The Committee recommendation includes section 203, waiving
provisions of existing legislation that require authorizations
to be in place for the State Department and the Broadcasting
Board of Governors prior to the expenditure of any appropriated
funds.

CHAPTER 3

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE--MILITARY

Operation and Maintenance

DEFENSE EMERGENCY RESPONSE FUND

The fiscal year 2001 Emergency Supplemental Appropriations
Act for Recovery from and Response to Terrorist Attacks on the
United States (Public Law 107-38) provided $40,000,000,000 in
emergency appropriations. Pursuant to the provisions of that
Act, the President has proposed, in formal messages to the
Congress received as of November 9, 2001, that activities of
the Department of Defense (and related intelligence activities)
be allocated a total of $20,516,000,000. Documents provided to
the Committee by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB)
indicate that the President intends to allocate another
$345,000,000 of funds not yet formally designated, yet still
available from Public Law 107-38, to defense and intelligence
activities. Therefore, in all, the Administration has indicated
its intent to allocate $20,861,000,000 in emergency
appropriations to defense and intelligence activities from
funds made available in Public Law 107-38.
Pursuant to the terms of Public Law 107-38, the President
has proposed the Congress formally approve in a supplemental
appropriations act the allocation of $20,000,000,000 from
Public Law 107-38. For programs funded in this chapter, the
President's supplemental request included a total of
$7,323,969,000 to support the Department of Defense's crisis
and recovery operations and national security responsibilities.
This amount is to support activities as follows: $1,735,000,000
for increased situational awareness; $855,969,000 for enhanced
force protection; $219,000,000 for improved command and
control; $2,938,000,000 for increased worldwide posture;
$545,000,000 for offensive counter-terrorism; $106,000,000 for
initial crisis response; and $925,000,000 for repair and
upgrade of the Pentagon.
The Committee recommends $7,242,911,000, a net decrease of
$81,058,000 from the request. The Committee notes this largely
reflects a reallocation of funds from Defense Department
programs funded in this chapter to other Department of Defense
activities (emergency military construction projects) funded in
Chapter 9 of the Committee supplemental appropriations bill.
Many of the proposed adjustments in this chapter to the
supplemental request reflect the fact that, in its version of
the fiscal year 2002 Defense Appropriations Act, the Committee
has already provided funding for many of the initiatives
requested by the President in the supplemental. In addition,
the Committee recommends other adjustments in light of the
pressing need to accelerate a number of counter-terrorism
programs not contained in the request, or in order to augment
funding already allocated by the President in a variety of
areas.
A summary of the Committee's recommendations, versus the
supplemental request, is shown in the table below.

SUMMARY
[In millions of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Budget Committee Change from
request recommended request
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Increased Situational Awareness................................. 1,735 1,735 0
Enhanced Force Protection....................................... 856 743 -113
Improved Command & Control...................................... 219 162 -57
Increased Worldwide Posture..................................... 2,938 2,801 -137
Offensive Counter Terrorism..................................... 545 769 224
Initial Crisis Response......................................... 106 108 2
Pentagon Repairs/Upgrade........................................ 925 925 0
-----------------------------------------------
Grand Total, Chapter 3.................................... 7,324 7,243 -81
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Classified Programs

Recommended adjustments to classified programs are
addressed in a classified annex accompanying this report.

Defense and Intelligence Funding From Public Law 107-38

The Committee observes that in this supplemental request--
as well as in the transfer of already available funds contained
in Public Law 107-38--the Administration has chosen to request
funds for defense and intelligence activities in a manner that
departs from all previous norms. In nearly all communications
to the Congress regarding the emergency funding needed for
defense and intelligence activities in response to the
terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, it has submitted both
its formal requests and supporting data--which normally would
include the appropriations accounts ultimately required for
obligation and fiscal management of funds, as well as program
and budget documentation--in a format radically different than
that traditionally used in budget requests. For example, the
Administration has requested that all Department of Defense
funds be appropriated to the ``Defense Emergency Response
Fund''--an account created by Congress in response to
naturaldisasters in 1989, and which has not been included in any budget
request by any subsequent Administration--for obligation, as opposed to
the appropriations accounts typically used in defense appropriations
acts. Compounding these difficulties, the Committee believes the
Administration's communication with the Committee and Congress
regarding planned allocation and obligation of funds has been, at best,
intermittent and scattershot (a notable exception being in the area of
intelligence and DoD classified activities).
The Committee is well aware of the difficulty, less than
two months following the attacks on our Nation, of preparing
any budget to respond to the myriad of requirements confronting
the U.S. military and intelligence community. And it
understands full well the need at this time to provide funds to
the executive branch, and ultimately to the ``user in the
field'', in a manner that combines timeliness with flexibility;
as well as the difficulties associated with generating precise
budget estimates in the midst of so much activity.
Accordingly, the Committee has recommended appropriating
funds for the Department of Defense and the intelligence
community in this supplemental measure in a manner basically
consistent with the Administration's approach, and specific
appropriations language requests. However, the Committee does
not believe this should be viewed as setting a new precedent.
Rather, it believes--and directs--that all subsequent
supplemental appropriations requests for defense and
intelligence activities in response to the attacks of September
11, 2001 be, to the extent possible, submitted using the
traditional appropriations account format and with similarly
configured, detailed supporting materials. This must be done in
order to reinstate a more ``regular order'' approach--to ensure
proper program review, fiscal discipline and controls, and
oversight by both the executive and legislative branches.

Reporting, Reprogramming, and New Start Requirements

In keeping with the concerns expressed above, and in order
to maintain the needed level of program funding fidelity and
budget discipline, the Committee expects that funds provided in
this chapter be used only for the activities identified in the
tables and paragraphs contained in this report (and, as
necessary, as amended in conference with the Senate), subject
to the traditional reprogramming procedures including
notification of new starts. This direction also applies to the
allocation of all other funds from Public Law 107-38 that have,
or will be, provided to the Department of Defense and those
activities of the National Foreign Intelligence Program (NFIP)
funded in defense appropriations acts. (The other funds
referred to include the Administration's announced allocation
of $13.5 billion in funds for defense and intelligence
activities from Public Law 107-38 which were not requested in
the President's supplemental request.) The Committee directs
the Department, in consultation with OMB, within 30 days of
enactment of this supplemental measure, to provide an
allocation plan for these first two increments of funding
(referred to by OMB as ``cash'' and ``15-day release'' funds,
in internal working documents), consistent with the guidance in
this report. Additional discussion regarding the so-called
``15-day release'' funds is found later in this report.
The Committee directs that, within 30 days of enactment of
this supplemental measure, the Undersecretary of Defense
(Comptroller) submit a Base for Reprogramming (DD 1414) for all
funds provided in the supplemental, as well as using the
project level of detail provided in the Committee report. The
Committee directs that, thereafter, a report be submitted on a
quarterly basis starting January 1, 2002 to the congressional
defense committees detailing: the funds available; the funds
transferred; the appropriations account to which transferred;
the amount obligated; and the amount expended. This report
shall generally be at the level of detail identified in the
Base for Reprogramming. For military personnel and operation
and maintenance accounts, the level of detail shall be similar
to the monthly reports provided to the Appropriations
Committees for ongoing operations in Bosnia and Kosovo. Each
report shall, for military personnel and operation and
maintenance accounts, identify savings due to cancellation or
downsizing of normal peacetime education, training,
professional development, or other activities due to individual
and unit activations or deployments in the war on terrorism.
The Committee directs that the threshold for below
threshold reprogrammings for defense appropriations activities
funded through appropriations provided in Public Law 107-38 be
set at $10,000,000. All reprogrammings among projects in the
Base for Reprogrammings at or above $10,000,000 are subject to
prior approval by the congressional defense committees per the
traditional reprogramming process. The Committee also directs
that new start notification procedures apply to the funds
provided in the supplemental. Notification of new starts,
regardless of dollar value, may be made by letter to the
congressional defense committees. The Committee encourages,
after submission of new start notification letters, immediate
follow-up with the congressional defense committees to ensure
expedited consideration and approval, as appropriate.

Overseas Contingency Operations Transfer Fund

Included within operation and maintenance appropriations
provided in title II of the Committee's version of the fiscal
year 2002 Defense Appropriations bill is funding for ongoing
DoD operations in Bosnia and Kosovo. These funds are provided
in the Overseas Contingency Operations Transfer Fund (OCOTF).
As a central transfer appropriations account, funds
appropriated to the OCOTF are provided to the Secretary of
Defense in a manner which provides considerable flexibility in
the allocation of funds provided therein. The Committee notes
that the basis for its actions in the fiscal year 2002 Defense
Appropriations bill were intended to fund U.S. military
activities in the Balkans, and not to provide a source of funds
for activities resulting as a consequence of the September 11,
2001 attacks. In keeping with the rationale behind the OCOTF,
the Committee therefore directs that funds provided in the
OCOTF may be used for other deployment and operational
activities than those specifically identified in the fiscal
year 2002 budget submission, but only 30 days after prior
written notification by the Secretary of Defense to the
congressional defense committees as to the specific purposes
for which the funds will be used.

INCREASED SITUATIONAL AWARENESS

The President requested $1,735,000,000 for Increased
Situational Awareness. These funds will support on going
military operations and enhance U.S. intelligence,
reconnaissance, surveillance, and targeting capabilities
against terrorist organizations.
The Committee recommends $1,735,000,000, as detailed in the
following table:

INCREASED SITUATIONAL AWARENESS
[In millions of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Budget Committee
request recommended Change
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CLASSIFIED...................................................... 1,735 1,735 0
-----------------------------------------------
Total: Increased Situational Awareness.................... 1,735 1,735 0
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Recommended adjustments to the programs in the supplemental
request are addressed in a classified annex accompanying this
report.

ENHANCED FORCE PROTECTION

The President requested $855,969,000 for Enhanced Force
Protection. These resources are to fund actions taken to better
protect military personnel and facilities against terrorist
attacks based on vulnerability assessments. These force
protection activities include improved security, access
control, training, chemical-biological detection and
consequence management, and antiterrorism countermeasures.
The Committee recommends $742,911,000, as detailed in the
following table:

ENHANCED FORCE PROTECTION
[In millions of dollars]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Budget Committee
request recommended Change
------------------------------------------------------------------------
ANTI-TERRORISM/FORCE PROTECTION. 324 200 -124
SSBN SECURITY (14 SHIPS) PORT 27 27 0
SECURITY IMPROVEMENTS..........
MEDICAL REQUIREMENTS (VACCINES, 56 0 -56
ANTIBIOTICS)...................
(Requirement funded in ........... ........... -56)
fiscal year 2002 Defense
Appropriations bill........
CHEMICAL BIOLOGICAL CONSEQUENCE 55 33 -22
MANAGEMENT.....................
(Requirement funded in ........... ........... -22)
fiscal year 2002 Defense
Appropriations bill........
ARMY CHEMICAL STOCKPILE 0 40 40
PREPAREDNESS PROGRAM...........
SECURITY CLEARANCES............. 25 25 0
TRAINING, TRAINING EQUIPMENT, 19 19 0
AND RANGES.....................
INDIVIDUAL PROTECTIVE SYSTEMS... 111 85 -26
(Requirement funded in ........... ........... -26)
fiscal year 2002 Defense
Appropriations bill........
FIGHTER/BOMBER/AFSOC/MAF SELF 139 139 0
PROTECTION.....................
ANTI-ACCESS IMPROVEMENTS........ 100 70 -30
OTHER PROPOSED ADJUSTMENTS:..... 0 105 105
(FSUTR Biological Weapons ........... ........... 40)
Proliferation Prevention...
(COTS--Visualization and ........... ........... 5)
Blast Modeling.............
(DTRA--Terrorist Device ........... ........... 15)
Defeat.....................
(Physical Security--Force ........... ........... 20)
Protection/Anti-terrorism
RDT&E......................
(DARPA Asymmetric Threat.... ........... ........... 25)
---------------------------------------
Total: Enhanced Force 856 743 -113
Protection...............
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Base Operations for Anti-Terrorism/Force Protection/Force Protection
Modernization

The Committee recommends supplemental appropriations of
$200,000,000 to fund ``Base Operations for Anti-Terrorism/Force
Protection/Force Protection Modernization''. The Committee
notes that the DoD has already been allocated $582,000,000 of
funds from Public Law 107-38 for these programs, and that the
Administration has provided notification of an additional
$234,000,000 from funds from Public Law 107-38 which are to be
devoted to this effort. Combined with the recommended funding
in this bill, supplemental appropriations have increased
funding for ``Base Operations Anti-Terrorism/Force Protection/
Force Protection Modernization'' by a total of $1,016,000,000.

Chemical and Biological Warfare Defense

The President requested $222,000,000 for programs related
to chemical and biological warfare defense, including
$56,000,000 for medical requirements, $55,000,000 for chemical
and biological consequence management, and $111,000,000 for
individual protective systems. This is in addition to
$69,000,000 that the Department of Defense has allocated from
previously appropriated supplemental funding to acquire
biological warfare detection equipment.
In title IX of the Committee's proposed fiscal year 2002
Department of Defense Appropriations bill, the Committee has
recommended $474,000,000 in additional funding for chemical and
biological warfare defense, including $175,000,000 for medical
requirements (vaccines and antibiotics). The Committee
therefore recommends reducing the supplemental request by a
total of $104,000,000, as outlined in the table, to eliminate
duplication and to address other critical counter-terrorism
shortfalls. For example, in this chapter the Committee
recommends an increase over the supplemental request of
$40,000,000 for the Army's Chemical Stockpile Preparedness
Program, to ensure that the existing U.S. stockpile of chemical
agents is safely protected until it is destroyed. Another
$40,000,000, over the supplemental request, is provided for the
Former Soviet Union Threat Reduction Program to reduce the
threat of biological weapons proliferation. These funds,
combined with $28,000,000 which the Administration has notified
the Committee it intends to allocate to purchasing additional
detectors, brings the total increase for Chemical and
Biological Warfare Defense recommended by the Committee (in
this bill, and the fiscal year 2002 Defense Appropriations
bill) to $769,000,000.

Former Soviet Union Threat Reduction

The Committee recommends an increase of $40,000,000 over
the supplemental request, only for the Former Soviet Union
Threat Reduction program. Of this amount, the bill requires
that $30,000,000 be transferred to the Department of State in
support of the Biological Weapons Redirect and Science and
Technology Centers programs. These programs have been
reasonably effective in promoting the reconfiguration of former
Soviet biological weapons production facilities for peaceful
uses and preventing former Soviet biological weapons experts
from emigrating to proliferant states. The Committee expects
these funds to be used to redirect to veterinary vaccine
production the Russian biological production facilities in
Pokrov and Berdsk that are now capable of producing large
quantities of anthrax and smallpox biological agents. Funds
should also be used to engage former Soviet biological weapons
scientists in collaborative research with U.S. corporations to
develop new vaccine and drug therapies for highly infectious
diseases.

Anti-Access Improvements

The Committee recommends a total of $70,000,000 for DoD
requirements to improve anti-access barriers and equipment
across the services and defense agencies, a reduction of
$30,000,000 to the request done without prejudice. The
Committee makes this reduction only in order to meet other,
similarly pressing requirements, and in its belief that the
funds provided for this purpose, combined with Base Operations
Anti-Terrorism/ Force Protection supplemental funding, will
support accomplishment of most critical requirements.

COTS Visualization and Blast Modeling

The Committee recommends an increase of $5,000,000 over the
supplemental request, only for the conversion of current CIA/
OTI technology for use by the USAF Force Protection Battlelab.
This is done in order to accelerate efforts to quickly produce
accurate blast models for specific or unique structures to
assist in choosing specific deployment and billeting locations.

Terrorist Device Defeat

The Committee recommends an increase of $15,000,000 over
the supplemental request, only for the Defense Threat Reduction
Agency's Terrorist Device Defeat Program. These funds are to be
used to develop a nuclear forensics database, and to conduct
applied research and development with operational and technical
support, in order to enhance the capability of DoD to detect,
diagnose and defeat improvised nuclear devices and radiological
dispersal devices.

Physical Security--Force Protection/Anti-Terrorism Research

The Committee recommends an increase of $20,000,000 over
the supplemental request, only for the Department's Force
Protection/Anti-Terrorism research, development, test and
evaluation program, funded through the Office of the Secretary
of Defense (through the ``Research, Development, Test and
Evaluation, Defense-Wide'' appropriation). This program
evaluates and tests commercial-off-the-shelf products to
identify those that will meet critical Department of Defense
physical security requirements.

DARPA Asymmetric Threat

The Committee recommends an increase of $25,000,000 over
the supplemental request, only for DARPA's Asymmetric Threat
Program. The new challenges of terrorism and biological warfare
require new technologies and techniques to counter them. The
projects in this program have the potential to make significant
contributions to this effort.

IMPROVED COMMAND AND CONTROL

The President requested $219,000,000 for Improved Command
and Control. These funds would support, upgrade, and enhance
U.S. communications capabilities to provide for more robust
command and control. Such efforts include replacing
communications equipment lost in the attacks, increasing
network security, procuring additional communications gear, and
enhancing overall network reliability and connectivity.
The Committee recommends $162,000,000, as detailed in the
following table:

IMPROVED COMMAND AND CONTROL
[In millions of dollars]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Budget Committee
request recommended Change
------------------------------------------------------------------------
SITE R/WASHINGTON ALTERNATE 72 72 0
OPERATIONS COMMAND CENTER......
PENTAGON IT BACKBONE............ 31 31 0
INFORMATION ASSURANCE (IA)/ 57 0 -57
CRITICAL INFRASTRUCTURE
PROTECTION (CIP)...............
(Requirement funded in ........... ........... -57)
fiscal year 2002 Defense
Appropriations bill........
RADIOS/PORTABLE COMMUNICATIONS.. 59 59 0
---------------------------------------
Total: Improved Command & 219 162 -57
Control..................
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Information Assurance/Critical Infrastructure Protection

The President requested $57,000,000 for information
assurance and critical infrastructure protection. This is in
addition to the $168,000,000 which the Department has already
allocated from previously appropriated supplemental funding.
The Committee, however, has already included an increase of
$275,000,000 in title IX of the proposed fiscal year 2002
Department of Defense Appropriations bill for the same
purposes, and thus recommends no additional funds in this
supplemental measure. Given the Committee's recommendation in
the Defense Appropriations bill, and the additional
$184,000,000 which the Administration has notified the
Committee it intends to allocate to this purpose, the total
proposed increases for information assurance and critical
infrastructure protection will be $627,000,000.

INCREASED WORLDWIDE POSTURE

The President requested $2,938,000,000 for Increased
Worldwide Posture. These resources would fund necessary
preparations for, and conduct of, the military response to the
September 11, 2001 attacks and the heightened threat
environment. Costs include mobilization of reserve forces,
movement of pre-positioned stocks, purchase of high-priority
spare parts and medical stocks that are in short supply,
rebuild of major combat systems to fill current Active and
Reserve unit shortages, and purchase of critical ammunition to
bring stocks to required levels. Costs identified cover
initial, limited contingency and humanitarian operations.
The Committee recommends $2,801,000,000, as detailed in the
following table:

INCREASED WORLDWIDE POSTURE
[In millions of dollars]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Budget Committee
request recommended Change
------------------------------------------------------------------------
CONTINGENCY RESPONSE FUND-- 1,495 1,195 -300
DEPLOYMENTS....................
(Incremental OPTEMPO........ ........... ........... -300)
HUMANITARIAN ASSISTANCE......... 5 5 0
ADDITIONAL SPARES............... 0 75 75
(Add funds for increased ........... ........... 75)
readiness spares...........
DEPOT MAINTENANCE............... 0 75 75
(Add funds for unfunded, ........... ........... 75)
executable backlog.........
MOBILIZE GUARD AND RESERVES..... 1,036 1,036 0
INCREASED ACTIVE MILPERS COSTS/ 352 352 0
SPECIAL PAYS AND ALLOWANCES....
LOGISTICS SUPPORT (SECOND 50 50 0
DESTINATION TRANSPORTATION &
PREPOSITIONED STOCKS
REPOSITIONING & BARE BASE).....
MEDICAL STOCKS AND AMMUNITION... 0 13 13
(Medical Stocks: procure ........... ........... 13)
consumable medical supplies
and NBC defense stocks.....
---------------------------------------
Total: Increased Worldwide 2,938 2,801 -137
Posture..................
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Incremental OPTEMPO Requirements

The Committee recognizes the difficulty (especially
considering the ongoing shaping of force packages and changing
operational requirements) in making funding estimates to
support increased operations, including deployments in support
of Operation ENDURING FREEDOM, combat operations in the region
in and around Afghanistan, and Operation NOBLE EAGLE. The
Committee notes that the Administration, on November 9, 2001,
formally proposed an allocation of funds from Public Law 107-38
to devote resources to fund an additional three months of such
operating requirements, above the three months of funding
support contained in the supplemental request. Furthermore, the
Committee notes that, in addition to these funds, the
Administration allocated $100,000,000 of previously
appropriated supplemental funding to this requirement. In this
bill, the Committee recommends additional appropriations of
$1,195,000,000. These funds, combined with $1,269,000,000 which
the DoD has notified the Committee it intends to allocate to
incremental OPTEMPO requirements, brings the total for
increased OPTEMPO resulting from the September 11, 2001 attacks
to $2,464,000,000.

Readiness Spares

The Administration has already allocated $320,000,000 of
supplemental funds from Public Law 107-38 to provide increased
readiness spares, in support of deployments and combat
operations. While actual expenditure data is only beginning to
be reported, the Committee notes that the DoD estimates that
significant shortfalls remain in this area. Accordingly, the
Committee has added an additional $75,000,000 over the
supplemental request, for readiness spares to improve the
overall readiness posture of the Services.

Depot Maintenance

The increased operating tempo of United States forces in
Operations ENDURING FREEDOM and NOBLE EAGLE has resulted in a
related increase in depot maintenance. The Administration
allocated $31,000,000 of its initial release of supplemental
funding to depot maintenance in anticipation of increasing
executable work. In order to support and enhance equipment
readiness, the Committee recommends an additional $75,000,000
over the supplemental request, to be allocated to executable
depot maintenance requirements.

Medical Stocks and Nuclear, Biological, and Chemical Defense Supplies

The Committee recommends an increase of $13,000,000 over
the supplemental request, only for consumable medical stocks
and pharmaceuticals related to nuclear, biological and chemical
(NBC) defense. The Committee is aware that the Army has
requirements for additional consumable medical supplies to
support early deploying medical units, and to provide for pre-
treatment and treatment of soldiers who may be injured due to
NBC attacks.

OFFENSIVE COUNTER TERRORISM

The President requested $545,000,000 for Offensive Counter
Terrorism. These funds would be used primarily to procure
munitions in order to increase production rates. Funds in this
category will position U.S. military forces to sustain counter
terrorism efforts into the future.
The Committee recommends $769,000,000, as detailed in the
following table:

OFFENSIVE COUNTER TERRORISM
[In millions of dollars]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Budget Committee
request recommended Change
------------------------------------------------------------------------
TACTICAL TOMAHAWK............... 50 50 0
TOMAHAWK BLOCK 3 CONVERSIONS.... 150 150 0
JOINT DIRECT ATTACK MUNITION 133 133 0
(JDAM).........................
JOINT AIR-TO-SURFACE STANDOFF 0 9 9
MISSILE (JASSM)................
(Adds funds to procure 19 0 ........... 9)
additional weapons.........
STANDOFF LAND-ATTACK MISSILE 25 25 0
EXPANDED RESPONSE (SLAM ER)....
LASER GUIDED BOMB (LGB) KITS.... 60 100 40
(Add funds to meet existing ........... ........... 40)
Navy requirement...........
HELLFIRE........................ 35 35 0
OTHER MUNITIONS................. 0 30 30
(Army small arms and 0 ........... 20)
artillery ammunition and
transportation.............
(USMC night vision devices, 0 ........... 10)
munitions and support
equipment..................
SOCOM COUNTER TERRORISM 92 237 145
REQUIREMENTS...................
(Additional identified ........... ........... 145)
Counter Terrorism
requirements...............
---------------------------------------
Total: Offensive Counter 545 769 224
Terrorism................
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Precision-Guided Munitions

The Administration has notified the Committee of its intent
to allocate $929,000,000 from funds previously made available
for obligation from Public Law 107-38 for a variety of
precision-guided munitions, such as JDAM ($57,000,000),
Tomahawk sea-launched cruise missiles ($400,000,000),
Conventional Air-Launched Cruise Missile conversions
($138,000,000), and Laser-Guided Bomb Kits ($256,000,000),
among others. In addition, the President requested $453,000,000
in the supplemental request for similar items. The Committee
bill fully funds this request.
In addition, the Committee recommends an increase of
$49,000,000 over the supplemental request, of which $9,000,000
is only for additional JASSM weapons, and $40,000,000 only for
additional laser guided bomb kits for the Navy. The funds for
the stealthy JASSM cruise missile allow procurement of 19
additional weapons, using extremely favorable pricing under an
existing contract option. The funds for Navy Laser Guided Bombs
(LGBs) allow the Navy to replenish large expenditures to date
as well as provide an inventory for future expenditures.

Ammunition, Support Equipment, and Logistical Support

The Committee recommends an increase of $30,000,000 over
the supplemental request, only for other munitions and related
logistical support. Of this amount, $20,000,000 is for Army
requirements for small arms ammunition, mortar rounds,
artillery rounds, other munitions, fuzes, and associated
logistical and transportation costs. The remaining $10,000,000
is to address Marine Corps requirements for munitions, night
vision equipment, sights and related support equipment.

Special Operations Command Counter-Terrorism Requirements

The Committee provides a total of $237,000,000--the
$92,000,000 requested in the supplemental request, and an
additional increase over the request of $145,000,000--for the
United States Special Operations Command (USSOCOM), to meet
requirements resulting from Operations NOBLE EAGLE and ENDURING
FREEDOM. Special Operations forces possess skills uniquely
suited for the counter-terrorism mission. Though these forces
are superbly trained and equipped, transforming those
capabilities into a sustained effort to combat world wide
terrorism requires additional training, equipment and other
readiness enhancements beyond that which has been made
available to date. The Committee directs the Commander in
Chief, USSOCOM, to provide to the congressional defense
committees not later than 30 days after enactment of this
supplemental measure, a report (in both classified and
unclassified forms) on the proposed uses of all funds provided
USSOCOM under this chapter, as well as other funding made
available from Public Law 107-38.

INITIAL CRISIS RESPONSE

The President requested $106,000,000 for Initial Crisis
Response. These funds are required to respond to the initial
crises in New York, Virginia, and Pennsylvania and to manage
the immediate consequences of these events. This includes the
cost of flying air patrols and deploying aircraft carriers to
protect New York City and Washington, D.C. In addition, this
response funds military support for disaster relief, including
increasing security at the Pentagon, mortuary services, and
support to the Federal Emergency Management Agency.
The Committee recommends $108,000,000, as detailed in the
following table:

INITIAL CRISIS RESPONSE
[In millions of dollars]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Budget Committee
request recommended Change
------------------------------------------------------------------------
MOBILE INSHORE BOAT SECURITY.... 0 10 10
SELF CONTAINED BREATHING 0 5 5
APPARATUS......................
USS COMFORT/MERCY MODERNIZATION. 0 10 10
MEDICAL MOBILIZATION PLAN 34 34 0
(Includes TRICARE Contracts
Adjustment)....................
CONSEQUENCE MANAGEMENT (INCLUDES 43 20 -23
JOINT TASK FORCE--CIVIL SUPPORT
(JTF-CS) FOR JFCOM)............
(Requirement funded in ........... ........... -23)
fiscal year 2002 Defense
Appropriations bill........
UH60 FUEL TANKS................. 29 29 0
---------------------------------------
Total: Initial Crisis 106 108 2
Response.................
------------------------------------------------------------------------

PENTAGON REPAIR/UPGRADE

The President requested $925,000,000 for Pentagon Repair
and Upgrades. These resources would be used to repair the
damage that resulted from the September 11th attack on the
Pentagon. This includes structural repairs required to make the
building safe, exterior repairs, and repairs to interior fire
and water damage. Also funded are the costs of replacing
equipment damaged in the attack, relocation and lease costs for
displaced employees, and additional antiterrorism enhancements
to the Pentagon.
The Committee recommends $925,000,000, as detailed in the
following table:

PENTAGON REPAIRS/UPGRADES
[In millions of dollars]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Budget Committee
request recommended Change
------------------------------------------------------------------------
RECOVERY/CONSTRUCTION........... 794 794 0
OFFICE EQUIPMENT................ 131 131 0
---------------------------------------
Total: Pentagon Repairs/ 925 925 0
Upgrade..................
------------------------------------------------------------------------

ADDITIONAL FUNDING ALLOCATED FROM PUBLIC LAW 107-38

The Committee notes that pursuant to the provisions of
Public Law 107-38 the President has submitted proposed
allocations of funds which are not available for release until
15 days after notification to the House and Senate Committees
on Appropriations. Two such proposed allocations containing
funds for the Department of Defense have been formally
transmitted by the President to the Congress (one on October
22, 2001, the other on November 9, 2001).
Those proposed allocations involving funding and programs
involving the Department of Defense are shown in the tables
below.

PROPOSED 15 DAY RELEASES--DoD
[In millions of dollars]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
15 day 15 day
release release
proposed proposed Total
(Oct 22) (Nov 9)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY TABLE

Increased Situational Awareness.. 438 1,909 2,347
Enhanced Force Protection........ 20 714 734
Improved Command & Control....... 210 527 737
Increased Worldwide Posture...... 70 2,643 2,713
Offensive Counter Terrorism...... 140 1,067 1,207
Initial Crisis Response.......... 4 52 56
Pentagon Repair/Upgrade.......... 41 50 91
Subtotal, Defense................ 923 6,962 7,885
Subtotal, Military Construction.. 0 20 20
--------------------------------------
Grand Total................ 923 6,982 7,905
======================================
ACTIVITIES FUNDED WITHIN
CATEGORIES

Increased Situational Awareness.. 438 1,909 2,347
======================================
Enhanced Force Protection:
Complete Anti-terrorism (AT)/ 0 339 339
Force Protection (FP) Task
Force Findings..............
Fund Base Operations to C1
for AT/FP...................
Force Protection 0 234 234
Modernization...............
Biological Warfare Detection 0 28 28
Systems.....................
Security Clearances.......... 0 10 10
MSC Ships Protection......... 0 93 93
Winter Olympics.............. 20 10 30
--------------------------------------
Subtotal: Enhanced Force 20 714 734
Protection................
======================================
Improved Command & Control:
White House Communications-- 191 0 191
upgrades to Air Force One,
other executive aircraft,
and Ground communication
systems that support the
President...................
NCS Cellular Priority Service 0 57 57
National Airborne Command 0 20 20
Post improvements...........
Global Command and Control 0 14 14
System (GCCS)--accelerate
acquisition.................
Deployable Command Post (for 19 0 19
CENTCOM)--accelerate
acquisition [also includes
intelligence capabilities
for other CINCs]............
Collaborative Planning Tool 0 16 16
for Command and Control--
simultaneous planning tool
for both forward deployed
and rear units..............
Link 16 (Pass target 0 214 214
information between
platforms)--allows for
better communication between
different units.............
Information Operations (IO)/ 0 184 184
Information Assurance (IA)
and Critical Infrastructure
Program.....................
JTF Battlespace Connectivity. 0 22 22
--------------------------------------
Subtotal: Improved Command 210 527 737
& Control.................
======================================
Increased Worldwide Posture:
Contingency Response fund-- 0 1,169 1,169
15% Incremental Increase in
OPTEMPO.....................
Humanitarian assistance...... 0 75 75
Mobilize Guard and Reserves.. 70 923 993
Special Pays................. 0 352 352
Second destination 0 74 74
transportation..............
Family support............... 0 50 50
--------------------------------------
Subtotal: Increased 70 2,643 2,713
Worldwide Posture.........
======================================
Offensive Counter Terrorism:
Tomahawk Upgrades............ 0 400 400
Laser Guided Bomb (LGB) Kits. 0 246 246
ATACMS--A surface-to-surface 0 78 78
guided missile capable of
targeting other missile
sites, defense systems,
logistics and command,
control, and communications
complexes...................
Other Munitions.............. 0 16 16
Munitions Swap Out/Cargo 0 127 127
Movement....................
F-15C JHMCS/APG 83 (Va) 0 42 42
modify remaining 20 aircraft
SOCOM Counter Terrorism...... 140 158 298
--------------------------------------
Subtotal: Offensive Counter 140 1,067 1,207
Terrorism.................
======================================
Initial Crisis Response:
Pentagon Building Security... 4 0 4
Mortuary (Mil Con), 0 20 20
transportation (20 million
is Mil Con).................
Active Duty: Adjustments to 0 32 32
TRICARE Contracts...........
--------------------------------------
Subtotal: Initial Crisis 4 52 56
Response..................
======================================
Pentagon Repair/Upgrade: Other 41 50 91
Recovery Efforts................
--------------------------------------
Subtotal: Pentagon Repair/ 41 50 91
Upgrade...................
======================================
Subtotal, Defense 923 6,962 7,885
Appropriations............
Subtotal, Military 0 20 20
Construction..............
--------------------------------------
Total DoD.................. 923 6,982 7,905
------------------------------------------------------------------------

The Committee has reviewed these proposed allocations, and
interposes no objections. Additional comments regarding a
number of classified activities, to include program guidance,
may be found in the classified annex accompanying this report.
As addressed earlier in this report, the Committee directs that
all ``15-day release'' funds delineated in the table above be
subjected to the same reporting and other requirements
described earlier in this report.

GENERAL PROVISIONS--THIS CHAPTER

Section 301 of the Committee bill amends a general
provision requested in the supplemental request, which
establishes the terms and conditions under which funds
appropriated under the heading ``Defense Emergency Response
Fund'' may be used, provides transfer authority for these
funds, and includes a number of reporting requirements.
Section 302 of the Committee bill amends a general
provision requested in the supplemental request, which provides
authority for current and future funds in the ``Defense
Cooperation Account'' to betransferred, following prior
notification to the congressional defense committees, to other
appropriations accounts.
Section 303 of the Committee bill amends a general
provision requested in the supplemental request, which allows
funds in the appropriations account ``Support for International
Sporting Competitions, Defense'' to be used to reimburse
members of the National Guard while performing State active
duty or full-time National Guard duty, and temporarily waives
the requirement to obtain certification from the Attorney
General for the Department's assistance to the 2002 Winter
Olympic Games in order to meet safety and security needs.
Section 304 of the Committee bill includes a general
provision requested in the supplemental request, which provides
that funds appropriated by this Act, or made available by the
transfer of funds in this Act, for intelligence activities are
deemed to be specifically authorized by the Congress for
purposes of section 504 of the National Security Act of 1947
(50 U.S.C. 414).
Section 305 of the Committee bill includes a new general
provision, which defines for purposes of this act the term
``congressional defense committees''.

CHAPTER 4

DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

The Committee recommends $25,630,966 for Emergency
Preparedness in the District of Columbia. These funds are made
available from the 2001 Emergency Supplemental Appropriations
Act for Recovery from and Response to Terrorist Attacks on the
United States (Public Law 107-38, approved September 18, 2001).
The Committee recognizes the responsibility of the District
government in supporting the Nation's Capital and has provided
funding for increased preparedness for chemical and biological
events.

CHAPTER 5

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE--CIVIL

DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY

Corps of Engineers--Civil

Operation and Maintenance, General

The Committee has recommended $139,000,000, the same as the
amount requested by the Administration, to support increased
security at over 300 critical Army Corps of Engineers owned and
operated infrastructure facilities, including enhanced physical
security, and facility vulnerability assessments to determine
additional facility security needs. The funds would also
support increased personnel and overtime compensation to
maintain additional guards at these facilities, including Corps
district offices, engineering centers, and laboratories.

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Bureau of Reclamation

WATER AND RELATED RESOURCES

The Committee has recommended $30,259,000, the same as the
amount requested by the Administration, for the Bureau of
Reclamation to enhance security at its dams, power plants, and
other critical facilities. Funds will be used for increased
surveillance, and for equipment and other immediate
improvements.
The funds provided will also be used for vulnerability
assessments to determine future security needs.

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

National Nuclear Security Administration

WEAPONS ACTIVITIES

The Committee recommendation for Weapons Activities is
$88,000,000, a reduction of $18,000,000 from the
Administration's request. Of these funds, $66,000,000 is to
address safeguards and security configuration vulnerabilities
throughout the nuclear weapons complex; $7,000,000 is to
accelerate deployment of near-term cyber security measures at
all nuclear weapons complex sites; and $15,000,000 is to
provide additional resources for transportation safeguards
system operations.

DEFENSE NUCLEAR NONPROLIFERATION

The Committee recommendation for Defense Nuclear
Nonproliferation is $18,000,000. These funds will be used to
increase the effectiveness of the prototype Biological Aerosol
Sentry and Information System (BASIS), a demonstration of a
prototype biological detection system to provide civilian
public health systems with early warning of airborne biological
agents. This funding is needed for the next round of
development to automate more of the processes and increase the
number of agents that can be detected. The Administration's
request included no additional funds for this activity.

ENVIRONMENTAL AND OTHER DEFENSE ACTIVITIES

Defense Environmental Restoration and Waste Management

The Committee recommendation for Defense Environmental
Restoration and Waste Management is $8,200,000, the same as the
Administration's request. These funds will be used to increase
theprotective forces at the Hanford site in Washington and the
Savannah River Site in South Carolina where nuclear materials are
stored.

Other Defense Activities

The Committee recommendation for Other Defense Activities
is $3,500,000, the same as the Administration's request. Of
these funds, $2,500,000 is to expand protective forces, replace
outdated alarm and radio systems, and install public address
systems at the Department of Energy's Washington, DC,
facilities. Funding of $1,000,000 will be used to purchase and
accelerate deployment of distributed air sampling units for the
detection of biological agents using the prototype Biological
Aerosol Sentry and Information System.

CHAPTER 6

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

National Park Service

OPERATION OF THE NATIONAL PARK SYSTEM

The Committee recommends $10,098,000 for Operation of the
National Park System to respond to the September 11, 2001
terrorist attacks on the United States. Of this amount,
$6,098,000, as requested, is for increased security patrols and
communications requirements at high profile locations and
$4,000,000 is to reimburse the National Park Service for
relocation of employees to accommodate National security
requirements. These latter funds were requested by the
Administration as part of the General Services Administration
account. The Committee has recommended a direct appropriation
to the National Park Service in lieu of channeling the funds
through GSA.

UNITED STATES PARK POLICE

The Committee recommends $25,295,000 for the United States
Park Police, as requested, to respond to the September 11, 2001
terrorist attacks on the United States. These funds are for
increased security patrols in Washington, DC and New York and
for equipment upgrades.

CONSTRUCTION

The Committee recommends $21,624,000 for Construction to
respond to the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks on the
United States. This amount is for repairs at Federal Hall on
Wall Street in New York City and for increased security,
including security equipment and expanding the security
perimeter around the Statue of Liberty.

Departmental Offices

Departmental Management

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

The Committee recommends $2,205,000 for Salaries and
Expenses, as requested, to respond to the September 11, 2001
terrorist attacks on the United States. These funds are
provided for the working capital fund of the Department of the
Interior to increase guard services and upgrade security
equipment at the Department of the Interior buildings near the
White House.

OTHER RELATED AGENCIES

Smithsonian Institution

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

The Committee recommends $21,707,000 for Salaries and
Expenses, as requested, to respond to the terrorist attacks on
the United States. These funds are for clean up at the Heye
Center in New York City and for increased security at
Smithsonian facilities.

National Gallery of Art

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

The Committee recommends $2,148,000 for Salaries and
Expenses, as requested, to respond to the September 11, 2001
terrorist attacks on the United States. These funds are for
increased security at the National Gallery of Art buildings in
Washington, DC.

John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts

OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE

The Committee recommends $4,310,000 for Operations and
Maintenance, as requested, to respond to the September 11, 2001
terrorist attacks on the United States. These funds are for
increased security at the John F. Kennedy Center for the
Performing Arts in Washington, DC.

National Capital Planning Commission

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

The Committee recommends $758,000 for Salaries and
Expenses, as requested, to respond to the September 11, 2001
terrorist attacks on the United States. These funds are for the
preparation of an Urban Design and Security Plan, which
provides a comprehensive framework for architectural,
landscape, and streetscape elements to address security needs
in Washington, DC.

CHAPTER 7

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Employment and Training Administration

TRAINING AND EMPLOYMENT SERVICES

The Committee provides $1,500,000,000 for National
Emergency Grants, authorized under section 173 of the Workforce
Investment Act, to States to assist workers who were dislocated
by the attacks of September 11, 2001. This is $500,000,000 less
than the request. The Administration has stated that an
additional $1,000,000,000 would be requested for the National
Emergency Grants with the fiscal year 2003 budget submission.
The Committee notes that the Economic Stimulus and Recovery
Act, H.R. 3090, which was approved by the House of
Representatives on October 24, 2001, provides an additional
$12,200,000,000 to assist unemployed individualswith their
health benefit costs and States with costs related to unemployment
benefits.
Under the National Emergency Grants States may provide a
variety of employment and training assistance and support
services, including temporary health care coverage of premium
costs, to dislocated workers if the Governor certifies in the
grant application to the Secretary of Labor that the attacks of
September 11th contributed importantly to closures or layoffs.
These funds are available for obligation for the period
beginning on the date of enactment of the appropriation and
ending 18 months after such date. The Committee has included
language that authorizes States to assist participants and
their dependents in retaining health coverage that had been
provided as a result of the participant's previous employment
by paying up to 75 percent of the full amount of the premium.
Such payments could be made for a period up to 10 months.

STATE UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE AND EMPLOYMENT SERVICE OPERATIONS

The Committee provides $4,100,000 for State Unemployment
Insurance and Employment Service Operations to help New York
recover from damages incurred as a result of the attacks of
September 11, 2001. This is the same as the request. A major
component of New York's telephone claims capability for
processing unemployment insurance claims was lost, resulting in
the need to deploy staff to take claims in person. In addition,
New York suffered a total loss of an Unemployment Insurance
field office for tax and quality assurance, requiring
replacement of space, equipment, and furniture.

Pension and Welfare Benefits Administration

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

The Committee provides $1,600,000 for the Pension and
Welfare Benefits Administration (PWBA), to relocate employees
and re-establish an office. This is the same as the request.
The PWBA New York regional office was located at 6 World Trade
Center; that building is now uninhabitable.

Occupational Safety and Health Administration

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

The Committee provides $1,000,000 for the Occupational
Safety and Health Administration (OSHA). This is the same as
the request. This includes funding for reconstitution of OSHA's
Manhattan office, which was completely destroyed in the attacks
of September 11, 2001, and continued on-site monitoring to
ensure the safety and health of recovery workers.

Departmental Management

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

The Committee provides $5,880,000 for the Department of
Labor, Office of the Assistant Secretary for Administration and
Management to address immediate security needs and recover
offices that were destroyed in the September 11, 2001 terrorist
attacks. This is the same as the request.

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

PUBLIC HEALTH AND SOCIAL SERVICES EMERGENCY FUND

The Committee provides $1,990,600,000 for emergency
expenses to respond to the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks
on the United States, and for other expenses necessary to
support activities related to countering potential biological,
disease, and chemical threats to civilian populations. This is
$500,000,000 above the request.
The additional $1,990,600,000 provided by the Committee for
bioterrorism preparedness and response, combined with the
$393,319,000 provided in H.R. 3061 for these activities, brings
the total to $2,383,919,000 for fiscal year 2002. This is
$2,151,400,000 above last year's level and $550,000,000 above
the request.
Within the total provided, $1,131,600,000 is for activities
of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), which
is $308,000,000 above the request and $950,681,000 above last
year's level. Of this amount, the Committee provides
$593,600,000 for the National Pharmaceutical Stockpile. This is
$50,000,000 less than the request due to the savings negotiated
over the purchase of antibiotics to treat persons exposed to
anthrax and other bacterial infections.
The Committee provides $423,000,000 for upgrading State and
local capacity, which is $358,000,000 above the request.
Included in this amount is $90,000,000 for early detection
surveillance, including a secured web-based disease
notification and surveillance system and the Health Alert
Network; and $100,000,000 for State and local preparedness
planning. The remaining $233,000,000 is for ongoing State and
local capacity building, including augmenting laboratory
capacity, and activities authorized in sections 319B, 319C, and
319F of the Public Health Service Act, as amended. The
Committee believes that a portion of this funding should be
available immediately to meet the needs of State and local
health departments as a result of the September 11, 2001
attacks and other subsequent events related to bioterrorism.
The Committee also believes that a portion of this funding
should be granted under the authority of the Public Health
Threats and Emergencies Act, which calls for assessments of
public health needs, provides grants to State and local public
health agencies to address core public health capacity needs,
and provides assistance to Stateand local health agencies to
enable them to respond effectively to bioterrorist attacks. The
Secretary is requested to provide the Committee with a plan to
distribute this funding within 15 days of enactment of this Act.
The Committee provides $50,000,000 for upgrading capacity
at CDC, which is the same as the request. Included in this
amount is $20,000,000 for internal laboratory capacity to
update and enhance existing laboratory protocols for use by
State and local health laboratories and to increase CDC's
capacity to handle additional lab samples from States;
$20,000,000 for epidemic intelligence service/disaster response
teams; and $10,000,000 for rapid toxic screening.
The Committee provides $30,000,000 to enhance security at
CDC laboratory facilities, and $15,000,000 for environmental
hazard control activities identified in the request. The
Committee also provides $20,000,000 to replenish public health
grants that were heavily impacted by the attacks of September
11, 2001 and other subsequent events related to bioterrorism.
Within the total provided, $537,000,000 is for the Office
of the Secretary and other Departmental agencies. This is the
same as the request. Of this amount, $509,000,000 is to
purchase 300 million doses of smallpox vaccine and $28,000,000
is for other activities identified in the request.
Within the total provided, $50,000,000 is for next-
generation vaccine research at the National Institutes of
Health. The request did not include funding for NIH. The
Committee believes, however, that part of the Nation's
preparedness must include an expansion of biomedical research
in bioterrorism prevention and treatment.
Within the total provided, $82,000,000 is for the Office of
Emergency Preparedness, which is $12,000,000 above the request.
Of this amount, $50,000,000 is to increase the number of large
cities that are able to fully develop Metropolitan Medical
Response Systems and $32,000,000 is for disaster medical
assistance teams, national disaster medical system readiness,
and special events.
Within the total provided, $170,000,000 is for the Health
Resources and Services Administration to assist hospitals and
emergency departments in preparing for, and responding to,
incidents requiring mass immunization and treatment. This is
$120,000,000 above the request. This funding would allow State
and regional planning with local hospitals, including community
health centers. It would also allow some communities to move
beyond the planning phase and begin implementation of its plan.
The Committee urges the Secretary to ensure that plans and
activities supported with these funds are integrated and
coordinated with State and local plans.
Within the total provided, $10,000,000 is for the Substance
Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration for grants
pursuant to section 582 of the Public Health Service Act to
develop programs focusing on the behavioral and biological
aspects of psychological trauma response and for developing
knowledge with regard to evidence-based practices for treating
psychiatric disorders of children and youth resulting from
witnessing or experiencing a traumatic event. The request did
not include funding for this activity.
Within the total provided, $10,000,000 is for the
Administration for Children and Families and the Administration
on Aging for expanded social services to New York and New
Jersey. This is the same as the request.
The Committee recognizes that additional funds may be
necessary to ensure that Federal, State, and local personnel
are trained, equipped, and prepared to respond to all chemical,
biological, disease, and nuclear incidents. The Committee
encourages the Department to continue to develop the Nation's
ability to respond to the public health and medical
consequences of a bioterrorist attack and the funding provided
includes a substantial new investment to achieve improvements
across the country. It is clear, however, that the task is
greater than was envisioned and much more needs to be done. The
Committee directs the Secretary to provide a report on the
state of the Nation's public health and medical preparedness
for bioterrorism no later than February 15, 2002. The report
should delineate how the investments made to our public health
and medical systems have improved our State and local capacity
and our readiness for potential acts of terrorism. It also
should make recommendations on possible further actions that
could be taken to strengthen key components of these systems.
These recommendations should also address additional resources
needed and focus on needs at the Federal, State, and local
levels with specific strategies for meeting those needs. The
report should provide specific objectives for preparedness,
response, hospital readiness, and applied biomedical research
along with time-lines and benchmarks for achieving those
objectives. In addition, the report should provide a detail
fiscal analysis, including plans for obligating and expending
these funds by the Federal government and the States and
localities.
The Committee intends to work closely with the Secretary to
ensure that the funds provided are appropriately allocated, are
expended on a timely basis, and are not used for duplicative or
unnecessary activities. The Committee notes that the Secretary
has both reprogramming and transfer authority that could be
used to supplement available funds. These are important fiscal
management tools in a time of national emergency andshould be
exercised if necessary to respond to increased need or changes in the
allocation of funds among activities. In either case, the Committee
expects the Department to comply with the established guidelines
governing the reprogramming or transfer of funds.

DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION

SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAMS

The Committee provides $10,000,000 to enable the Department
of Education to provide crisis recovery services in New York
and other jurisdictions for students, educators, and their
families under the Safe and Drug-Free Schools and Communities
National Programs Project SERV (School Emergency Response to
Violence). This is the same as the request. The $10,000,000
will support activities such as counseling and mental health
assessments, referrals, and other activities that are essential
to restore the teaching and learning environment in schools.

RELATED AGENCIES

National Labor Relations Board

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

The Committee provides $180,000 for the National Labor
Relations Board (NLRB) for one-time security infrastructure
costs to upgrade the ten NLRB offices located in facilities not
controlled by the General Services Administration. This is the
same as the request.

Social Security Administration

LIMITATION ON ADMINISTRATION EXPENSES

The Committee provides $7,500,000 for the Social Security
Administration (SSA) to cover additional costs incurred as a
result of the attacks of September 11, 2001. This is the same
as the request. The attacks on New York City resulted in some
temporary SSA office closings as well as a longer-term impact
on disability claims processing. The New York regional office,
a local field office and a hearings and appeals office were
closed temporarily until the Federal Building in lower
Manhattan reopened. Of the funds provided, $2,500,000 is
included for increased security at SSA facilities required by
government security procedures. Additional funds will be used
to pay for infrastructure costs, including space, furniture,
and supplies for employees relocated from damaged offices.

CHAPTER 8

LEGISLATIVE BRANCH EMERGENCY RESPONSE FUND

(INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)

The Legislative Branch is provided $256,081,000 to ensure
the continuance of government, and to enhance the safety and
security of legislative branch offices, systems, and employees.
Of this amount, $34,500,000 is transferred to the Senate,
$40,712,000 to the House, $1,000,000 to the United States
Capitol Historical Society, and the remaining $179,869,000 is
transferred to the Capitol Police Board for transfer to other
affected entities of the Legislative Branch. These amounts are
intended to cover additional expenses resulting from terrorists
attacks on the United States, such as the costs of increased
security measures, and the development and execution of
contingency plans to relocate members and congressional staff
and other employees of the legislative branch in response to
imminent threats.
The Committee anticipates that the remaining balance of
$179,869,000 be allocated as follows: Capitol Police Board
$59,396,000, Architect of the Capitol, $105,700,000, and the
Library of Congress $14,773,000. The Committee recognizes that
unanticipated future events may require adjustments to these
estimates.
In addition, funds provided the Legislative Branch, except
for funds provided to the House and Senate, from the first $20
billion provided by P. L. 107-38, that are not yet obligated
are transferred to the Capitol Police Board. The Board is
directed to transfer such funds consistent with the objectives
of P. L. 107-38 and the needs of the Legislative Branch.
In response to the biological incident, occurring in
October 2001, on the Capitol Complex and the emergency response
required to protect life and property in the congressional
community, the United States Capitol Police, the United States
Senate, the House of Representatives, the Library of Congress,
the Architect of the Capitol, and the General Accounting Office
have incurred certain costs to protect life and property and
provide for continuity of operations of the Congress of the
United States. As of November 9, 2001, a total cost of
$36,346,000 has been incurred, for which funds are provided.
The Committee notes these costs are continually being assembled
and will ensure adequate funding is provided to properly
respond to this unfortunate incident. In addition, $12,000,000
is provided for the Chief Administrative Officer of the House
of Representatives to implement additional mail handling
protocols, and $21,712,000 to secure off site computer storage.
It is recognized that the United States Senate has similarneeds
and due to comity between the two bodies, the Committee anticipates
these matters will be addressed by the Senate.

CAPITOL POLICE BOARD

CAPITOL POLICE

SALARIES AND GENERAL EXPENSES

As a result of the incidents occurring on September 11,
2001, and the subsequent biological incident, it has become
apparent the United States Capitol Police is evolving into a
police force which will be very different than the past. The
Committee is committed to providing all resources necessary to
enable the United States Capitol Police to be the best force in
this country. The Committee recognizes the officers have been
working twelve-hour shifts, six days a week since September
11th and notes $32,000,000 is provided within the total $40
billion emergency supplemental to cover overtime costs. Funding
is included in this bill to reimburse the National Guard for
providing assistance to the Capitol Police to relieve officers
from the tedious hours they have been working and to allow them
to receive proper training. In addition, funding for a new USCP
Command Center and headquarters facility is provided to the
Architect of the Capitol.
The Chief of Police is directed to establish an Office of
Emergency Planning, Preparedness, and Operations, and to report
to the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations by
December 15, 2001 on the plans for the establishment of said
office. The office shall be responsible for mitigation and
preparedness operations, crisis management and response,
resource services, and recovery operations.
The recent incidents of biological exposure and
contamination in the United States Capitol facilities have
illustrated the need for an enhanced response capability
dedicated to the specific requirements of chemical and
biological attacks. Response time could be reduced and the
degree of exposure to people and places reduced by increasing
the internal capability available in Congressional agencies.
The Chief of Police is directed to initiate a study on the best
organizational structure and mission to provide this enhanced
capability. The United States Capitol Police is authorized an
increase of up to 72 FTE's to provide this capability, based
upon the results of this study.

ADMINISTRATIVE PROVISIONS--THIS CHAPTER

Several administrative provisions are included. One
provision extends the policing jurisdiction of the United
States Capitol Police to include the property and facilities of
the United States Botanic Garden. There are two provisions
which authorize the Chief Administrative Officer of the House
of Representatives to acquire buildings and facilities by
lease, purchase, or such other arrangement in order to respond
to an emergency situation and to enter into memoranda of
understanding between the House and executive branch agencies
to provide facilities, equipment, supplies, personnel, and
other support services as required. There is a provision which
establishes an office within the House of Representatives. The
Committee has included a provision which authorizes salary
adjustments for the Chief and Assistant Chief of the Capitol
Police. There is a provision that authorizes assistance for the
Capitol Police from executive departments and agencies. There
is a provision that authorizes the United States Capitol
Preservation Commission to transfer funds to the Architect of
the Capitol for planning, engineering, design or construction
of the Capitol Visitors Center. The Committee has included a
provision which sets maximum salary limits for project
directors for the Architect of the Capitol. There is a
provision which amends the authority of the Architect of the
Capitol to acquire property or space. Another provision
authorizes the Capitol Police to accept contributions of
recreational, comfort, and other incidental items and services
while on duty in response to emergencies. A provision has been
included to remove a limitation in the fiscal year 2002 Capitol
Visitor Center appropriation regarding the scope of the use for
the funds provided. The funds may be used for any authorized
component of the project. There is a provision that adds a
short title to the enacted Legislative Branch Appropriations
Act for 2002.

CHAPTER 9

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE

MILITARY CONSTRUCTION

MILITARY CONSTRUCTION, ARMY

The Committee recommends $55,700,000 for Military
Construction, Army. The President requested $4,600,000 for a
classified overseas project. In addition to the request, the
Committee has appropriated $51,100,000 for three other homeland
security projects, including $35,000,000 to secure four sites
where stockpiles of weapons of mass destruction are located,
$7,000,000 for a classified project at Dugway Proving Ground in
Utah, and $9,100,000 for three anti-terrorism/force protection
projects at Fort Detrick, Maryland. The Committee urges the
Army to begin these projects as soon as possible.

MILITARY CONSTRUCTION, NAVY

The Committee recommends $2,000,000 for Military
Construction, Navy, for a perimeter road at Thurmont Naval
Support Facility (NSF) in Maryland. The President did not
include funds for this project.

MILITARY CONSTRUCTION, AIR FORCE

The Committee recommends $47,700,000 for Military
Construction, Air Force. The President requested $21,000,000
for planning and design of a classified project. The additional
$26,700,000 is for construction of two classified overseas
projects. The Committee urges the Air Force to execute these
projects, which support Operation Enduring Freedom, as quickly
as possible.

GENERAL PROVISIONS--THIS CHAPTER

(including transfer of funds)

Section 901 authorizes the Secretary of Defense to transfer
funds from current and prior Military Construction
Appropriations Acts only if insufficient funds are available in
the Defense Emergency Response Fund. The appropriate
congressional defense committees must be notified at least 10
days prior to the transfer, must receive a form 1391, and must
be apprised of the source of funds from which the transfer is
derived.
Section 902 provides the Secretary of Defense with
authority to carry out unauthorized military construction
projects only if the projects are needed to respond to acts or
threatened acts of terrorism. At least 10 days before this
authority can be exercised, the Secretary must provide notice
and a form 1391 to the appropriate congressional defense
committees.

Dover Mortuary

Pursuant to the 15-day notification procedures established
in the Emergency Supplemental, $19,800,000 is included the
Administration's release dated November 9, 2001 to construct a
mortuary facility at Dover Air Force Base in Delaware. The
Committee expects construction of this facility to begin as
soon as possible.

CHAPTER 10

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

The Committee recommends $458,000 for the Office of the
Secretary, for intelligence equipment, communications and
training ($158,000) and for consulting support and analysis
($300,000).

Transportation Security Administration

Subject to authorization, the Committee recommends
$15,000,000 for start-up costs for the Transportation Security
Administration, a new multi-modal DOT agency included in H.R.
3150, as passed the House on November 1, 2001. Although this
bill authorizes new user fees for passenger and baggage
screening activities, the fees are not eligible to pay the
costs of this new agency. This appropriation allows the
Administration to begin immediate planning and implementation
for this new, and critically important, mission of the
department. With these funds, the new agency can begin the
hiring for critical staff immediately, allowing the agency to
hit the ground running once its legislative authorization is
enacted. Much like the Office of Homeland Security provides for
government-wide synthesis and coordination of security
activities, this DOT agency will provide a focal point for
security policy and enhancement in all modes of transportation,
coordinating and overseeing the activities of private industry,
state and local governments, and the Federal Government in a
systematic manner.

Aircraft Passenger and Baggage Screening Activities

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $1,000,000,000
for the Secretary of Transportation to conduct passenger and
baggage screening activities at our nation's commercial service
airports. H.R. 3150 authorizes the establishment of a
Transportation Security Administration, headed by a new
Undersecretary for Transportation Security. Among other things,
the Undersecretary is given the responsibility for the
screening of passengers and property on aircraft in commercial
air service. To offset these new federal costs, the bill
authorizes collection of user fees from passengers and
airlines, to be used only for security purposes specified in
the bill. This bill establishes that such fees may not be
collected until an appropriation is made for screening
activities. The Senate-passed version of this bill also
contemplates additional federal screening responsibilities, and
likewise authorizes new user fees. The bill assumes quick
enactment of legislation authorizing these activities and fees,
and provides the appropriation necessary to finance a greatly
enhanced screening program across the country. The Committee
understands that this appropriation, based on current travel
projections, will not fund an entire year of screening
operations. However, this appropriation provides the up-front
costs needed to get the new program underway as soon as
possible. The bill makes such funding contingent on enactment
of authorizing legislation for the conduct of such activities
as well as collection of the offsetting fees, and specifies
that the appropriation shall be reduced, as fees are collected,
to result in an anticipated final general fund appropriation of
zero. According to the Federal Aviation Administration,
anticipated fee receipts from H.R. 3150 would be sufficient to
fully offset the appropriation in this bill.

COAST GUARD

Operating Expenses

The Committee recommends $144,913,000 for ``Operating
expenses'', to be distributed as shown below:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
Activity Amount
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Reserve activation.................................... $110,000,000
Increased homeland security capability................ 31,293,000
Chemical, biological, and radiological strike teams... 3,620,000
-----------------
Total........................................... 144,913,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------

The Committee does not include the $60,235,000 requested to
increase the pace of operations to provide homeland security
activities. Discussions with the Coast Guard indicate that the
majority of these funds are to restore funds which the Coast
Guard deleted from its fiscal year 2002 budget request. In this
bill, the Committee has placed a priority on those activities
directly responding to the terrorist attacks of September 11th.

FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION

Operations

(AIRPORT AND AIRWAY TRUST FUND)

The Committee recommends $291,500,000 for various
improvements in aviation and airport security. These funds
shall be distributed as shown below:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
Activity Amount
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Security demonstration projects and activities........ $28,500,000
Sky marshals.......................................... 233,000,000
Security experts...................................... 30,000,000
-----------------
Total........................................... 291,500,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Security demonstration projects and activities.--The bill
includes $28,500,000 for the conduct of short-duration pilot
projects and demonstrations involving potential new security
technologies and concepts. The Committee is aware of several
new technologies that could significantly improve aviation
security. However, given the unproven nature of these systems
and the need to integrate their use into government, airline
and airport operations, the prudent course is to establish
limited, short-duration operational demonstrations in select
airports and involving select air carriers. Of the amount
provided, $2,000,000 is only for demonstration of 100 percent
positive passenger bag match technology at Reagan Washington
National Airport in Virginia.
Sky marshals.--The Committee believes the sky marshals
program should be greatly expanded, beyond the level assumed in
the Administration request. Although significantly expanded,
the number of sky marshals is still inadequate to fully address
the threat. DOT officials indicate that the main choke point in
hiring additional marshals is not a lack of qualified and
willing candidates, but a lack of training facilities. For this
reason, the Committee recommends a total of $258,000,000 for
the sky marshal program, including $233,000,000 for the hiring
of additional marshals under ``Operating expenses'' and
$25,000,000 for additional aviation security training
facilities and associated programs under ``Facilities and
equipment''.
Security experts.--The Committee believes the Department of
Transportation should investigate the hiring of a cadre of
federal officers to serve as security ``experts'' at commercial
airports. Many high-threat airports in Europe and around the
world employ such experts, which are used to carefully check
the documentation of travelers, conduct identity checks, and
query a variety of government databases including criminal and
immigration ``watch lists'' which are not often provided to
private industry. The Committee bill provides $30,000,000 for
establishment of such expert teams at a select group of
``category X'' airports around the country, to prove the
feasibility of this concept.

Facilities and Equipment

(Airport and Airway Trust Fund)

The Committee recommends $175,000,000 for ``Facilities and
equipment'', to be distributed as shown below:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
Activity Amount
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Explosive detection systems........................... $100,000,000
Cockpit door and transponder modifications............ 50,000,000
Aviation security training facilities and programs.... 25,000,000
-----------------
Total........................................... 175,000,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Cockpit door and transponder modifications.--Although the
Committee is very supportive of hardening cockpit doors, the
Committee's understanding is that most of the administration's
requested funding for this effort would not be obligated until
permanent door designs have been developed, which is currently
estimated to take eighteen months. Interim fixes, including
deadbolts, locks, and door strengthening, have been largely
accomplished already by the air carriers, and require little
additional funding by the Federal Government. For this reason,
the Committee believes much of the proposed funding would be
put to better use in the sky marshal program and for other
security activities which can have a near-term impact. The
Committee will consider additional appropriations for door
replacements when the design effort has matured.

FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION

Federal-Aid Highways

Emergency Relief Program

(HIGHWAY TRUST FUND)

The Committee recommends $75,000,000 for the Federal
Highway Administration's Emergency Relief program, to fund
repairs and reconstruction of Federal-aid highways which were
damaged or destroyed by the collapse of the World Trade Center
buildings. This is consistent with the Administration's
request.

FEDERAL RAILROAD ADMINISTRATION

Safety and Operations

The Committee recommends $6,000,000 for the Federal
Railroad Administration's safety and operations program, to
fund additional expenses related to overtime and hiring of
police and security officers related to the security and
inspection of rail infrastructure; additional security
personnel; costs associated with increased safety inspector
travel; and other security measures. This is consistent with
the Administration's request.

FEDERAL TRANSIT ADMINISTRATION

Formula Grants

The Committee recommends $23,500,000 for the replacement of
buses and transit kiosks destroyed by the collapse of the World
Trade Center ($4,800,000); technical assistance for transit
agencies to refine and develop security and emergency response
plans ($5,200,000); acceleration and expansion of the PROTECT
program aimed at detecting chemical and biological agents in
transit stations ($4,000,000); emergency response drills with
transit agencies and local first response agencies
($4,500,000); and security training for transit operators
($5,000,000).
Dulles corridor transit project.--To facilitate the
extension of rail service to Washington Dulles International
Airport, the Administrator of the Federal Transit
Administration shall work with the Commonwealth of Virginia,
Northern Virginia municipalities, the Metropolitan Washington
Airports Authority, and the Washington Metropolitan Area
Transit Authority to develop and implement a financing plan for
the Dulles Corridor rapid transit project.
Oversight activities.--The Committee requests that the
Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) task the Federal
Transit Administration (FTA) to provide, on a reimbursable
basis, oversight activities as required under FEMA's Public
Assistance Program related to the rebuilding or enhancement of
transit facilities damaged by the September 11 terrorist
attacks.
FTA may perform these services directly or procure them
under contract or other arrangement.

RESEARCH AND SPECIAL PROGRAMS ADMINISTRATION

Research and Special Programs

The Committee recommends $2,500,000 for the crisis
management center and related emergency facilities run by the
Research and Special Programs Administration. Funds are
provided to finance improvements directly related to
communication equipment and software problems incurred during
the September 11th attacks. This funding level will include
upgrades including the secure video conferencing system,
dedicated communication lines, and equipment and software that
provide secure handling for classified information. This will
enable effective, continuous communication with each modal
administration during emergencies.

RELATED AGENCY

NATIONAL TRANSPORTATION SAFETY BOARD

salaries and expenses

The Committee recommends $465,000 for additional expenses
of the National Transportation Safety Board arising from the
September 11, 2001 attacks. The Board responded to each of the
September 11th attack sites, and funds have been provided to
cover the costs of such response.

CHAPTER 11

DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY

Departmental Offices

salaries and expenses

The Committee does not provide $9,400,000 for the
administrative expenses related to the Air Transportation
Stabilization Board. The Committee understands that the
Department of the Treasury has been given responsibilities for
administering the recently enacted guaranteed loan program for
the airline industry and believes other sources of funds should
be sought for this purpose.

Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration

salaries and expenses

The Committee provides $2,032,000, as requested by the
Administration, to replace equipment and offices in New York.

Financial Crimes Enforcement Network

salaries and expenses

The Committee provides $1,700,000, as requested by the
Administration, to support critical investigative efforts.

Federal Law Enforcement Training Center

salaries and expenses

The Committee provides $13,846,000, as requested by the
Administration, and an additional $9,385,000 for training costs
associated with new hiring by law enforcement agencies.

acquisition, construction, improvements and related expenses

The Committee provides $8,500,000 for critical facility
improvements at the bureau's training facility in Cheltenham,
Maryland. Because of the urgency associated with this project,
and to expedite the acquisition of architectural and
engineering services, the Committee includes language
authorizing the Federal Law Enforcement Training Center to
expedite normal procurement procedures, waiving certain
statutory provisions relating to competition, notice, and fee
limitations.

Financial Management Service

salaries and expenses

Due to budgetary constraints the Committee has not included
$600,000 as requested by the Administration for the Financial
Management Service.

Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms

salaries and expenses

The Committee provides $31,431,000, as requested by the
Administration. The Committee also includes bill language
permitting acquisition and other activities associated with
expanding the bureau's canine training facility in Front Royal,
Virginia.

United States Customs Service

salaries and expenses

The Committee provides $301,759,000 for Customs Salaries
and Expenses. Of this, $160,146,000 is provided as a direct
appropriation for critical border and port security staffing
and technology, including $80,073,000 for critical personnel,
primarily inspectors, agents, and canine enforcement officers
at ports of entry, particularly for the northern border and
$80,073,000 for similar increases for the 20 most vulnerable
seaports. The Committee is supportive of additional resources
for the Customs Service to meet new requirements and workload
demands on the northern border and critical seaports including
technology.
The Committee has also provided $141,613,000 to include:
$107,500,000 as proposed by the Administration for response and
recovery efforts; $21,303,000 to support enhanced overseas
anti-money-laundering investigations; and $12,810,000 for a
commercial backup facility for the Newington Data Center, which
houses essential law enforcement, trade and other critical
information and communication resources. The total funding for
this stand-alone backup facility in fiscal year 2002 is
$19,810,000, including $7,000,000 that is funded in the
Department-Wide Systems and Capital Investments Programs
account.

operation, maintenance and procurement, air and marine interdiction
programs

The Committee provides $6,700,000, as requested by the
Administration, to support the bureau's enhanced air security
mission.

Internal Revenue Service

processing, assistance, and management

Due to budgetary constraints, the Committee has not
included $16,658,000 requested by the Administration, for
Processing, Assistance and Management.

tax law enforcement

The Committee provides $4,544,000, as requested by the
Administration, to replace equipment and offices in New York
and to increase the bureau's participation in investigative
activities to combat terrorism.

information systems

Due to budgetary constraints, the Committee has not
included $15,991,000 as requested by the Administration for
Information Systems.

United States Secret Service

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

The Committee provides $104,769,000, as requested by the
Administration, for response, recovery and critical law
enforcement efforts related to the September 11, 2001 terrorist
attacks.

EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT

OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATION

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Due to budgetary constraints, the Committee has not
included $50,400,000 requested by the Administration for the
Executive Office of the President.

INDEPENDENT AGENCIES

General Services Administration

REAL PROPERTY ACTIVITIES

FEDERAL BUILDINGS FUND

The Committee provides $87,360,000 for security, response
and recovery, and replacement space costs in New York.

NATIONAL ARCHIVES AND RECORDS ADMINISTRATION

OPERATING EXPENSES

Due to budgetary constraints, the Committee has not
included $4,818,000 requested by the Administration for
National Archives Operating Expenses.

REPAIRS AND RESTORATION

Due to budgetary constraints, the Committee has not
included $2,180,000 requested by the Administration for
National Archives Repairs and Restoration.

CHAPTER 12

DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS

Departmental Administration

GENERAL OPERATING EXPENSES

The Committee recommends $2,000,000 in General operating
expenses for a comprehensive evaluation of all Veterans
Affairs' processes and facilities to determine what
improvements should be made to secure employees, veterans and
continuity of services. The evaluation recommendations should
include and consider other security actions and recommendations
implemented by other Federal, State and local government
agencies.

DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT

Management and Administration

OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL

The Committee recommends $1,000,000 in the Office of
Inspector General to replace office and investigative
equipment, telephones, furniture, computers, vehicles and
supplies damaged in the World Trade Center office due to the
September 11, 2001 attacks.

INDEPENDENT AGENCIES

Environmental Protection Agency

SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY

The Committee recommends $10,000,000 in Science and
technology to assess and improve building security at EPA
laboratory sites.

ENVIRONMENTAL PROGRAMS AND MANAGEMENT

The Committee recommends $140,360,000 in Environmental
programs and management of which $30,000,000 is to assess and
improve building security at EPA sites, $700,000 is to fund
temporary relocation costs of the Region 2 New York office and
replacement of computer and telecommunications equipment
damaged due to the September 11, 2001 attacks, and $109,660,000
is for drinking water vulnerability assessments.

HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCE SUPERFUND

The Committee recommends $5,800,000 in Hazardous substance
superfund of which $5,500,000 is to establish a West Coast
immediate response team to provide Federal, State, and local
preparedness for attack mitigation and response, and $300,000
to fund temporary relocation costs of the Region 2 New York
office and replacement of computer and telecommunications
equipment damaged due to the September 11, 2001 attacks.

STATE AND TRIBAL ASSSISTANCE GRANTS

The Committee recommends $5,000,000 in State and tribal
assistance grants to provide grants to State counter-terrorism
coordinators to work with EPA and drinking water utilities in
assessing drinking water safety.

Federal Emergency Management Agency

DISASTER RELIEF

The Committee recommends $4,900,000,000 in Disaster relief
to fund additional disaster relief efforts in New Jersey, New
York and Virginia in response to the September 11, 2001
attacks. Funds are to help individual victims, remove debris
from the World Trade Center site, and assist with rebuilding
critical infrastructure. The amount provided includes funding
for expenses related to traffic control and detours in New York
City and for the repair and reconstruction of non-Federal-aid-
eligible highways destroyed or damaged by the collapse of the
World Trade Center buildings.
The Committee recognizes that many ambulance service
providers, at the request of local, state and Federal
officials, responded to the terrorist attacks of September 11,
2001. Many ambulance providers traveled long distances to
respond. Due to the sudden, horrific and enormous nature of the
events of September 11, 2001 many of these providers did not
have contractsor other formal arrangements in place for
services, but responded based on the direct verbal requests of local,
state or Federal government officials. These ambulance providers
incurred many costs, including personnel and overtime costs, fuel and
travel expenses, and damaged and destroyed emergency vehicles and life
saving equipment. Ambulance providers are critical local health and
safety community resources. These additional costs and the potential
loss of revenue diminish the providers' ability to serve their
communities, hospitals and other health care facilities and patients.
The Committee urges FEMA and state and local governments receiving
Federal emergency assistance to reimburse fully and expeditiously these
ambulance service providers.

EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT PLANNING AND ASSISTANCE

The Committee recommends $35,000,000 for Emergency
management planning and assistance, of which not less than
$10,000,000 is to be used for enhancement of FEMA's ability to
support the 2002 Winter Olympics. The Committee has not
included the budget request of $550,000,000 for a grant program
for first responder training and equipment within FEMA. The
Committee notes that a grant program for first responders
already exists within the Department of Justice and does not
feel it is appropriate to duplicate that effort with a new FEMA
program.

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

The Committee recommends $30,000,000 for Salaries and
expenses, of which not less than $10,000,000 is to be used to
enhance the capabilities of the National Security Division. The
Committee remains concerned that neither FEMA nor the Office of
Management and Budget has been able or willing to provide
information regarding FEMA's role in Homeland Security or the
status of the Office of National Preparedness and how this
office will work with the established National Domestic
Preparedness Office. Until the Committee is fully informed, it
will continue to deny funding requests for the Office of
National Preparedness.

National Aeronautics and Space Administration

HUMAN SPACE FLIGHT

The Committee recommends $81,000,000 in Human space flight,
including $16,000,000 for information security, $60,000,000 for
security and counterintelligence, and $5,000,000 for
communications capabilities. The funds will provide resources
for the costs being incurred for: additional security personnel
and overtime compensation; modifications to security
perimeters; construction of additional checkpoints; additional
security monitoring and communications equipment; relocation of
critical functions and personnel; and increased air and sea
patrols at the Kennedy Space Center in Florida.

SCIENCE, AERONAUTICS AND TECHNOLOGY

The Committee recommends $36,500,000 in Science,
aeronautics and technology, including $16,000,000 for
information security, $15,000,000 for security and
counterintelligence, and $5,500,000 for communications
capabilities. These funds will provide resources for the costs
being incurred for: additional security personnel and overtime
compensation; modifications to security perimeters;
construction of additional checkpoints; additional security
monitoring and communications equipment; relocation of critical
functions and personnel.

OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL

The Committee recommends $3,000,000 for the Office of
Inspector General, for security and counterintelligence. These
funds will provide additional personnel, criminal
investigations, related training, travel, and security/
intelligence equipment.

National Science Foundation

RESEARCH AND RELATED ACTIVITIES

The Committee recommends $300,000 in Research and related
activities for additional security measures at NSF research and
development facilities.

CHAPTER 13

GENERAL PROVISION--THIS DIVISION

Sec. 1301. The provision provides that no part of any
appropriation contained in this Division shall remain available
for obligation beyond the current fiscal year unless expressly
so provided.

Changes in the Application of Existing Law

Pursuant to clause 3(f)(1), of rule XIII of the House of
Representatives, the following statements are submitted
describing the effect of provisions in Division B of the
accompanying bill which directly or indirectly change the
application of existing law.
The bill includes language providing that appropriations
shall remain available for more than one year for programs for
which the basic authorizing legislation does not presently
authorize such extended availability.
Language is included for Department of Commerce, National
Telecommunications and Information Administration, Public
Telecommunications Facilities, Planning and Construction
waiving matching requirements for funds in this Act.
Language is included allowing certain organizations and
financial institutions to receive Small Business Administration
economic injury disaster loans.
Language is included allowing the Small Business
Administration to raise the aggregate cap on disaster loans to
a single borrower in certain circumstances.
Language is included waiving prior authorization
requirements for the expenditure of funds by the Department of
State or the Broadcasting Board of Governors.
Language is included for Department of Defense--Military
for several appropriations that are not currently authorized by
law, and as such may be construed as legislative in nature.
Language is included for Department of Defense--Military in
Operation and Maintenance for ``Defense Emergency Response
Fund'' which provides funds for costs of the mobilization of
Guard and Reserve forces, Increased Situational Awareness,
Enhanced Force Protection, Pentagon Repair and Upgrade,
Offensive Counter Terrorism, and other activities.
Language is included for Department of Defense--Military
which clarifies and establishes the terms and conditions for
obligation and transfer of funds from ``Defense Emergency
Response Fund'' may be transferred to other appropriations
accounts, and establishes several reporting requirements.
Language is included for Department of Defense--Military
concerning the availability of and transfer of funds in the
``Defense Cooperation Account''.
Language is included that makes an emergency appropriation
designation, which may be construed to be legislative in
nature.
Language is included for Department of Defense--Military
concerning the ``Support for International Sporting
Competitions, Defense'' appropriations account.
Language is included for Department of Defense--Military
concerning funds for intelligence related programs.
Language is included for Department of Labor, Employment
and Training Administration, Training and Employment Services
allowing the use of funds for temporary health care coverage
assistance.
Language is included for Department of Education, Higher
Education allowing international education funds to be used to
support visits and study in foreign countries by individuals
who are participating in advanced foreign language training and
international studies in areas vital to U.S. national security
and who plan to apply their language skills and knowledge of
these countries in the fields of government, the professions,
or international development.
Language is included that allows up to one percent of
international education funds provided in this Act to be used
for program education, national outreach, and information
dissemination activities.
Language is included that provides for the policing of the
United States Botanic Garden.
Language is included that authorizes the House of
Representatives' Chief Administrative Officer, during emergency
situations, to acquire buildings and facilities and to enter
into agreements with legislative or executive branch agencies.
Language is included which establishes an office in the
House of Representatives.
Language is included to adjust the salaries of the Chief
and Assistant Chief of the Capitol Police, subject to approval.
Also, language is included that authorizes the Capitol Police
to accept contributions when responding to emergencies.
Language is included that authorizes the transfer of funds
to the Architect of the Capitol from the United States Capitol
Preservation Commission.
Language is included that authorizes the Architect of the
Capitol to set maximum salary limits for project directors.
Language is included that authorizes the Architect of the
Capitol to acquire property.
Language is included for the ''Defense Emergency Response
Fund'' that provides authority to the Secretary to transfer
amounts for the DERF into Military Construction Appropriations
Acts under specific circumstances.
Language is included for Department of Defense--Military
Construction providing authority under specific circumstances
to the Secretary of Defense to carry out military construction
projects not currently authorized by law.
Language is included for Federal Law Enforcement Training
Center, Acquisition, Construction, Improvements and Related
Expenses to facilitate and expedite critical facility
improvements at the bureau's training facility in Cheltenham,
Maryland. The language authorizes the Federal Law Enforcement
Training Center to expedite normal procurement procedures for
architectural and engineering services, waiving certain
statutory provisions relating to competition, notice, and fee
limitations.
Language is included for Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and
Firearms, Salaries and Expenses permitting acquisition and
other activities associated with expanding the bureau's canine
training facility in Front Royal, Virginia.

Appropriations Not Authorized by Law

Pursuant to clause 3(f)(1) of rule XIII of the Rules of the
House of Representatives, the following table lists the
appropriations in Division B of the accompanying bill which are
not authorized by law:

[Dollars in millions]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appropriation in
Agency/program Last year of Authorization level last year of Appropriation
authorization authorization in this bill
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Department of Justice:
Office of Justice Programs: Byrne 1995............... 100.0.............. 500.0.............. 17.1
Grants.
Department of Commerce:
International Trade 1996............... Such sums.......... 248.7.............. 0.8
Administration.
Bureau of Export 2001............... Such sums.......... 64.7............... 1.8
Administration.
National Telecommunications 1993............... 59.9............... 71.8............... 8.3
and Information
Administration.
Broadcasting Board of Governors... 2001............... 467.2.............. 467.2.............. 19.2
Securities and Exchange Commission 1999............... 351.3.............. 324.0.............. 20.7
Department of Defense--Military: 1990............... 100.0.............. 100.0.............. 7.242.9
Defense emergency response fund.
District of Columbia--Federal
Funds
Federal payment for Protective NA................. NA................. NA................. 12.1
Clothing and Breathing
Apparatus.
Federal payment for NA................. NA................. NA................. 1.0
Specialized Hazardous
Materials Equipment.
Federal payment for Chemical NA................. NA................. NA................. 10.4
and Biological Weapons
Preparedness.
Federal payment for NA................. NA................. NA................. 2.1
Pharmaceuticals for
Responders.
Department of Energy:
Weapons Activities:
Safeguards and Security... 2001............... 377.6 (\1\)........ 377.6.............. 73.0
Transportation Safeguards. 2001............... 115.7.............. 115.7.............. 15.0
Defense Nuclear 2001............... 245.9.............. 235.9.............. 18.0
Nonproliferation:
Nonproliferation R&D.
Defense Environmental 2001............... 203.7 (\1\)........ 203.7.............. 8.2
Restoration and Waste
Management: Safeguards and
security.
Other Defense Activities......
Nuclear safeguards and 2001............... 124.4.............. 116.4.............. 3.5
security.
Department of Labor:
Employment and Training NA................. NA................. NA................. 1,500.0
Administration, Training and
Employment Services: Health
benefits.
Legislative Branch: Capitol NA................. NA................. NA................. 1.0
Historic Society.
Department of Transportation:
Office of the Secretary
Transportation Security NA................. NA................. NA................. 15.0
Administration.
Aircraft passenger and NA................. NA................. NA................. 1,000.0
baggage screening
activities (user fees).
Coast Guard: Operating 1999............... 3,006.2............ 3,013.5............ 144.9
expenses.
Federal Railroad 1998............... 90.7............... 77.3............... 6
Administration: Safety and
operations (3).
Department of the Treasury: ...................
Federal Law Enforcement NA (\4\)........... NA................. NA................. $31.7
Training Center, Salaries and
Expenses and Acquisition,
Construction, Improvements
and Related Expenses.
Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and NA (\5\)........... NA................. NA................. $31.4
Firearms, except those
activities related to the
enforcement of tobacco
smuggling and regulation of
explosives.
U.S. Customs Service, Salaries 1992............... Such sums.......... $1,484.1........... \6\ $308.5
and Expenses and Operation,
Maintenance and Procurement,
Air and Marine Interdiction
Programs.
Environmental Protection Agency:
Science and Technology........ ................... ................... ................... 10.0
Clean Air Act............. 1997............... Such sums.......... 177.2..............
Clean Water Act........... 1990............... 153.5.............. 27.0...............
Environmental programs and ................... ................... ................... 190.7
management.
Clean Air Act............. 1997............... Such sums.......... 177.2..............
Clean Water Act........... 1990............... 153.5.............. 27.0...............
State and tribal assistance ................... ................... ................... 5.0
grants.
Clean Air Act............. 1997............... Such sums.......... 177.2..............
Clean Water Act........... 1990............... 153.5.............. 27.0...............
Hazardous substance superfund. 1994............... 5,100.0............ 1,480.9............ 11.8
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(\1\) Authorization for safeguards and security was spread throughout several program accounts.
(\2\) Authorization for this program was contained within the authorization provided for Arms Control
activities.
(\3\) Past appropriations provided as two separate accounts, Office of the administrator and railroad safety.
Authorized level is for railroad safety. Office of the administrator had general authority under 49 USC,
section 103, with no specific authorized amount.
(\4\) Established pursuant to Treasury Order 140-01.
(\5\) Established pursuant to Treasury Orders 120-1, 120-2, and 120-3.
(\6\) $80,073,000 proposed for northern border staffing is authorized as ``such sums'' in P.L. 107-56.

Transfer of Funds

Pursuant to clause 3(f)(2) of rule XIII of the Rules of the
House of Representatives, the following is submitted describing
the transfer of funds provided in Division B of the
accompanying bill.
Language has been included in Department of Defense--
Military, Operation and Maintenance for ``Defense Emergency
Response Fund'' which provides for the transfer of funds out of
and into this account.
Language has been included in Department of Defense--
Military, Sections 301 and 302, which allows for the transfer
of funds to other appropriations accounts of the Department of
Defense.
Section 901 authorizes the Secretary of Defense, under
certain circumstances, to transfer to the Defense Emergency
Response Fund (DERF) unobligated balances from previous
Military Construction Appropriations Acts if the DERF is in
sufficient to carry out needed military construction projects.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Account to Amount Account from Amount
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Senate--Sergeant at Arms and Doorkeeper of the $34,500,000 Legislative Branch Emergency $34,500,000
Senate. Response Fund.
House of Representatives--Salaries and 40,712,000 Legislative Branch Emergency 40,712,000
Expenses. Response Fund.
Capitol Police Board.......................... 179,869,000 Legislative Branch Emergency 179,869,000
Response Fund.
United States Capitol Historical Society...... 1,000,000 Legislative Branch Emergency 1,000,000
Response Fund.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Constitutional Authority

Clause 3(d)(1) of rule XIII of the Rules of the House of
Representatives states that:

The Committee on Appropriations bases its authority to
report this legislation from Clause 7 of Section 9 of Article I
of the Constitution of the United States of America which
states:

No money shall be drawn from the Treasury but in
consequence of Appropriations made by law * * *

Appropriations contained in this Act are made pursuant to
this specific power granted by the Constitution.

Statement of General Performance Goals and Objectives

Compliance With Clause 3 of Rule XIII (Ramseyer Rule)

In compliance with clause 3(e) of rule XIII of the Rules of
the House of Representatives, changes in existing law made by
Division B of the bill, as reported, are shown as follows
(existing law proposed to be omitted is enclosed in black
brackets, new matter is printed in italic, existing law in
which no change is proposed is shown in roman):

SECTION 9 OF THE ACT OF JULY 31, 1946

AN ACT To define the area of the United States Capitol Grounds to
regulate the use thereof, and for other purposes.

* * * * * * *

Sec. 9. [The Capitol Police] (a) The Capitol Police shall
police the United States Capitol Buildings and Grounds under
the direction of the Capitol Police Board, consisting of the
Sergeant at Arms of the United States Senate, the Sergeant at
Arms of the House of Representatives, and the Architect of the
Capitol, and shall have the power to enforce the provisions of
this Act and regulations promulgated under section 14 thereof,
and to make arrests within the United States Capitol Buildings
and Grounds for any violations of any law of the United States,
of the District of Columbia, or of any State, or any regulation
promulgated pursuant thereto: Provided, That for the fiscal
year for which appropriations are made by this Act the Capitol
Police shall have the additional authority to make arrests
within the District of Columbia for crimes of violence, as
defined in section 16 of title 18, United States Code,
committed within the Capitol Buildings and Grounds and shall
have the additional authority to make arrests, without a
warrant, for crimes of violence, as defined in section 16 of
title 18, United States Code, committed in the presence of any
member of the Capitol Police performing official duties:
Provided further, That the Metropolitan Police force of the
District of Columbia are authorized to make arrests within the
United States Capitol Buildings and Grounds for any violation
of any such laws or regulations, but such authority shall not
be construed as authorizing the Metropolitan Police force,
except with the consent or upon the request of the Capitol
Police Board, to enter such buildings to make arrests in
response to complaints or to serve warrants or to patrol the
United States Capitol Buildings and Grounds. For the purpose of
this section, the word ``grounds'' shall include the House
Office Buildings parking areas and that part or parts of
property which have been or hereafter are acquired in the
District of Columbia by the Architect of the Capitol, or by an
officer of the Senate or the House, by lease, purchase,
intergovernment transfer, or otherwise, for the use of the
Senate, the House, or the Architect of the Capitol.
(b) For purposes of this section, ``the United States
Capitol Buildings and Grounds'' shall include any building or
facility acquired by the Chief Administrative Officer of the
House of Representatives for the use of the House of
Representatives for which the Chief Administrative Officer has
entered into an agreement with the United States Capitol Police
for the policing of the building or facility.
(c)(1) For purposes of this section, ``the United States
Capitol Buildings and Grounds'' shall include all buildings and
grounds of the United States Botanic Garden, including the
National Garden and Bartholdi Park.
(2) For purposes of this section, the Joint Committee on
the Library may suspend the application of section 4 of this
Act to the buildings and grounds described in paragraph (1) in
order to promote the interests of the United States Botanic
Garden.

* * * * * * *

SECTION 1 OF THE ACT OF DECEMBER 13, 1973

(Public Law 93-180)

AN ACT Authorizing the securing of storage space for the United States
Senate, the United States House of Representatives, and the Office of
the Architect of the Capitol.

Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the
United States of America in Congress assembled, That,
notwithstanding any other provision of law, the Architect of
the Capitol, with the approval of the House Office Building
Commission and Senate Committee on Rules and Administration, is
authorized to [secure, through rental, lease, or other
appropriate agreement, storage space] acquire, through
purchase, lease, or other appropriate arrangement, property or
space in areas within the District of Columbia and its environs
beyond the boundaries of the United States Capitol Grounds for
use of the United States Senate, the United States House of
Representatives, the United States Capitol Police, and the
Office of the Architect of the Capitol, under such terms and
conditions [as such Commission and committee may authorize] as
the Architect deems reasonable and appropriate, and to incur
any necessary incidental expenses in connection therewith.

* * * * * * *

SECTION 1 OF THE ACT OF DECEMBER 20, 1979

(Public Law 96-152)

AN ACT To establish by law the position of Chief of the Capitol Police,
and for other purposes.

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled, That, (a)
* * *

* * * * * * *

(c) The Chief of the Capitol Police shall receive
compensation at a rate determined by the Capitol Police Board,
[but not to exceed the rate of basic pay payable for level ES-4
of the Senior Executive Service, as established under
subchapter VIII of chapter 53 of title 5, United States Code
(taking into account any comparability payments made under
section 5304(h) of such title).] but not to exceed $2,500 less
than the lesser of the annual salary for the Sergeant at Arms
of the House of Representatives or the annual salary for the
Sergeant at Arms and Doorkeeper of the Senate.

* * * * * * *

SECTION 108 OF THE LEGISLATIVE BRANCH APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 1991

administrative provisions

Sec. 108. (a) The Architect of the Capitol may fix the rate
of basic pay for not more than 12 positions at a rate not to
exceed the highest total rate of pay for the Senior Executive
Service under subchapter VIII of chapter 53 of title 5, United
States Code, for the locality involved.
(b) Effective beginning with any pay period beginning on or
after the date of enactment of the Legislative Branch
Appropriations Act, 1992, the rate of basic pay for up to 8
positions under the jurisdiction of the Architect of the
Capitol may be fixed at such rate as the Architect considers
appropriate for each, not to exceed 135 percent of the minimum
rate payable for grade GS-15 of the General Schedule.
(c) The Architect of the Capitol may fix the rate of basic
pay for not more than 4 positions for Executive Project
Directors whose salary is payable from project funds, at a rate
not to exceed 95 percent of the highest total rate of pay for
the Senior Executive Service under subchapter VIII of chapter
53 of title 5, United States Code, for the locality involved.

PUBLIC LAW 107-68

AN ACT Making appropriations for the Legislative Branch for the fiscal
year ending September 30, 2002, and for other purposes.

* * * * * * *
TITLE II--OTHER AGENCIES

* * * * * * *

ARCHITECT OF THE CAPITOL

Capitol Visitor Center

For an additional amount for the [unassigned space in the]
Capitol Visitor Center project, $70,000,000, to remain
available until expended: Provided, That section 3709 of the
Revised Statutes of the United States (41 U.S.C. 5) shall not
apply to the funds made available under this heading: Provided
further, That the Architect of the Capitol may not obligate any
of the funds which are made available for the Capitol Visitor
Center under this Act or any other Act without an obligation
plan approved by the chair and ranking minority member of the
Committee on Appropriations of the House of Representatives
[for House space] and the Committee on Appropriations of the
Senate [for Senate space].

* * * * * * *

TITLE III--GENERAL PROVISIONS

* * * * * * *

Sec. 312. No funds appropriated or otherwise made available
under this Act shall be available to any person or entity that
has been convicted of violating any provision of the Buy
American Act (41 U.S.C. 10a-10c).
This Act may be cited as the ``Legislative Branch
Appropriations Act, 2002.''.

Comparison With the Budget Resolution

Five-Year Outlay Projections

(Millions)
Budget Authority........................................ 20,001
Outlays:
2002................................................ 9,347
2003................................................ 5,862
2004................................................ 2,506
2005................................................ 1,457
2006 and beyond..................................... 829

Assistance to State and Local Governments

In accordance with section 308(a)(1)(C) of the
Congressional Budget and Impoundment Control Act of 1974
(Public Law 93-344), as amended, the financial assistance to
State and local governments provided in Division B of the
accompanying bill is as follows:

(Millions)
Budget Authority........................................ 5,789
Fiscal Year 2002 outlays resulting therefrom............ 577

ADDITIONAL VIEWS OF DAVID R. OBEY

In less than 300 years, the United States has grown from a
tiny society in a remote corner of the world to the dominant
power in global affairs. There are many reasons for that
ascendancy but it is in no small measure tied to the fact that
we have had two great oceans to protect us during times of
trouble in Europe, Asia and Africa.
The security that those oceans gave the early settlers
permitted greater degree of social order and the evolution of a
society in which decisions were made by law rather than by
force. The security provided a fertile ground for the growth of
democratic institutions. It gave the American people the
opportunity to pour their energies into generating wealth and
building better lives for themselves and their families. It
provided investors with a stable environment in which
commercial activities would not be disrupted by foreign armies.
The absence of foreign threat created conditions that allowed
the potential for profit or loss to be gauged with greater
accuracy and that contributed to the evolution of our complex
financial system. The absence of foreign threats allowed us as
a society to invest more in education, research and physical
infrastructure.
But on September 11, the barriers that the oceans have
provided against foreign troubles seemed to all but disappear.
We entered a new era with not only an enormous loss of life and
property but with a profound loss of the feeling of security
that we now realize was one of our most unique and treasured
national possessions.
The good news is that we have the wealth and technology to
recover much of that lost security if we use it wisely. The
first step down that road is the investment in enhanced
domestic security made in this bill. Unfortunately, it does not
go nearly as far as it should.
The President's budget staff has reported that federal
agencies have submitted proposals for responding to the attacks
of September 11th that total more than $127 billion. That staff
argues that we should reject more than two thirds of those
proposals. In a great many instances, their recommendation is
correct. Some proposals represent little more than an attempt
by certain agencies to use the present situation to repackage
spending requests that have been repeatedly rejected in the
past and which have little true relevance to enhancing
security. There are other proposals that could significantly
boost security but cannot be initiated in the near term even if
funds are provided. Deferring action on those proposals will
give both branches of government more time to evaluate our
security needs and seek the most effective possible solutions.
There are still other proposals that solve particular security
problems--but they are problems that can be dealt with for at
least a short period of time in effective but less expensive
ways, again providing more time to evaluate and prioritize
needs.
But there are other proposals that the White House budget
staff argues should be rejected where that conclusion seems not
only wrong but also foolish and in some instances even
mindless. These include such things as:
Steps to insure the continuity of operations
at intelligence and law enforcement agencies in the
event of an attack against those organizations,
Strengthening the capability of federal,
state and local public health agencies to detect and
defend against an attack using biological weapons.
Reducing the vulnerability to attack of
military installations where nuclear, biological and
chemical weapons are stored,
Increasing the number of Customs Inspectors
on the Canadian border and at ports of entry,
Providing the FBI with the funds necessary
to allow it to convert to a badly needed new computer
system this coming spring rather than waiting until
2004.
Helping Russia provide a greater degree of
control and security over its nuclear and chemical
weapons and its technology to build such weapons,
Increasing FDA inspections of imported food
so that 10% of such imports are inspected rather than
less than 1% as is currently the case,
Purchasing equipment that will protect our
mail from dangerous biological agents.
I offered an amendment in the full Appropriations
committee, which would have added $6.5 billion to begin to fix
these and other security problems with resources that would be
available immediately if the President chose to use them. (See
table at end of these views for details) That amendment posed
the question: ``Should we act now on a specific number of time
sensitive security enhancements or should we wait until next
spring?'' It is a question in which the American people have an
enormous stake and should therefore be a matter of rigorous
discussion.
The President's budget staff and the House Republican
Leadership have remained solidly on the side of waiting.
Despite the fact that my amendment was defeated by the
committee by a vote of 34 to 31, it was clear, based on the
public comments of a number of members who voted in the
negative, that the amendment would have passed had it not been
for instructions issued by House Republican leaders. Now it is
up to the Full House to determine whether this proposal should
be debated and voted on by all members of the body.
Unfortunately for the purposes of public discussion, some
of the unmet needs are highly classified. Others while not
formally classified could provide our adversaries with more
information about our vulnerabilities than I feel comfortable
discussing in print or in public. Nonetheless, the American
people deserve to know as much as possible about how
effectively the government is mobilizing available resources to
protect them from further attacks and I hope the following
discussion is useful in framing some of the problems and the
need for addressing those problems sooner rather than later.

protecting against bioterrorism

Upgrading State and Local Health Departments and Hospitals

The amendment adds $277 million to the amount in the bill
for assistance to state and local health departments, bringing
the total to $700 million.
These agencies are the first line of defense against
bioterrorism. They have the lead role in detecting suspicious
disease outbreaks that may indicate a bioterrorist attack, in
investigating outbreaks to determine the cause and source, in
doing the lab analysis needed to identify pathogens and
chemical poisons and to determine whether suspicious substances
are actually harmful, in organizing distribution of preventive
antibiotics and vaccines, and in communicating with health care
providers and the public. Yet, many state and local health
departments report serious gaps in their preparedness and
capacity to respond to terrorism and to major naturally
occurring disease outbreaks.
Several leading public health organizations are calling for
at least $835 million in increased federal funding for state
and local public health preparedness. The National Governors
Association says $2 billion is needed for these purposes. The
latest annual report from the advisory panel on domestic
preparedness for terrorism involving weapons of mass
destruction, which is chaired by Governor Gilmore of Virginia,
recommends appropriation of sufficient resources to fully fund
the CDC's Strategic Plan for Preparedness and Response to
Biological and Chemical Terrorism.
The Committee's bill takes a good first step, by adding
$358 million to the President's proposal of just $65 million.
But considerably more needs to be done.
Some of the additional funds in the Democratic amendment
would be used to upgrade the capacity of state and local public
health labs. This would include, for example bio-safety
upgrades, so that the labs can more safely handle dangerous
pathogens like anthrax; equipment and training to perform rapid
molecular analysis to accurately identify the major potential
bioterrorism agents far more quickly than the 1-3 days often
required for older techniques (well under half the labs in the
bioterrorism response network have any capacity in this area,
and many of those need enhancements); and equipment and
training to perform ``rapid toxic screens'' for possible
chemical terrorism agents in human samples (only five state
health labs have this capacity now).
The funds added by the Democratic amendment would also be
used for a number of other important purposes, including better
epidemiological surveillance (so that more areas can undertake
active programs to watch for unusual disease events, rather
than just collecting reports from doctors and hospitals after
diagnoses have been made); more capacity to investigate disease
outbreaks; and more training for public health and laboratory
personnel.
The amendment also provides $15 million for public health
and laboratory training programs, to help upgrade skills and
alleviate shortages of trained personnel.

Expanded CDC Support of State and Local Health Departments

Although CDC is a major producer of ``distance learning''
and other training materials for health professionals
nationwide and worldwide, CDC's production facilities date to
the 1950s, much of its broadcast equipment is outmoded and in
need of frequent repair, and studio space is cramped and
inflexible. The amendment therefore provides $85 million to
start construction of CDC's proposed new Scientific
Communications Center (no such funds are included in the
Committee bill). The new center would greatly improve CDC's
ability to provide distance learning and other public health
training, as well as to communicate with state and local health
departments, health care providers, and the public during
health emergencies. Some of the additional funds could also be
used to accelerate completion of infectious disease and
environmental toxicology labs.
The amendment also adds $40 million to the $50 million in
the Committee bill for other CDC needs, such as laboratory
upgrades and development and dissemination of new rapid testing
methods to detect biological and chemical terrorism agents.

Accelerating Research on Biohazards, Detection, and Treatment

Currently, no vaccines are available against some of the
diseases thought to pose significant bioterrorism risks (plague
and most viral hemorrhagic fevers, for example), and concerns
about side effects limit the usefulness of other vaccines such
as those against smallpox and anthrax. There are also no known
drug therapies for some of the major bioterrorism threats,
including smallpox. Clearly, more research is needed in these
areas.
The Democratic amendment would provide $115 million to NIH
to pursue an accelerated biomedical research agenda related to
preventing and treating potential bioterrorism-related
diseases. In contrast, the Committee bill provides just $50
million and the President proposes no additional funding at
all. Research areas that would be funded by the amendment
include new ways of treating adverse reactions to smallpox
vaccine, development of the next generation of smallpox
vaccine, development of a new and safer anthrax vaccine as well
as improved means of treating anthrax, use of antiviral drugs
to treat diseases like smallpox and Ebola, and development of
vaccines for other diseases of concern, such as Ebola, plague
and Q-fever.

Bio-Safety Laboratories at NIH and Fort Detrick

Work with dangerous disease organisms like smallpox and its
relatives and Ebola fever requires very specialized facilities
to protect the health of researchers and prevent organisms from
escaping. Currently, there are only three labs in the country
with the highest-level bio-safety features (``Level 4'') needed
to work with the most dangerous pathogens. Researchers at NIH
tell us that this is an insufficient number, and that long
waiting times for lab access are hampering work needed to help
us better understand these diseases and develop better vaccines
and drugs to fight them. Therefore, the amendment provides $85
million for constructing and equipping two new high-biosafety-
level labs at NIH, including a Level 4 lab.
Further, the Level 4 lab at the Army medical research
institute at Fort Detrick has been playing a major role in
testing specimens during the recent anthrax incidents, and its
capacity has been greatly strained as a result. Over the last
six weeks it has tested almost ten times the number of samples
it usually handles in a year. If we had another similar
incident, the system could fail. The amendment therefore
includes $482 million for a large new Level 4 lab at Fort
Detrick.

Securing the Mail

The Postal Service is a critical component of $900 billion
mailing industry that employs nine million people and is
responsible for eight percent of the gross domestic product. It
is also a daily presence in the lives of Americans in every
community across the Nation. The Postal Service is now on the
front lines fighting against recent bioterrorist attacks.
Tragically, this war has resulted in four deaths, two of them
Postal employees. Americans are afraid of the mail now. Initial
estimates of mail volumes for September 5 through October 8
declined by 6.6 percent compared to the same period a year
earlier. First-Class Mail volume declined 2 percent; Priority
Mail declined 15 percent; and Standard Mail fell 11 percent
from their levels a year ago.
The Postal Service is working with private contractors and
experts from across the Federal government to identify
technology to restore faith in the mail system, protect Postal
employees, and ensure the safety of the American people in the
aftermath of this unprecedented threat. The Postal Service has
already initiated contracts to use electronic beam and x-ray
technology to sterilize limited amounts of mail. It is
continuing to assess the use of these technologies, and others,
to determine the best type of equipment for mail sanitation.
The initial results are expected in a matter of weeks. The
Postal Service is also exploring the use of detection
technology and improved cleaning and filtration systems to
ensure that the sanitization process works and that the
employees and Postal customers are safe.
This bill does not do anything to protect our mail system.
The Obey amendment would have provided $500 million for
immediate Postal equipment needs. We know this will not cover
the total need. The Postal Service has indicated they may need
as much as $3 billion. The Obey amendment would make a down
payment on mail security though, and it would be done in a
fiscally responsible way by requiring a plan before the Postal
Service could spend any of these funds.

Airport and Airline Safety

Since September 11th there have been two main priorities to
ensure the security of our nation's airplanes. One is to detect
dangerous substances and people by enhancing the screening of
bags and passengers and increasing law enforcement at airports.
The second is to stop any terrorist who enters a plane by
increasing the number of federal air marshals and by securing
cockpit doors. The Obey amendment includes the additional
funding for air marshals included in the Committee bill and the
full funding requested by the President for cockpit doors. The
President's proposal includes the cockpit door funding, but not
the funding for additional air marshals. The Committee bill
includes the air marshal funding, but only one-sixth of what
the President requested for cockpit doors.
September 11th happened because terrorists were able to
enter the cockpits of three airplanes. The Obey amendment
provides an additional $250 million to prevent this from ever
happening again and would fully fund the President's request of
$300 million. Today, the airlines have made some improvements
so that cockpit doors cannot be as easily broken into, such as
the strengthening of bolts.
The President proposed $300 million so that modifications
can be made to secure the cockpit door in such a way as to
permanently prevent an intruder from entering the cockpit door.
The funding requested by the President and included in the
amendment would be provided to airlines to ensure that all
aircraft cockpit doors are modified as quickly as possible.
Shortly after September 11th, the President said that he
intended to provide $500 million in cockpit door funding.
Since September 11th the Federal Aviation Administration
has imposed additional security requirements on our nation's
airports, and rightly so. Increased patrols of ticket counters,
baggage claim and make-up areas, and screening checkpoints have
been mandated, as has increased inspections of controlled
access points and the areas outside the airport. Airports have
also been required to re-issue all airport identification and
verify such identification at all access gates.
To meet these additional requirements, the airports have
incurred additional costs, primarily for additional law
enforcement officers and overtime. The American Association of
Airport Executives estimates the cost of these additional
requirements to be about $500 million this year. These
increased costs come at a time when airports are losing money
due to decreased air travel and fewer people able to visit
airport shops and eateries; the airports estimate the total
revenue decrease to be $2 billion in 2002, or 20% of estimated
revenue. The Obey amendment includes $200 million to assist
airports in meeting the costs of the increased security
requirements mandated by the FAA.

Law Enforcement

Since September 11, Federal and State law enforcement
agents have been overwhelmed. Most of our agents and officers
were trained to combat traditional threats, such as robbery and
drug trafficking; now they are being asked to address the most
complex and dangerous threat our Nation has faced in recent
memory. Our law enforcement agencies are dedicated to bringing
the perpetrators of this attack to justice. However, they are
overworked and armed with outdated tools and equipment. To help
address critical investigative and infrastructure needs, the
FBI requested $1.5 billion. The Administration only requested,
and this bill only contains, $539 million. They Obey amendment
includes a total of $1.1 billion for this critical agency to
combat this new threat with 21st Century tools.
The FBI has been the lead Federal agency for investigating
terrorist activity. All 56 FBI field offices are involved in
the investigation. Agents are following up on hundreds of
thousands of leads and tips. They need modern tools to address
this staggering workload. Problems with document control and
data processing encountered during the McVeigh investigation
underscore these needs. According to the FBI, more than 13,000
of their desktop computers are four to eight years old and
unable to run today's basic software. Many smaller offices are
connected to our internal network at speeds less than most
individual Internet users have at their homes. Agents are
unable to electronically store much investigative information--
such as photographs or graphics--into investigative databases
data.
The Obey amendment includes $409 million, $304 million
above the Administration's request, to improve the FBI's
computer systems. These funds will provide upgraded desktop
equipment for FBI field offices, enabling the FBI to access to
information more quickly, allowing them to finish this spring
instead of in 2004. This funding will also allow the FBI to
begin converting paper files to electronic so that it can
continue operating if paper files in any of the field offices
are destroyed, maintain better control over criminal records,
and perform more efficient investigations. Without these
computer tools, it will be virtually impossible for the FBI to
efficiently manage a terrorist investigation of the size and
scope that we are facing now. The Obey amendment also provides
additional funds to hire more high-tech ``cyber cops'' and
hazardous materials personnel; improve DNA analysis and
surveillance programs; and make infrastructure and personnel
improvements.

Keeping Weapons of Mass Destruction Away from Terrorists

One of the most fundamental steps in protecting U.S.
citizens from terrorist attacks is keeping dangerous weapons
out of the hands of those who would use them against us. This
requires greater efforts for securing of federal, non-federal
and even foreign sources of materials for these weapons than is
permitted within the amounts requested by OMB.

Securing Biological Agents

The bill as reported by the Committee contains $156,700,000
as requested by the Administration for improved security at the
Center for Disease Control, National Institute of Health, Food
and Drug Administration, and the U.S. Departments of
Agriculture and Energy. The Democratic amendment would provide
an additional $1,008,000,000 to meet the needs of these and
other agencies that have been identified after the September 11
terrorist attack on our nation.

Nuclear Non-Proliferation

Russian President Vladimir Putin said that nuclear
proliferation ``is one of the foremost threats of contemporary
times.'' President George Bush stated ``Our highest priority is
to keep terrorists from acquiring weapons of mass
destruction.'' But the Administration's budget request and the
bill reported by the Committee contain no funds for nuclear
non-proliferation activities in Russia, which is perhaps the
major deficiency of this bill, which provides only $18,000,000
for non-proliferation technology activities. The Minority
amendment instead provides $316,000,000 more to the Department
of Energy for non-proliferation and intelligence activities:
$131,000,000 for protection against the use of
spent nuclear fuel as ``dirty bombs'' by terrorists,
consolidation of nuclear materials and weapons within Russia,
accelerated physical security over Russian Navy nuclear
weapons, and increased nuclear monitoring equipment at the
Russian border to detect smuggling.
$60,000,000 to assist Russia to improve physical
security of Soviet-designed nuclear power plants and to assist
the United Nations in detecting and inspecting undeclared
nuclear activities in countries that support terrorism.
$77,000,000 for non-proliferation technology
development. Some of these funds are for global surveillance
and monitoring of illicit movement of nuclear materials
overseas by terrorist. The rest of the funds are to develop
tools for law enforcement and military applications; chemical-
agent systems for use in subways and at sporting or other
highly populated events; helicopter-based biological agent
detection systems; and an advanced airport baggage inspector
for trace quantities of illicit chemicals or explosive
residues.
$30,000,000 for Russian nuclear and biological
scientists, who are susceptible to recruitment by terrorists.
These funds are to convert Russian biological weapons
facilities to civilian vaccine production, and to provide seed
funds to Russian scientists to develop and market new
technologies.
$18,000,000 for improved intelligence concerning
illicit nuclear materials.

Assured Security of U.S. Nuclear Weapons

The bill as reported by the Committee contains $99,700,000,
which is $18,000,000 less than requested by the Administration,
for the Department of Energy to improve the security of U.S.
nuclear weapons and materials. The Minority amendmentprovides
an additional $503,000,000 to the Department of Energy to provide
better protection against terrorist incidents at U.S. federal nuclear
facilities:
$84,000,000 for hardening of U.S. nuclear material
and weapons storage to include construction projects,
additional force protection, replacement of aging protective
systems, and replacement of alarm, detection, and assessment
systems.
$57,000,000 for increased security at Department
of Energy environmental cleanup sites that contain radioactive
and other toxic materials.
$35,000,000 for secure transportation of nuclear
weapons, to include enhancement of operations centers,
transportation infrastructure upgrades, and improvements to
special response force vehicles.
$327,000,000 million for cybersecurity,
bioterrorism, and classified activities at Pantex, Texas.

Chemicals and Chemical Weapons

The bill as reported by the Committee contains no funds to
address security risks associated with chemicals and chemical
weapons. The Minority amendment provides an additional
$85,000,000:
$50,000,000 for assessing vulnerability to and
reducing risks associated with the storage of dangerous
chemicals within the United States. Treatment plants store
large quantities of chemicals, primarily chlorine, as a
disinfectant for wastewater. About 60 percent of wastewater is
treated by fewer than 300 facilities--which, by their nature,
are near population centers. This poses a large risk to those
population centers. In addition, there is concern that the
nation's wastewater infrastructure could serve as a conduit for
hazardous substances or other threats. Wastewater collection
systems form an extensive network that runs near or beneath key
buildings and roads, and is contiguous to many communication
and transportation networks.
$350,000,000 for improved security at four
Department of Defense sites that store tons of chemical
weapons.

Oversight of Labs Handling Dangerous Bacteria and Viruses

Numerous laboratories throughout the country handle and
store dangerous pathogens that are considered major
bioterrorism risks. While there are benefits to research work
with these organisms, they must be handled, stored, transferred
and disposed of safely in order to prevent them from falling
into the wrong hands (or being released accidentally into the
environment).
CDC is required by law to regulate labs that transfer or
receive certain dangerous organisms (known as ``select
agents''), to make sure that proper procedures and safeguards
are in place. However, only 9 staff are currently assigned to
this function. Of the roughly 250 labs registered under the
program, CDC has been able to inspect only about 60. There is
also a backlog in simply processing applications for
registration (which involve detailed documentation regarding
handling and safety procedures).
The Democratic amendment would provide $10,000,000 to CDC
for oversight and regulation of labs handling dangerous
organisms. Neither the President's proposal nor the Committee
bill expressly provide any additional funds for this purpose.
It also provides $9,000,000 for improved security at Ft.
Detrick MD, which is one of the most important defenses against
bioterrorism, and well as home for important classified
activities. This will fund some of the basics for force
protection: fencing, gates, barricades and a remote inspection
facility.

Other Federal Security Requirements

The bill as reported by the Committee contains $58,000,000
for a number of federal agencies to secure dangerous materials.
The Minority amendment provides an additional $64,000,000 for
improved security at the National Institutes of Health, the
Food and Drug Administration, and the Department of
Agriculture.

Immigration and Border Security

Well before September 11, it became clear that we needed to
harden security along the Northern Border. There are 128
Northern Border ports and stations. There are 64 ports and
stations along the Northern Border that historically have not
been open 24 hours per day. Some of these locations were
secured by placing traffic cones in the road and using signs to
detour travelers to another processing center. The Congress
recognized these deficiencies when it passed the USA PATRIOT
Act, which authorized tripling the number of border personnel
at the ports of entry along the Northern Border. The public
needs to understand, however, that not one additional dime was
provided to any federal agency to deal with the problems with
the passage of this act. That legislation provides lawmakers
who wish to do so with the opportunity to tell their
constituents that they voted for the authority to provide such
services without discussing whether or not they voted for the
funds required to implement that authority. That can only be
provided in actual appropriations and this is the only
appropriation bill left in this session that could contain such
funding.
Despite the porous security on the Northern Border and the
lessons learned from the Millennium bombing conspiracy, the
Administration did not request any additional funds to expand
the Customs Service Northern Border hiring initiative. This
bill cut funds needed to secure federal buildings and protect
federal workers in order to increase spending for Northern
Border Customs agents by $80 million over the request. That is
still not enough. The Obey amendment would have provided $145
million in line with the Service's request, to complete the
hiring of 790 additional Customs agents and the purchase of new
inspection technology.
The bill provides a total of $409.6 million for critical
personnel, equipment and technology needs of the Immigration
and Naturalization Service. The Obey amendment would have
provided an additional $128 million above the amount for the
most critical construction and facility needs of the INS. While
staffing levels for INS inspectors and Border Patrol agents
have increased dramatically over the past six years, including
an additional 300 land point of entry inspectors funded in this
supplemental package, facility expansions have not kept pace.
For the Border Patrol alone, facility shortfalls exceed 60
percent of requirements. Use of trailers and temporary
facilities are common, and in many cases agents have no
adequate space in which to detain arrestees. The Obey amendment
addresses the highest priority construction needs for the INS,
and represents a down payment toward meeting INS's detention
and other facility requirements.

port security

The Obey amendment includes a total of $915 million to
improve security at our nation's ports. There are 361 public
ports in the United States and they conduct over 95 percent of
United States overseas trade.
The Interagency Commission on Crime and Security in U.S.
Seaports reported in Fall 2000 that the state of security in
U.S. seaports generally ranges from poor to fair and that
control of access to the seaport or sensitive areas within the
seaports is often lacking. The Commission found that criminal
organizations are exploiting weak security in ports to commit a
wide range of cargo and that the volunerability of American
ports to potential terrorist attack is high. The Commission
recommended minimum security guidelines for U.S. seaports and
the implementation of a five-year crime and security technology
deployment plan.
The Obey amendment includes $200 million for grants to U.S.
seaports for security assessment and enhancements. The 14
deepwater seaports in Florida alone estimate that $80 million
is needed to fully implement critical security measures that
have been identified. Many ports have not even begun the
process of identifying needed security measures. The funds
provided in the amendment can be used for such assessments and
for implementation of such measures once assessments are
performed.
The Customs Service only inspects 2 percent of the 600,000
cargo containers entering our seaports every day. The
Administration requested no new funding for additional Customs
agents at the Nation's seaports. The Committee bill only
contains approximately $80 million. The Obey amendment includes
$147 million for 841 new Customs inspectors and to continue the
purchase of new inspection equipment at our 20 most vulnerable
seaports.
The Obey amendment also includes $368 million for the Coast
Guard, $223 million more than the Committee bill. The Coast
Guard has substantially increased operation since September
11th and devoted the majority of its operations to ensuring
that our nation's ports are secure. Prior to September 11,
Coast Guard operations were spread evenly to drug interdiction,
search and rescue, fisheries enforcement, port security and
navigation aids. Today, almost 60% of Coast Guard operations
are devoted to port security. The amendment fully funds the
President's request of $203 million for increased Coast Guard
operations for six months of FY 2002. The Committee bill funds
only $145 million of the President's request. The amendment
also includes $165 million for increased Coast Guard operations
for the remainder of FY 2002. While it may be necessary in the
future to provide even additional Coast Guard port security
funding, at a minimum it is necessary to ensure that Coast
Guard active duty personnel do not decrease after March 31,
2001.

train and bus security

September 11th demonstrated how critical both rail and
intercity buses are to our transportation system. When our
nation's aviation system was shut down, many people used
intercity buses, Amtrak and other passenger rail systems to
reach their destinations.
Since September 11th, all of our transportation systems
have reviewed their security posture. Our motor coach and
passenger rail systems have very limited security today. Buses
and rail systems are terrorist targets in other countries and
the amendment includes $200 million to fund some limited
security improvements. Amtrak has identified over $500 million
of security needs, including fencing, increased guards, and
alarm systems. Motor coach companies have identified some
limited steps that they can take to increase security, by
establishing communications systems linked to police, screening
passengers and installing cameras and estimate the costs of
such improvements to be about $100 million.

food and water safety

The issue of ensuring the safety of imported food was
important before September 11th, and it is even more important
afterwards.
Most Americans would probably be astounded to know that the
FDA is only able to inspect seven-tenths of one percent of the
imports under its jurisdiction.
FDA itself told the subcommittee this year, ``FDA wants to
assure the safety of the imported food supply, however, our
resources have not kept pace with the increase in trade.''
The FY 2002 Agriculture Appropriations bill does provide
full funding of this year's pay raise for FDA personnel, which
will help ease constraints on the agency's budget.
But the events of September 11th require us to do more.
In its November 5th issue, Newsweek included the following
item:

``Am I satisfied with the inspections we're doing?
No,'' said [Health and Human Services Secretary Tommy]
Thompson. ``I am more fearful about this than anything
else.'' [Emphasis added.]

The FDA told the Agriculture Subcommittee this year that
getting to a level of 10% inspection on imports would cost
about $300 million.
This bill (like the Administration's request) will add $46
million for import inspection. The amendment offered by Rep.
Obey would have included all the funds in this bill for the
FDA, but would have provided an additional $239 million, for a
total of $300 million, to meet the full cost identified above
to reach 10% inspection. In addition, it would have provided
$20 million for investigative and emergency operations
activities at FDA.
Water supply systems are vulnerable to many kinds of
terrorist attacks: physical attack, chemical and biological
attack. Sabotaging our drinking water system, through
biological or chemical terrorism is, for good reason, a large
concern to the general public. Unfortunately, poisoning our
drinking water is not difficult feat--a fire hydrant could be
used as the conduit for contaminating our drinking water.
Contaminating water supplies is rooted in history and while the
stories are difficult to document, we know that they have
occurred. There have been a few attempts to position a water
supply in the United States. One occurred in New York City in
the mid-1980s when low levels of plutonium were found in the
drinking water. In another instance, a cult contaminant a city
water supply tank with salmonella in Dalles, Oregon which
resulted in more than 750 cases of salmonellos is in a county
that typically has fewer than five cases a year. Given the lack
of security of our water supply system facilities,
contamination of our drinking water supply is highly possible.
The physical security of our water supply system is also of
great concern. Our water systems are highly vulnerable to
explosion or disruptions in the pumping and electrical systems.
Often, the water plants are older facilities with pumps 60-80
years old and many of these pumps have no spare parts meaning
that they must be sent out for repair. Some of the smaller
water supply plants have no one manning the water facility at
all.
Finally, community water supplies are generally designed to
deliver water through the use of pressure and usually supply
most of the water for fire-fighting purposes. Sabotaging pumps
that maintain flow and pressure or disabling electric power
sources could cause long term disruption. Long term loss of the
water supply or water pressure could adversely affect our
ability to fight a fire or cause numerous other problems.
This amendment would provide an additional $80 million to
secure our drinking water systems--for vulnerability
assessments, remedial work, emergency operating plants and
research for 750 large and medium-sized water systems as well
as 600 small systems. These funds will help to secure our
drinking water supplies and to protect the American public.

security of government buildings and facilities

There are over 2.7 million U.S. Federal employees around
the world. In the aftermath of the September 11th, there is a
renewed sensitivity to the threat that is posed to Federal
employees. To many around the world, Federal employees are a
symbol of America. Unfortunately, not all Federal employees
enjoy the protection that we have here in the Capitol. Federal
employees are targets. We learned that tragic lessons the hard
way in Oklahoma. We were reminded of this lesson on September
11. The President requested $201 million through the General
Service Administration to enhance security at Federal
facilities and begin finding replacement space for dislocated
Federal employees in New York. This bill only provides $88
million to address these issues. The Obey amendment would fully
fund the President's request.
The amendment offered by the Minority includes $29,300,000
to design and construct perimeter security and a visitor
screening facility to protect the Washington Monument. The
Washington Monument because of its symbolic value and its
panoramic view of the Washington Mall, the Pentagon and the
Northern Virginia area is classified as the number one
potential terrorist target by the U.S. Park Police. It has been
the target of three significant attacks since 1979 including
hostage, sniper and truck bomb threats. New security systems
for the Monument were in development prior to the terrorist
attacks on September 11, 2001 and provisions of funding in the
Emergency Supplemental will allow construction of these
upgrades to begin immediately, An additional $5,346,000 is
proposed by the minority for perimeter security upgrades at the
Jefferson Memorial and $7,078,000 for similar upgrades at the
Lincoln Memorial.
The Obey amendment also provides a total of $186,500,000,
an increase of $155,000,000 over the base bill, for the
security needs of the Federal Judiciary. While the President's
request for the supplemental fully funded the security needs of
the White House and the Legislative Branch, only 7 percent of
the Judiciary's identified immediate security needs were
included in the request. The Obey amendment would only provide
only about one-third of the identified need, but would provide
for: enhanced security systems and equipment at courthouses
nationwide; an emergency communications system to ensure that
judges and court administrators can maintain contact with the
Administrative Office of the U.S.Courts; specific security
needs at the Thurgood Marshall Federal Judiciary Building,
which is adjacent to the Capitol Complex; increased security
requirements to address the biological/chemical threat posed in
the screening of mail to the Judiciary; and the installation of
protective window film at certain court facilities nationwide.

NASA

NASA's Kennedy Space Center is a symbol of American
achievement and international cooperation. This Center and
other NASA facilities are potentially high-profile terrorist
targets. In order to prepare for and ensure a robust capability
to mitigateterrorist attacks we must provide the necessary
funds. This amendment, similar to the Majority's proposal, includes
additional funds for securing NASA facilities.

National Water Infrastructure

The bill as reported by the Committee contains $139,000,000
for the Army Corps of Engineers and $30,259,000 for the
Department of the Interior Bureau of Reclamation as requested
by the Administration to partially meet the security
requirements identified by these agencies after the September
11 terrorist attack on our nation. Together, these agencies
operate hydroelectric power facilities, dams, locks, and
commercial waterways in all 50 states. The Committee bill funds
only 52 percent of what the Army Corps of Engineers and only 38
percent of that the Bureau of Reclamation identified as their
counter-terrorism security requirements in fiscal year 2002.
The amendment which the Majority offered unsuccessfully in
Committee and hopes to offer in the House would provide an
additional $168 million over the Committee bill to fully fund
that the Army Corps of Engineers and the Bureau of Reclamation
have identified to provide adequate physical security to their
most critical facilities in fiscal year 2002. The additional
funds are necessary to minimize the risk of terrorist
disruption to shipment of commercial goods over the nation's
waterways, and to reduce the risk of a terrorist attack on a
federal dam, which could result in tremendous loss of life,
economic disruption, and severe environmental damage.
After the terrorist attacks, the Army Corps of Engineers
designated 372 facilities as ``critical'' that needed immediate
increased surveillance and protection against terrorist attack.
These needs include increased personnel and overtime
compensation to maintain additional guards; restricting/
controlling vehicular traffic over dams; deploying barriers,
barricades, bollards, and gates; increasing electronic
surveillance of locks, dams, and powerhouses; and conducting
detailed vulnerability assessments.
The Bureau of Reclamation operates 362 ``high-hazard'' and
``significant-hazard'' dams and hydroelectric facilities in 17
western states. Hazard ratings are based on the potential for
loss of life and property damage downstream. Three of the
Bureau's dams are listed as National Critical Infrastructure.
The Administration's budget request and this bill provides only
78 percent of the guards, 24 percent of the equipment, and none
of the funds for cyber-security that the Bureau requested from
the Office of Management and Budget for counter-terrorism
security.

Security Upgrades for U.S. Military Facilities

The Office of Management and Budget estimates that we have
over $2.4 billion in unmet security needs for our military
installations, but none was requested by the Administration for
this supplemental. Recognizing that the security of our bases,
weapons, as well as the men and women who serve us, the
Committee included $80,000,000, certainly needed by not even
adequate to meet the highest priority needs.
The Obey amendment included $355,000,000 to address this
problem. In the United States, many of our bases have been open
to the public, or traversed by major highways and other public
roads. In an open society, we want to keep these facilities as
open as possible, but at the same time we must increase their
security. The funds in the amendment are not for glamorous
solutions, but the basics: fencing and perimeter roads to
provide a first line of defense, barriers, gates and
guardhouses for traffic control, and remote facilities so that
trucks and shipments could be inspected without endangering
nearby facilities.

Security for Schools and Colleges

The Obey Amendment adds $100,000,000 to the Committee bill
to help schools, colleges and universities across the country
to conduct essential emergency preparedness activities and to
implement security improvements. Because academics come first,
schools and institutions of higher education have not had
adequate funds to prepare for unanticipated, crisis events
caused by bio-terrorism, suspicious packages, bomb threats, and
school shootings.
Many schools and colleges lack the emergency communications
equipment needed to get real-time information from emergency
responders during a crisis. Schools report a need for funds to
train school security personnel, students and staff in
evacuation and emergency procedures. Moreover, they report a
need to upgrade security equipment and technology, particularly
electronic access control and intrusion detection systems,
video surveillance equipment, and emergency management systems
and communications equipment.
For example, a New Jersey school district with over 4,000
students reports:

We have many parents who work in Manhattan. When a
disaster such as the WTC tragedy occurs, when a train
is ``bombed'' as it was several years ago, or when
there is a weather-related disaster, we improvise our
own emergency relief plan with our staff, parents, and
local law enforcement officers until parent returns
home. This is particularly difficult as two of our
eight schools are in ``dead areas'' that will not allow
for wireless communication. Funding to improve
communications is needed * * *. Our funds are dedicated
to provide as strong as possible educational programs
focused on each and every child becoming a life-long
learner. Therefore, it should be no surprise to any of
our legislators that we've not budgeted for new locks,
extra security guards, new doors, state of the art
communications systems, remodeling of office space. All
of our efforts have been spent on instruction and
learning.

The Obey Amendment includes the $10,000,000 requested by
the President for emergency assistance to school districts for
mental health and other services that are needed after a
traumatic event occurs.
However, we have an obligation to help safeguard our
children, teachers, faculty and education staff by helping
schools, colleges, and universities to be proactive inassessing
their emergency response capabilities and security needs before another
tragedy.

Other Security

Foreign Language Training

The Obey Amendment adds $20,000,000 to the Committee bill
for a National Security Foreign Language Initiative to increase
the number of international experts, including those entering
government service, with in-depth expertise and language
proficiency in the targeted world areas of Central and South
Asia, the Middle East, Russia, and the Independent states of
the former Soviet Union.
Our national security, stability and economic vitality
depend, in part, on American experts who have sophisticated
language skills and cultural knowledge about the various areas
of the world. An urgent need exists, in particular, to enhance
the fluency of U.S. citizens in languages relevant to
understanding societies where Islamic and/or Muslim culture,
politics, religion, and economy are a significant factor. There
was no better illustration of this critical need than the FBI
Director's call on September 17th for U.S. citizens who are
fluent in Arabic, Persian, or Pashto to enlist as contract
linguists to help with the nation's probe into the September
11th attacks.
The Obey Amendment will help correct our deficit in foreign
language and international expertise. No American university,
for example, currently offers foreign language training in
Pashto, the main language of the Taliban. Fewer than 1% of
American college students are studying in languages deemed by
Department of Defense to be critical to national security. The
additional $20 million will provide financial assistance to
colleges and universities to double our current level of effort
to train experts in targeted languages, including Arabic,
Azeri, Armenian, Dari, Hindi, Kazakh, Persian, Pashto, Tajik,
Turkish, Turkmen, Uzbek, and Urdu. The funds also would be used
to enhance the capacity of U.S. higher education institutions
to sustain these programs over time.

Domestic Preparedness Assistance Program for First Responders

The amendment offered at Full Committee would also have
provided an increase of $150,000,000 over the $400,000,000 in
the Majority's package for Department of Justice state and
local domestic preparedness assistance for first responders, in
accordance with plans for this program developed by each State
and approved by the Department of Justice, rather than a
duplicative program under the Federal Emergency Management
Agency as proposed by the Administration. Funds provided would
have been available for additional domestic preparedness
equipment grants, training exercises, technical assistance, and
related research and development.

Grants for Firefighters

This amendment provides an additional $150 million for
grants to firefighters. Often, firefighters are our first
responders to an emergency and they certainly played a large
role in the response to the terrorist attack on the World Trade
Center on September 11. The Urban and Search and Rescue teams
that are used in terrorist incidents such as this are primarily
made up of firefighters and in fact, eight tasks forces were
deployed to New York City to support the New York Fire
Department at Ground Zero. Additional monies for these grants
could be used to train firefighter personnel, purchase vehicles
and equipment, and protective equipment--all items needed to
support our firefighters.

Conclusion

This proposal was put together in a condensed time frame
and by a staff with limited resources to explore the needs and
responsibilities of all of the agencies and activities of the
federal government. Informed and thoughtful people may well
differ with specific recommendations contained in this package.
In doing so they may well improve its content. Such is the
normal nature of the legislative process. What is not normal
and should not be acceptable, particularly under the current
circumstances, is to push such proposals aside without proper
debate and based only on the argument that nothing more can be
done to protect the American people until next spring because
they do not fit within an arbitrary spending ceiling that was
neither debated nor agreed to by the Congress.
We have already suffered a remarkable level of damage at
the hands of terrorists. Few would have predicted that a single
act by a single terrorist organization could have resulted in a
loss of life or loss of property and loss of economic growth of
the magnitude that we have experienced. Every day that our
ports and borders are inadequately guarded is another day of
opportunity for those who wish us ill. Every day that nuclear
and chemical stockpiles in the former Soviet Union are kept in
facilities without adequate security is also an opportunity for
such individuals. Once they have achieved control over these
materials or succeeded in slipping them across U.S. borders our
only hope will be a larger and more effective law enforcement
effort. Every day we delay in providing that effort is another
day that they have a better chance in making another successful
attack.
If the House of Representatives is to decide that we should
not spend the amounts needed to further tighten domestic
security, it should not be on the basis of a vote in a single
committee in which a majority of those present and voting would
have reversed the outcome, given the dictates of their own
conscience and judgments.

MINORITY PROPOSED ADDITIONS TO THE COMMITTEE BILL FOR DOMESTIC SECURITY
\1\
[In millions of dollars]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Minority
Committee Minority vs.
Bill Proposal Committee
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Protecting Against Bioterrorism:
Upgrading State & Local Health 593 915 +322
Departments & Hospitals............
Expanding CDC Support of State and 50 175 +125
Local Health Departments...........
Accelerating Research on Biohazards, 100 165 +65
Detection and Treatment............
Bio Safety Laboratories at NIH and 0 567 +567
Fort Detrick, MD...................
Vaccine and Drug stockpiles......... 1103 1153 +50
Other Bioterrorism Requirements..... 110 110 +0
-------------------------------
Total........................... 1956 3085 +1129
===============================
Securing the Mail:
Procurement of Sanitation Equipment 0 500 +500
for Postal Service.................
===============================
Airport and Airline Safety:
Federal Assistance for Mandated 0 200 +200
Security Upgrades at Airports......
Increased Sky Marshals and Sky 288 288 +0
Marshal Training...................
Cockpit Door Security & Explosive 159 409 +250
Detection Equipment................
Innovations in Airport Security..... 90 90 +0
-------------------------------
Total........................... 537 987 +450
===============================
Law Enforcement:
FBI Case Management Computer System 105 212 +107
(Trilogy)..........................
FBI Data Backup and Warehousing..... 0 197 +197
FBI Cybersecurity, Transportation 434 798 +364
and Other..........................
Other Justice Department Law 106 112 +6
Enforcement........................
Law Enforcement Assistance 17 17 +0
(Olympics).........................
Law Enforcement Assistance (National 25 244 +219
Capital Area)......................
Federal Law Enforcement Training 14 32 +18
Center.............................
Secret Service, IRS ect............. 236 236 +0
-------------------------------
Total........................... 937 1848 +911
===============================
Keeping Weapons of Mass Destruction Away
from Terrorists:
Improved Security at 4 DoD Sites 35 35 +0
Storing Tons of Chemical Weapons...
Improved Security for Nuclear 88 534 +446
Weapons Activities.................
Nuclear Non Proliferation Assistance 0 191 +191
for Russia.........................
Security of Russian Nuclear and 0 30 +30
Biological Scientists..............
Nuclear, Chemical and Biological 18 95 +77
Detection..........................
Improved Security at Nuclear Cleanup 8 65 +57
Sites..............................
Energy Intelligence................. 4 22 +18
CDC Oversight and Training for Labs 0 10 +10
Handling Dangerous Pathogens.......
Increased Security of Dangerous 0 50 +50
Chemical Storage Sites.............
Improved Security at Fort Detrick, 9 9 +0
MD.................................
Improved Security at CDC, NIH, FDA 58 122 +64
and USDA Research Facilities.......
-------------------------------
Total........................... 220 1163 +943
===============================
Immigration and Border Security:
790 Additional Customs Agents for 80 145 +65
Canadian Border....................
Machine Readable Visa Machines at 0 30 +30
All U.S. Consulates................
Immigration Inspectors, Border 410 410 +0
Patrol & Related Equipment.........
Adequate INS Detention & Admin. 0 128 +128
Facilities at U.S. Border Crossings
-------------------------------
Total........................... 490 713 +223
===============================
Port Security:
Full Annual Cost of Expanding Coast 145 369 +224
Guard by 640 positions.............
Federal Grants for Port Security 0 200 +200
Assessments and Enhancements.......
800 Additional Customs Service 80 147 +67
Agents for Cargo Inspection........
-------------------------------
Total........................... 225 716 +491
===============================
Train and Bus Security:
Federal Grants for Enhancing 0 200 +200
Security of Rail and Bus Travel....
===============================
Food and Water Safety:
Expand FDA Inspections to Cover 10% 61 300 +239
of All Food Imports................
Increase in FDA Emergency Operations 0 20 +20
and Investigations Staff...........
Assessment and Enhancement of 115 195 +80
Security for Drinking Water........
-------------------------------
Total........................... 176 515 +339
===============================
Security of Government Buildings and
Facilities:
Security Upgrades for Supreme Court 32 187 +155
and Other Federal Courthouses......
Security Upgrades for Federal 182 374 +192
Buildings..........................
Increased Security for Federal 81 113 +32
Museums, Parks and Monuments.......
Security Upgrades for National Water 169 337 +168
Infrastructure.....................
Security Measures for White House 306 306 +0
and Congress.......................
Security for U.S. Overseas 0 158 +158
Facilities.........................
Security Upgrades for U.S. Military 80 355 +275
Facilities.........................
-------------------------------
Total........................... 850 1830 +980
===============================
Security for Schools and Colleges:
Grants for Assessment and Emergency 0 100 +100
Response Planning..................
===============================
Other Security:
Counterterrorism Assistance for 400 550 +150
State and Local First Responders...
Grants for Firefighters............. 0 150 +150
Foreign Language Training in Arabic, 0 20 +20
Farsi, Pashto, etc.................
Miscellaneous Security Items........ 10 40 +30
-------------------------------
Total........................... 10 210 +200
===============================
Total Package............... 5401 11867 +6466
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ On October 17th, the president requested $20 billion in
discretionary appropriations in conformance with PL 107-38. Based on
the analysis of the Minority Staff of the Appropriations Committee,
$4.7 billion of that $20 billion request related to items involving
``domestic security.'' The remainder of the items involved oversees
defense operations and recovery from the attack of September 11th in
New York, Virginia and Pennsylvania. The package being proposed by the
Minority involves only the items dealing with ``domestic security.''

ADDITIONAL VIEWS OF HON. JAMES T. WALSH, HON. NITA LOWEY, HON. MAURICE
D. HINCHEY, AND HON. JOSE E. SERRANO

The bipartisan New York Congressional Appropriations
delegation strongly opposes the Committee's failure to include
additional contingent emergency spending for the critical
recovery efforts in New York City. The Committee's actions
directly contradict the language of the 2001 Emergency
Supplemental Appropriations Act for Recovery from and Response
to Terrorist Attacks on the United States (P.L. 107-38). P.L.
107-38 explicitly states:

That not less than one-half of the $40,000,000,000
shall be for disaster recovery activities and
assistance related to the terrorist acts in New York,
Virginia and Pennsylvania on September 11, 2001

We expect that the Congress and the Bush Administration
will keep its commitment to provide $20 billion for these
activities out of the funding available in P.L. 107-38. We
understand the pressing needs for national security and
homeland defense created by the September 11 attacks, which is
why we drafted our amendment as a contingent emergency to give
the President money in the bank to spend when needed. We
believe this is the best way to deal with the extraordinary
expenses--detailed below--arising from the attack on New York.
We appreciate the President's willingness to ask for more
funding when he believes it is necessary. With Congress heading
into a long recess, we believe it would be better to have this
authority in hand immediately.
Nearly 5,000 people are dead or still missing as a result
of the terrorist attacks on the World Trade Center. New York
City, New York State, and the entire metropolitan region have
lost billions in property and economic damages. In the days
following September 11, Governor George Pataki and Mayor
Rudolph Giuliani, with input from business, industry, and
labor, developed a comprehensive list of the most immediate
needs and highest priorities for the promised $20 billion in
relief. This list was developed in full consultation with all
interested parties and was endorsed by the entire 31-member New
York Congressional delegation.
In the first days following the attack, 25,000 New York
residents were displaced from their homes; today, more than two
months after the attack, 5,000 people are still unable to go
home. The attack completely destroyed more than 16 million
square feet of hotel and office space, while doing damage to
millions more, resulting in the dislocation of 838 major
companies. In addition, 15,000 small businesses were destroyed,
disabled, or significantly disrupted. As a direct result of the
attacks, New York lost more than 108,500 jobs. This figure does
not include the thousands more than have been lost in the City,
State, and metropolitan region during the last two months as
the effects of the attacks rippled through the economy. The New
York City Partnership and Chamber of Commerce estimate that New
York will lose $83 billion in economic activity this year.
The City and State both sustained huge losses, not only
through the destruction of critical infrastructure, but also
through the estimated loss of $12 billion in revenue over the
next 18 months. In addition, the City lost $1.4 billion in
destroyed or damaged police, fire, and sanitation equipment.
The World Trade Center sat on top of a major transit hub, and
subway and commuter rail stations were destroyed when the
towers collapsed. As a result, the subway system in lower
Manhattan has lost 42 percent of its capacity. It will cost at
least $3 billion to remediate and repair these facilities. The
West Side Highway and other roads surrounding the World Trade
Center were severely damaged, and the estimated cost of repairs
is at least $250 million.
The Borough of Manhattan Community College, part of the
City University of New York, sustained nearly $300 million in
damages to buildings and equipment at its campus when Seven
World Trade Center collapsed. New York City public school
students lost thousands of hours of classroom time that will
need to be made up before the end of the year, costing the
Board of Education at least $100 million.
Public utilities in and around Ground Zero also suffered
major losses. Electrical power to lower Manhattan was disrupted
by the complete destruction of two electricity substations
located in the World Trade Center complex. In addition, five
transmission feeders and associated equipment supplying the
substations were severely damaged. The 24-inch steam
distribution main (approximately 1,500 feet of steam piping)
that ran beneath the WTC complex and approximately 500 feet of
steam main adjacent to the WTC is presumed destroyed pending
access and excavation of the site. Finally, 11,000 feet of
natural gas distribution lines in and around the WTC complex
were damaged or destroyed.
Telecommunications systems were also severely damaged when
numerous switches that route telephone calls were damaged or
destroyed. Several hundred cables transporting telephone
service from those switches to customers in the surrounding
neighborhoods were crushed and/or water damaged. Two million
circuits were severely damaged at the New York Stock Exchange.
By working 24 hours a day for almost a week, Verizon
reconstructed the telephone lines in order to get the New York
Stock Exchange up and running by September 17.
The most popular public radio station in New York, WNYC-FM,
and the nation's largest public television station, Thirteen/
WNET-TV, sustained at least $15 million in damages. WNYC's FM
transmitter and antenna, as well as its backup FM transmitter
were destroyed in the collapse of the North Tower. Thirteen/
WNET-TV was knocked off the air for five days and lost an
engineer, who was working at the transmitters site atop Tower
One. With the collapse of the World Trade Center buildings,
Thirteen lost both its analog transmitters, a new digital
transmitter, switching equipment and other hardware.
New York metropolitan area hospitals responded generously
to the attacks, sending medicine, supplies, equipment, and
staff down to the site. Some of this equipment was lost when
the Towers collapsed. Combined with tremendous overtime costs,
the hospitals sustained at least $140 million in direct
operating losses.
These losses are real, and only scratch the surface of what
is likely to be needed in the coming months and years. We
appreciate the funding provided in division B of the bill, but
strongly disagree with the Committee's reasons for voting down
our amendment for an additional $9.7 billion to support the
recovery efforts in New York.
James T. Walsh.
Maurice D. Hinchey.
Jose E. Serrano.
Nita Lowey.

ADDITIONAL VIEWS OF HON. CHET EDWARDS

While I voted for the Committee's mark of the FY02
Department of Defense Appropriations Act, I was very
disappointed that the Committee did not include an increase in
funding for nonproliferation programs within the $20 billion
supplemental appropriation that was attached.
I find it irresponsible and dangerous that even in light of
the September 11th terrorist attacks, this House has said, in
effect by our votes, that it is less important to fund programs
that protect Americans from the threat of nuclear terrorists
than it was a year ago. Earlier this year, the Department of
Energy Appropriations bill included a smaller budget than last
year's for nuclear nonproliferation programs with Russia. These
programs provide for increases in security for loosely guarded
Russian nuclear materials that could fall into the wrong hands.
At the time, I was assured that the supplemental appropriations
bill would be the appropriate place to increase this budget, as
it would include programs funded to respond to the attacks of
September 11th. Unfortunately, this bill did not include those
funds, and the only amendment offered during Committee
consideration of the bill that would have increased our efforts
in this area was struck down 34-31.
The President has made it clear that he believes this is a
threat. On November 13, he stated: ``Our highest priority is to
keep terrorists from acquiring weapons of mass destruction * *
* We agreed that it is urgent that we improve the physical
protection and accounting of nuclear materials and prevent
illicit nuclear trafficking.'' Earlier this year, a review led
by former Senator Howard Baker and former White House Counsel
Lloyd Cutler declared: ``The national security benefits to U.S.
citizens from securing and/or neutralizing * * * nuclear
weapons and potential nuclear weapons could constitute the
highest return on investment in any current U.S. national
security and defense program.''
Let me review five facts that are not in dispute:
1. If the September 11th terrorists had used a nuclear
bomb, with a soda can sized lump of plutonium, and placed it in
lower Manhattan, millions of people would have died.
2. There are over 600 metric tons, enough for 41,000
nuclear devices, of weapons-usable material in Russia today
that is in urgent need of additional security improvements,
according to the U.S. Department of Energy.
3. We know of 14 separate seizures of highly enriched
uranium that had been stolen from Russian nuclear sites since
1992. In eight of those cases, the uranium was seized outside
of Russia, in Germany, the Czech Republic, and Bulgaria.
4. We know that since 1993 Osama bin Laden's Al Qaeda
organization has made attempts to obtain nuclear material from
Russia. In fact, when Northern Alliance forces drove Taliban
forces out of Kabul, they found schematics and other background
materials describing how to build a crude nuclear bomb.
5. Because of an agreement signed in September between the
United States and Russia, we have a window of opportunity to
put in place anti-terrorist safeguards at numerous Russian
nuclear sites. No one knows when that window of opportunity
will close.
Based on those known facts and the devastating potential of
nuclear terrorist attacks, Congress should act immediately to
work with Russia in providing adequate safeguards at their
numerous nuclear sites.
I know that every Member of this House would do almost
anything to prevent a nuclear terrorist attack on the United
States. Sadly, though, our spending decisions are not
consistent with that commitment.
I will vote for this bill because of the good that it does,
and because I know that the Chairman will continue to look for
an opportunity to fund these critical programs. I believe we
have a moral obligation to the American people to do everything
possible to prevent terrorists from using nuclear weapons
against American families.
Chet Edwards.