[Senate Report 107-151]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
Calendar No. 370
107th Congress Report
SENATE
2d Session 107-151
_______________________________________________________________________
NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION
ACT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2003
REPORT
[to accompany s. 2514]
on
AUTHORIZING APPROPRIATIONS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2003 FOR MILITARY ACTIVITIES
OF THE DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE, FOR MILITARY CONSTRUCTION, AND FOR
DEFENSE ACTIVITIES OF THE DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY, TO PRESCRIBE PERSONNEL
STRENGTHS FOR SUCH FISCAL YEAR FOR THE ARMED FORCES, AND FOR OTHER
PURPOSES
together with
ADDITIONAL AND MINORITY VIEWS
__________
COMMITTEE ON ARMED SERVICES
UNITED STATES SENATE
May 15 (legislative day, May 9), 2002.--Ordered to be printed
COMMITTEE ON ARMED SERVICES
(107th Congress, 2d Session)
CARL LEVIN, Michigan, Chairman
EDWARD M. KENNEDY, Massachusetts JOHN WARNER, Virginia
ROBERT C. BYRD, West Virginia STROM THURMOND, South Carolina
JOSEPH I. LIEBERMAN, Connecticut JOHN McCAIN, Arizona
MAX CLELAND, Georgia BOB SMITH, New Hampshire
MARY L. LANDRIEU, Louisiana JAMES M. INHOFE, Oklahoma
JACK REED, Rhode Island RICK SANTORUM, Pennsylvania
DANIEL K. AKAKA, Hawaii PAT ROBERTS, Kansas
BILL NELSON, Florida WAYNE ALLARD, Colorado
E. BENJAMIN NELSON, Nebraska TIM HUTCHINSON, Arkansas
JEAN CARNAHAN, Missouri JEFF SESSIONS, Alabama
MARK DAYTON, Minnesota SUSAN COLLINS, Maine
JEFF BINGAMAN, New Mexico JIM BUNNING, Kentucky
David S. Lyles, Staff Director
Judith A. Ansley, Republican Staff Director
C O N T E N T S
----------
Page
Purpose of the bill.............................................. 1
Committee overview and recommendations........................... 2
Explanation of funding summary............................... 5
Accrual funding of civilian personnel benefits............... 13
Division A--Department of Defense Authorizations................. 17
Title I--Procurement............................................. 17
Explanation of tables........................................ 17
Subtitle A--Authorization of Appropriations.................. 17
Chemical Agents and Munitions Destruction, Defense (sec.
106)................................................... 17
Subtitle B--Army Programs.................................... 18
Pilot program on sales of manufactured articles and
services of certain Army industrial facilities without
regard to availability from domestic sources (sec. 111) 39
Army Aircraft............................................ 39
UH-60 Blackhawk (multiyear procurement).............. 39
CH-47 cargo helicopter modifications................. 39
Aircraft survivability equipment..................... 39
Airborne command and control......................... 40
Avionics support equipment........................... 39
Army Missiles............................................ 40
Guided Multiple Launch Rocket System rocket.......... 40
Army Ammunition.......................................... 40
50-caliber Saboted Light Armor Penetrator............ 40
155mm high explosive projectiles..................... 41
Wide Area Munition................................... 41
Bunker Defeat Munition............................... 41
Modern demolition initiators......................... 41
Special equipment for ammunition depots.............. 41
Conventional ammunition demilitarization............. 42
Other Army Procurement................................... 42
Family of Heavy Tactical Vehicles.................... 42
Heavy armored sedan.................................. 42
Army data distribution system (data radio)........... 42
Area common user modification program................ 43
Night vision devices................................. 43
Combat support medical............................... 43
Training devices, non-system......................... 44
Subtitle C--Navy Programs.................................... 44
Navy Aircraft............................................ 68
F/A-18E/F aircraft................................... 68
V-22 Osprey aircraft advance procurement............. 68
Airborne low frequency sonar......................... 68
Navy joint primary aircraft training system.......... 69
EA-6B aircraft modifications......................... 70
AV-8B precision targeting pod........................ 71
F/A-18 aircraft modifications........................ 71
P-3 aircraft modifications........................... 71
Fleet aircrew simulator training..................... 72
Navy Weapons............................................. 72
Hellfire missiles.................................... 72
Weapons industrial facilities........................ 72
Close-in Weapons System modifications................ 72
Gun mount modifications.............................. 73
Navy and Marine Corps Ammunition......................... 73
120mm High Explosive Anti-Tank cartridges............ 73
155mm High Explosive M795............................ 73
Navy Shipbuilding and Conversion......................... 73
Future aircraft carrier procurement.................. 73
Submarine refueling overhauls........................ 74
Large deck amphibious ship replacement............... 75
Landing craft air cushion service life extension
program............................................ 75
Other Navy Procurement................................... 75
Ship integrated condition assessment system.......... 75
Stainless steel sanitary spaces...................... 76
Electronic warfare program change.................... 76
Joint engineering data management information and
control system..................................... 76
SPQ-9B radar......................................... 77
Improving efficiency on ships through food service
technology......................................... 77
Integrated bridge to improve ship situational
awareness.......................................... 77
Submarine combat control system...................... 77
NULKA anti-ship missile decoy system................. 78
Submarine training device modifications.............. 78
Marine Corps Procurement................................. 78
Auto test equipment systems.......................... 78
Lightweight multi-band satellite terminals........... 78
Subtitle D--Air Force Programs............................... 79
C-130J aircraft program (sec. 131)....................... 94
Pathfinder programs (sec. 132)........................... 94
Oversight of acquisition for defense space programs
(sec. 133)......................................... 95
Leasing of tanker aircraft (sec. 134).................... 95
Air Force Aircraft....................................... 96
C-17 aircraft trainers............................... 96
C-17 aircraft interim contractor support............. 96
EC-130J aircraft program............................. 96
CV-22 Osprey aircraft advance procurement............ 97
B-2 Spirit bomber.................................... 98
B-52 bomber.......................................... 98
F-16 aircraft modifications.......................... 98
C-5 aircraft avionics modernization program.......... 98
C-130 aircraft modifications......................... 99
KC-135 aircraft boom operator weapons system
trainer........................................ 100
Upgrades to Air National Guard targeting pods........ 100
Air Force Ammunition..................................... 100
Sensor-fuzed weapon.................................. 100
MJU-52/B infrared countermeasures.................... 100
Air Force Missiles....................................... 101
Minuteman III modifications.......................... 101
Advanced Extremely High Frequency satellite program.. 101
Defense Support Program mobile terminal displays..... 101
Titan space boosters................................. 102
Evolved Expendable Launch Vehicle mission assurance.. 102
Other Air Force Procurement.............................. 102
Spacelift range system (space)....................... 102
Panoramic night vision goggles....................... 102
Subtitle E--Other Matters.................................... 102
Defense-Wide Programs.................................... 110
Global information grid.............................. 110
Avionics enhanced situational awareness.............. 110
EC-130J Commando Solo spares......................... 110
SEAL Delivery Vehicles............................... 111
Multiband Multimission Radios........................ 111
Advanced Lightweight Grenade Launcher................ 111
Low Profile Night Vision Goggle...................... 111
Modular Integrated Communications Helmet system...... 112
Special Operations Craft-Riverine.................... 112
Advanced night vision system......................... 112
M48 protective masks................................. 112
M12 decontamination system........................... 113
Chemical-Biological Protective Shelter............... 113
Other Items of Interest.................................. 113
Abrams tank program.................................. 113
Accelerated chemical demilitarization................ 114
Chemical demilitarization secondary waste disposal... 114
Acquisition programs at the National Security Agency. 115
Advanced Aviation Institutional Training Simulator... 115
Armored Security Vehicle............................. 116
Hydra 70 rocket...................................... 116
Vessels for tactical sealift......................... 117
Title II--Research, Development, Test, and Evaluation............ 119
Explanation of tables........................................ 119
Subtitle A--Authorization of Appropriations.................. 119
Subtitle B--Program Requirements, Restrictions, and
Limitations................................................ 121
Basic seismic research program for support of national
requirements for monitoring nuclear explosions (sec.
211)................................................... 121
Advanced SEAL Delivery System (sec. 212)................. 121
Army experimentation program regarding design of the
Objective Force (sec. 213)............................. 123
Subtitle C--Missile Defense Programs......................... 123
Annual operational assessments and reviews of ballistic
missile defense program (sec. 221)..................... 123
Report on Midcourse Defense program (sec. 222)........... 124
Report on Air-based Boost program (sec. 223)............. 125
Report on Theater High Altitude Air Defense (THAAD)
program (sec. 224)..................................... 126
References to new name for Ballistic Missile Defense
Organization (sec. 225)................................ 126
Subtitle D--Improved Management of Department of Defense Test
and Evaluation Facilities.................................. 126
Department of Defense Test and Evaluation Resource
Enterprise (sec. 231).................................. 128
Transfer of testing funds from program accounts to
infrastructure accounts (sec. 232)..................... 129
Increased investment in test and evaluation facilities
(sec. 233)............................................. 130
Uniform financial management system for Department of
Defense test and evaluation facilities (sec. 234)...... 132
Test and evaluation workforce improvements (sec. 235).... 133
Compliance with test and evaluation master plan
requirements (sec. 236)................................ 134
Report on implementation of Defense Science Board
recommendations (sec. 237)............................. 134
Subtitle E--Other Matters.................................... 135
Pilot programs for revitalizing Department of Defense
laboratories (sec. 241)................................ 135
Technology transition initiative (sec. 242).............. 136
Encouragement of small business and nontraditional
defense contractors to submit proposals potentially
beneficial for combating terrorism (sec. 243).......... 138
Vehicle fuel cell program (sec. 244)..................... 139
Defense Nanotechnology Research and Development Program
(sec. 245)............................................. 140
Additional Matters of Interest............................... 141
Science and technology initiatives....................... 141
Merit-based selection procedures......................... 142
Army..................................................... 143
Science and technology for the Objective Force....... 155
Fundamental research for Army transformation......... 156
Materials research for the Objective Force........... 156
Applied materials research for the Objective Force... 156
Army missile research................................ 156
Interactive training technologies.................... 157
Advanced coatings research........................... 157
Fastening and joining research....................... 157
21st Century Truck................................... 157
Advanced manufacturing technology.................... 158
Tungsten penetrators................................. 158
Portable hybrid power systems........................ 158
Landmine detection technologies...................... 158
Environmental restoration technologies............... 158
Geosciences and atmospheric research................. 159
Stationary fuel cell initiative...................... 159
Personal navigation for the Objective Force warrior.. 159
Unmanned aerial vehicle data links................... 159
Multi-fuel auxiliary power units..................... 159
Combat vehicle technology............................ 159
Mobile parts hospital................................ 160
Rapid prototyping.................................... 160
Aircrew coordination training........................ 160
Echelon surveillance and reconnaisance............... 160
Proton Exchange Membrane Fuel Cell Demonstration..... 160
Low-cost interceptor technology...................... 160
Supercluster Distributed Memory Technology........... 161
Family of Systems Simulation......................... 161
Advanced Tank Armament System........................ 161
Army technology for environmental enhancement........ 162
Javelin.............................................. 162
Armored systems modernization--engineering
development........................................ 162
Joint Simulation System Core Program................. 162
Automatic test equipment development................. 162
Multi-mode top attack threat simulators.............. 163
Studies and analyses................................. 163
Battle Labs cooperative research..................... 163
Aerostat for missile defense......................... 163
Aircraft engine component improvement program........ 164
Technology for language training..................... 164
Information Systems Security......................... 164
Navy..................................................... 164
Robotic countermine technology....................... 178
Marine mammal detection and mitigation............... 178
Corrosion research................................... 178
Data fusion.......................................... 178
Advanced power systems............................... 179
Polymer composites research.......................... 179
Bioenvironmental hazards research.................... 179
Navy materials research.............................. 179
Electronics research for naval applications.......... 179
Low acoustic signature motors and propulsors......... 179
Ship service fuel cell technology.................... 179
Unmanned surface vehicles............................ 180
Multifunction antenna systems........................ 180
Laser welding and cutting for ship manufacturing..... 180
Ocean modeling research for mine and expeditionary
warfare............................................ 181
Aviation survivability............................... 181
Gas turbine engine electric start to reduce ship
maintenance........................................ 181
Surface vessel torpedo tubes......................... 181
Electromechanical actuators.......................... 182
Reducing maintenance by improving brushes on electric
motors............................................. 182
Reducing unspecified development..................... 182
Lightweight 155mm howitzer........................... 182
Navy fuel cell technology demonstration.............. 183
Facilities improvement............................... 183
Urban operations environment research................ 183
Duplication of research and development efforts...... 184
Power node control centers........................... 184
Initiative to reduce destroyer life cycle costs...... 184
Standard missile advanced optical correlator......... 184
Submarine combat systems modernization............... 185
Elimination of redundant studies..................... 185
Lightweight torpedo development...................... 186
Outboard system improvements......................... 186
SEARAM ship self-defense system...................... 186
NULKA anti-ship missile decoy system................. 186
Radar absorbing tiles for ship self-defense.......... 187
Navy integrated human resources strategy............. 187
Navy studies and analyses............................ 187
Combating terrorism wargaming and research........... 187
F/A-18E/F engine durability improvements............. 188
Precision target aided navigation.................... 188
Improving information provided to the warfighter..... 188
Marine Corps ground combat/supporting arms systems... 188
Interoperability support of the warfighter........... 189
Unmanned Aerial Vehicle Tactical Control System...... 189
Modeling and simulation.............................. 189
Maritime manufacturing technology.................... 190
Air Force................................................ 190
Aerospace materials manufacturing and research....... 204
Lithium ion batteries for unmanned vehicles.......... 204
Wireless ISR technology.............................. 204
Space technology research............................ 204
Cyber security research.............................. 204
Aluminum aerostructures.............................. 205
Crew systems and personnel research.................. 205
Unmanned Aerial Vehicles in controlled airspace...... 205
Advanced spacecraft technology....................... 206
Advanced Wideband System satellite program........... 206
Low-cost autonomous attack system.................... 207
B-2 Spirit bomber.................................... 207
Precision location and identification program........ 207
Space-based Infrared System-High component........... 208
Deployable oxygen systems............................ 208
Integrated medical information technology system..... 208
Fixed aircrew standardized seats..................... 209
Aircrew rescue signaling systems..................... 209
Common low observable verification system............ 209
Maglev upgrade program............................... 210
Joint directed energy combat operations and
employment......................................... 210
Air Force studies and analyses....................... 210
Theater airborne reconnaissance system improvements.. 210
Global Positioning System Jammer Detection and
Location........................................... 210
Joint air-to-surface standoff missile development.... 211
Multi-sensor command and control constellation....... 211
Global Positioning System satellite program.......... 212
Spacelift range system............................... 213
Manufacturing technologies........................... 213
Defense-wide............................................. 213
Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency fundamental
research........................................... 228
University research initiatives...................... 229
Nanotechnology incentive fund........................ 229
Medical free electron laser.......................... 229
Computing systems and communications technology...... 230
Chemical-Biological Defense Program funding.......... 230
Tactical technology.................................. 232
Materials and electronics technology................. 232
Weapons of mass destruction defeat technology........ 232
Combating Terrorism Technology Support Working Group. 232
Wafer-scale planarization technology................. 233
Bottom Anti-Reflective Coatings for circuit boards... 233
Nanophotonics systems fabrication facility........... 233
Wide-bandgap semiconductor........................... 233
Vehicle fuel cell program............................ 233
Technology transition initiatives.................... 234
Instructional technologies for first responders...... 234
Unexploded ordnance remediation...................... 235
Ballistic missile defense systems engineering........ 235
Ballistic missile defense test and evaluation........ 235
Arrow................................................ 235
High power discriminator radar....................... 235
Midcourse systems engineering and integration........ 236
Small kill vehicle technology development............ 237
Sea-based boost defense.............................. 237
Space-based boost defense............................ 237
Airborne Laser....................................... 237
Airborne Infrared Surveillance system................ 237
Russian-American Observation Satellite (RAMOS) solar
arrays............................................. 238
Technical studies and analyses....................... 238
Information security scholarship program............. 239
Information security................................. 239
National Imagery and Mapping Agency feature level
database........................................... 239
Intelligent spatial technologies..................... 239
Broadcast-Request Imagery Technology Experiment...... 240
Laser additive manufacturing initiative.............. 240
Advanced technologies for special operations......... 240
Joint Threat Warning System.......................... 241
Embedded Integrated Broadcast Service Receivers...... 241
Test and evaluation science and technology program... 241
Central test and evaluation investment program....... 241
Live fire test and training.......................... 242
Other Items of Interest.................................. 242
Crusader artillery system............................ 242
Future launch and spacelift concepts................. 242
Hybrid engine military vehicles...................... 243
Magdalena Ridge Observatory.......................... 244
Patents and licensing................................ 244
National Consortium for Biodefense................... 245
Patriot Advanced Capability-3........................ 245
Rotorcraft external airbag protection system......... 245
Sensor instrumentation............................... 246
Space-based Laser.................................... 246
Treatment of decompression sickness.................. 246
Title III--Operation and Maintenance............................. 247
Explanation of tables........................................ 247
Subtitle A--Authorization of Appropriations.................. 287
Armed Forces Retirement Home (sec. 303).................. 287
Range enhancement initiative fund (sec. 304)............. 287
Subtitle B--Environmental Provisions......................... 287
Enhancement of authority on cooperative agreements for
environmental purposes (sec. 311)...................... 287
Modification of authority to carry out construction
projects for environmental responses (sec. 312)........ 287
Increased procurement of environmentally preferable
products and services (sec. 313)....................... 288
Cleanup of unexploded ordnance on Kaho'olawe Island,
Hawaii (sec. 314)...................................... 289
Subtitle C--Defense Dependents' Education.................... 290
Assistance to local educational agencies that benefit
dependents of members of the Armed Forces and
Department of Defense civilian employees (sec. 331).... 290
Impact aid for children with severe disabilities (sec.
332)................................................... 290
Options for funding dependent summer school programs
(sec. 333)............................................. 290
Comptroller General study of adequacy of compensation
provided for teachers in the Department of Defense
Overseas Dependents' Schools (sec. 334)................ 291
Subtitle D--Other Matters.................................... 291
Use of humanitarian and civic assistance funds for
reserve component members of Special Operations Command
engaged in activities related to clearance of landmines
(sec. 341)............................................. 291
Calculation of five-year period of limitation for Navy-
Marine Corps Intranet contract (sec. 342).............. 291
Reimbursement for Reserve intelligence support (sec. 343) 292
Clarification of required core logistics capabilities
(sec. 344)............................................. 292
Rebate agreements under the special supplemental food
program (sec. 345)..................................... 292
Additional Matters of Interest............................... 293
Anti-corrosion initiative................................ 293
Enhanced secure communications to reserve components..... 294
Foreign currency fluctuation............................. 294
Personal gear for service members........................ 294
Training range enhancement initiative.................... 294
Travel................................................... 296
Army..................................................... 296
Battlefield mobility enhancers....................... 296
Information operations............................... 296
Aviation training backlog............................ 296
Utilities privatization.............................. 297
Facilities sustainment............................... 297
Navy..................................................... 297
Ship depot maintenance............................... 297
Improved shipboard combat information center......... 297
Submarine broadcast support.......................... 298
Mark-45 overhauls.................................... 298
Critical infrastructure protection for Navy and
Marine Corps....................................... 298
Configuration management for Navy weapons systems.... 298
Air Force................................................ 298
Air Force flying hour program........................ 298
Combat air patrols................................... 299
Spacelift range system............................... 300
Utilities costs...................................... 300
Defense-Wide............................................. 300
Joint recruiting and advertising..................... 300
Training and qualification shortfalls................ 301
Procurement Technical Assistance Program............. 301
Logistics reengineering.............................. 301
Cultural and historic activities..................... 301
Base information system.............................. 301
C3 and Intelligence Mission and Analysis Fund........ 302
Psychological operations............................. 302
Commander in Chief for Homeland Security............. 303
Studies.............................................. 303
Commercial imagery to support military requirements.. 303
Guard and Reserve Components............................. 305
Army information operations.......................... 305
Antiterrorism/force protection access control........ 305
Initial issue........................................ 305
Air Force Reserve Command server consolidation....... 305
National Guard support for test and evaluation....... 305
Air National Guard medical equipment................. 306
Miscellaneous Additional Items of Interest................... 306
Formerly Used Defense Sites.............................. 306
Drug interdiction and counterdrug activities............. 306
Other Items of Interest...................................... 307
Aerial refueling fee-for-service......................... 307
Air Force supersonic ranges.............................. 307
Army ammunition plants................................... 307
C-130 aircraft force structure........................... 308
Commissary benefit....................................... 308
Department of Defense support to the Interallied
Confederation of Reserve Officers and the Interallied
Confederation of Medical Reserve Officers.............. 309
Formerly Used Defense Site at Waikoloa and Waimea, Hawaii
Island................................................. 309
Funding for efforts to address environmental impacts of
unexploded ordnance, discarded military munitions, and
munitions constituents................................. 309
Improved justification of service training budgets....... 310
``Starship'' repair plan................................. 310
Status of the Uniform National Discharge Standards....... 311
Training of Navy and Marine Corps units for the global
war on terrorism and to support the global naval forces
presence policy........................................ 311
Title IV--Military Personnel Authorizations...................... 313
Subtitle A--Active Forces.................................... 313
End strengths for active forces (sec. 401)............... 313
Authority to increase strength and grade limitations to
account for reserve component members on active duty in
support of a contingency operation (sec. 402).......... 313
Increased allowance for number of Marine Corps general
officers in grades above major general (sec. 403)...... 314
Increase in authorized strengths for Marine Corps
officers on active duty in the grade of colonel (sec.
404)................................................... 314
Subtitle B--Reserve Forces................................... 314
End strengths for Selected Reserve (sec. 411)............ 314
End strengths for reserves on active duty in support of
the Reserves (sec. 412)................................ 314
End strengths for military technicians (dual status)
(sec. 413)............................................. 315
Fiscal year 2003 limitation on non-dual status
technicians (sec. 414)................................. 316
Subtitle C--Authorization of Appropriations.................. 316
Authorization of appropriations for military personnel
(sec. 421)............................................. 316
Title V--Military Personnel Policy............................... 317
Subtitle A--Officer Personnel Policy......................... 317
Extension of certain requirements and exclusions
applicable to service of general and flag officers on
active duty in certain joint duty assignments (sec.
501)................................................... 317
Extension of authority to waive requirement for
significant joint duty experience for appointment as a
chief of a reserve component or a National Guard
director (sec. 502).................................... 317
Subtitle B--Reserve Component Personnel Policy............... 317
Time for commencement of initial period of active duty
for training upon enlistment in reserve component (sec.
511)................................................... 317
Authority for limited extension of medical deferment of
mandatory retirement or separation of reserve component
officer (sec. 512)..................................... 318
Subtitle C--Education and Training........................... 318
Increase in authorized strengths for the service
academies (sec. 521)................................... 318
Subtitle D--Decorations, Awards, and Commendations........... 318
Waiver of time limitations for award of certain
decorations to certain persons (sec. 531).............. 318
Korea Defense Service Medal (sec. 532)................... 318
Subtitle E--National Call to Service......................... 318
National call to service (sec. 541 and 542).............. 318
Subtitle F--Other Matters.................................... 319
Biennial surveys on racial, ethnic, and gender issues
(sec. 551)............................................. 319
Leave required to be taken pending review of a
recommendation for removal by a board of inquiry (sec.
552)................................................... 319
Stipend for participation in funeral honors details (sec.
553)................................................... 320
Other Items of Interest...................................... 320
Career progression of military astronauts................ 320
Human resources strategy and community support planning.. 320
Integrated personnel readiness system.................... 320
Title VI--Compensation and Other Personnel Benefits.............. 323
Subtitle A--Pay and Allowances............................... 323
Increase in basic pay for fiscal year 2003 (sec. 601).... 323
Rate of basic allowance for subsistence for enlisted
personnel occupying single Government quarters without
adequate availability of meals (sec. 602).............. 323
Basic allowance for housing in cases of low-cost or no-
cost moves (sec. 603).................................. 323
Subtitle B--Bonuses and Special and Incentive Pays........... 323
One-year extension of certain bonus and special pay
authorities for reserve forces (sec. 611).............. 323
One-year extension of certain bonus and special pay
authorities for certain health care professionals (sec.
612)................................................... 324
One-year extension of special pay and bonus authorities
for nuclear officers (sec. 613)........................ 324
One-year extension of other bonus and special pay
authorities (sec. 614)................................. 324
Increased maximum amount payable as multiyear retention
bonus for medical officers of the Armed Forces (sec.
615)................................................... 324
Increased maximum amount payable as incentive special pay
for medical officers of the Armed Forces (sec. 616).... 324
Assignment incentive pay (sec. 617)...................... 324
Increased maximum amounts for prior service enlistment
bonus (sec. 618)....................................... 325
Subtitle C--Travel and Transportation Allowances............. 325
Deferral of travel in connection with leave between
consecutive overseas tours (sec. 631).................. 325
Transportation of motor vehicles for members reported
missing (sec. 632)..................................... 325
Destinations authorized for Government-paid
transportation of enlisted personnel for rest and
recuperation upon extending duty at designated overseas
locations (sec. 633)................................... 325
Vehicle storage in lieu of transportation to United
States territory outside Continental United States
(sec. 634)............................................. 326
Subtitle D--Retirement and Survivor Benefits Matters......... 326
Phased-in authority for concurrent receipt of military
retired pay and veterans' disability compensation for
certain service-connected disabled veterans (sec. 641). 326
Increased retired pay for enlisted reserves credited with
extraordinary heroism (sec. 642)....................... 326
Expanded scope of authority to waive time limitations on
claims for military personnel benefits (sec. 643)...... 326
Subtitle E--Other Matters.................................... 327
Additional authority to provide assistance for families
of members of the Armed Forces (sec. 651).............. 327
Time limitation for use of Montgomery GI Bill entitlement
by members of the Selected Reserve (sec. 652).......... 327
Status of obligation to refund educational assistance
upon failure to participate satisfactorily in Selected
Reserve (sec. 653)..................................... 327
Prohibition on acceptance of honoraria by personnel at
certain Department of Defense schools (sec. 654)....... 327
Other Items of Interest...................................... 327
Reserve personnel compensation program review............ 327
Title VII--Health Care........................................... 329
Eligibility of surviving dependents for TRICARE dental
program benefits after discontinuance of former
enrollment (sec. 701).................................. 329
Advance authorization for inpatient mental health
services (sec. 702).................................... 329
Continued TRICARE eligibility of dependents residing at
remote locations after departure of sponsors for
unaccompanied assignments (sec. 703)................... 329
Approval of Medicare providers as TRICARE providers (sec.
704)................................................... 329
Claims information (sec. 705)............................ 329
Department of Defense Medicare-Eligible Retiree Health
Care Fund (sec. 706)................................... 330
Technical corrections relating to transitional health
care for members separated from active duty (sec. 707). 330
Other Items of Interest...................................... 330
Research on war-related illnesses........................ 330
Reserve health care...................................... 330
Title VIII--Acquisition Policy, Acquisition Management, and
Related Matters................................................ 333
Subtitle A--Major Defense Acquisition Programs............... 333
Buy-to-budget acquisition of end items (sec. 801)........ 333
Report to Congress on incremental acquisition of major
systems (sec. 802)..................................... 333
Pilot program for spiral development of major systems
(sec. 803)............................................. 334
Improvement of software acquisition processes (sec. 804). 335
Independent technology readiness assessments (sec. 805).. 336
Timing of certification in connection with waiver of
survivability and lethality testing requirements (sec.
806)................................................... 337
Subtitle B--Procurement Policy Improvements.................. 337
Performance goals for contracting for services (sec. 811) 337
Grants of exceptions to cost or pricing data
certification requirements and waivers of cost
accounting standards (sec. 812)........................ 337
Extension of requirement for annual report on defense
commercial pricing management improvement (sec. 813)... 339
Internal controls on the use of purchase cards (sec. 814) 339
Assessment regarding fees paid for acquisitions under
other agencies' contracts (sec. 815)................... 340
Pilot program for transition to follow-on contracts for
certain prototype projects (sec. 816).................. 340
Waiver authority for domestic source or content
requirements (sec. 817)................................ 341
Subtitle C--Other Matters.................................... 341
Extension of the applicability of certain personnel
demonstration project exceptions to an acquisition
workforce demonstration project (sec. 821)............. 341
Moratorium on reduction of the defense acquisition and
support workforce (sec. 822)........................... 341
Extension of contract goal for small disadvantaged
businesses and certain institutions of higher education
(sec. 823)............................................. 342
Mentor-protege program eligibility for HUBZone small
business concerns and small business concerns owned and
controlled by service-disabled veterans (sec. 824)..... 342
Repeal of requirements for certain reviews by the
Comptroller General (sec. 825)......................... 342
Multiyear procurement authority for purchase of
dinitrogen tetroxide, hydrazine, and hydrazine-related
products (sec. 826).................................... 342
Multiyear procurement authority for environmental
services for military installations (sec. 827)......... 342
Other Items of Interest...................................... 343
Consolidation of contract requirements................... 343
Management of electromagnetic spectrum in the acquisition
process................................................ 344
Polyacrylonitrile carbon fibers.......................... 344
Title IX--Department of Defense Organization and Management...... 347
Time for submittal of report on quadrennial defense
review (sec. 901)...................................... 347
Increased number of deputy commandants authorized for the
Marine Corps (sec. 902)................................ 347
Base operating support for Fisher Houses (sec. 903)...... 347
Prevention and mitigation of corrosion (sec. 904)........ 347
Title X--General Provisions...................................... 349
Subtitle A--Financial Matters................................ 349
Transfer authority (sec. 1001)........................... 349
Reallocation of authorizations of appropriations from
ballistic missile defense to shipbuilding (sec. 1002).. 349
Authorization of appropriations for continued operations
for the war on terrorism (sec. 1003)................... 352
Authorization of emergency supplemental appropriations
for fiscal year 2002 (sec. 1004)....................... 353
United States contribution to NATO common-funded budgets
in fiscal year 2003 (sec. 1005)........................ 353
Development and implementation of financial management
enterprise architecture (sec. 1006).................... 354
Departmental accountable officials in the Department of
Defense (sec. 1007).................................... 354
Department-wide procedures for establishing and
liquidating personal pecuniary liability (sec. 1008)... 354
Travel card program integrity (sec. 1009)................ 355
Subtitle B--Naval Vessels and Shipyards...................... 355
Number of Navy surface combatants in active and reserve
service (sec. 1021).................................... 355
Plan for fielding the 155-millimeter gun on a surface
combatant (sec. 1022).................................. 356
Report on initiatives to increase operational days of
Navy ships (sec. 1023)................................. 356
Subtitle C--Reporting Requirements........................... 357
Repeal and modification of various reporting requirements
applicable with respect to the Department of Defense
(sec. 1031)............................................ 357
Annual report on hardened and deeply buried targets (sec.
1032).................................................. 360
Revision of date of annual report on counterproliferation
activities and programs (sec. 1033).................... 360
Quadrennial quality of life review (sec. 1034)........... 360
Subtitle D--Homeland Defense................................. 361
Homeland security activities of the National Guard (sec.
1041).................................................. 361
Conditions for use of full-time reserves to perform
duties relating to defense against weapons of mass
destruction (sec. 1042)................................ 361
Weapon of mass destruction defined for purposes of the
authority for use of Reserves to perform duties
relating to defense against weapons of mass destruction
(sec. 1043)............................................ 362
Report on Department of Defense homeland defense
activities (sec. 1044)................................. 362
Strategy for improving preparedness of military
installations for incidents involving weapons of mass
destruction (sec. 1045)................................ 362
Subtitle E--Other Matters.................................... 363
Continued applicability of expiring governmentwide
information security requirements to the Department of
Defense (sec. 1061).................................... 363
Acceptance of voluntary services of proctors for
administration of Armed Services Vocational Aptitude
Battery (sec. 1062).................................... 364
Extension of authority to sell aircraft and aircraft
parts for use in responding to oil spills (sec. 1063).. 364
Amendments to impact aid program (sec. 1064)............. 364
Additional Matters of Interest............................... 364
Improved management of Department of Defense contracting
for services........................................... 364
Information technology investments for functional area
applications........................................... 366
Defense Emergency Response Fund.......................... 368
Modernization of strategic systems....................... 393
Stand off surveillance camera............................ 393
Aerospace propulsion research............................ 393
Air Force defensive information operations............... 393
SINCGARS family of radios................................ 394
Major equipment for hardened and deeply buried targets... 394
C3I Intelligence programs................................ 394
Management and organizational headquarters............... 394
Air Force tactical deception personnel................... 394
Other Items of Interest...................................... 395
Comptroller General study of Special Operations Command
forces language requirements, training and
proficiencies.......................................... 395
Department of Defense STARBASE Program................... 395
Title XI--Department of Defense Civilian Personnel Policy........ 397
Extension of authority to pay severance pay in a lump sum
(sec. 1101)............................................ 397
Extension of voluntary separation incentive pay authority
(sec. 1102)............................................ 397
Extension of cost sharing authority for continued FEHBP
coverage of certain persons after separation from
employment (sec. 1103)................................. 397
Eligibility of nonappropriated funds employees to
participate in the Federal Employees Long-Term Care
Insurance Program (sec. 1104).......................... 397
Increased maximum period of appointment under the
experimental personnel program for scientific and
technical personnel (sec. 1105)........................ 397
Qualification requirements for employment in Department
of Defense professional accounting positions (sec.
1106).................................................. 398
Housing benefits for unaccompanied teachers required to
live at Guantanamo Bay Naval Station, Cuba (sec. 1107). 398
Title XII--Matters Relating to Other Nations..................... 399
Subtitle A--Cooperative Threat Reduction with States of the
Former Soviet Union........................................ 399
Specification of Cooperative Threat Reduction programs
and funds (sec. 1201).................................. 399
Funding allocations (sec. 1202).......................... 399
Authorization of use of Cooperative Threat Reduction
funds for projects and activities outside the Former
Soviet Union (sec. 1203)............................... 399
Waiver of limitations on assistance under programs to
facilitate Cooperative Threat Reduction and
nonproliferation (sec. 1204)........................... 400
Additional Matters of Interest............................... 400
Cooperative Threat Reduction with the States of the
Former Soviet Union.................................... 400
Pilot program for scientific exchange with the countries
of the Former Soviet Union............................. 401
Subtitle B--Other Matters................................ 401
Administrative support and services for coalition liaison
officers (sec. 1211)....................................... 401
Use of Warsaw Initiative funds for travel of officials
from partner countries (sec. 1212)..................... 402
Support of United Nations-sponsored efforts to inspect
and monitor Iraqi weapons activities (sec. 1213)....... 402
Arctic and Western Pacific environmental cooperation
program (sec. 1214).................................... 402
Division B--Military Construction Authorizations................. 403
Explanation of funding tables................................ 403
Fiscal Year 2003 Authorization of Appropriations for Military
Construction................................................... 423
Title XXI--Army.................................................. 423
Summary...................................................... 423
Authorized Army construction and land acquisition
projects (sec. 2101)................................... 423
Family housing (sec. 2102)............................... 423
Improvements to military family housing units (sec. 2103) 423
Authorization of appropriations, Army (sec. 2104)........ 423
Modification of authority to carry out certain fiscal
year 2002 projects (sec. 2105)......................... 423
Modification of authority to carry out certain fiscal
year 2000 project (sec. 2106).......................... 424
Modification of authority to carry out certain fiscal
year 1999 project (sec. 2107).......................... 424
Modification of authority to carry out certain fiscal
year 1997 project (sec. 2108).......................... 424
Title XXII--Navy................................................. 425
Summary...................................................... 425
Authorized Navy construction and land acquisition
projects (sec. 2201)................................... 425
Family housing (sec. 2202)............................... 425
Improvements to military family housing units (sec. 2203) 425
Authorization of appropriations, Navy (sec. 2204)........ 425
Modification of authority to carry out certain fiscal
year 2000 projects (sec. 2205)......................... 425
Title XXIII--Air Force........................................... 427
Summary...................................................... 427
Authorized Air Force construction and land acquisition
projects (sec. 2301)................................... 427
Family housing (sec. 2302)............................... 427
Improvements to military family housing units (sec. 2303) 427
Authorization of appropriations, Air Force (sec. 2304)... 427
Other Items of Interest...................................... 427
Training facilities for military operations in urban
terrain................................................ 427
Title XXIV--Defense Agencies..................................... 429
Summary...................................................... 429
Authorized defense agencies construction and land
acquisition projects (sec. 2401)....................... 429
Improvements to military family housing units (sec. 2402) 429
Energy conservation projects (sec. 2403)................. 429
Authorization of appropriations, defense agencies (sec.
2404).................................................. 429
Other Items of Interest...................................... 429
Bio-defense research laboratory facility at Fort Detrick. 429
Title XXV--North Atlantic Treaty Organization Investment Program. 431
Summary...................................................... 431
Authorized North Atlantic Treaty Organization
construction and land acquisition projects (sec. 2501). 431
Authorization of appropriations, North Atlantic Treaty
Organization (sec. 2502)............................... 431
Title XXVI--Guard and Reserve Forces Facilities.................. 433
Summary...................................................... 433
Authorized Guard and Reserve construction and land
acquisition projects (sec. 2601)....................... 433
Title XXVII--Expiration and Extension of Authorizations.......... 435
Expiration of authorizations and amounts required to be
specified by law (sec. 2701)........................... 435
Extension of authorizations of certain fiscal year 2000
projects (sec. 2702)................................... 435
Extension of authorizations of certain fiscal year 1999
projects (sec. 2703)................................... 435
Effective date (sec. 2704)............................... 435
Title XXVIII--General Provisions................................. 437
Subtitle A--Military Construction Program and Military Family
Housing Changes............................................ 437
Lease of military family housing in Korea (sec. 2801).... 437
Repeal of source requirements for family housing
construction overseas (sec. 2802)...................... 437
Subtitle B--Real Property and Facilities Administration...... 437
Agreements with private entities to enhance military
training, testing, and operations (sec. 2811).......... 437
Conveyance of surplus real property for natural resource
conservation (sec. 2812)............................... 438
Modification of demonstration program on reduction in
long-term facility maintenance costs (sec. 2813)....... 438
Subtitle C--Land Conveyances................................. 439
Conveyance of certain lands in Alaska no longer required
for National Guard purposes (sec. 2821)................ 439
Land conveyance, Fort Campbell, Kentucky (sec. 2822)..... 439
Modification of authority for land transfer and
conveyance, Naval Security Group Activity, Winter
Harbor, Maine (sec. 2823).............................. 439
Land conveyance, Westover Air Reserve Base, Massachusetts
(sec. 2824)............................................ 440
Land conveyance, Naval Station Newport, Rhode Island
(sec. 2825)............................................ 440
Land exchange, Buckley Air Force Base, Colorado (sec.
2826).................................................. 440
Land acquisition, Boundary Channel Drive Site, Arlington,
Virginia (sec. 2827)................................... 440
Land conveyances, Wendover Air Force Base Auxiliary
Field, Nevada (sec. 2828).............................. 441
Subtitle D--Other Matters.................................... 441
Transfer of funds in lieu of acquisition of replacement
property for National Wildlife Refuge system in Nevada
(sec. 2841)............................................ 441
Other Items of Interest...................................... 441
Accompanied tours in Korea............................... 441
Aircraft carrier basing plans............................ 442
Availability of excess lands for school construction..... 442
Division C--Department of Energy National Security Authorizations
and Other Authorizations....................................... 443
Title XXXI--Department of Energy National Security Programs...... 443
Subtitle A--National Security Programs Authorizations........ 443
Atomic energy defense activities......................... 443
National Nuclear Security Administration (sec. 3101)..... 460
Weapons activities....................................... 460
Defense Nuclear Nonproliferation......................... 464
Naval Reactors........................................... 465
Office of Administrator.................................. 465
Defense Environmental Management (sec. 3102)............. 465
Other Defense Activities (sec. 3103)..................... 467
Defense Nuclear Waste Disposal (sec. 3105)............... 469
Subtitle B--Recurring General Provisions..................... 469
Reprogramming (sec. 3121)................................ 469
Limits on minor construction projects (sec. 3122)........ 470
Limits on construction projects (sec. 3123).............. 470
Fund transfer authority (sec. 3124)...................... 470
Authority for conceptual and construction design (sec.
3125).................................................. 470
Authority for emergency planning, design, and
construction activities (sec. 3126).................... 471
Funds available for all national security programs of the
Department of Energy (sec. 3127)....................... 471
Availability of funds (sec. 3128)........................ 471
Transfer of defense environmental management funds (sec.
3129).................................................. 471
Transfer of weapons activities funds (sec. 3130)......... 471
Subtitle C--Program Authorizations, Restrictions, and
Limitations................................................ 472
Availability of funds for environmental cleanup reform
(sec. 3131)............................................ 472
Robust Nuclear Earth Penetrator (sec. 3132).............. 473
Database to track notification and resolution phases of
significant finding investigations (sec. 3133)......... 473
Requirements for specific request for new or modified
nuclear weapons (sec. 3134-3135)....................... 474
Limitation on availability of funds for program to
eliminate weapons grade plutonium production (sec.
3136).................................................. 475
Subtitle D--Proliferation Matters............................ 475
Administration of program to eliminate weapons grade
plutonium production in Russia (sec. 3151)............. 475
Security of nuclear materials and facilities worldwide
(sec. 3152)............................................ 476
Repeal of requirement for reports on obligation of funds
for programs on fissile materials in Russia (sec. 3153) 477
Expansion of annual reports on status of nuclear
Materials Protection, Control and Accounting program
(sec. 3154)............................................ 477
Export Control Operations program........................ 477
Subtitle E--Other Matters.................................... 478
Indemnification of Department of Energy contractors (sec.
3161).................................................. 478
Worker health and safety rules for Department of Energy
facilities (sec. 3162)................................. 478
One-year extension of authority of Department of Energy
to pay voluntary separation incentive payments (sec.
3163).................................................. 478
Support for public education in the vicinity of Los
Alamos National Laboratory, New Mexico (sec. 3164)..... 479
Subtitle F--Disposition of Weapons-Usable Plutonium at
Savannah River, South Carolina............................. 479
Disposition of weapons-usable plutonium at Savannah
River, South Carolina (sec. 3181-3183)................. 479
Engineering, construction, and project management........ 482
Disposition of special nuclear material from the Rocky
Flats Site............................................. 482
Title XXXII--Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board............. 485
Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board (sec. 3201)...... 485
Authorization of appropriations for the Formerly Used
Sites Remedial Action Program in the Corps of Engineers
(sec. 3202)............................................ 485
Legislative Requirements......................................... 485
Departmental Recommendations................................. 485
Committee Action............................................. 485
Congressional Budget Office Cost Estimate.................... 486
Regulatory Impact............................................ 486
Changes in Existing Law...................................... 486
Additional Views of Senator Jean Carnahan........................ 487
Additional Views of Senator John McCain.......................... 488
Minority Views of Senators John Warner, Bob Smith, James M.
Inhofe, Rick Santorum, Pat Roberts, Wayne Allard, Tim
Hutchinson, and Jeff Sessions.................................. 494
Minority Views of Senator Wayne Allard........................... 498
Calendar No. 370
107th Congress Report
SENATE
2d Session 107-151
======================================================================
AUTHORIZING APPROPRIATIONS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2003 FOR MILITARY ACTIVITIES
OF THE DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE, FOR MILITARY CONSTRUCTION, AND FOR
DEFENSE ACTIVITIES OF THE DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY, TO PRESCRIBE PERSONNEL
STRENGTHS FOR SUCH FISCAL YEAR FOR THE ARMED FORCES, AND FOR OTHER
PURPOSES
_______
May 15 (legislative day, May 9), 2002.--Ordered to be printed
_______
Mr. Levin, from the Committee on Armed Services, submitted the
following
R E P O R T
together with
ADDITIONAL AND MINORITY VIEWS
[To accompany S. 2514]
The Committee on Armed Services reports favorably an
original bill to authorize appropriations during the fiscal
year 2003 for military activities of the Department of Defense,
for military construction, and for defense activities of the
Department of Energy, to prescribe personnel strengths for such
fiscal year for the Armed Forces, and for other purposes, and
recommends that the bill do pass.
PURPOSE OF THE BILL
This bill would:
(1) authorize appropriations for (a) procurement, (b)
research, development, test and evaluation, (c)
operation and maintenance and the revolving and
management funds of the Department of Defense for
fiscal year 2003;
(2) authorize the personnel end strengths for each
military active duty component of the Armed Forces for
fiscal year 2003;
(3) authorize the personnel end strengths for the
Selected Reserve of each of the reserve components of
the Armed Forces for fiscal year 2003;
(4) impose certain reporting requirements;
(5) impose certain limitations with regard to
specific procurement and research, development, test
and evaluation actions and manpower strengths; provide
certain additional legislative authority, and make
certain changes to existing law;
(6) authorize appropriations for military
construction programs of the Department of Defense for
fiscal year 2003; and
(7) authorize appropriations for national security
programs of the Department of Energy for fiscal year
2003.
Committee overview and recommendations
The events following September 11, 2001, have once again
shown that the U.S. military is the most capable fighting force
in the world. The success of our forces in Afghanistan has been
remarkable. Osama bin Laden--if he is alive at all--is on the
run and in hiding. Many of his al Qaeda terrorists have been
captured or killed. The Taliban regime that harbored them is no
more, and a new government is in place. Nations around the
world have been put on notice: America is determined to protect
itself from more attacks and to bring terrorists to justice.
The excellence behind that success was not built in months.
The success of our forces in Afghanistan is a tribute to the
men and women of the Armed Forces and the investments in
national defense that Congress and the Department of Defense
have made over many years. Future success on the battlefield
will likewise depend upon the success of Congress and the
Department in preparing, training, and equipping our military
for tomorrow's missions.
The administration's fiscal year 2003 budget request of
$396.8 billion for national security activities includes an
increase of $48.0 billion over the fiscal year 2002 level, the
largest increase in defense spending in two decades. The
committee will do all in its power, as it has done in the past,
to ensure that our forces have the resources, tools and
technologies that they need to deter and, if necessary, prevail
in future conflicts.
At the same time, the committee has a responsibility to
ensure that the resources our taxpayers provide for the
national defense are spent wisely. More than a year into
office, the administration has completed a Quadrennial Defense
Review as required by law, but still has not complied with the
statutory requirements to provide Congress with a National
Security Strategy and an Annual Report outlining detailed plans
for the size, structure, shape, or transformation of our
military. Inthe absence of such planning, the committee is
concerned that the Department of Defense will have difficulty
establishing a clear vision for the future of our Armed Forces.
In the first 41 days of congressional session this year,
the committee held 41 hearings to examine the administration's
budget request and related issues. During the course of these
hearings, the committee identified five priorities to guide its
actions in developing the National Defense Authorization Act
for Fiscal Year 2003:
(1) Continue the improvements in the compensation and
quality of life of the men and women in the Armed Forces,
retirees and their families.
(2) Sustain the readiness of the military services to
conduct the full range of their assigned missions, including
current and future operations against international terrorism.
(3) Improve the efficiency of Defense Department programs
and operations and apply the savings toward high-priority
programs.
(4) Improve the ability of the Armed Forces to meet
nontraditional threats, including terrorism and weapons of mass
destruction.
(5) Promote the transformation of the Armed Forces to meet
the threats of the 21st century.
First and foremost, the committee recommendations would
improve the compensation of our men and women in uniform by
authorizing a 4.1 percent pay raise, with an additional
targeted pay raise for the mid-career force. The committee
recommendations would improve the conditions in which members
of the Armed Forces live and work by authorizing $640.0 million
above the budget request to improve and replace military
facilities. In accordance with the Budget Resolution reported
by the Senate Budget Committee, the committee also recommends a
provision that would address a longstanding inequity in the
compensation of military retirees by authorizing the concurrent
receipt of military retired pay and veterans disability
compensation by certain military retirees. Finally, the
committee recommendations would authorize a new assignment
incentive pay of up to $1,500 per month to reward military
members who agree to serve in difficult-to-fill assignments.
The committee recommendations would take an important step
to ensure the readiness of our military forces by setting aside
$10.0 billion, as requested by the administration, to fund
ongoing operations in the war against international terrorism
during fiscal year 2003. The committee recommendations would
also add funding to address shortfalls in a number of key
readiness accounts. These funding increases include: $126.0
million for the improvement of military training ranges; $228.6
million for aircraft, ship, and Navy gun depot maintenance;
$176.2 million for maintenance of Air Force flight line
facilities and Army buildings; $45.0 million for ammunition to
meet new training requirements and supplement war reserve
stocks; and $55.0 million to address the Army's aviation
training backlog. The committee recommendations would also help
lessen the burden on some of the Department's high demand, low
density assets by authorizing $110.0 million for the purchase
of an additional EC-130J Commando Solo aircraft and $114.0
million for modifications to EA-6B electronic warfare aircraft.
Legislation enacted by the committee last year set a goal
for the Department to achieve an additional $1.7 billion of
savings in fiscal year 2003 by implementing improved management
practices for the $50.0 billion spent annually on services
contracts. The committee has built on this initiative by
recommending a provision that would establish additional goals
for increased competition and increased use of performance-
based services contracting, a change which should result in
additional savings in the future. The committee also recommends
provisions that would improve the efficiency of DOD programs
and operations by requiring the Department to develop a
comprehensive financial management enterprise architecture;
establishing a framework for the Department to develop a
disciplined approach to evolutionary acquisition programs;
addressing recurring problems with the abuse of purchase cards
and travel cards by military and civilian personnel; and
requiring the Department to address longstanding problems in
the development and acquisition of software.
The committee recommendations would take a significant step
toward addressing nontraditional threats by providing in excess
of $10.0 billion for combating terrorism initiatives, as
requested by the Department. In addition, the committee
recommendations include an increase of $199.7 million to
enhance the security of our nuclear materials and nuclear
weapons; an increase of $42.7 million in funding for the U.S.
Special Operations Command; and an increase of $30.5 million
for defense against chemical and biological weapons and other
efforts to combat weapons of mass destruction (WMD). The
committee also recommends legislative provisions that would
require DOD to take a more comprehensive approach to
installation preparedness for WMD attacks; authorize the
Secretary to expand cooperative threat reduction activities
beyond the countries of the Former Soviet Union; and authorize
the use of National Guard personnel in State status to assist
in border security.
Finally, the committee continued its effort to promote the
transformation of the Armed Forces to meet the threats of the
21st century by adding more than $1.1 billion to the Navy's
shipbuilding accounts to refuel a nuclear submarine and pay for
advance procurement of an aircraft carrier, a Virginia-class
submarine, a DDG-51 class destroyer, and an LPD-17
classamphibious transport dock. The committee recommendations would
promote the transformation of the Army by adding $105.0 million of
funding for research and development on the Army Future Combat System,
adding more than $100.0 million for science and technology needed to
help the Army achieve its Objective Force, and by providing $96.3
million for nine additional Blackhawk helicopters. The committee
recommendations would advance the transformation of the Air Force by
fully funding the $5.2 billion requested by the Department for the F-
22, the $3.5 billion requested for continued research and development
on the Joint Strike Fighter, and the more than $1.0 billion requested
for unmanned aerial vehicles.
The committee also recommends a number of legislative
initiatives to promote military transformation. These include:
an initiative to address major shortcomings in the Department's
test and evaluation infrastructure that have led to inadequate
testing of major weapons systems; a technology transition
initiative to ensure that new technologies developed in the
Department's science and technology programs are rapidly
fielded in weapons systems for our warfighters; and a
nanotechnology initiative to ensure that the Department has a
focused approach to this emerging area of technology. The
committee recommendations would also add more than $170.0
million to the Department's science and technology budget,
bringing the Department closer to the Secretary's goal of
devoting 3 percent of all defense funds to the programs that
promise to bring us the revolutionary technologies that will be
needed to prevail in future conflicts.
Today, America's Armed Forces are capable and ready to help
keep the peace, deter traditional and nontraditional threats to
our security and our vital interests around the world, and win
any conflict decisively. Working together, Congress and the
executive branch must build on the considerable strengths of
our military forces and their record of success by preserving a
high quality of life for U.S. forces and their families,
sustaining readiness, and transforming the Armed Forces to meet
the threats and challenges of tomorrow. The committee believes
that the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year
2003 would take an important step in that direction.
Explanation of funding summary
The administration's budget request for the national
defense function of the federal budget for fiscal year 2003 was
$396.8 billion, of which $300.4 billion was for programs that
require specific funding authorization. According to the
estimating procedures used by the Congressional Budget Office
(CBO), the amount requested was $396.3 billion. The funding
summary table that follows uses the budget authority as
calculated by CBO.
The following table summarizes both the direct
authorizations and equivalent budget authority levels for
fiscal year 2003 defense programs. The columns relating to the
authorization request do not include funding for the following
items: pay and benefits for military personnel, military
construction authorizations provided in prior years, and other
small portions of the defense budget that are not within the
jurisdiction of this committee or that do not require an annual
authorization.
Funding for all programs authorized in the bill is
reflected in the columns related to the budget authority
request and the total budget authority implication of the
authorizations in this bill. The committee recommends funding
authorizations totaling $393.3 billion in budget authority for
fiscal year 2003.
The funding level recommended by the committee is within
the budget authority level of $393.4 billion for the national
defense function recommended in the Concurrent Resolution on
the Budget for Fiscal Year 2003 reported by the Senate
Committee on the Budget.
This funding level is $3.1 billion below the level
requested by the administration in the fiscal year 2003 budget
request using the CBO budget authority levels that were
incorporated into the Concurrent Resolution on the Budget for
Fiscal Year 2003 reported by the Senate Committee on the
Budget.
This $3.0 billion adjustment reflects an increase of $516.0
million in mandatory spending to increase the military
retirement benefits of retirees who also receive veterans
disability benefits, and a decrease of $3.5 billion to reflect
the proper accounting for civilian retirement and health
benefits under current law. Both of these are discussed in
detail elsewhere in this report.
Accrual funding of civilian personnel benefits
The President's budget proposed shifting the financing
obligation of various federal civilian employee health and
retirement benefits from the Office of Personnel Management to
the federal departments and agencies employing those civilians,
including the Department of Defense, on an accrual basis.
Although this proposal would not have affected the benefits due
to federal employees and would not have purchased any
additional defense capabilities, it resulted in a $3.3 billion
increase in the budget authority requested for the Department
of Defense in fiscal year 2003 compared to the funding that
would have been required to implement the same defense programs
under current law. For the entire national defense function,
the accounting increase in fiscal year budget authority levels
was $3.5 billion.
Implementation of the President's proposal requires
enactment of legislation that is not in the jurisdiction of
this committee. Such legislation has not yet been enacted. In
addition, the Concurrent Resolution on the Budget reported by
the Senate Committee on the Budget rejected the proposed shift
to accrual funding for future retirement and health benefits
for current federal employees, and reduced the discretionary
funding for the national defense function by $3.5 billion.
Similar reductions were made to the discretionary funding
requests of non-defense agencies.
Therefore, the bill reported by the committee has adjusted
the funding requested by the President for the national defense
function for fiscal year 2003 by $3.5 billion in order to
comply with the Budget Resolution. This adjustment would not
reduce the amount of funding requested and available for
defense programs in fiscal year 2003 net of this proposed
accounting change, nor would it result in any reduction in
benefits available to federal civilian employees of the
Department of Defense, the Department of Energy, or other
agencies.
The following table summarizes the adjustments made to
specific accounts throughout this bill to continue funding
these benefits under the procedures contained in current law.
DIVISION A--DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE AUTHORIZATIONS
TITLE I--PROCUREMENT
Explanation of tables
The following tables provide the program-level detailed
guidance for the funding authorized in title I of this Act. The
tables also display the funding requested by the administration
in the fiscal year 2003 budget request for procurement programs
and indicate those programs for which the committee either
increased or decreased the requested amounts. As in the past,
the administration may not exceed the authorized amounts (as
set forth in the tables or, if unchanged from the
administration request, as set forth in the Department of
Defense's budget justification documents) without a
reprogramming action in accordance with established procedures.
Unless noted in the report, funding changes to the budget
request are made without prejudice.
Funds transferred to the accounts in this title from the
Defense Emergency Response Fund (DERF) are displayed on the
tables that follow as increases to the amount requested for
those programs in the procurement accounts. Programs for which
funds were transferred from the DERF are annotated to indicate
that funds were originally requested in the DERF.
SUBTITLE A--AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS
Chemical agents and munitions destruction, Defense (sec. 106)
The budget request for the Army included $1.5 billion for
the Chemical Agents and Munitions Destruction program: $974.2
million for operation and maintenance; $302.7 million for
research and development; and $213.3 million for procurement.
The request also included $167.6 million for military
construction described elsewhere in this report. These funds
were requested in an Army account, contrary to the requirements
of current law.
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
the total requested level of funding, although only in the
account required by law: Chemical Agents and Munitions
Destruction, Defense.
Section 1521(f) of title 50, United States Code, requires
that funds for this program shall not be included in the budget
accounts for any military department. The committee is
concerned that funds for chemical demilitarization have been
requested in the Army budget accounts, contrary to the
requirements of current law. The committee expects the
Department of Defense to comply with the law by requesting
chemical demilitarization funds in a Department of Defense
account.
SUBTITLE B--ARMY PROGRAMS
Pilot program on sales of manufactured articles and services of certain
Army industrial facilities without regard to availability from
domestic sources (sec. 111)
The committee recommends a provision that would extend the
authorization for a single Army industrial facility to sell
manufactured articles and services to commercial contractors
providing weapons systems to the Department of Defense. The
provision extends this pilot program through fiscal year 2004.
The intent of the pilot program is to allow Army industrial
facilities to contract and team for additional workload, even
if the products are available from commercial services, in
order to utilize more fully the existing capacity at Army
Ammunition Plants (AAPs). The committee understands that the
pilot program has resulted in some increased revenue for AAPs
($16.1 million as of March 2002). The committee believes,
however, that as revenue from commercial sources rises, the
need for the Army to continue a directly appropriated subsidy
to AAPs for underutilized capacity should decline. Therefore,
the provision also includes a requirement that, once annual
revenues from the pilot program exceed $20.0 million, 0.05
percent of the AAPs' Underutilized Plant Capacity budget shall
be transferred to the following fiscal year's funding for
demilitarization of conventional ammunition. Finally, the
provision directs the Department of Defense Inspector General
to review the pilot program and report to Congress on its
utility.
Army Aircraft
UH-60 Blackhawk (multiyear procurement)
The budget request included $153.4 million for 12 UH-60L
Blackhawk helicopters. At planned acquisition rates, the Army
will not meet its required number of 1,680 Blackhawk
helicopters until fiscal year 2011. The committee recommends an
increase of $96.3 million for nine additional UH-60L
helicopters to be fielded in accordance with Army priorities, a
total authorization of $249.7 million.
CH-47 cargo helicopter modifications
The budget request included $382.1 million for
modifications to the CH-47 heavy lift helicopters. The CH-47
Chinook helicopter is the Army's only active heavy cargo
helicopter and is a key element in the contingency corps. This
program extends the CH-47F airframe service life, introduces an
open electronic architecture, and upgrades the aircraft
engines. The committee notes that the Army's fiscal year 2003
budget request for CH-47 helicopter modernization did not
include funds for crew safety enhancements such as crash-worthy
rotating and transversing crew seats. The committee notes that
there is commercially available, off-the-shelf equipment to
fulfill this immediate requirement. The committee recommends an
increase of $4.0 million for crash-worthy seats for CH-47
modifications, a total authorization of $386.1 million.
Aircraft survivability equipment
The budget request included no funds for aircraft
survivability equipment. Without fiscal year 2003 funding, the
production line for the AN/AVR-2A, the only laser detecting set
in production for the Department of Defense, will be closed.
The Army has an approved operational requirement for over 3,000
laser detecting sets, but to date only 1,058 have been
purchased. Failure to fund additional laser detecting sets will
result in increased risk for loss of aircrew and aircraft to
proliferating threat laser-aided systems. The committee
therefore recommends $8.0 million for the production of AN/AVR-
2A laser detecting sets.
Airborne command and control
The budget request included $27.7 million for the Army
Airborne Command and Control System (A2C2S). With this funding
the Army intended to accelerate this critical program to enter
into low-rate initial production toward the end of fiscal year
2003. The committee now understands that development and
testing requirements will prevent such an ambitious schedule.
Accordingly, the Army has requested that funding be transferred
from procurement to research and development to fund those
activities. The committee recommends the transfer of $10.0
million from Aircraft Procurement, Army to PE 64818 and a
decrease of the remaining $17.7 million to Aircraft
Procurement, Army.
Avionics support equipment
The budget request included $7.5 million for the Aviator's
Night Vision Imaging System (ANVIS). The ANVIS is critical to
the aviators' ability to operate at night and in low-light
conditions. The fiscal year 2003 budget request would procure
694 systems, only two-thirds of the quantity procured in fiscal
year 2002 and less than half of the quantity planned for fiscal
year 2004. The committee notes an outstanding requirement for
nearly 2,500 ANVIS and believes that the safety and
effectiveness of Army aviators demand a higher procurement
rate. Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $5.0
million, a total authorization of $12.5 million.
Army Missiles
Guided Multiple Launch Rocket System rocket
The budget request included $29.7 million for the
procurement of 108 Guided Multiple Launch Rocket System (GMLRS)
rockets. The GMLRS replaces the current Multiple Launch Rocket
System (MLRS) rockets, integrating a guidance and control
package and a new rocket motor to achieve greater range and
precision. The committee recommends an increase of $15.0
million for additional GMLRS rockets, a total authorization of
$44.7 million.
Army Ammunition
50-caliber Saboted Light Armor Penetrator
The budget request included $4.4 million to procure .50-
caliber Saboted Light Armor Penetrators (SLAPs), $4.1 million
for the Army and $265,000 for the Marine Corps. The committee
recommends an increase of $4.3 million to procure additional
.50-caliber SLAP rounds, $4.0 million to support the Army's
transformation plan, and $300,000 to complete the Marine Corps'
full approved acquisition objective (AAO).
155mm high explosive projectiles
The budget request included $30.2 million for high
explosive projectiles fired from 155mm howitzers. The committee
recommends an increase of $1.0 million to purchase additional
rounds to augment war reserve stocks.
Wide Area Munition
The budget request included $12.5 million for procurement
of 383 Hornet munitions. In an October 2001 report, the
Department of Defense Inspector General (IG) found that: (1)
the Wide Area Munition (WAM) program has experienced cost
increases of 330 percent and schedule slips of more than five
years; (2) performance requirements have been lowered and no
longer meet user needs; (3) operational effectiveness has not
been demonstrated; (4) the Army did not perform tests to ensure
safety before producing and deploying the WAM; and (5)
requirements were built on past threat assessments that are no
longer valid. The Army reviewed the program in response to the
IG's report and revalidated the need for the planned WAM
fielding requirement.
The committee believes that the Army has failed to exercise
adequate oversight of the WAM program, especially over WAM
performance requirements and demonstrated effectiveness. The
committee therefore recommends a reduction of $6.0 million for
the WAM.
Bunker Defeat Munition
The budget request included $7.8 million to procure the
Bunker Defeat Munition (BDM), a single-shot, portable,
disposable munition used against earth and timber field
fortifications. The committee recommends an increase of $5.0
million to procure additional BDMs in support of contingency
operations and training.
Modern demolition initiators
The budget request included $28.0 million for modern
demolition initiators (MDIs). MDIs are non-electric detonators
that are used to initiate munitions and explosives. MDIs
provide a safer, more reliable detonation system while
decreasing time on target. The committee recommends an increase
of $4.0 million to procure additional MDIs.
Special equipment for ammunition depots
The budget request included $4.8 million for unique, low
density equipment items specifically designed and manufactured
for use in ammunition depots. This funding represents a $4.0
million decrease from fiscal year 2002 levels. The committee
believes that continued support for ammunition depot
operations, including specialized equipment, is important for
the continuation of ammunition production and demilitarization
efforts. Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of
$3.0 million for Ammunition Peculiar Equipment, Army.
Conventional ammunition demilitarization
The budget request included $50.0 million for the
demilitarization of ammunition. The committee is concerned
about the sizeable backlog of ammunition that must be
demilitarized and therefore recommends an increase of $10.0
million to Procurement of Ammunition, Army for additional
demilitarization.
Other Army Procurement
Family of Heavy Tactical Vehicles
The budget request included $242.8 million for the Family
of Heavy Tactical Vehicles (FHTV), of which $34.3 million was
for the Movement Tracking System (MTS). The Army needs a
capability to track the location of vehicles, communicate with
vehicle operators, and redirect movements based on battlefield
requirements. MTS provides that critical capability. The
committee notes that MTS is required immediately by Army
Reserve units supporting the digitized Counter-Attack Corps,
but MTS for those units will not be fielded for several more
years. In light of the recent mobilization of numerous Army
Reserve units, the committee believes that the time line should
be shortened and recommends an additional $9.0 million, a total
of $43.3 million for MTS, and a total allocation of $251.8
million for FHTV.
Heavy armored sedan
The budget request for the Defense Emergency Response Fund
(DERF), Counter-Terrorism and Force Protection Activity,
included $10.7 million for procurement of heavy armored sedans,
including Heavy Armored Vehicles (HAV) and Light Armored
Vehicles (LAV). The budget request also included $581,000 for
the same program, reflecting a total request of $11.3 million.
The Army identified an overlap of six vehicles between the
budget request and the DERF. In addition, the Army stated that
15 of the vehicles would be applied to ``as yet unidentified
force protection threats and vehicle replacements due to
anticipated damage OCONUS.'' The committee, based on a
systematic assessment of requirements, does not believe that
the Army has justified funding these 21 additional vehicles.
Once justified, the committee will consider authorizing
additional funding for additional vehicles. The committee
therefore recommends a decrease of $2.4 million in this
activity to reflect the overlap and unjustified requirement.
The committee recommends that the remaining $8.9 million be
transferred to Other Procurement, Army, Line 18.
Army data distribution system (data radio)
The budget request included $74.8 million for the Enhanced
Position Location Reporting System (EPLRS). EPLRS is the
critical mobile data radio required to establish the Army's
tactical Internet and is a key enabler for network-centric
warfare. The committee recommends an increase of $10.0 million
for additional EPLRS, a total authorization of $84.8 million.
Area common user modification program
The budget request included $75.9 million for modifications
to the Area Common User System (ACUS) and its migration to the
Army's Warfighting Information Network. This program supports
the downsizing of ACUS legacy systems through the procurement
and fielding of the Single Shelter Switch (SSS) and the High
Mobility Digital Group Multiplexer Assemblage (HMDA) systems.
The budget request funded no SSSs nor HMDAs, leaving the Army
well short of its requirements for these systems. Therefore,
the committee recommends an increase of $25.0 million for the
procurement of additional SSS and HMDA systems, a total
authorization of $100.9 million.
Night vision devices
The budget request included $60.5 million for night vision
devices. Of this amount, $7.3 million is for the procurement of
the AN/PVS-7 night vision device and the AN/PVS-14 monocular
night vision device (MNVD). The AN/PVS-7 and the AN/PVS-14
systems enable the individual soldier to see, understand, and
act first during night and low-light conditions. These systems
will support Army counterterrorism and force protection efforts
while continuing to provide current forces with continued
nighttime dominance. The committee recommends an increase of
$10.0 million for additional AN/PVS-7 and AN/PVS-14 night
vision devices, a total authorization of $70.5 million.
Combat support medical
The budget request included $21.0 million for field medical
equipment and Deployable Medical Systems (DEPMEDS). The
committee supports the Army's initiative to modernize its
combat support medical capability for combat casualty care.
The Army's $21.0 million request included $8.3 million for
field medical equipment which would modernize the medical
equipment components for clinical diagnostic treatment and
prevention. However, the committee notes that the Army's
request does not include funds for the rapid intravenous (IV)
infusion pumps. The rapid IV infusion pump is a miniature,
portable, lightweight pump specifically designed for life-
saving intravenous fluid resuscitation by a medic in the field
to restore blood pressure of victims with severe blood loss or
dehydration. The committee notes that this type of device is
critical to soldier battlefield survivability.
The Army's $21.0 million request for combat support medical
also included $12.7 million for DEPMEDS. DEPMEDS modernizes
non-medical equipment such as temper tents and shelters,
environmental control units, and water distribution systems for
hospital platforms. The committee notes that the Army's fiscal
year 2003 budget request includes a $1.3 million request for
surgical medical temper tents, a 45 percent reduction from
thefiscal year 2002 level. Surgical medical temper tents offer medical
personnel and surgical teams shelter to provide medical and trauma care
to soldiers in forward deployed sites.
The committee recommends an increase of $5.7 million for
additional rapid IV infusion pumps and $5.0 million for
additional DEPMEDS, a total authorization of $31.7 million.
Training devices, non-system
The budget request included $111.7 million for the Non-
System Training Devices (NSTD) program. The NSTD program
introduces realistic and effective simulative training devices
into the individual and unit training setting. NSTD items
include the multiple integrated laser engagement system
(MILES), enhanced tower simulator (ETOS), and the engagement
skills trainer (EST).
The EST is a marksmanship trainer and individual and crew-
served weapons simulator. It is particularly suited to the
training of Army National Guard and Army Reserve soldiers with
limited access to live firing ranges and is a high priority for
those components.
Fort Knox has a requirement for an instrumentation system
and automated after-action review capability to evaluate
training proficiency in a military operations on urbanized
terrain (MOUT) environment. The committee notes that the
current training system requires a large number of military
observer controllers (OC) to observe and evaluate training. A
range instrumentation system would instead allow many of these
personnel to return to their primary duties, helping to
alleviate the stress on Army operating tempo. The committee,
therefore, recommends $4.0 million for the engagement skills
trainer and $1.4 million for Fort Knox range instrumentation, a
total authorization of $117.1 million.
SUBTITLE C--NAVY PROGRAMS
Navy Aircraft
F/A-18E/F aircraft
The budget request included $3.2 billion to buy 44 F/A-18E/
F aircraft under a multiyear procurement program.
The Navy structured the multiyear contract to permit
variations in quantity within a specified quantity range. Last
year the Navy bought 48 aircraft. Two years ago, the Navy had
planned to buy 48 aircraft in fiscal year 2003.
The Navy wants to buy F/A-18E/F aircraft at higher rates
than are supported in this budget in order to allow the
retirement of F-14 fighters and S-3 aircraft that are being
used primarily as tanker aircraft earlier than under current
production plans. In fact, despite significant shortfalls in
the fiscal year 2003 budget request in the ship
recapitalization area, the Chief of Naval Operations (CNO) has
recommended applying any additional resources to the F/A-18E/F
program before building more ships.
The committee agrees with the CNO that recapitalizing
aviation is a high priority. Further, the committee believes
that greater efficiency can be maintained if the Navy were to
continue buying F/A-18E/F aircraft at level rates until the
Navy's inventory requirements are met. Therefore, the committee
recommends an additional $240.0 million to buy four more F/A-
18E/F aircraft, for a total production of 48 aircraft in fiscal
year 2003.
V-22 Osprey aircraft advance procurement
The budget request included $60.3 million in advance
procurement for 13 V-22 Osprey aircraft in fiscal year 2004.
Section 123 of the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2002 (Public Law 107-107) restricts the procurement
of V-22 Osprey aircraft to the minimum sustaining rate of 11
aircraft until the Secretary of Defense certifies to Congress
that the Department of Defense has completed specific
operational testing successfully. According to information
provided to the committee, the Department will conduct an
operational assessment in fiscal year 2003 but will not begin
the operational evaluation until late fiscal year 2004,
continuing into fiscal year 2005.
Since procurement of no more than 11 V-22 aircraft in
fiscal year 2004 would be consistent with staying at the
minimum sustaining rate until that testing is complete, the
committee recommends a decrease of $9.2 million in advance
procurement, a total authorization of $51.1 million.
Airborne low frequency sonar
The budget request included $86.9 million to pay for
various non-recurring charges and production support items for
the MH-60R helicopter program. The budget does not include any
such funding for the AN/AQS-22 airborne low frequency sonar
(ALFS), a dipping sonar system that will be part of the MH-60R
helicopter's equipment. The Navy competitively selected ALFS to
outfit the MH-60R fleet.
The Navy intends to use the MH-60R to replace two
helicopters: (1) the SH-60R, which currently fills needs for
antisubmarine warfare capability on cruisers, destroyers and
frigates; and (2) SH-60F, which performs similar functions and
provides other administrative support to aircraft carriers.
The Navy plans to begin production of the MH-60R helicopter
in fiscal year 2004. There is a requirement for non-recurring
funds in fiscal year 2003 to redesign circuit card assemblies
to eliminate obsolete parts, upgrade power amplifiers, and
qualify a second source for the ALFS cable. Such efforts could
lead to significant reductions in total life cycle costs.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $5.0 million
to pay for non-recurring activities to support ALFS production
in fiscal year 2004.
Navy joint primary aircraft training system
The budget request included no funding for continued Navy
procurement of the joint primary aircraft training system
(JPATS) to support Navy training requirements. The budget also
included no funding for JPATS trainers to allow the Navy to
take fuller advantage of JPATS aircraft already bought.
The Navy had planned to buy JPATS aircraft throughout the
Future Years Defense Program (FYDP). Last year, the Navy
decided that its existing trainer, the T-34C, has sufficient
service life remaining to allow the Navy to delay any
additional JPATS procurement until later in the FYDP,
specifically fiscal year 2007.
The Navy has been a partner in this joint program with the
Air Force, although the Air Force began buying the aircraft
five years before the Navy. The committee remains concerned
that the Navy is willing to take such a course of action in a
joint program, where its actions obviously force the Air Force
to absorb greater costs than the Air Force had originally
planned.
The Navy provided a report to Congress explaining the
decision to interrupt JPATS production. The report indicated
that: (1) they had not changed their position on the remaining
useful life on the T-34C trainers; (2) the Navy would use JPATS
trainers already bought to provide training services for the
naval flight officer pipeline; and (3) the Navy still did not
need to buy any more JPATS aircraft until later in the
FYDP.Nevertheless, the Chief of Naval Operations (CNO) submitted a list
of priority items that should be budgeted if additional funds were made
available. The CNO's list ranked additional funding of JPATS trainer
procurement as number seven on a list of 101 items. The CNO indicated
that JPATS purchases now would ``enable earlier transition out of aging
T-34 aircraft.''
The committee continues to believe that the improved
aircrew survivability offered by the ejection seat-equipped
JPATS aircraft is an important factor warranting continued
purchases of the trainer by the Navy. The T-34C aircraft that
would otherwise be used for training are aging and will be an
increasing burden on operating and support costs for the Navy.
The committee, therefore, recommends an increase of $39.0
million to buy six JPATS aircraft for the Navy. Continued
purchases by the Navy would mean fielding a more efficient and
safer primary aircraft training system. The committee also
recommends an additional $7.0 million to buy operational flight
trainers to support training operations using JPATS already
procured, for a total authorization of $46.0 million.
EA-6B aircraft modifications
The budget request included $137.6 million for
modifications to the EA-6B aircraft, including $60.3 million
for buying and installing new wing center sections for 15
aircraft. The budget request did not include any funding to buy
additional ALQ-99 band 9/10 transmitters or USQ-113
communications receivers/jammers. The EA-6B aircraft is one of
the Department's principal high demand/low density (HD/LD)
assets. This designation translates into a need to take special
measures to ensure that the systems achieve higher readiness
rates to increase their availability and reduce demands on
already stressed maintenance support personnel.
The Navy has identified, through recent fatigue life
inspection of EA-6B aircraft, the need to buy and install
additional wing center section replacements. Until these
modifications are completed, 51 of the fleet of 124 aircraft
will be subject to restricted flight operations. The Navy has
indicated that, with additional funds, they could modify and
return an additional four aircraft to full operational flying
envelope. Therefore, the committee recommends an additional
$40.0 million to buy and install new EA-6B wing center
sections.
The Navy would use additional ALQ-99 band 9/10 transmitters
to replace older band 9 transmitters. The ALQ-99 Band 9/10
transmitter uses digital electronics while the older band 9
transmitters employ analog technology that is much less
reliable. The newer band 9/10 transmitters would also extend
the frequency coverage available compared to the band 9
transmitters. The Navy needs the expanded frequency ranges and
capabilities of the ALQ-99 band 9/10 transmitters to counter
the electronic protection techniques used in a wide variety of
threat systems.
The Navy informs the committee that an additional $37.0
million would allow them to finish buying all of the ALQ-99
band 9/10 transmitters they need before the contractor closes
the production line. Therefore, the committee recommends an
increase of $37.0 million to buy ALQ-99 Band 9/10 transmitters.
The EA-6B aircraft use the USQ-113 communications
receivers/jammers to monitor and jam communications in the very
high frequency (VHF) and ultra high frequency (UHF) portions of
the radio frequency spectrum. These systems allow the EA-6B to
deny an enemy critical command and control capability and
reduce an adversary's ability to maintain situational
awareness. With additional funds, the Navy could buy additional
USQ-113 V(3) versions of the system to outfit more of the fleet
of aircraft and improve equipment maintainability and
operational capability. Therefore, the committee recommends an
increase of $37.0 million to buy additional USQ-113 V(3)
communications receivers/jammers.
In total, the committee recommends an additional
authorization of $114.0 million for the EA-6B program,
recognizing that this HD/LD aircraft deserves special attention
in keeping the fleet healthy while the Department decides how
it intends to recapitalize this airborne electronic aircraft
fleet.
In the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year
2000 (Public Law 106-65), Congress provided an increase of $5.0
million to initiate a joint service (Navy/Air Force) analysis
of alternatives to examine a replacement for the aging EA-6B
aircraft. The committee is aware that the services will shortly
present their preferred alternatives to the Under Secretary of
Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics. The
committee encourages the Department to move forward with a
preferred alternative or alternatives to ensure that the vital
capabilities that the EA-6B fleet currently provides will
continue to be available to future combatant commanders.
AV-8B precision targeting pod
The budget request included $32.2 million for modifications
to the AV-8B aircraft but included no funding for Litening II
precision targeting pods. The Marine Corps began acquisition of
these pods to provide the AV-8B with the ability to use
precision-guided weapons. Although no funds were included in
the budget request, the Marine Corps has identified buying
additional Litening II pods as a high priority item to continue
outfitting Marine Corps AV-8B squadrons with this capability.
The committee recommends an increase of $55.0 million for the
procurement of Litening II targeting pods, a total
authorization for AV-8B aircraft modifications of $87.2
million.
F/A-18 aircraft modifications
The budget request included $421.7 million for
modifications to the F/A-18 aircraft and $11.7 million for the
engineering change proposal 583 (ECP-583) for the Marine Corps'
F/A-18A aircraft. These funds were identified primarily for
installation of kits procured in previous years.
ECP-583 is an upgrade package that consists of new avionics
hardware allowing the older F/A-18A to process and utilize
updated versions of F/A-18C/D software and accessories. This
change gives these older aircraft capabilities comparable to
Lot 17 F/A-18C aircraft, particularly the ability to perform
precision strike missions.
Since the Marine Corps' F/A-18A aircraft are slated to
remain in the inventory until replaced by the Joint Strike
Fighter (JSF), the committee believes that the Marine Corps
should upgrade more of the F/A-18A inventory with improved
capability. Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of
$25.0 million for the procurement of additional ECP-583 to
continue the Marine Corps' F/A-18A aircraft modernization.
P-3 aircraft modifications
The budget request included $102.7 million for
modifications to the P-3 aircraft, which included $72.4 million
for the procurement of four anti-surface warfare improvement
program (AIP) kits. The AIP modification has greatly expanded
the capabilities of the P-3 aircraft, giving it particular
capability to operate against surface targets in coastal
regions. These upgrades include better ability to provide
standoff surveillance and targeting. The AIP makes these
aircraft very attractive to fleet and battle group commanders
to supplement the capabilities offered by other high demand,
low density (HD/LD) forces. The committee recommends an
increase of $14.0 million for the procurement of one additional
AIP kit for the P-3 aircraft.
Fleet aircrew simulator training
The budget request included $442.3 million in Navy aircraft
common ground equipment, including $79.5 million for the fleet
aircrew simulator trainer (FAST). These funds would be used to
buy four high-fidelity, networked F/A-18C tactical flight
trainers, to include: mission brief/debrief stations;
instructor-operator stations; and commercial, off-the-shelf
(COTS) software to enable sharing of common distributed
databases. Since much of the tactically relevant training is
done in two-ship formations, it would appear prudent to buy
fewer stations and see whether the potential training payoff is
realized before expanding the capability to simulate four-ship
formations. The committee understands that, because there may
be maintenance and other single station down times, buying a
two-station suite could have limitations. Therefore, the
committee recommends a decrease of $15.0 million in common
ground equipment to buy a three-station FAST system. If this
capability were to prove beneficial in operation, the committee
would entertain a request to buy additional stations.
Navy Weapons
Hellfire missiles
The budget request included no funding for the procurement
of AGM-114 Hellfire missiles. The Department of the Navy uses
Hellfire missiles as a primary attack weapon for both the
Marine Corps AH-1W attack helicopter and the Navy MH-60
helicopter. The committee understands that the fiscal year 2002
Hellfire inventory is only 54 percent of the inventory
objective. Although no funds were included in the budget
request, the Navy and Marine Corps have identified buying
additional Hellfire missiles as a high priority item to
mitigate against further erosion in the inventory level from
training expenditures and from retirements due to shelf life
expirations. The committee recommends an increase of $15.0
million for the procurement of AGM-114 Hellfire missiles.
Weapons industrial facilities
The budget request included $17.7 million for various
activities at government-owned, contractor-operated weapons
industrial facilities. The committee recommends an increase of
$20.0 million to accelerate the facilities restoration program
at the Allegany Ballistics Laboratory.
Close-in Weapons System modifications
The budget request included $32.2 million for modifications
to the Close-in Weapons System (CIWS) for surface ship self-
defense. The basic CIWS is an effective weapon for defense
against anti-ship cruise missiles. An upgrade, called the
``Block 1B'' modification, enhances these capabilities,
improves the reliability of the system, and expands the target
set to include other threats, such as that posed by small
boats. Because of the importance of providing these
capabilities to the fleet, the committee recommends an increase
of $5.0 million for procurement and installation of Block 1B
modifications in CIWS mounts.
Gun mount modifications
The budget request included $8.4 million in gun mount
modifications, including: (1) $3.7 million for the procurement
and installation of modifications to surface ship five-inch,
54-caliber gun mounts; and (2) $2.0 million for procurement and
installation of safety and reliability improvements for minor
caliber guns including the 25-millimeter, MK-38 gun. The budget
request included no funds for the procurement of additional 25-
millimeter, MK-38 guns.
The five-inch gun provides the only gunfire support from
the sea for the Marine Corps and comprises a part of the
layered, ship self-defense system. The five-inch gun mount
modification program provides gun safety updates, shock-hardens
the gun and mount for future munitions, modifies five-inch, 54-
caliber guns to 62-caliber, and develops a rotatable pool of
gun mounts for the cruiser conversion and ship overhaul
programs.
Additional funding for five-inch gun mount modifications
would help prevent a break in production for procurement of
modification kits for the cruiser conversion program and allow
continuation of other ordnance alterations. The committee
recommends an increase of $10.0 million for the five-inch gun
mount modifications program.
The 25-millimeter, MK-38 gun is mounted on Navy and Coast
Guard vessels to provide a gun capability against small boats.
The Navy has identified a requirement for procurement of
additional guns for the vessels providing port security for
homeland defense. Therefore, the committee recommends an
increase of $5.0 million for procurement and installation of
25-millimeter, MK-38 guns on Navy and Coast vessels, a total
authorization for gun mount modifications of $23.4 million.
Navy and Marine Corps Ammunition
120mm High Explosive Anti-Tank cartridges
The budget request includes $23.2 million for the 120mm
High Explosive Anti-Tank (HEAT) anti-tank and air defense
multi-purpose round. The committee recommends an increase of
$8.7 million for the Marine Corps to procure additional
cartridges to meet war reserve shortfalls.
155mm High Explosive M795
The budget request included $23.7 million for purchases of
the 155mm High Explosive (HE) M795 projectile for the Marine
Corps, an extended range projectile to augment and ultimately
replace current, shorter range cargo projectiles. The committee
recommends an increase of $4.0 million to procure additional
155mm HE M795 projectiles.
Navy Shipbuilding and Conversion
Future aircraft carrier procurement
The budget request included $243.7 million for advance
procurement of CVNX-1, the next generation nuclear powered
aircraft carrier. The fiscal year 2001 budget request and the
fiscal year 2002 amended budget request projected asking for
full funding for this ship in fiscal year 2006. This plan was
based on an acquisition strategy that included using advance
construction activities before fiscal year 2006. Congress
approved the Navy's advance construction plan for CVNX-1 in the
Floyd D. Spence National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal
Year 2001.
The Navy's fiscal year 2003 budget request would result in
a significant cost increase and at least a one-year delay in
the delivery of CVNX-1 compared to previous plans.
After submitting the 2003 budget request, the Navy provided
the committee with information that indicated that restoring
fiscal year 2003 funding would enable the Navy to begin the
work necessary to support the Navy's previous plan. The
additional Navy information identifies a Future Years Defense
Program (FYDP) funding profile which would result in savings of
over $200.0 million for the total cost of the ship.
The committee believes that the Navy should take reasonable
actions to save funds in the shipbuilding account.
Additionally, restoring the delivery schedule of CVNX-1 would
underscore the importance of the aircraft carrier. Aircraft
carriers have, once again, demonstrated their vital importance
to U.S. national security during Operation Enduring Freedom in
Afghanistan. During the early days of that operation, up to
three carriers were engaged and the operational commander in
chief used one of these carriers as a platform for launching
Special Operations missions into Afghanistan. The aircraft
carriers responded quickly to the operational commander's
requirements and conducted continuous joint combat operations
as directed by the operational commander in chief. Therefore,
the committee recommends an increase of $229.0 million to begin
restoring the original delivery schedule for CVNX-1 at a total
ship cost less than that presumed in the FYDP.
Submarine refueling overhauls
The budget request included $271.3 million for refueling a
single Los Angeles-class attack submarine.
The 1999 ``Attack Submarine Study'' conducted by the Joint
Chiefs of Staff concluded that the Navy needed to have a
minimum of 68 attack submarines in fiscal year 2015 to meet
requirements defined by the regional commanders in chief and
the national intelligence community. The Navy is building new
attack submarines at a rate of only one per year in the Future
Years Defense Program (FYDP) and will need to accelerate that
rate to meet requirements for the better capability that will
be afforded by the new Virginia-class submarines.
In the near-term, the only action the Navy could take to
sustain submarine force levels would be to refuel, rather than
retire, Los Angeles-class attack submarines that have many
years of useful service life remaining. The Navy has indicated
that there is an additional Los Angeles-class attack submarine
that is due for refueling in fiscal year 2003. The yards
capable of conducting such a refueling will be unable to accept
additional work in fiscal year 2004. Absent obtaining
additional funding for fueling in fiscal year 2003, the Navy
would be forced to scrap this boat. Therefore, the committee
recommends an increase of $200.0 million to refuel an
additional attack submarine in fiscal year 2003 and extend its
useful life in the fleet.
Large deck amphibious ship replacement
The budget request included $10.0 million for advance
procurement plans for LHD-9, a ship to replace an aging LHA-1
Tarawa-class amphibious assault ship. The budget documentation
indicated that the Navy would seek authorization for LHD-9 in
fiscal year 2008.
LHD-8, already under construction, is scheduled to replace
one of the retiring Tarawa-class ships. The committee received
testimony that the Navy will complete, in the next few months,
an analysis of alternatives to determine the specifications for
ships to replace the remaining four Tarawa-class ships that
will reach 35 years of ship life between 2011 and 2015. The
Navy's study activities are included in a program called the
``LHA Replacement'' or LHA(R) program.
The Navy identified a need for additional research and
development funds to continue LHA(R) operational requirements
and preliminary concept design activities. Therefore, the
committee recommends a decrease of $10.0 million in LHD-1
advance procurement and an increase of $10.0 million in PE
64567N to continue LHA(R) operational requirements development
and preliminary concept design activities.
Landing craft air cushion service life extension program
The budget request included $67.6 million for inducting
three landing craft air cushion (LCAC) vehicles into a service
life extension program (SLEP). This SLEP effort is designed to
increase the life of the LCACs by 20 years and provide them
with increased capability. This capability expansion includes
enhanced command, control and navigation capabilities and
increased operational range and lift capacity.
The Marine Corps has indicated that accelerating this
program would be a high priority if additional funds were to be
made available. Therefore, the committee recommends an increase
of $22.0 million to induct another LCAC into the SLEP in fiscal
year 2003.
Other Navy Procurement
Ship integrated condition assessment system
The budget request included no funds for procurement of
integrated condition assessment systems (ICAS) for surface
ships. ICAS remotely monitors the operating parameters of
machinery throughout a ship, analyzes the collected data, and
alerts operators to potential performance problems. ICAS has
the potential to: (1) reduce the hours required to measure,
analyze and report machinery operations; (2) reduce total
operating costs; and (3) improve operational availability. ICAS
has been installed in a number of surface ships and is
performing well. The committee recommends an increase of $11.0
million for procurement and installation of ICAS in surface
ships.
Stainless steel sanitary spaces
The budget request included $123.4 million for procurement
and installation of various items of ship support equipment
costing less than $5.0 million. The budget did not include
funding specifically for providing stainless steel sanitary
spaces for backfitting on existing Navy ships. The use of
stainless steel sanitary spaces could result in lower life
cycle costs and improved quality of life for sailors.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $6.0 million
to accelerate the procurement and installation of the stainless
steel sanitary spaces on Navy ships.
Electronic warfare program change
The budget request included $168.8 million for development,
procurement and installation of the advanced integrated
electronic warfare system (AIEWS). Of that amount, $25.9
million was included in PE 64757N for research and development;
$15.8 million was included in Other Procurement, Navy (OPN)
tobuy and install one AIEWS in an active duty ship; and $127.2 million
was included in Shipbuilding and Conversion, Navy (SCN) to buy and
install eight AIEWSs in new construction ships.
The Navy recently terminated the AIEWS effort and announced
a restructuring of surface ship electronic warfare programs.
The Navy has decided to focus on upgrading the SLQ-32 systems
presently installed in Navy ships rather than developing and
procuring a new system. As part of that restructuring, the Navy
has asked to transfer:
(1) $25.9 million within PE 64757N from AIEWS
development to development of SLQ-32 system
improvements as part of the shipboard electronic
warfare system improvement program; and
(2) $1.6 million of the OPN funding to PE 64757N for
the shipboard electronic warfare system improvement
program.
The Navy has indicated that the remaining OPN funding is
excess to current requirements. The Navy has taken no position
on what should happen with the SCN funding.
An electronic countermeasures suite is vital to the layered
defenses of surface combatants. Therefore, the committee
directs the Secretary of the Navy to ensure that, for any new
construction ships previously scheduled to receive the AIEWS,
the Navy outfits those ships with a suitable replacement system
of at least equal capability to that installed in other ships
of the same ship class. Therefore, the committee authorizes:
(1) an increase of $1.6 million in PE 64757N; (2) the requested
realignment of $25.9 million within that program element from
AIEWS to electronic warfare system improvement; and (3) a
decrease of $15.8 million in OPN. In addition, the committee
authorizes the Secretary of the Navy to apply the SCN funds to
buy and install electronic warfare equipment as directed above.
Joint engineering data management information and control system
The budget request included no funding for the joint
engineering data management information and control system
(JEDMICS) program. JEDMICS is the joint Department of Defense
(DOD) system for permanently storing, managing and controlling
digital engineering drawings and associated technical data.
JEDMICS replaced labor-intensive, inefficient manual and semi-
automated engineering drawing repositories with automated
central repositories for all engineering and manufacturing
information for DOD weapons systems.
The committee is concerned that, without additional
funding, the Navy may not be able to ensure that engineering
and technical data for weapons systems in JEDMICS are aligned
with the exact configuration of weapons systems and their spare
parts being used in the fleet. Therefore, the committee
recommends an increase of $3.0 million to continue verification
of the JEDMICS databases.
SPQ-9B radar
The budget request included $27.1 million in gunfire
control equipment, including $14.4 million for procurement of
SPQ-9B radars. The SPQ-9B provides surface ships with a gunfire
control radar that also enhances ship self-defense
capabilities. Developing and fielding a solid state transmitter
has the potential to reduce life cycle costs and improve
performance of this radar. Therefore, the committee recommends
an increase of $10.0 million to design, build, test and
integrate a solid state transmitter into the SPQ-9B radar.
Improving efficiency on ships through food service technology
The budget request included $9.8 million for procurement
and installation of smart ship-type systems for AEGIS system
ships. The aim of these systems is to improve the quality of
service for personnel serving aboard ship.
The Navy has successfully tested a program to provide an
advanced food service technology system aboard two non-
combatant ships. The Navy is now testing the system on an AEGIS
cruiser. The committee believes that the system has the
potential to significantly reduce the time required for food
service and reduce demands on personnel to support ship food
service operations. Therefore, the committee recommends an
increase of $2.0 million for procurement and installation of
the advanced food service technology system.
Integrated bridge to improve ship situational awareness
The budget request included $14.8 million for procurement
and installation of eight integrated bridge system upgrades for
AEGIS system ships. The integrated bridge system, by automating
navigation and ship control functions, improves situational
awareness and provides continuous updates to displays which
previously required manual updates. The committee recommends an
increase of $5.0 million to accelerate the procurement and
installation of the integrated bridge system.
Submarine combat control system
The budget request included $46.3 million for procurement
and installation of various items of equipment to modernize
submarine combat control systems. Upgrading submarines to a
common combat control system configuration should help improve
fleet operational readiness and reduce life cycle costs.
Suchupgrades could also lead to improved war fighting capability. For
example, replacing older weapons' launch control systems with newer
equipment would help eliminate single points of failure for self-
defense. The committee recommends an increase of $10.0 million to
accelerate the procurement and installation of submarine combat control
systems upgrades.
NULKA anti-ship missile decoy system
The budget request included $28.0 million for anti-ship
missile decoy systems, including $12.3 million for procuring 40
new NULKA decoys. Procuring additional NULKA decoys would
ensure that fleet installations remain on a reasonable
schedule, would keep production rates above the minimum
sustaining level, and would achieve more reasonable unit
production costs. The committee recommends an increase of $10.8
million for the NULKA procurement program to purchase
additional decoys.
Submarine training device modifications
The budget request included $17.3 million to procure
submarine training device modifications. The Navy has critical
training requirements to support submarines in the fleet and is
beginning to use performance support systems that would enhance
training quality opportunities. The committee understands that
the Navy is using such systems to support operator training and
diagnostics for submarine Tomahawk launch systems. The
committee believes that the Navy could use these systems more
extensively to provide on-the-job operation, maintenance and
troubleshooting support normally provided by journeymen and
advanced schoolhouse training. Therefore, the committee
recommends an increase of $5.0 million to expand the use of
performance support systems in conducting submarine training.
Marine Corps Procurement
Auto test equipment systems
The budget request included $0.9 million for the third
echelon test system (TETS). TETS is a portable, automated
tester that provides diagnostic testing and fault isolation
capability for communications, electronic, and ground weapons
systems, such as the tube-launched, optically-tracked, wire-
guided missile (TOW); Light Armored Vehicle (LAV); and the
target location designation and hand-off system. The committee
understands that the Marine Corps has recently increased the
requirement for TETS to support high-powered lasers and track/
motorized vehicle platforms. However, the Marine Corps has not
requested funding to buy the test equipment to meet this
requirement. Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of
$8.0 million for additional TETS to meet these new
requirements.
Lightweight multi-band satellite terminals
The budget request included $1.0 million to continue
purchasing lightweight multi-band satellite terminals for
Marine Corps communications battalions to support all combat
echelons. Having these terminals would allow the communications
battalions to provide reliable communications to highly mobile
combat elements in addition to reducing operations and support
costs. The committee recommends an increase of $5.0 million for
buying additional lightweight multi-band satellite terminals.
SUBTITLE D--AIR FORCE PROGRAMS
C-130J aircraft program (sec. 131)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
the Secretary of the Air Force to enter into a multiyear
contract to purchase C-130J aircraft and variants of the C-
130J, subject to the C-130J completing the process to achieve
certification for worldwide over-water capability.
The Air Force has indicated that the recently announced
overall airlift roadmap assumes approval of the Air Force's
request to approve multiyear procurement authority for the C-
130J. Such purchases would include purchases for the Marine
Corps. The Air Force has estimated that buying 64 C-130Js (40
for the Air Force and 24 for the Marine Corps) under a
multiyear contract would save more than $650 million.
The committee recognizes that the Air Force will not
complete final C-130J operational test and evaluation until
early in fiscal year 2004. The Air Force, however, is buying
the C-130J as a commercial item. The aircraft has already
achieved FAA certification. In addition, the delay in
operational testing has been caused primarily by added
requirements for defensive systems that were not part of the
original program.
The C-130J has been performing well in interim operational
assessments, and operational squadrons are already flying the
aircraft successfully. Therefore, the committee believes that
the possibility of achieving the promised savings outweighs any
risk remaining in the testing program once over-water
capability clearance is achieved.
Pathfinder programs (sec. 132)
The Air Force has designated a number of ``pathfinder''
pilot programs for spiral development and acquisition reform.
Among those identified as pathfinders are large significant
programs such as the Global Positioning System, the Space-based
Radar and the Global Hawk Unmanned Aerial Vehicle. The
committee encourages the Air Force to continually look for new
ways to reduce the time that it takes to acquire weapons
systems. However, the committee believes that certain minimum
standards for oversight should apply to these programs.
Therefore, the committee recommends a provision that would
require the Secretary of the Air Force to determine by February
1, 2003, which pathfinder programs the Air Force intends to
conduct as spiral development programs. The committee directs
the Secretary to submit a spiral development plan to the
Secretary of Defense for each of the selected programs in
accordance with the requirements of section 803. For the
pathfinder programs that are not selected and approved for
spiral development, the committee provision would require the
Director of Operational Test and Evaluation, the Joint
Requirements Oversight Council, the Under Secretary of Defense
(Comptroller) and Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition,
Technology, and Logistics to assess the pathfinder program
acquisition plans and report the results of these assessments
to the committee no later than May 15, 2003.
Oversight of acquisition for defense space programs (sec. 133)
The committee recommends a provision that would direct the
Office of the Secretary of Defense (OSD) to maintain oversight
of space program acquisition and require the Secretary of
Defense to submit to Congress by March 15, 2003 a detailed plan
on how oversight by OSD and the Joint Staff will be
accomplished. The Defense Department's space acquisition
programs are among the most important programs in the
Department because they are critical to maintaining and
improving the surveillance, communications and situational
awareness needed to support U.S. military forces.
Currently, however, a number of defense space programs are
experiencing significant problems with cost growth and schedule
slippage, and at least some of the problems appear to be
connected with the oversight and management of the programs.
For example, in December 2001 the Space-based Infrared System-
High (SBIRS-High) program sustained a Nunn-McCurdy cost breach
when the unit cost estimate for the program increased by more
than 70 percent, indicating more than $2.0 billion in cost
growth. The program has also experienced an 18- to 24-month
schedule slip. An independent review team established by the
Air Force found significant problems with the oversight and
management of the SBIRS-High program, including less-than-
optimal systems engineering and requirements development
processes. The Advanced Extremely High Frequency (AEHF) program
has also been experiencing delays and cost overruns.
In February 2002, the Under Secretary of Defense for
Acquisition, Technology and Logistics delegated oversight
authority over all major defense space programs to the Under
Secretary of the Air Force. In testimony to the Strategic
Subcommittee on March 20, 2002, the Under Secretary stated his
intent to significantly alter most of the existing processes by
which the OSD oversees space programs, including the Integrated
Product Team and Defense Acquisition Executive Summary
processes. The committee believes that the Office of the
Secretary of Defense should maintain a strong oversight role
for space programs because of their military importance and
their inherently joint nature.
Leasing of tanker aircraft (sec. 134)
The Air Force has stated that it has a requirement for
additional tanker aircraft but has not budgeted funds for the
acquisition of such aircraft until fiscal year 2008. Section
8159 of the Department of Defense Appropriations Act for Fiscal
Year 2002 gave the Secretary of the Air Force discretion to
enter into leases for up to 100 Boeing 767 aircraft for use as
tanker aircraft but provided no funds for that purpose.
Section 8159 required the Secretary to submit a report to
the congressional defense committees outlining any plans for
implementing the provision at least 30 days before entering
into any lease arrangement under this authority. The Secretary
indicated on February 12, 2002, that he would not take any
action without first coming to both the authorization
committees and the appropriations committees to have money
authorized and appropriated.
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of the Air Force to submit the report required by
section 8159 and obtain authorization and appropriation of
funds necessary to enter a lease for such aircraft, in
accordance with his publicly stated commitments to the
Congress, before entering such a lease.
The committee reserves judgement on any particular lease of
tanker aircraft, on the source of funding for such a lease, and
on other specific issues regarding the lease until the
Secretary decides whether to recommend a lease, submits the
report required by section 8159, and seeks authorization and
appropriation of funds necessary to enter the proposed lease in
accordance with the requirements of this provision.
Air Force Aircraft
C-17 aircraft trainers
The budget request included $2.7 billion for buying C-17
aircraft and various support equipment. The budget, however,
included no funding for maintenance training devices to support
additional operating locations for the C-17 aircraft. To
maintain core task proficiency, a minimum of three maintenance
training devices is required:
(1) an aircraft maintenance systems trainer (AMST);
(2) a trainer evaluation performance aircraft
training set (TEPATS); and
(3) an aircraft engine trainer (AET).
An AMST and TEPATS have been funded in recent years, but an
AET is required to complete the set of maintenance training
devices. The Air Force also needs to make software enhancements
to the AMST and TEPATS devices. The committee recommends an
increase of $11.3 million for C-17 aircraft modifications
including $9.2 million for the procurement of an AET training
device and $2.1 million for software enhancements.
C-17 aircraft interim contractor support
The budget request included $612.5 million for interim
contractor support (ICS) for the C-17 aircraft. The C-17
flexible sustainment program provides ICS for the airframe,
including material management for unique spares, a wartime
surge capability, and a process to incorporate aircraft
modifications rapidly into the program. With additional
aircraft being delivered each year, the required funding for
this support is increasing. The amount authorized and
appropriated for fiscal year 2002 was approximately $71 million
greater than that for fiscal year 2001. In fiscal year 2003,
however, the budget request is for an increased amount that
represents a growth of almost twice the fiscal year 2002
increase. Therefore, the committee recommends a decrease of
$59.7 million to sustain the previously established growth in
C-17 ICS, a total authorization of $552.8 million.
EC-130J aircraft program
The budget request included no funds to purchase EC-130J
aircraft to support modernization of the Commando Solo aircraft
squadron whose mission is to engage in psychological operations
activities. The Commando Solo aircraft is designed to jam local
radio and television station broadcasts and inject programming
from our psychological operations forces. Using the Commando
Solo, our forces disseminate our message to the local
population and prevent them from hearing only the word of an
adversary. In testimony before the Subcommittee on Emerging
Threats and Capabilities, the Commander in Chief, Special
Operations Command, singled out this unit's contribution in
Operation Enduring Freedom.
An Air National Guard unit operates the Commando Solo
aircraft for the Special Operations Command. This unit has six
EC-130 Commando Solo aircraft. The currently funded program
includes providing the unit with three EC-130J Commando Solo
aircraft, leaving the unit to operate a mix of three EC-130J
and three EC-130E aircraft for at least six years.
While any such unit getting new equipment faces some
overlap period, the longer the transition period stretches out,
the greater the demand on training ground support personnel,
pilots, operators and maintenance personnel. This situation is
particularly difficult for the unit operating Commando Solo
aircraft, because the aircraft have been heavily tasked and
fitthe definition of a ``high demand/low density,'' or HD/LD unit.
The current Future Years Defense Program (FYDP) would
provide newer EC-130J aircraft to replace the three remaining
older EC-130E aircraft at a rate of one per year, starting in
fiscal year 2006. Adding an EC-130J this year would permit the
Air Force and SOCOM to accelerate this replacement by at least
a year. This initiative fits with the committee's efforts to
help alleviate the pressure on HD/LD units. Therefore, the
committee recommends an increase of $110.0 million in Aircraft
Procurement, Air Force to buy one C-130J aircraft and convert
it to the EC-130J Commando Solo configuration.
CV-22 Osprey aircraft advance procurement
The budget request included $10.1 million in advance
procurement for two CV-22 Osprey aircraft in fiscal year 2004.
Section 123 of the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2002 (Public Law 107-107) restricts the procurement
of V-22 Osprey aircraft to the minimum sustaining rate of 11
aircraft until the Secretary of Defense certifies to Congress
that the Department of Defense has completed specific
operational testing successfully. According to information
provided to the committee, the Department will conduct an
operational assessment in fiscal year 2003 but will not begin
the operational evaluation until late in fiscal year 2004,
continuing into fiscal year 2005.
Procuring more than 11 V-22 aircraft in fiscal year 2004
would be inconsistent with staying at the minimum sustaining
rate until that testing is complete. The committee recommends
advance procurement in Aircraft Procurement, Navy, to support
buying 11 MV-22 aircraft in fiscal year 2004. Therefore, the
committee recommends a decrease of $10.1 million, leaving no
advance procurement funding for CV-22 aircraft.
B-2 Spirit bomber
The budget request included $72.1 million in funding for
Aircraft Procurement, Air Force, line 24 for the B-2 bomber.
The research and development request for the B-2 bomber
inadvertently included $25.2 million that should have been
included in the procurement account to buy Airborne Integrated
Terminals (AIT) for UHF satellite communications. The committee
recommends a $25.2 million decrease in B-2 research and
development in PE 64240F and a corresponding increase in
procurement for the B-2 in PE 11127F, a total authorization of
$97.3 million.
B-52 bomber
The budget request for fiscal year 2003 contained no
funding for procurement for the B-52 bomber. The committee
recommends $20.0 million for PE 11113 for the B-52 for the
Electronic Countermeasures Improvement (ECMI) program to
continue the upgrades for the current ALQ-172 electronic
countermeasures system. The ECMI provides better situational
awareness, ground and in-flight reprogramming capability, and
improved reliability and maintainability over the current
system. The Air Force has not included funding for any of the
ECMI kits in fiscal year 2003. Without funding for 2003, the
production line would have to shut down for one year, which
would result in increased per unit costs and would delay the
ECMI by two years. The B-52 bomber, although the oldest bomber
in the Air Force, once again demonstrated its value through its
performance in Afghanistan. Only by a continued commitment to
modernization and upgrade programs can the B-52 be relied upon
for the next 35 years as planned.
F-16 aircraft modifications
The budget request included $265.0 million for
modifications to the F-16 aircraft, but it included no funding
for continuing a program to replace engines of block 42 F-16
aircraft with the F100-PW-229 engine. This re-engining program
would enable Air National Guard units flying the block 42 F-16
aircraft to have comparable speed, thrust, and maneuverability
with other F-16 aircraft, allowing full integration into the
Expeditionary Air Force structure. Such a modification would
also increase the reliability and maintainability of these
aircraft. Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of
$60.0 million for F100-PW-229 engines for block 42 F-16
aircraft, a total authorization of $325.0 million for F-16
aircraft modifications.
C-5 aircraft avionics modernization program
The budget request included $86.0 million in procurement
for C-5 aircraft modifications, including $78.1 million for the
avionics modernization program (AMP).
The budget request also included $277.8 million in PE
41119F for operational system development for the C-5 aircraft,
including $41.7 million for AMP development.
After the Defense Department submitted the budget request,
the service conducted an integrated risk assessment. That
assessment concluded that the Air Force had underestimated the
time required to complete development and testing and needed to
restructure the AMP effort. The Air Force has informed the
committee that their restructuring plan includes a need to
shiftsome of the procurement budget request for fiscal year
2003 to research and development to complete development and testing.
Therefore, the committee recommends a decrease of $26.6 million in C-5
aircraft modification procurement and a corresponding increase of $26.6
million in PE 41119F for C-5 aircraft operational system development.
C-130 aircraft modifications
The budget request included $138.5 million for
modifications to the C-130 aircraft. The committee recommends
an overall increase of $38.0 million, a total authorization of
$176.5 million.
The budget request included $18.4 million for the enhanced
traffic alert and collision avoidance system (TCAS). This
modification is required by the Air Force Navigation and Safety
Master Plan and global air traffic management mandates. Meeting
these requirements is essential for aircraft to maintain
worldwide, unrestricted airspace access. Because of the
essential contribution that TCAS can make to aircraft safety,
the committee recommends an increase of $15.0 million to
accelerate installation of TCAS for C-130s.
The budget request included no funding for quick engine
change (QEC) kits for the T56 engines used in Air Force Special
Operations Command (AFSOC) MC-130E, AC-130H, or AM-130P
aircraft. AFSOC units currently face the difficulty of using
and maintaining five different versions of T56 QECs across the
AFSOC C-130 fleet. These versions are neither compatible nor
interchangeable, greatly complicating the required logistics.
These differences could be eliminated if the MC-130E and AC-
130H aircraft received an oil cooler augmentation (OCA) and if
the MC-130P aircraft received both the OCA and a generator
modification. The committee, therefore, recommends an increase
of $13.0 million to procure T56 QEC kits for the AFSOC C-130
fleet.
The budget request included no funding for prototyping and
testing an eight-bladed propeller and a new electronic control
system. The propeller system is designed to increase available
thrust and improve reliability and maintainability. The Navy
has invested $45.0 million in an eight-bladed propeller for the
E-2 and C-2 aircraft, both of which have T56 engines similar to
the C-130 fleet. Navy testing of an E-2 outfitted with this
system is scheduled to finish later this year.
If the Air Force were to conduct a test with a C-130
aircraft using the new propeller system, they would have the
basis upon which to decide whether to program the rest of the
C-130 fleet for a propeller upgrade program. Such testing could
evaluate claims of significant savings in operating and support
costs. If these estimates are correct, the fact that the Air
Force operates a large fleet of C-130 aircraft could translate
into substantial benefits to the operating forces. Therefore,
the committee recommends an increase of $10.0 million to
conduct the prototyping and testing of an eight-bladed
propeller and a new electronic control system for the C-130
aircraft.
KC-135 aircraft boom operator weapons system trainer
The budget request included $108.7 million for
modifications to the C-135 aircraft, including modifications to
the KC-135 air refueling aircraft. The budget did not include
any funding for a new boom operator weapons system trainer
(BOWST).
The Air Force has indicated that the current system for
training boom operators is obsolete and unreliable. If it
fails, the air crews would have to conduct this critical
training on actual sorties. In addition, the Air Force expects
that if they deploy the new BOWST, air crews will actually be
able to supplant some of the actual training sorties that now
provide training that is impossible to conduct on the current
ground training equipment. For example, the Air Force expects
that new boom operators will require only six actual aircraft
sorties to achieve initial qualification instead of nine. The
committee believes that these savings would be significant.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $6.5 million
for the procurement of the BOWST, a total authorization of
$115.2 million in C-135 aircraft modifications.
Upgrades to Air National Guard targeting pods
The budget request included $349.5 million for
miscellaneous production charges related to Air Force aircraft
but included no funding to modify existing Litening II
precision targeting pods deployed in the Air National Guard F-
16 fleet.
The Air National Guard has identified a candidate upgrade
program that would install a new forward-looking infrared
(FLIR) sensor in the Litening II pod. This upgraded FLIR would
have higher reliability than current systems, thereby reducing
the demands on maintenance personnel. The new FLIR would also
yield capability improvements, including doubled detection
range, automatic target tracking and multiple target tracking.
The committee recommends an increase of $20.0 million for
procurement of Litening II targeting pod improvements.
Air Force Ammunition
Sensor-fuzed weapon
The budget request included $106.0 million for the sensor-
fuzed weapon, a cluster munition used against land combat
vehicles. The committee recommends an increase of $10.0 million
to achieve a more economic order quantity rate and to lower the
overall unit cost.
MJU-52/B infrared countermeasures
The budget request did not include funding for MJU-52/B
infrared (IR) countermeasures for F-15 aircraft. However, Air
Combat Command has validated a compelling requirement to field
an expendable countermeasure for F-15s as soon as possible.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $1.0 million
to purchase additional MJU-52/B IR countermeasures. These
countermeasures would provide Air Force F-15s with new
defensive capabilities to deny sophisticated infrared missile-
seekers, thereby increasing survivability.
Air Force Missiles
Minuteman III modifications
The budget request included $580.7 million in PE 11213F for
modifications to the Minuteman III (MMIII) land-based
Intercontinental Ballistic Missile (ICBM). The committee
recommends an additional $23.2 million to ensure that the
multi-part MMIII modernization program remains on track. Two
elements of the modernization effort, the Guidance Replacement
Program (GRP) and the Propulsion Replacement Program (PRP),
must move in tandem. However, recent labor rate increases in
the PRP and GRP have led to a mismatch in the tandem production
rates of these two components.
The additional funds would also support the purchase of
shipping and storage containers and container inserts to allow
the Air Force to download the MMIII ICBMs to a single warhead
configuration, consistent with the Nuclear Posture Review. The
committee urges the Air Force to continue to download the MMIII
ICBMs as quickly as possible so that all MMIII warheads are in
a single warhead configuration by 2007.
Advanced Extremely High Frequency satellite program
The budget request included $94.5 million for Advanced
Extremely High Frequency (AEHF) satellite procurement in PE
33604F. Due to the slip of the AEHF program's Critical Design
Review schedule, however, the Air Force has indicated that the
proposed fiscal year 2003 procurement funding will not be
required to carry out the program in fiscal year 2003.
Therefore, the committee recommends a reduction of $94.5
million in PE 33604F.
Defense Support Program mobile terminal displays
The Defense Support Program (DSP) satellites are the space
component of the nation's current early warning system for
ballistic missile launches. These satellites detect
intercontinental ballistic missile launches against the U.S.
and can also detect the launch of short-range ballistic
missiles. The system provided early warning of Iraqi SCUD
missile launches to soldiers and civilians during the Desert
Storm conflict.
Currently, the more capable Space-based Infrared System-
High (SBIRS-High) is in line to replace the DSP satellites, the
first of which was launched in the 1970's. Significant cost and
schedule problems with SBIRS-High, however, have called into
question whether a replacement system for DSP will be ready on
time.
In the meantime, the mobile ground terminal displays for
DSP, which provide an important means to receive DSP missile
warning data, have become obsolete and are no longer
supportable. If any of the displays were to fail in the future,
the nation's ability to detect and warn of ballistic missile
launches would be degraded. Given the likelihood that DSP will
be required to serve longer than anticipated because of the
SBIRS-High problems, it is prudent to ensure DSP systems are
adequately funded and modernized.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $2.1
million for procurement of new display units for DSP mobile
ground terminals.
Titan space boosters
The budget request included $335.3 million in Missile
Procurement, Air Force for the Titan space booster. The
committee recommends a reduction of $20.0 million as a result
of program execution delays.
Evolved Expendable Launch Vehicle mission assurance
The budget request included $158.9 million for the Evolved
Expendable Launch Vehicle (EELV). The EELV is a new, low-cost
commercial-government partnership that will reduce the cost of
launch by 25 to 50 percent. The Wideband Gapfiller Satellites
(WGS) will be launched using the EELV and will provide critical
and substantially improved communications services. The
committee recommends an additional $14.5 million for mission
assurance to support the WGS first-of-a-kind as recommended
bythe EELV broad area review.
Other Air Force Procurement
Spacelift range system (space)
The budget request contained $108.3 million in Other
Procurement, Air Force for spacelift range system (space) to
continue range modernization and recapitalization efforts, a
$23.0 million decrease from the fiscal year 2002 level. In
order to support the growing reliance of the United States on
space systems and other systems that rely on the spacelift
ranges, the Air Force must ensure that the ranges can meet the
requirements for an automated and standardized spacelift range
system. The committee is concerned that the modernization
schedule has not been maintained as originally planned.
Therefore, the committee recommends an additional $9.5 million
for recapitalization and modernization efforts, including the
planning and scheduling system and adequate spares. The
committee recommends a total increase of $29.0 million for
spacelift ranges for procurement, research and development, and
operation and maintenance accounts.
Panoramic night vision goggles
The budget request included $3.8 million to procure night
vision goggles but included no funding to begin buying the next
generation device for aviators, the panoramic night vision
goggles (PNVG). The Air Force has informed the committee that
the tremendous improvement in field-of-view offered by PNVGs
will greatly improve situational awareness, reduce aircrew
spatial disorientation, and enable quicker, more accurate
target identification. The improvements directly translate to
greatly enhanced aircrew safety. With the funding Congress
provided last year to complete development, the Air Force will
be ready to begin buying the PNVGs in fiscal year 2003. Because
of the tremendous potential for improved operational capability
and safety for aviators using PNVGs, the committee recommends
an increase of $8.1 million to buy PNVGs.
SUBTITLE E--OTHER MATTERS
Defense-Wide Programs
Global information grid
The budget request included $517.0 million for the Defense
Information Services Agency (DISA) to begin the first year of a
two-year program to build the global information grid (GIG) to
expand existing bandwidth at key Department of Defense (DOD)
sites. The committee supports the aim of the GIG to enhance
DOD's ability to transmit greater quantities of information
more rapidly around the world but is concerned that the planned
execution of almost $1.0 billion over two years is overly
ambitious. For example, efforts to expand information
transmission capabilities in the past have been slowed because,
upon attempting to insert new technology, DOD has discovered
that the facilities to house those technologies are inadequate.
The committee believes that similar challenges are likely to
arise in a program of this magnitude. Therefore, the committee
recommends a decrease of $115.9 million, reflecting the need
for a more realistic execution schedule. The committee's
recommendation for fiscal year 2003 totals $401.1 million to
support expansion of the network backbone to the highest
priority sites in the continental United States, Europe, and
Pacific Command.
Avionics enhanced situational awareness
The budget request included $18.6 million in the Special
Operations Forces (SOF) Rotary Wing Upgrades and Sustainment
procurement account for purchasing, integrating, and installing
Mission Processors (MPs), Multifunction Displays (MFDs), and
Intelligence Broadcast Receivers (IBRs) in Army Special
Operations aircraft. The MP and MFD replace obsolete equipment
that is no longer supportable or upgradeable. The IBR allows
the pilots to receive the latest intelligence data from
national intelligence sources while conducting their worldwide
missions. These three programs together form a large part of
the rotary wing Common Avionics Architecture for Penetration
(CAAP) Enhanced Situational Awareness (ESA) program. Given the
fact that the MP and MFD functions are being handled by
antiquated systems that will no longer be supportable in fiscal
year 2004, that there is no IBR capability in current aircraft,
and that the timetable for the MH47 Service Life Extension
Program provides an opportunity to also execute the CAAP ESA
program, the committee recommends an increase of $9.6 million
in Procurement, Defense-Wide for SOF Rotary Wing Upgrades and
Sustainment for purchasing, integrating, and installing six
additional sets of MPs, MFDs, and IBRs.
EC-130J Commando Solo spares
The budget request did not include any funding for a set of
spares for the EC-130J TV/radio broadcast equipment required
for the Commando Solo psychological operations missions. These
spare parts, including radios, TV converters, and media
players, support the airborne special mission equipment package
contained in the EC-130J. The committee recommends an increase
of $2.2 million in Procurement, Defense-Wide for Special
Operations Aircraft Support to purchase a set of spares for the
EC-130J Commando Solo mission.
SEAL Delivery Vehicles
The budget request did not include funding for procurement
of the SEAL Delivery Vehicle (SDV). The SDV is a wet
submersible operated by a crew of two that can clandestinely
transport up to four SEALs with their combat gear and mission
equipment into hostile waters. The Special Operations Command
considers SDVs a high priority requirement in order to conduct
successful naval special operations. Additional funding would
accelerate procurement of the SDVs required to meet the
inventory objective. Therefore, the committee recommends an
increase of $4.5 million in Procurement, Defense-Wide for the
MK VIII MOD 1--SEAL Delivery Vehicle for an additional SDV.
Multiband Multimission Radios
The budget request included $6.0 million in the Special
Operations Communications Equipment and Electronics procurement
account for the Multiband Multimission Radio (MBMMR). This
funding should ensure fielding of the radios to approximately
58 percent of the Special Operations Forces (SOF) who have a
requirement for the radios. The MBMMR allows SOF teams to
communicate on a user-selected frequency utilizing a single
radio with embedded communications security. It reduces the
communications combat load by approximately 37 pounds,
augmenting or replacing other radios. The command has stated
that, ``MBMMR is required for SOF operations in the current war
on global terrorism.'' Therefore, the committee recommends an
increase of $5.0 million in Procurement, Defense-Wide for the
Special Operations Communications Equipment and Electronics for
the MBMMR.
Advanced Lightweight Grenade Launcher
The budget request included $3.7 million for the Special
Operations Forces Small Arms and Weapons procurement account
for the Advanced Lightweight Grenade Launcher (ALGL) systems
for the Special Operations Command (SOCOM). The committee
recommends an increase of $3.0 million in Procurement, Defense-
Wide for Special Operations Forces Small Arms and Weapons to
purchase additional ALGL systems, which provide first-round-hit
capability on lightly armored vehicles at ranges beyond 1,500
meters. The ALGL procurement would provide special operators
with an improved 40mm weapons system capability consisting of a
lightweight 40mm grenade launcher, day/night fire control, and
mount (ground and vehicle). The system would replace one that
is twice as heavy, non-man portable, and less accurate.
Low Profile Night Vision Goggle
The budget request did not include funding for Low Profile
Night Vision Goggles (LPNVG) for the Naval Special Warfare
Command. The LPNVG is an image intensification system using
folded optics to reduce the overall system profile. The current
goggle system, whose optics are mounted more than two inches
away from the front of the eye, puts undue strain on the user's
neck when used in a high-sea state. The LPNVG system moves the
center of gravity closer to the user's face, reducing fatigue
and neck strain associated with long sea transit, and reduces
mount failure. The LPNVG also provides a superimposed day image
and can accommodate a Heads-Up Display, which would allow the
user to simultaneously view displays from a Global Positioning
System (GPS), Maritime Forward Looking Infrared Radar
(MARFLIR), or other instruments. The committee recommends an
increase of $2.0 million in Procurement, Defense-Wide for
Special Operations Forces Small Arms and Weapons Acquisition
for the procurement of approximately 147 additional LPNVGs.
Modular Integrated Communications Helmet system
The budget request did not include funding for the Modular
Integrated Communications Helmet (MICH) System. The MICH system
provides the special operations forces with state-of-the-art
ballistic and impact protection while providing an advanced
communications capability, which allows Special Forces
operators to connect to a wide range of radios and vehicle,
boat and aviation intercoms. The communications portion of the
helmet can also be used separately. The committee recommends an
increase of $5.0 million in Procurement, Defense-Wide for
Special Operations Forces Small Arms and Weapons to purchase
approximately 4,250 MICH systems.
Special Operations Craft-Riverine
The budget request did not include any funding for Special
Operations Craft-Riverine (SOC-R) procurement. The SOC-R is an
air-transportable, armored craft that is capable of carrying
special operations forces for insertion, extraction, and
reconnaissance missions in riverine environments. SOC-R is more
capable and supportable than existing Vietnam-era craft and,
unlike the latter, fully meets operational requirements.
Procurement of SOC-Rs would allow Special Operations Command to
accelerate attainment of its total inventory objective.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $8.0 million
in Procurement, Defense-Wide for Special Operations Forces
Combatant Craft Systems to purchase approximately six SOC-R
systems.
Advanced night vision system
The budget request included $1.9 million for advanced night
vision goggles in the Special Operations Forces Operational
Enhancements procurement program for a helmet-mounted goggle
system that includes a state-of-the-art night vision
capability, combining image intensification with thermal
imagery. It also allows operators to direct fire on threats
detected by thermal signatures and, in sum, provides the
operator with a distinct battlefield advantage. The committee
recommends an increase of $4.0 million in Procurement, Defense-
Wide for Special Operations Forces Operational Enhancements for
an advanced night vision system.
M48 protective masks
The budget request included $125.3 million in the Defense-
wide procurement account for individual protection in the
Chemical-Biological Defense Program for equipment and items to
protect military personnel from exposure to chemical and
biological agents. The request, however, did not include
funding for the M48 mask for AH-64 Apache helicopter crews. The
committee recommends an increase of $500,000 to procure
additional M48 masks for Apache crews.
M12 decontamination system
The budget request included $15.6 million in the Defense-
wide procurement account for decontamination in the Chemical-
Biological Defense Program for equipment to decontaminate
personnel and equipment exposed to chemical or biological
agents. The request did not include funds for upgrades to
theM12 decontamination system, which will eventually be replaced by the
Modular Decontamination System (MDS). The committee notes that
production of the MDS is behind schedule. Therefore, the committee
recommends an increase of $6.0 million to procure additional upgrades
for the M12 decontamination system.
Chemical-Biological Protective Shelter
The budget request included $14.9 million in the Defense-
wide procurement account for collective protection in the
Chemical-Biological Defense Program to procure 27 Chemical-
Biological Protective Shelters (CBPS). The CBPS is a highly
mobile, rapidly deployable shelter system designed for forward
medical treatment in contaminated battlefield environments. The
committee recommends an increase of $7.0 million to procure
additional Chemical-Biological Protective Shelters to meet the
increasing threat of chemical and biological attack against
U.S. military personnel.
OTHER ITEMS OF INTEREST
Abrams tank program
The budget request included $376.3 million to upgrade M1
Abrams tanks to the M1A2 System Enhancement Package (SEP)
configuration and $123.7 million to continue the retrofit of
M1A2 tanks to the M1A2 SEP configuration.
While retrofit of existing M1A2s to the SEP configuration
will continue in the out-years, the fiscal year 2003 budget
request represented the last year of funding for the Abrams
upgrade program. As a result, after 2003, the United States
will not be funding production of new or significantly upgraded
main battle tanks for the first time since the end of World War
II.
The committee strongly supports the Army's plan to acquire
the Future Combat Systems for its transformation to the
Objective Force. However, the committee is equally strong in
its support for efforts to recapitalize and selectively
modernize the heavy Counter-Attack Corps which will be the
basis of the Army's warfighting capability for the next 10 to
20 years until the Objective Force systems are fielded in
sufficient numbers to assume that responsibility.
Current Army plans are to retrofit only 419 of the
remaining 627 M1A2 tanks to the SEP configuration. The
resulting tank fleet will consist of 966 M1A2 SEP, 208 M1A2,
and over 4,000 M1A1 tanks. Three years ago the Army strongly
opposed a proposed plan that would have resulted in a similar
mix of three separate tank configurations, arguing emphatically
against the perceived operational and logistical difficulties
in supporting that mixture and urging the committee to ensure
that the M1A2 tank fleet would consist of only the SEP
configuration. Now the Army has apparently reversed its
position with what the committee fears is little consideration
of the Army's own former arguments against such a mixture.
The committee does not understand the rationale for
maintaining 208 M1A2 tanks not modernized to the SEP
configuration, nor does it understand the slow pace of the SEP
retrofit program. The committee is also concerned with the
limited funding being applied to the electronic obsolescence
problem in the tank fleet and to continued updating of the
digitization systems in the M1A2 SEP tanks.
The committee directs the Army to present to the
congressional defense committees, no later than March 30, 2003,
a plan to accelerate the SEP retrofit program, including the
upgrade of the entire fleet of 627 M1A2 tanks by fiscal year
2009, and to establish an adequate obsolescence management and
technology insertion program. This plan should consider all
innovative acquisition means, including a multiyear procurement
and modernization through spares of electronic modules.
Accelerated chemical demilitarization
The budget request included $1.5 billion for Chemical
Agents and Munitions Destruction. This level of funding
supports the schedule and cost estimated by the Defense
Acquisition Board in 2001 for the chemical demilitarization
program. Since that cost estimate, and since the fiscal year
2003 budget submission was finalized, the Department of Defense
approved a new plan for accelerated destruction of chemical
agents at the Aberdeen Chemical Agent Disposal Facility. In
addition, the Army, which serves as the executive agent for
chemical demilitarization, developed a proposal for accelerated
destruction and reconfiguration at other chemical stockpile
sites in order to reduce or eliminate the risk of a terrorist
attack against them.
If fully implemented, accelerated destruction could reduce
the schedule for destruction of chemical agents at some sites
by an estimated three to five years and could produce life
cycle cost savings estimated as high as $3.0 billion.
Accelerated destruction could also permit the United States to
meet its Chemical Weapons Convention destruction deadline for
almost all of its stockpile sites instead of being five or more
years out of compliance as is now projected.
The Department of Defense included a request for $300.0
million for accelerated chemical demilitarization in its
fiscalyear 2002 supplemental budget request to the Office of Management
and Budget (OMB), but the proposed funding was not approved by OMB.
The committee believes that accelerated demilitarization of
chemical weapons and agents is in the national security
interest and urges the Department of Defense to identify funds
to implement accelerated destruction, possibly through a
reprogramming request or a supplemental budget request.
Chemical demilitarization secondary waste disposal
An important element of the chemical demilitarization
program is the safe and efficient disposal of the contaminated
by-products of the chemical weapons destruction process. By-
products, otherwise referred to as ``secondary waste,'' include
contaminated charcoal, haloginated plastics, brines, dunnage,
and spent decontamination solution. The committee notes that
States with chemical weapons stockpiles are working
individually with the Department of the Army to resolve
secondary waste disposal issues. As a result, the commencement
and execution of the chemical demilitarization activities at
several destruction sites are directly related to the selection
of the means by which to dispose of secondary waste.
The safe and timely destruction of the chemical stockpile
remains the primary goal of the chemical demilitarization
program. Therefore, the committee urges the Department of the
Army to continue to work with these States to identify and
implement solutions for the disposal of secondary waste using
appropriate processes.
Acquisition programs at the National Security Agency
The Senate report accompanying S. 1438 (S. Rept. 107-62)
raised several concerns about acquisition programs at the
National Security Agency (NSA). The report noted that the
Director of the NSA has made progress in transforming the NSA.
The report, however, expressed concern that more progress needs
to be made in the NSA processes if the NSA is to achieve the
capabilities that the Nation will require.
The statement of managers accompanying S. 1438 (Conf. Rpt.
107-333) identified a number of specific actions to help
improve the situation at the NSA. The statement of managers
also expressed the view that the NSA should seek the advice of
independent, outside experts to assist in guiding its selection
of technologies under this baselining effort. The statement of
managers concluded that, unless the Office of the Secretary of
Defense (OSD), the Community Management Staff (CMS), and the
NSA complete the baselining by December 1, 2002, Congress would
direct that the NSA's modernization effort be designated a
major defense acquisition program, with milestone decision
authority likely residing with the Under Secretary of Defense
for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics until initial
operational capability (IOC) is achieved.
The committee believes that, although the NSA has been
making some progress since last year, much remains to be done.
The committee encourages the NSA, the OSD and the CMS to make
greater progress before December 1, 2002.
Advanced Aviation Institutional Training Simulator
The budget request included $111.7 million for non-system
training devices such as the Multiple Integrated Laser
Engagement System 2000 and the Engagement Skills Trainer. In
the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2002,
Congress authorized $5.0 million for the procurement of
Advanced Aviation Institutional Training Simulators (AAITS),
yet the Army did not request funding for AAITS in the fiscal
year 2003 budget request. The committee understands that AAITS
provides full-motion, reconfigurable cockpit simulation for AH-
64 Apache, UH-60 Blackhawk, and the OH-58C/D Kiowa Warrior
helicopters. The committee believes that the Army should
maximize the use of training simulators and encourages the Army
to consider the AAITS as a training platform to improve aviator
student safety upon transition to the actual aircraft.
Armored Security Vehicle
The budget request included $14.6 million for the Armored
Security Vehicle (ASV). The Army has decided to terminate the
ASV program after completion of the multiyear contract in
fiscal year 2003. At that time, the Army will have
approximately 100 ASVs, well short of the 602 required for the
Counter-Attack Corps and the forward deployed units in Korea
and Europe, and far from the total requirement of 1940.
By any standard, the ASV has been a success. The vehicle
provides ample protection for soldiers in military police units
from anti-personnel land mines and from small arms and crew-
served weapons fire, a serious threat to a soldier standing in
the unprotected turret of a High Mobility Multi-purpose Wheeled
Vehicle, the Army's alternative military police vehicle. The
ASV can protect the crew against anti-personnel mines; .50-
caliber, armor-piercing machine gun fire; and 155-millimeter
artillery fire at 15 meters. It is strategically mobile, able
to deploy on a C-130 aircraft with 95 percent of its fuel and
ammunition. Finally, the tactical mobility of the ASV is
atleast equal to, and in some aspects greater than, that of the Interim
Armored Vehicle, a program on which the Army plans to spend over $6.0
billion.
The committee does not understand the Army's decision to
terminate the ASV and directs the Chief of Staff of the Army to
fully justify the Army's position to the congressional defense
committees no later than March 30, 2003.
Hydra 70 rocket
The budget request included $22.4 million for the Hydra 70
rocket system, an 83 percent reduction from the fiscal year
2002 appropriated level. The Army directed this reduction in
conjunction with the planned termination of the program in
fiscal year 2004. The Army's intent is to replace the Hydra 70
rocket with the Advanced Precision Kill Weapon System (APKWS).
The committee notes, however, that the APKWS, currently in
research and development, is not scheduled to be available
until 2008 at the earliest.
In the interim, the Army's plan is to decrease training to
extend the existing Hydra 70 inventory until the APKWS becomes
available. The full training requirements for Army units call
for an annual expenditure of 179,000 rounds of Hydra 70; at
this rate, the Army's Hydra 70 inventory would be depleted by
2004.
Compounding the risk associated with planned training
shortfalls, the war on terrorism has further accelerated the
draw on existing Hydra 70 stocks. During operations in
Afghanistan, special forces and regular military units have
relied heavily on the Hydra 70 rocket system to provide fire
support to forces on the ground.
Given the importance of the Hydra 70 rocket to both
training and warfighting, the committee does not understand the
Army's plan to terminate the Hydra 70 program. The committee
finds that the Army may be incurring a significantly high level
of risk by this action. Therefore, the committee directs the
Chief of Staff of the Army to fully justify the Army's position
to the congressional defense committees no later than March 30,
2003.
Vessels for tactical sealift
The Army and Navy are leasing a commercially built, high-
speed vessel for experiments and exercises which gather data
and test the military utility and suitability of high-speed
vessel concepts, sea-keeping, and tactics. The Marine Corps is
leasing a similar vessel for intra-theater tactical lift in the
Western Pacific. The Department of Defense will use information
collected from all three of these efforts to assist in
determining the requirements for tactical sealift vessels for
the future.
These analyses could very well point toward the need to
build some hull form never before constructed in a U.S.
shipyard. If this were the case, the Department and the U.S.
shipbuilding industry might need to use a different acquisition
strategy in acquiring the vessels, including taking steps to
develop the skilled trades required to design and build such
vessels. If the Department were to decide on a hull form never
before constructed in a U.S. shipyard, the committee would
encourage the Army, Navy, and Marine Corps to consider a wider
range of acquisition strategies that would reduce risk in
acquiring a brand-new type of ship.
TITLE II--RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST, AND EVALUATION
Explanation of tables
The following tables provide the program-level detailed
guidance for the funding authorized in title II of this Act.
The tables also display the funding requested by the
administration in the fiscal year 2003 budget request for
research, development, test and evaluation programs and
indicate those programs for which the committee either
increased or decreased the requested amounts. As in the past,
the administration may not exceed the authorized amounts (as
set forth in the tables or, if unchanged from the
administration request, as set forth in the Department of
Defense's budget justification documents) without a
reprogramming action in accordance with established procedures.
Unless noted in the report, funding changes to the budget
request are made without prejudice.
Funds transferred to the accounts in this title from the
Defense Emergency Response Fund (DERF) are displayed on the
tables that follow as increases to the amount requested for
those programs in the research and development accounts.
Programs for which funds were transferred from the DERF are
annotated to indicate that funds were originally requested in
the DERF.
SUBTITLE A--AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS
SUBTITLE B--PROGRAM REQUIREMENTS, RESTRICTIONS, AND LIMITATIONS
Basic seismic research program for support of national
requirements for monitoring nuclear explosions (sec. 211)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of the Air Force, through the Director of the Air
Force Research Laboratory, to manage the Department of Defense
program of basic seismic research to support U.S. national
requirements for monitoring nuclear explosions. The provision
would authorize $20.0 million for this research program.
The budget request included $37.6 million for Arms Control
Technology in PE 63711BR, a reduction of $25.3 million from the
previous year. The amount requested includes $4.0 million for
the seismic research program, which is not sufficient funding
to ensure mission accomplishment. The committee provision would
authorize $20.0 million of this funding for the seismic
research program needed to support the national requirement to
monitor nuclear explosions.
For more than 50 years, the Air Force has had a unique
mission requirement to monitor nuclear explosions around the
world. This mission is assigned to the Air Force Technical
Applications Center (AFTAC) at Patrick Air Force Base in
Florida. Since the mid-1990s, newly validated national
requirements have substantially lowered the mandated thresholds
for detecting, locating, and identifying nuclear explosions. In
order to meet these challenging requirements, AFTAC is
currently implementing a program to build high frequency
seismic arrays to monitor areas of national interest. This
program will roughly double the size of the operational U.S.
seismic network.
In order to meet the national requirement to monitor
nuclear explosions, it is necessary to conduct basic seismic
research to understand the geology and seismic characteristics
of each region of concern. This understanding is essential in
order to calibrate each seismic array so the data they receive
can be interpreted correctly. For nearly 40 years, the Air
Force has managed this basic seismic research program, which is
conducted by numerous universities with geological and seismic
expertise.
Since this program was transferred to the Department of
Defense in fiscal year 1997, funding requests by the Department
for this essential research have been insufficient, and the
program has relied on additional funds provided by Congress to
ensure that the mission could be accomplished adequately.
The committee believes $20.0 million is the proper level
offunding to ensure mission accomplishment and urges the Department to
program adequate and stable funding in the future to perform this
essential seismic research mission supporting a critical national
requirement.
Advanced SEAL Delivery System (sec. 212)
The budget request included $56.5 million for procurement
associated with the Advanced SEAL Delivery System (ASDS),
including $21.8 million for ASDS procurement and $34.7 million
for ASDS advance procurement. The ASDS is a miniature,
combatant submarine being developed for the covert delivery of
naval special operations forces. Unlike existing SEAL delivery
vehicles, it transports Navy SEALs to longer ranges in a dry
environment, enhancing the operators' ability to perform. The
system includes the ASDS mini-sub and transport equipment.
Significant technical and financial problems continue to
plague this program. The National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2000 required the Department of Defense to review
this program and consider elevating it to a higher level of
acquisition review. The Department conducted a review and
instituted a more rigorous oversight mechanism but has yet to
conduct the overarching integrated product team review of the
ASDS program, which had been scheduled for this year. The
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2002
directed the Comptroller General to review the ASDS program.
The Comptroller General's review of the program indicated that
the ASDS program continues to experience problems associated
with performance, technical issues, mission requirements, and
cost and schedule, which, if not resolved, could lead to
further cost growth, schedule delays, and an inability to meet
program objectives.
The committee recognizes the technical challenges
associated with developing and fielding this unique system and
continues to support the overall effort to develop a mini-
submarine, given the potential value of such a vehicle for
naval special warfare missions. The committee is increasingly
concerned, however, about the program's technological, cost,
and scheduling problems. The committee does not believe that
funding advance procurement items related to the second boat
and procuring sonar for the second boat are justified until
problems with the first boat are resolved.
Therefore, the committee recommends a decrease of $34.7
million in the ASDS advance procurement and a decrease of $5.0
million in the ASDS procurement. In addition, the program has
yet to obligate the $13.7 million in fiscal year 2002 advance
procurement for items associated with purchasing the second
boat. Again, due to the fact that the program has not been able
to resolve the problems associated with the first boat, the
committee believes that there is no justification for spending
fiscal year 2002 funds on procurement for the second boat.
Therefore, the committee recommends a provision that would
allow the Secretary of Defense to use funds that were
authorized and appropriated for fiscal year 2002 for ASDS
advance procurement, but are no longer needed for that purpose,
for ASDS research and development in the Special Operations
Tactical Systems Development program, PE 11644BB, and for ASDS
procurement activities associated with the first boat; the use
of these funds would be subject to an action in an
appropriations act. The committee also recommends a reduction
of the $12.2 million in the budget request for ASDS research
and development in the Special Operations Tactical Systems
Development program, PE 11644BB, and a $1.5 million reduction
in the budget request for ASDS procurement to reflect the use
of these funds available from fiscal year 2002.
In order to encourage development of a solution to these
technical problems, especially those associated with the
batteries, the committee also recommends an increase of $12.0
million for ASDS procurement for purchase of a lithium ion
battery set for the first boat. The committee believes,
however, that the program requires more attention from the
Commander in Chief, Special Operations Command; the Navy; and
the Office of the Secretary of Defense. The committee,
therefore, recommends that no more than 50 percent of the
fiscal year 2003 ASDS procurement funding (excluding the amount
of $12.0 million added for the battery set) be released before
the Secretary of Defense conducts a complete review of the
requirements, mission, management, and cost structure of the
ASDS program and reports to the congressional defense
committees on his findings.
Army experimentation program regarding design of the Objective Force
(sec. 213)
Section 113 of the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2002 requires the Secretary of the Army to develop
and provide resources for an experimentation program that will
provide information on the design of the Objective Force and
will include the formal linkage of the interim brigade combat
teams to that experimentation. The committee considers such an
experimentation program to be of critical importance to the
successful transformation of the Army to the Objective Force
and is concerned that the Secretary of the Army has not taken
concrete steps to comply with that legislation. Therefore, the
committee recommends a provision that would require
theSecretary of the Army to submit a report to Congress on the details
of the experimentation program no later than March 30, 2003, and to
fund that experimentation program as a separate program element in the
fiscal year 2004 budget request submission to Congress.
SUBTITLE C--MISSILE DEFENSE PROGRAMS
Annual operational assessments and reviews of ballistic missile defense
program (sec. 221)
The Missile Defense Agency has discussed the possibility of
``contingency deployments'' of a number of ballistic missile
defense systems in the 2004 time frame, including the Ground-
based Midcourse, Sea-based Midcourse, Theater High Altitude
Area Defense (THAAD), and Air-based Boost (or Airborne Laser)
systems. The committee believes that before a decision on
``contingency deployment'' is made, the Department of Defense
should have the best possible information on the potential
operational effectiveness of the candidate system. Therefore,
the committee recommends a provision that would require the
Director of Operational Test and Evaluation (DOT&E) to conduct
annual operational assessments of the ballistic missile defense
systems discussed above and report the results of these
assessments to the Secretary of Defense and Congress by January
15 of each year, beginning in 2003.
In testimony to the committee on March 7, 2002, the
committee chairman asked each of the military service chiefs
whether he had been consulted on the Department's missile
defense budget for fiscal year 2003; each responded that he had
not. The committee is concerned that under the new Missile
Defense Agency organization, the military services have not
been afforded the opportunity to provide the proper guidance
and advice on the missile defense budget. Therefore, this
provision would direct the Joint Requirements Oversight Council
(JROC) to review annually the cost, schedule and performance
criteria for all Missile Defense Agency programs and assess the
validity of the criteria in relation to military requirements.
The provision would require the JROC to report the results of
this review to the Secretary of Defense and Congress by January
15 of each year, beginning in 2003.
Report on Midcourse Defense program (sec. 222)
In a January 2, 2002 memorandum from the Secretary of
Defense restructuring the Department's ballistic missile
defense programs, the Secretary stated that the ``special
nature of missile defense development, operations, and support
calls for non-standard approaches to both acquisition and
requirements generation.'' As such, the Secretary has exempted
missile defense programs from the Department's traditional
acquisition directives and processes that require certain
programmatic information be developed to assist in oversight of
programs within the Department.
The committee is concerned that the exemption of missile
defense programs from these acquisition processes has also
resulted in the elimination of certain reports to Congress on
missile defense programs. These reports are critical to
congressional understanding and oversight for missile defense
programs, and are required for all other major defense
acquisition programs. One of the most important ballistic
missile defense programs affected by the exemption is the
Midcourse Defense program, which includes both the Ground-based
national missile defense system and the Sea-based Midcourse
system (formerly known as Navy Theater-Wide). The committee,
therefore, recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Defense to submit to Congress, by January 15,
2003, certain types of programmatic information for the Ground-
based Midcourse program which are required by sections 2431 and
2432 of title 10 United States Code for all major defense
acquisition programs and are critical to congressional review
and oversight.
Until the fiscal year 2002 budget submission, all
information required by sections 2431 and 2432 of title 10,
United States Code had been submitted to Congress for all major
ballistic missile defense programs. However, neither the fiscal
year 2002 budget submission nor the fiscal year 2003 submission
included such information. Both the Under Secretary of Defense
for Acquisition, Technology and Logistics Pete Aldridge and the
Director of the Missile Defense Agency Lieutenant General
Ronald Kadish have testified to the committee that they intend
to provide Congress with the information it needs. This
committee provision, therefore, would establish the minimum
congressional requirements for information on the Midcourse
Defense program.
Section 2431 of title 10, United States Code requires the
Secretary of Defense to submit to Congress, along with the
budget justification, documentation regarding the development
and procurement schedules for each weapons system for which
funding is requested. The required documentation includes the
following:
(1) the development schedule, including estimated
annual costs until development is completed; and
(2) the planned procurement schedule, including the
best estimate by the Secretary of Defense of the annual
costs and units to be procured until procurement is
completed.
This provision would require that this information be provided
for the Midcourse Defense program.
Section 2432 of title 10, United States Code requires the
Secretary of Defense to submit to Congress at the end of each
quarter of each fiscal year a report on current major defense
acquisition programs, including the current estimate of program
acquisition unit costs, the reasons for any changes in that
estimate, and the major contracts under the program together
with the reasons for any changes in cost or schedule variances
under those contracts. Additionally, section 2430 of title 10,
United States Code defines major defense acquisition programs
to include those acquisition programs estimated by the
Secretary of Defense to require an eventual total expenditure
for research, development, test and evaluation of more than
$300.0 million. The budget request for the Midcourse Defense
program exceeds $3.0 billion for fiscal year 2003 alone.
Therefore, the committee provision would require that this
information be provided for the Midcourse Defense program.
Finally, section 149 of title 10, United States Code
establishes the Director of Operational Test and Evaluation
(DOT&E) as the principal advisor to the Secretary of Defense
and the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology
and Logistics on operational test and evaluation. A primary
function for the DOT&E is oversight of the development of the
Test and Evaluation Master Plan (TEMP) for major defense
acquisition programs in accordance with Department of Defense
regulations. The committee provision would require that the
TEMP for the Ground-based Midcourse program be developed in
accordance with Departmental regulations and subsequently
provided to Congress.
Report on Air-based Boost program (sec. 223)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Defense to submit to Congress, by January 15,
2003, certain types of programmatic information for the Air-
based Boost (formerly known as the Airborne Laser) program
which are required by sections 2431 and 2432 of title 10 of the
United States Code for all major defense acquisition programs
and are critical to congressional understanding and oversight.
The Air-based Boost program is a well established program
which the Department of Defense has stated could be ready for
``contingency deployment'' within the next few years and for
which almost $600.0 million has been requested in fiscal year
2003. No detailed information on the plans for this program has
been submitted to Congress, however, in either the fiscal year
2002 or 2003 budget submissions. The information required by
this provision for the Air-based Boost program would be the
same as required by section 222 of the committee bill for the
Midcourse Defense program.
Report on Theater High Altitude Air Defense (THAAD) program (sec. 224)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Defense to submit to Congress by January 15, 2003,
certain types of programmatic information for the THAAD program
which are required by sections 2431 and 2432 of title 10 of the
United States Code for all major defense acquisition programs
and are critical to congressional understanding and oversight.
The information required by this provision for THAAD would be
the same as required by section 222 for the Midcourse Defense
program.
THAAD is a well established program which the Department of
Defense has stated could be ready for ``contingency
deployment'' within the next few years and for which more than
$900.0 million has been requested in fiscal year 2003. No
detailed information on the plans for this program, however,
has been submitted to Congress in either the fiscal year 2002
or 2003 budget submissions.
Section 232 of the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2002 specifically required the Secretary of Defense
to submit to Congress by February 1, 2002, the estimated total
life cycle costs for each ballistic missile defense program
which enters Engineering and Manufacturing Development (EMD).
The Department has failed to provide such information for THAAD
even though THAAD entered into EMD in calendar year 2000. In
addition, the Department has failed to provide estimated total
life cycle costs for THAAD despite repeated requests from
Congress, including a letter to the Under Secretary of Defense
for Acquisition, Technology and Logistics from the Committee on
Armed Services chairman and the Strategic Subcommittee chairman
requesting such information.
Therefore, the recommended provision would place a funding
limitation on the THAAD program: no more than 50 percent of the
amount authorized to be appropriated in fiscal year 2003 for
THAAD may be expended until Congress has received the
information required by the provision.
References to new name for Ballistic Missile Defense Organization (sec.
225)
In January 2002, the Secretary of Defense directed a
reorganization of the Department's missile defense programs
that included changing the name of the Ballistic Missile
Defense Organization (BMDO) to the Missile Defense Agency
(MDA).Therefore, the committee recommends a provision that
would amend existing provisions of law to refer to the MDA vice the
BMDO.
SUBTITLE D--IMPROVED MANAGEMENT OF DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE TEST AND
EVALUATION FACILITIES
The annual report of the Department of Defense (DOD)
Director of Operational Test and Evaluation for fiscal year
2001 concludes that inadequate funding of DOD test and
evaluation (T&E) infrastructure has led to inadequate testing
of major weapons systems. The Director's report states:
During the past decade while T&E infrastructure
resources were being reduced, we witnessed an alarming
trend of too many programs entering dedicated
operational T&E (OT&E) without having completed
sufficient developmental T&E (DT&E). As a result, the
services have conducted OT&E on immature systems and
the results reflect the consequences. In recent years,
66 percent of Air Force programs have stopped
operational testing due to a major system or safety
shortcoming. Since 1996, approximately 80 percent of
Army systems tested failed to achieve reliability
requirements during operational testing. * * * The
acquisition process fails to deliver systems to the
warfighter that meet reliability and effectiveness
requirements.
In section 913 of the National Defense Authorization Act
for Fiscal Year 2000, the committee required the Defense
Science Board (DSB) to assess the resources and capabilities of
the test and evaluation facilities of the Department of
Defense. The DSB report, issued in December 2000, supports the
Director's conclusion that the Department is no longer
conducting adequate testing of weapon systems. The DSB report
states:
1. Testing is not being conducted adequately--if systems
are not adequately tested they enter the inventory with latent
defects that can be very costly and can impact operational
effectiveness.
2. A particularly shocking finding is that there is growing
evidence that the acquisition system is not meeting
expectations as far as delivering high quality, reliable and
effective equipment to our military forces.
3. The lack of testing cannot be blamed on the lack of
facilities; however, limited infrastructure is a contributor to
the lack of interoperability testing.
4. There is an increasing incidence of test waivers.
5. The T&E process is not funded properly--in phasing or in
magnitude
a. Funds are not available early enough
b. Corners are cut in the testing that is done[.]
6. There is not enough government oversight of testing done
by industry. * * *
It appears that we too often fail to carry out adequate
testing. In those cases where the testing is adequate, we fail
to take the corrective actions needed based on the results of
that testing. In many cases, we allow our acquisition programs
to proceed to their next phases, such as moving from
development or technical testing to operational testing or
moving from development into production and deployment with our
combat forces, when the test results we have gathered clearly
indicate the systems are not ready.
The committee believes that the Department of Defense has
no greater duty than to ensure that the weapons systems that it
puts in the hands of our soldiers, sailors, airmen and marines
will operate as intended in combat situations. Adequate testing
of weapons systems is not an abstract concept: lives depend
upon it.
For this reason, the committee recommends a series of
provisions to implement the recommendations of the Director of
Operational Test and Evaluation and the report of the Defense
Science Board task force on test and evaluation capabilities.
Department of Defense Test and Evaluation Resource Enterprise (sec.
231)
The committee recommends a provision that would establish a
Department of Defense Test and Evaluation Resource Enterprise
(T&E/RE), which shall report to the Director of Operational
Test and Evaluation.
The Director of Operational Test and Evaluation stated in
his annual report for fiscal year 2001:
The current approach to managing the DOD T&E
infrastructure is through centralized oversight by
DOT&E and decentralized funding and management by the
Military Departments and Defense Agencies. Funding and
manpower levels for the individual ranges and centers
are programmed by the owning service, even though the
ranges may possess unique T&E capabilities which are
used primarily by the other services and defense
agencies. This approach has led to a reluctance by the
owning service to fully fund and sustain some of these
unique capabilities.
The Director noted that the establishment of a T&E/RE to
address this problem was the ``most significant
recommendation''of the December 2000 report of the Defense
Science Board task force on test and evaluation facilities. The task
force explained this recommendation as follows:
Extensive reduction in test facilities and personnel
has been pursued during the last five years.
Notwithstanding this necessary effort, unnecessary
duplication of capabilities exists in all three
services. * * *
[The] unwillingness of the services to provide
adequate resources for T&E [while] still maintain[ing]
substantial redundant capabilities suggests that a
change is needed.
The fundamental concern of T&E facility managers is
how [to] get enough money and manpower to continue
their operations. They compete with other activities
within their services for resources, and with other
activities both within their Services and outside for
``business'' support. This does not lead to long-range
business planning and, it is not possible for them to
make investment decisions based on future utilization
or business-like return on assets analyses. They have
little control over the ``business'' they manage and
are subject to highly variable budgeted support. * * *
Centralized, consolidated management of T&E facilities
within the Department of Defense could overcome many of
these serious problems.
The provision recommended by the committee would implement
the task force recommendation by establishing a centralized
T&E/RE, which would report to the Director of Operational Test
and Evaluation. Under this provision, funding for the
investment, operation and maintenance, development and
management of Major Range Test and Facility Base (MRTFB)
facilities and resources would be transferred to the new T&E/
RE. The T&E/RE would also be responsible for ensuring that test
planning and test execution is conducted by the appropriate
military service organizations. However, the day-to-day
operation and management of the test ranges and facilities and
the testing activities carried out at those ranges and
facilities would remain in the hands of the military services.
The provision would require that the new T&E/RE be
established within one year of the date of enactment. To ensure
central oversight over investments in the MRTFB, the provision
would require that the Director of Operational Test and
Evaluation approve all investments of $500,000 or more during
the one-year transition period.
Transfer of testing funds from program accounts to infrastructure
accounts (sec. 232)
The committee recommends a provision that would transfer
testing funds from the research and development programs of the
military departments and defense agencies to the major test and
evaluation investment accounts of the Department of Defense.
The Director of Operational Test and Evaluation stated in
his annual report for fiscal year 2001:
In the long run, increasing the tempo of testing will
require a shift in our current practices for funding
and managing test facilities and ranges. * * * At the
present time, defense programs must bear both the cost
of their tests and the overhead costs to maintain the
ranges. This has proven to be a disincentive to
testing. The cost to program managers has risen sharply
over the past decade as they take on the overhead costs
of the test ranges; as a result, program managers seek
to minimize the amount (and therefore the cost) of
testing. As they succeed, their success forces the
price even higher for each test. * * *
A recent analysis shows that about $2.4 billion in
test costs (previously funded in the MRTFB [Major Range
and Test Facility Base] institutional budgets) have
been shifted to the users since FY90. Eighty-five
percent of the shift occurred during the last five
years.
As institutional funds have fallen, the test ranges
and centers have sought to recover more costs from
users. The users, in turn, have reduced testing and
accepted additional risk to remain within their
budgets. Test adequacy has suffered as a consequence.
In FY01, the MRTFB charged an estimated $250 million
per year more to users than was charged to them prior
to FY90. Effectively, this means that, although users
in FY01 collectively paid the same amount as in FY90,
they were doing less testing.
The committee provision would address this problem by
shifting five-eighths of one percent of the budgets of the
military departments and defense agencies for Demonstration and
Validation, Engineering and Manufacturing Development, and
Operational Systems Development (approximately $250.0 million)
to the major test and evaluation investment accounts of the
Department. The specific transfers would be as follows:
For the Army: from Demonstration and Validation to PE
64759A, $5.0 million; from Engineering and Manufacturing
Development to PE 64759A, $18.0 million; from Operational
Systems Development to PE 64759A, $6.0 million.
For the Navy: from Demonstration and Validation to PE
64759N, $15.0 million; from Engineering and Manufacturing
Development to PE 64759N, $32.0 million; from Operational
Systems Development to PE 64759N, $17.0 million.
For the Air Force: from Demonstration and Validation to PE
64759F, $9.0 million; from Engineering and
ManufacturingDevelopment to PE 64759F, $27.0 million; from Operational
Systems Development to PE 64759F, $60.0 million.
For Defense-wide: from Demonstration and Validation to PE
64940D8Z, $37.0 million; from Engineering and Manufacturing
Development to PE 64940D8Z, $8.0 million; from Operational
Systems Development to PE 64940D8Z, $25.0 million.
The Committee expects that these transfers will not be
implemented as an across-the-board reduction on programs
undergoing demonstration and validation, engineering and
manufacturing development, or operational development, but will
instead be proportionally allocated to such programs on the
basis of the projected test and evaluation costs to be paid by
these programs.
The provision would also require the military services to
change their funding policies to ensure that users of the MRTFB
are charged only for the direct costs of testing and are no
longer required to pay for overhead costs. The committee
anticipates that the research and development programs of the
Department should recover a significant portion of the funds
transferred to the MRTFB investment accounts through lower
overhead rates charged for testing at MRTFB facilities.
However, any shortfall of funding resulting from this transfer
should not be taken directly from testing budgets of the
programs and shall not be used as a basis for reducing testing
requirements for any system. On the contrary, the committee
believes that the lower rates charged for testing at MRTFB
facilities should lead to increased testing of Department of
Defense systems.
The committee also recognizes that the elimination of
indirect costs could lead to increased funding needs in test
and evaluation accounts other than the investment accounts to
which funds would be transferred by this provision. The
committee urges the Department of Defense Comptroller, in
consultation with the Director of Operational Test and
Evaluation, to make any adjustments among the test and
evaluation accounts of the Department of Defense and the
military services that may be needed, pursuant to established
procedures, to ensure that the test ranges and facilities of
the Department are able to conduct required operations.
Increased investment in test and evaluation facilities (sec. 233)
The committee recommends a provision that would increase
the amount authorized to be appropriated for the Central Test
and Evaluation Investment Program (CTEIP) of the Department of
Defense (PE 64940D8Z) to $251.3 million, an increase of $128.0
million. The increase consists of $70.0 million transferred to
the CTEIP program by section 232; $50.0 million added to the
CTEIP program to increase the Department's overall level of
investment in its test and evaluation facilities; and $8.0
million that would be made available for specific technology
programs to support testing and evaluation, as described
elsewhere in this report.
Overall, the $251.3 million total provided by the committee
recommendations would more than double the amount of funding
available in the CTEIP account and the transfers and increases
made by this bill would more than double the funding available
in the test and evaluation (T&E) investment accounts of the
Department as a whole.
In his annual report for fiscal year 2001, the Director of
Operational Test and Evaluation identified significant
deficiencies in the Department's T&E infrastructure. The
Director's report states:
When the capabilities of the test ranges are compared
with requirements for testing current and future
systems, significant deficiencies are evident. They
limit the ability to conduct adequate testing of
weapons and support systems. Some of the more
significant deficiencies are:
Range infrastructure. * * * Miss distance and
attitude measurement systems lack adequate fidelity.
Instrumentation shortfalls include limited radar,
telemetry, and optical equipment assets to support
multiple simultaneous engagements and insufficient
instrumentation to track multiple vehicles. There are
no chemical-biological test chambers large enough to
accommodate complete systems. A replacement for the
self-defense test ship is needed to retain the
capability to demonstrate surface ship cruise missile
defense systems.
Targets and threat representations. Generally,
realistic targets are not available in sufficient
numbers to support the various weapon systems under
development. Representative targets for certain anti-
ship cruise missile threats are not available.
Deficiencies exist in the quantity and types of
ballistic missile defense targets. Threat
representation shortfalls have also been identified.
Needs include a vector-scoring capability on full-scale
targets and improved capability for testing infrared
missile engagements.
Realistic test environments. New-generation systems
have much more extensive operating footprints than
their predecessors and, therefore, need much larger
test ranges to support full-scale operational
scenarios. Space test capabilities are not sufficient to
meet space mission area testing requirements. Shallow water
ranges for undersea warfare testing are inadequate. Chemical
and biological simulators and simulants are not representative
of the threat. Generally, there is a lack of priority and
funding for testing of weapon systems in the extremes of their
natural operating environments.
Interoperability. Interfaces with other systems are
not included in many test plans. Many systems are
tested only on an individual basis. The failure to test
systems with complementary ones in combined scenarios
precludes effective assessment of their compatibility
and ability to operate together.
The committee believes that the increased funding levels
for the CTEIP program and the test and evaluation investment
and modernization accounts of the military services represent
the minimum level needed to address the serious infrastructure
problems identified in the Director's report. For this reason,
the committee urges the Department to maintain these funding
levels in future budget requests.
Uniform financial management system for Department of Defense test and
evaluation facilities (sec. 234)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Defense to implement a single financial management
and accounting system for all test and evaluation (T&E)
facilities of the Department of Defense (DOD).
Section 907 of the Strom Thurmond National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1999 required the Secretary
to develop a plan, including a schedule, for establishing a
cost-based management information system for DOD laboratories
and test and evaluation centers.
Despite this requirement, the annual report of the Director
of Operational Test and Evaluation for fiscal year 2001 states
that cost comparisons between the test and evaluation
facilities of military services are difficult ``because there
is no common financial management system among the services.''
The Defense Science Board (DSB) Task Force on Test and
Evaluation Capabilities strongly supports this conclusion in
its December 2000 report, which states:
The Task Force found each of the Services uses
different financial management methods to manage the
affairs of their facilities and recommends that DOD
implement a common financial management methodology for
all T&E facilities. * * *
Consistent financial management practices would ease
the problem of interservice range utilization and make
it possible to determine the value of making changes in
facilities usage. It would also facilitate more
efficient operations. At present we cannot measure
either input or output values. * * * Each service has a
different financial management system for T&E.
The provision recommended by the committee would implement
a recommendation of the DSB Task Force by requiring that the
Secretary establish a common financial management methodology
for all T&E facilities. The provision would require that the
new T&E financial management and accounting system be
consistent with the financial management enterprise
architecture developed by the Secretary pursuant to section
1006.
One of the objectives of the new financial management
methodology would be to enable the Department of Defense to
track the total cost of test and evaluation activities. The
committee recognizes that this total cost includes costs
incurred by activities outside the test and evaluation
facilities of the Department of Defense. The committee believes
that the financial management enterprise architecture developed
by the Department should enable the Department to track such
costs.
Test and evaluation workforce improvements (sec. 235)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology and
Logistics to develop a plan to ensure that the test and
evaluation (T&E) workforce of the Department of Defense (DOD)
is of sufficient size and has the expertise needed to ensure
that the testing of DOD systems identifies issues of military
suitability and effectiveness in a timely and accurate manner.
The Director of Operational Test and Evaluation stated in
his annual report for fiscal year 2001:
Infrastructure is not limited to facilities, but also
includes people and processes. The DSB [Defense Science
Board] Task Force learned that the issue of human
resources--how to attract and retain personnel with the
motivation and skill to serve and lead in civilian and
military capacities--is one of the most significant
concerns of the T&E community.
The demographics of T&E show that a large fraction of
its community will soon be eligible to retire. Further,
the downsizing over the last ten years has all but
precluded the recruiting of new talent. As a result,
the relationships established by our T&E community over
the years with universities and the hiring of graduates
with skills in new research areas have suffered.
The provision recommended by the committee would
implementone of the recommendations of the DSB Task Force on Test and
Evaluation Capabilities by requiring the Department to develop a
strategic plan for future human resource requirements of the DOD test
and evaluation community. The plan would establish the number and
qualifications of military and civilian personnel needed to properly
staff the test and evaluation community of the Department of Defense
and develop specific milestones for achieving a workforce with the
desired composition.
The committee expects the Department to conduct a thorough
review of the personnel system to identify any enhanced
personnel flexibility that may be needed to attract and retain
quality test and evaluation personnel. The committee notes that
section 4308 of the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 1996 authorized the Department to establish an
acquisition workforce demonstration project. This authority,
which enables the Department to waive certain regulatory
requirements and to utilize pay-banding approaches such as
those recommended by the Director of Operational Test and
Evaluation in his annual report, has been utilized only on a
small scale to date.
Compliance with test and evaluation master plan requirements (sec. 236)
The committee recommends a provision that would prohibit
unauthorized deviations from testing requirements.
The Director of Operational Test and Evaluation stated in
his annual report for fiscal year 2001:
The December 2000 Defense Science Board Report noted,
``The systems below Acquisition Category (ACAT) I in
the priority system are being fielded without adequate
testing. Even for the ACAT I programs there is growing
evidence that testing is not being done adequately.'' *
* *
One feature of current practice I seek to change is
the services' ability to waive tests without DOT&E
review and approval. The Defense Science Board strongly
recommended that Secretary of the Navy Instruction
5000.2B be modified to rule out waivers as a unilateral
action by the Service. The current policy allows
waivers from criteria for certification of readiness
for operational test (such as completion of the system
safety program) and waivers for deviation from testing
requirements directed by the Test and Evaluation Master
Plan.
In fact, the Defense Science Board (DSB) Task Force on Test
and Evaluation (T&E) Capabilities concluded, ``The process of
handling waivers seriously undermines the T&E process--and may
have already had negative impact on weapons systems.''
The provision recommended by the committee would implement
a recommendation of the DSB Task Force by requiring that any
deviation from the requirements of a Test and Evaluation Master
Plan be either: (1) approved through the same procedures
pursuant to which the Plan was established (including the
approval of the Director of Operational Test and Evaluation);
or (2) approved by the Secretary or Deputy Secretary of
Defense. This provision is not intended to preclude the
certifying official for operational test readiness from
approving a test ``limitation of scope'' where testing to
actual requirements would constitute a regulatory violation or
a safety hazard.
Report on implementation of Defense Science Board recommendations (sec.
237)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Defense to report on the implementation of the
recommendations of the December 2000 report of the Defense
Science Board (DSB) Task Force on Test and Evaluation
Capabilities.
In addition to the overarching recommendations that would
be implemented by the provisions of this subtitle, the DSB
Report contains a number of recommendations regarding specific
test and evaluation investments. These include recommendations
on frequency spectrum management, embedded instrumentation,
investment in targets, and the use of training facilities and
exercises for test and evaluation events. The committee
believes that these recommendations merit detailed review by
the Department.
SUBTITLE E--OTHER MATTERS
Pilot programs for revitalizing Department of Defense laboratories
(sec. 241)
The committee recommends a provision that would re-
authorize and expand a set of pilot programs aimed at improving
the quality of the Department of Defense (DOD) laboratories and
test and evaluation centers. In section 246 of the Strom
Thurmond National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year
1999 and section 245 of the National Defense Authorization Act
for Fiscal Year 2000, Congress authorized the Secretary of
Defense to establish pilot programs and, if necessary, waive
regulations in order to attract the finest quality, highly
trained technical talent to Department labs and test centers,
enable these facilities to adopt more business-like practices
to increase efficiency, and permit the establishment of new
cooperative programs with the private sector to promote
technologicalinnovation. The provision would re-authorize these
pilot programs for an additional three years.
The committee notes that support for these types of reforms
exists throughout the Department. In testimony to the Emerging
Threats and Capabilities subcommittee, the Director of Defense
Research and Engineering noted that he had requested an
extension of the pilot programs through Department channels. At
the same hearing, representatives of the military services all
highlighted the need to attract the best technical workforce
possible for the Department's science and technology
enterprise.
Despite this support, the committee notes with concern that
the Department has made limited progress in exploiting these
pilot programs. An Army briefing for the committee stated that,
``Between the personnel and legal communities we have been
effectively shut down.''
An October 2000 Defense Science Board study highlighted a
number of reasons that these pilot programs are critical for
the vitality of the labs and test centers. It noted that
``there is a clear relationship between the technical
capabilities of the laboratories and the capabilities of future
U.S. military forces.'' It concluded that ``personnel practices
of the Federal Civil Service System'' are the primary cause for
the defense labs' difficulty in recruiting and retaining high
quality staff. The committee provision seeks to assist the
Department in addressing these issues to support the
revitalization of the labs.
The committee's provisions would expand the existing
program so that the Secretary could make use of waivers to:
assist the labs in retaining and shaping the best possible
scientific and engineering workforce, enter into partnerships
to promote the education of the next generation of defense
technology specialists, and promote the defense technological
industrial base. The provision would also require the Secretary
to report on the barriers encountered in attempting to execute
the existing pilot programs and progress being made to overcome
the barriers. The committee directs the Secretary to coordinate
these reports between the Office of the Undersecretary of
Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics and the
Office of the Undersecretary of Defense for Personnel and
Readiness.
The committee directs the Comptroller General to review the
implementation and execution of the pilot programs. The review
shall examine the pilot programs and assess the extent of
utilization of the authorities, effects of the executed
programs in achieving stated revitalization goals, barriers to
implementation and execution, and recommendations for follow-on
actions or clarification of authorities.
Additionally, the provision would extend the authorities of
the pilot programs to leverage some of the opportunities that
arose during the limited implementation of the existing pilot
programs. The provision would authorize the Secretary to
establish a limited liability corporation as part of an
expansion of public-private partnerships involving the labs and
test centers. The committee believes that this type of
partnership is in the best interest of the Department and will
assist the labs and test centers in improving their technical
capabilities.
Finally, the provision would authorize the Secretary to
designate a total of no more than 30 scientific, technical, and
engineering positions across the organizations participating in
the pilot program as positions in the excepted service. This is
intended to allow the labs to attract the finest, highly
trained scientific and engineering talent available. In
testimony to the Emerging Threats and Capabilities
subcommittee, government officials contrasted the different
approaches that the Department of Defense, Department of
Energy, and National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) use
to fill technical positions. The witnesses noted that NNSA has
been authorized with a number of excepted service positions
that they are using to bring additional expertise into the
organization. This excepted service approach is already used by
a number of DOD organizations, including the Defense
Intelligence Agency and the service academies, and was
recommended by the service organizations participating in the
original pilot program.
Technology transition initiative (sec. 242)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Defense to carry out a technology transition
initiative to facilitate the rapid transition of new
technologies from science and technology programs of the
Department of Defense into acquisition programs for the
production of the technologies. The committee has had a long-
standing concern about the Department's ability to effectively
and efficiently transition technologies out of the laboratory
and into the hands of the warfighter. Successful and rapid
transition of revolutionary technologies into defense systems
is one of the central aspects of military transformation.
The committee notes that, historically, technology
transition has been stifled by three major issues: leadership,
organizational cooperation, and funding. Aggressive leadership
and championing of new technologies from the highest levels of
the Department is necessary to overcome organizational and
cultural barriers and effect real technological change. All
technology transition depends on the coordination of technology
developers, acquisition program managers, and military
users.Successful technology transition is often associated with
programs that have established innovative personnel and technical
exchanges, have entered into formal cooperative agreements, or have
made extensive use of technology demonstrations and experimentation.
Finally, it is critical that funding be available to transition science
and technology programs that have achieved required technological
maturity. Too often, the Department's budgeting process moves too
slowly to take advantage of transition opportunities, even if those
opportunities develop over a number of years and within funded
Department science and technology programs.
The committee commends the Department for initiating a
number of activities to support technology transition. The
Navy's Future Naval Capabilities Integrated Product Teams, Air
Force's Applied Technology Council, and the Advanced Concept
Technology Demonstrations (ACTDs) are excellent examples of
involving technology developers and users in the planning and
funding of new technologies in order to promote transition. The
Department's move toward spiral acquisition policies and
growing use of technology readiness levels are also supportive
of technology transition.
In testimony to the Emerging Threats and Capabilities
subcommittee, the Director of Defense Research and Engineering
highlighted the Department's ACTD program and Quick Reaction
fund as the centerpiece of the DOD technology transition
strategy. The committee supports these efforts, but notes that
the majority of technologies developed both inside and outside
of the Department cannot be transitioned through these limited
efforts. Therefore, the committee's recommended provision is
intended to broaden Departmental efforts at transition,
establish high-level leadership, promote organizational
cooperation, and provide funding for transition activities.
The provision requires the Secretary to (1) establish a
council comprised of organizations critical for successful
technology transition, in particular the science and technology
executives, service acquisition executives, and operational
users; (2) develop memoranda of agreement, joint funding
agreements, and other cooperative arrangements for the
transition of technologies into production; and (3) establish a
technology transition fund to carry out jointly-funded
technology transition projects with the military services.
The committee recommends that joint-funding of these
projects should be contingent upon the development of a
specific agreement between the science and technology,
acquisition, and operational requirements communities which
delineates technological maturity of the program, acquisition
strategy of the relevant acquisition program, and a preliminary
description of the concept of operational use of the technology
under consideration.
The committee directs each of the military services to
designate a senior official to serve as an advocate for
technology transition within the military service and to work
with the DOD Technology Transition Initiative Manager
designated pursuant to this provision. The senior technology
transition advocates in the military services should work to
identify and transition both technologies that are developed
within the DOD science and technology programs and technologies
that are developed in the private sector. The committee
recommends that the council meet at least semi-annually to
review candidate proposals.
The committee encourages the Initiative Manager to work
with the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Logistics, the
Commander of the Joint Forces Command, and the Director of
Operational Test and Evaluation as the council works to
evaluate proposals and transition technologies. Each of these
organization's areas of responsibility--logistics,
experimentation, and test and evaluation--are important factors
in developing a successful and rapid transition pathway. The
committee also notes that the transition of critical
logistical, sustainment and testing technologies are
increasingly important to reducing costs and improving the
efficiency of the Department of Defense.
Encouragement of small business and nontraditional defense contractors
to submit proposals potentially beneficial for combating
terrorism (sec. 243)
The committee recommends a provision that would create a
Small Business Outreach panel to enhance the Department's
ability to utilize small businesses and non-traditional defense
contracts as it works to develop technologies for combating
terrorism and weapons of mass destruction.
The committee notes that in the wake of the terrorist
activities in 2001, an overwhelming number of technology
developers have approached the Department of Defense, Office of
Homeland Security, and Congress with proposals for research or
technology in support of the war on terrorism. The Department's
broad agency announcement relating to combating terrorism
resulted in over 12,000 proposals, many of which have yet to be
given a formal technical evaluation and response.
The provision would establish a panel consisting of
government and private sector experts who would serve as the
Department's screening committee for technology proposals to
combating terrorism and weapons of mass destruction. The panel
would screen and evaluate research and development proposals
that it believes are likely to make a significant
contributionto the government's efforts to combat terrorism at home and
abroad. The committee understands that no panel can fairly be expected
to review 12,000 proposals and expects the panel members to apply their
professional expertise in screening proposals to determine which
submissions merit in-depth review.
The panel would make recommendations to the Under Secretary
of Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics on the
technical merits of proposals, potential contract sponsors
(military service or defense agency) within the Department,
recommended funding levels, and transition pathways.
The committee directs the Department to use all available
electronic commerce technology to carry out its activities,
including proposal submission, review, response to proposers,
and recommendations within the Department. This is consistent
with the Department's efforts to streamline its procedures and
make more use of electronic transactions in conducting
Department business.
The committee also recommends that the Department increase
its outreach efforts to small businesses and non-traditional
contractors. This part of the industrial base can and should
play a critical role in the development of technologies to
fight terrorism at home and overseas. This is evident in the
success that the Department has achieved in using the Small
Business Innovative Research (SBIR) program to fulfill some of
its technology development needs. The Committee directs the
Department to expand its outreach activities using web-based
tools, conferences, and other informational activities to
assist small innovative companies in understanding the
Department's technology goals, funding opportunities and
mechanisms, and management processes.
Vehicle fuel cell program (sec. 244)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Defense to carry out a cost-shared program to
identify and support technological advances that are necessary
to develop fuel cell technology for use in vehicles that would
be used by the Department of Defense. The committee recommends
$10.0 million to carry out the program and directs the
Secretary to conduct the program in cooperation with the
Secretary of Energy; other appropriate federal agencies,
including the Army; and private industry. The committee directs
the Secretary to ensure that at least half of the total cost of
the program be borne by industry, either in cash or in kind.
The vehicle fuel cell program shall include development of
vehicle propulsion technologies and fuel cell auxiliary power
units as well as pilot demonstration of such technologies as
appropriate. The program shall also include development of
technologies necessary to address critical issues such as
hydrogen storage and the need for a hydrogen fuel
infrastructure.
Over the last decade, the Department of Defense has
supported the development and utilization of fuel cell
technology in three broad areas: stationary power applications,
mobile applications, and other power applications. The
committee believes that significant benefits could be gained
from these existing programs that will have applications for
vehicle fuel cell technology. Important objectives of the
program established by this provision are to ensure that
critical technology advances are shared among the varied fuel
cell technology programs within the Department and other
federal agencies, and to ensure the maximum leverage of federal
funding for fuel cell technology development across this broad
spectrum.
To facilitate cooperation with industry and to leverage the
investments of both the federal government and the private
sector, the Secretary shall consider establishment of a Defense
Industry Fuel Cell Partnership. Significant advancements have
been made in the development of fuel cell technology, but the
committee believes that more could be accomplished if this work
is done in cooperation with private industry.
The committee directs the Secretary to submit a report to
the congressional defense committees no later than April 30,
2003, that describes how funding for the vehicle fuel cell
program will be expended in fiscal year 2003 and how the
program meets the objectives set forth in this provision.
Defense Nanotechnology Research and Development Program (sec. 245)
The committee recommends a provision that would establish a
comprehensive program to organize and coordinate nanoscale
research and development within the Department of Defense (DOD)
and with appropriate civilian agencies. The committee
recognizes the importance of advances in this field to the
genesis of revolutionary military technologies and to military
transformation.
The need for an integrated program in nanotechnology
research is predicated on two major considerations. The first
is the vast potential for new military capabilities to be
derived from nanoscale research and development. The list of
potentially transformative capabilities enabled by
nanotechnology extends to numerous defense needs, including
warfighter protection, mobility, information processing,
communication, energy, and cost- and size-reduction of weapons
systems. This potential makes the establishment of a dedicated
program to advance the field, develop applications,
andaccelerate the transition of nanoengineered products into the
services an imperative.
Secondly, the magnitude of DOD investment in nanoscale
research and development has tripled since 1998, reaching over
$200.0 million in the fiscal year 2003 budget request. This
request mirrors investment trends across the entire government
and internationally. Given the scale and scope of the DOD and
federal commitment to nanotechnology, the committee feels that
it is necessary to coordinate the various programs to ensure
completeness, balance, and the minimization of redundancy
within the nanotech- nology research portfolio.
The provision directs the Department to establish a set of
long-term challenges for nanotechnology research, which should
be coordinated with and modeled after the Grand Challenges
articulated by the National Nanotechnology Initiative.
Specifically, the challenges should represent broad goals or
capabilities related to national defense that are not yet
attainable given the present state of nanotechnology, but which
may be achieved within a time frame of several years to several
decades. These challenges will provide the operating framework
and benchmarks under which the program will be organized,
funded, and evaluated.
The committee directs that each challenge be comprised of a
set of specific technical goals, each with a lead service or
defense agency charged with organizing and coordinating
research and technology transition in that area. The committee
directs the Department to execute, as appropriate, memoranda of
agreement, joint funding agreements, and other cooperative
arrangements in order to optimize coordination and accomplish
program goals.
The provision requires an annual report to the Congress to
describe the program's research and coordination activities.
The report should review and assess the status and progress of
the program with respect to the established challenges and
technical goals; describe the funding levels for each service
and defense agency participating in the program; describe the
coordination between the research efforts within the program
and with those of civilian agencies and the private sector;
evaluate efforts at transitioning research, technologies, and
concepts into military products and uses; and recommend new
initiatives, programs, mechanisms for coordination, or other
activities that would facilitate the achievement of program
purposes.
The committee also recognizes the important role that
Information Analysis Centers (IAC) have played in data
collection, analysis, and dissemination within specific areas
of science and technology of relevance and interest to the
defense community. The committee believes that the
establishment of an IAC for defense nanotechnology would
substantially support the activities of the program, and
recommends that the Secretary of Defense consider instituting
such a center.
ADDITIONAL MATTERS OF INTEREST
Science and technology initiatives
The committee supports Department of Defense efforts to
transform itself to meet the emerging threats of the 21st
century. The committee feels that a robust defense science and
technology program is a requirement in order to develop the new
systems and operational concepts that will enable
transformation. Unmanned vehicles, satellite communications,
and precision weapons are transforming today's military. In the
same way, new systems based on nanotechnology, robotics, and
artificial intelligence will transform the military of the
future. To ensure that each wave of technological change is
sustainable and can be expanded upon, however, it is critical
to make the small but stable investments in fundamental and
applied research that produce the capabilities of the future.
The committee fully supports the Department's stated goal
of investing 3 percent of the defense budget into science and
technology programs. The fiscal year 2003 budget request fell
short of that goal. In fact, the budget request would decrease
the percentage of the budget invested in science and technology
each consecutive year, falling to 2.3 percent of the budget by
2007. The committee urges the Department and each of the
military services to achieve the 3 percent goal as soon as
practicable.
To support the transformation of the military, the
committee recommendations would provide over $170.0 million for
high priority science and technology programs above the amount
requested in the fiscal year 2003 budget. This includes over
$200.0 million in research to support the development of the
Army's Objective Force, with new technologies such as unmanned
ground vehicles, hybrid electric vehicles, and next generation
weapons systems. The committee recommends adding $23.5 million
to research programs to address corrosion problems in
platforms, weapons systems, and installations. This research
could eventually save the Department billions of dollars per
year in corrosion maintenance and repair costs.
The committee recommendations would provide an additional
$33.0 million for revolutionary research and technology to meet
future cyberthreats. The funding would include extensive
investments in scholarship programs to train the next
generation of information security specialists. The committee
notes that a limiting factor to technological transformation
will be theability to generate and deliver power on demand to
critical military assets. For this reason, the committee recommends an
increase of $41.0 million in research and development on revolutionary
power technologies.
The committee recommendations would also provide an
additional $34.0 million for nanotechnology investments. This
burgeoning scientific field has the promise to transform
technologies ranging from power systems to aerospace materials
to biological sensors. In addition, the committee
recommendations increase Department investments in basic
research by nearly $50.0 million. These fundamental research
programs are often performed in collaboration with universities
and national laboratories and help serve to train tomorrow's
scientific leaders.
In addition to these investments, the committee continues
to work to ensure that the Department gets the best return on
investment on research dollars. The committee recommendations
would provide an additional $25.0 million for the Department's
technology transition activities as well as establish a new
funding mechanism and coordinated process for rapid transition
of technologies from the laboratory to the battlefield.
The recommendations for authorization of appropriations for
fiscal year 2003 would continue the committee's tradition of
strongly supporting the defense science and technology
enterprise. By supporting strong research investments,
strengthening our defense laboratories, and working to speed
transition of technologies into operational systems, the
committee hopes to continue and accelerate the transformation
of the military.
Merit-based selection procedures
The committee notes that section 2304(j) of title 10,
United States Code, states that it is the policy of Congress
that any contract for a program, project, or technology
identified in legislation be entered into through merit-based
selection procedures. Section 2374 of title 10 establishes the
same policy for the award of any new grant for research,
development, test, or evaluation to a non-Federal Government
entity. Each of these provisions states that the presumption in
favor of competitive, merit-based awards may be overridden only
by a provision of law that specifically refers to section
2304(j) or section 2374, specifically identifies the particular
non-Federal Government entity involved, and specifically states
that the award to that entity is required notwithstanding the
policy favoring merit-based selection.
The committee is concerned that, despite the enactment of
section 2304(j) and section 2374, the Department of Defense
continues to award contracts and grants for research and
development programs and projects to specific entities without
the use of merit-based selection procedures. The committee
directs the Department to use all applicable procedures in the
award of any new contract, grant or other agreement entered
into with funds authorized to be appropriated by this title.
The committee directs the Department to make use of
memoranda of agreements, cost sharing, and other cooperative
arrangements as necessary to ensure that the funds authorized
to be appropriated by this title address defense technology
development goals in the most cost effective and technically
sound manner.
Army
Science and technology for the Objective Force
The Army's ability to meet an accelerated schedule to
deploy Future Combat Systems, Objective Force Warrior, and
other elements of the Objective Force depends on revolutionary
technologies being developed through science and technology
investments. The committee strongly supports the goals of Army
transformation and therefore recommends an increase of over
$200.0 million for science and technology investments to
support Army transformation.
The committee recommends an additional $20.0 million in PE
63005A for revolutionary vehicle technologies. Of this amount,
$7.5 million would be used to accelerate development of
components for hybrid electric drives and hybrid electric
vehicles, $5.0 million for robotic follower vehicles for
logistics support missions, and $7.5 million for enhanced
active protection systems for combat vehicles.
The committee recommends an additional $33.0 million in PE
63001A for Objective Force Warrior technologies. These funds
will develop enabling technologies that would reduce the load
and increase the lethality of the dismounted soldier.
Technologies to be developed include power sources, new
materials for body armor, head-mounted sensors, microrobotic
vehicles, signature management systems, portable water
purification technologies, communications systems, and
lightweight weapons and ammunition.
The committee recommends an additional $7.8 million in PE
63710A for advanced night vision technologies. Of this amount,
$5.0 million would be used for miniaturized sensors for micro
air vehicles, and $2.8 million for enhancing target recognition
capabilities of infrared sensor systems.
The committee recommends an additional $20.4 million for
new munitions technologies for the Objective Force. Of this
amount, $2.4 million would be added in PE 62624A for the
development of smaller, lighter, longer range, more lethal
warhead technologies, and $3.0 million would be added for the
development of revolutionary countermobility systems. An
additional $15.0 million would be added to PE 63313A for
development of long range, loitering missile technology.
The committee recommends an additional $2.5 million in PE
62786A for new technologies to support heavy airdrop missions.
The ability to deliver supplies and other payloads from high
altitudes with great precision is a critical part of a lighter,
rapidly deployable force.
The committee recommends an additional $7.5 million in PE
62712A for the development of airborne landmine detection
systems. Low false alarm rate, airborne minefield detection
systems would provide the speed and countermine capabilities
necessary for a highly mobile ground force.
Finally, the committee notes that the transformation of the
military will demand a transformed defense industrial base. The
committee recommends an increase of $7.0 million in PE 78045A
for new manufacturing technologies that will help affordably
meet the Future Combat System's accelerated schedule.
Technologies to be developed include manufacturing processes
for low-cost, uncooled infrared sensors, advanced armor
systems, microelectromechanical systems (MEMS), and new
munitions technologies.
The committee has recommended a number of additional
increases for science and technology projects that will support
the development of the Objective Force. These are described
elsewhere in the report.
The committee notes with concern that the acceleration in
the schedule for the fielding of components of the Objective
Force was not matched by increases in funding for supporting
science and technology programs. The Army must fully fund these
programs to ensure that transformation will not be limited,
incremental, and unsustainable.
Fundamental research for Army transformation
The budget request included $139.6 million in PE 61102A for
programs to perform the critical fundamental research that will
provide the foundation for Army transformation. The committee
recommends an additional $3.0 million for the development of
novel optoelectronic materials and devices for future
communication and display technologies; $1.0 million for
genetics research using animal models to identify critical
physiological differences in personnel that may affect mission
performance; and $4.0 million for research on predicting
terrain conditions in support of military operations.
The committee directs the Army to continue to support basic
research efforts and protect research investments, even in the
face of near-term incremental modernization needs and
operational costs.
Materials research for the Objective Force
The budget request included $74.9 million in PE 61104A for
university and industry research centers. The committee
recommends an increase of $4.0 million in basic research to
support the development of objective force technologies. Of
this amount, $2.5 million would be used for research in
modeling and simulation of armor materials design and laser-
based materials processing, and $1.5 million would be used for
thedevelopment of novel ferroelectric materials for
miniaturized microwave electronic devices.
Applied materials research for the Objective Force
The budget request included $18.7 million in PE 62105A for
applied research in materials technology. The committee
recommends an increase of $12.5 million for materials research
that would contribute to the development of the Objective
Force.
Of this amount, $4.0 million would be used for advanced
materials processing research in nanomaterials, polymer
composites, metals, ceramics, and superalloys; $2.5 million for
research on the reliability of electronic components in smart
munitions and ground vehicles; $3.0 million for the development
of new multifunctional composite materials and new simulation
tools for use in Future Combat Systems; and $3.0 million for
low-cost enabling processing technologies for multifunctional
materials.
Army missile research
The budget request included $31.9 million in PE 62303A for
applied research in missile technology. The committee
recommends an increase of $5.0 million for the development of
new technologies for the next generation of Army missile
systems. Of this amount, $3.0 million would be used for
research on enhanced radar and command and control technologies
to improve surveillance and fire control capabilities for short
range air defense missions. The remaining $2.0 million would be
used for development of lightweight composites for missile
chassis to reduce weight and increase the range of future
missile systems.
Interactive training technologies
The budget request included $20.6 million in PE 62308A for
applied research on advanced concepts and simulation. The
committee recommends an additional $2.5 million for the
development of interactive technologies to support training and
mission rehearsal exercises. The committee notes that this
program represents an excellent technology transition
opportunity building on the Army's work at the Institute for
Creative Technologies.
Advanced coatings research
The budget request included $55.8 million in PE 62601A for
applied research on automotive technologies. As part of an
overall initiative in corrosion research and development, the
committee recommends an increase of $1.5 million for
fundamental research to study corrosion and to develop
corrosion-resistant coatings.
Fastening and joining research
The budget request included $55.8 million in PE 62601A for
applied research on combat vehicles and automotive
technologies. The committee recommends an increase of $1.8
million to study and develop new fastening, adhesive, and
bonding technologies for improving the safety, quality, and
reliability of equipment and machinery in Army systems.
21st Century Truck
The budget request included no funding in PE 62601A for the
21st Century Truck program of the National Automotive Center
(NAC). The committee recommends an increase of $22.0 million
for this program.
Of this amount, $17.0 million would be provided for the
21st Century Truck base program, and $5.0 million would be
provided for continuation of work on hybrid technology under
the Commercially-Based Tactical Truck (COMBATT) program.
The 21st Century Truck program is one of several advanced
technology programs that is carried out by the NAC and cost-
shared with industry in support of the Army's transformation.
The primary function of 21st Century Truck is to accelerate
development and fielding of advanced, state-of-the-art
information and mobility technologies into the military's land
warfare systems.
The committee believes the 21st Century Truck program plays
a key role in the Army's transformation because of its
potential to reduce dramatically the fuel use and emissions of
medium and heavy trucks while maintaining or enhancing safety
and performance. Integration of advanced commercial
technologies, including alternative propulsion technologies,
into the Army's land warfare systems is a critical ingredient
for success of the Army's transformation.
Because of the importance of advanced technology
development to the Army's transformation and in order to
provide a basis for future decisions, the committee directs the
NAC to prepare a report that describes how its programs are
integrated into the Army's transformation plan. The NAC shall
submit the plan to the congressional defense committees by no
later than April 30, 2003.
Advanced manufacturing technology
The budget request included $55.8 million in PE 62601A for
applied research in combat vehicle and automotive technology.
The committee recommends an increase of $5.0 million for
research on the development of new automotive manufacturing
technologies, including developing advanced materials and
manufacturing processes, to support Objective Force vehicle
goals.
Tungsten penetrators
The budget request included $38.1 million in PE 62624A for
applied research in weapons and munitions technology. The
committee recommends an increase of $1.0 million for research
on tungsten penetrators for a variety of Future Combat Systems
applications. The committee notes that tungsten penetrator
materials have the potential to provide an alternative to
depleted uranium penetrators without reducing the lethality of
munitions.
Portable hybrid power systems
The budget request included $27.4 million in PE 62705A for
applied research in electronics and electronic devices. The
committee recommends an additional $2.0 million for the
development of small, high energy density power systems that
support development of personal soldier communications and
hybrid electric vehicles. The committee believes that new power
technologies are one of the fundamental drivers of Army
transformation and are critical to the development of both
Future Combat Systems and Objective Warrior technologies.
Landmine detection technologies
The budget request included $13.2 million in PE 62712A for
applied research on countermine systems. The Army has a
continuing mission to improve the speed and lower the false
alarm rate of landmine detection systems. The committee urges
the Army to continue to explore all possible technology
approaches to landmine detection including acoustic, nuclear,
and magnetic techniques. The committee recommends an increase
of $2.0 million to develop polymer-based, low-cost, landmine
detection systems, and an additional $3.0 million for acoustic
technologies for landmine detection.
Environmental restoration technologies
The budget request included $23.0 million in PE 62720A for
applied research to develop environmental technologies. The
committee recommends an increase of $4.0 million for applied
research on remediation technologies associated with recovered
unexploded ordnance.
Geosciences and atmospheric research
The budget request included $42.9 million in PE 62784A for
Military Engineering Technology. The committee recommends an
increase of $2.0 million for research in the environmental
sciences, including hydrometeorology, climatology, and remote
sensing data fusion techniques. The committee notes that
climate and terrain information resulting from geosciences and
meteorological research has been critical during operations in
Afghanistan.
Stationary fuel cell initiative
The budget request included $42.9 million in PE 62784A for
Military Engineering Technology. The committee recommends an
additional $10.0 million for the development of stationary fuel
cell systems to accelerate the deployment of high efficiency,
reliable, high-quality, environmentally benign power through
distributed generation systems.
Personal navigation for the Objective Force warrior
The budget request included $50.3 million in PE 63001A for
Warfighter Advanced Technology. The committee recommends an
increase of $5.0 million to develop microelectromechanical
systems (MEMS)-based combination inertial navigation systems
and global positioning system (INS/GPS) precision location
information systems to support soldiers operating in urban
environments. The committee recommends an additional $3.0
million for the development of ultrawideband sensor systems for
precise warfighter position and location tracking especially in
urban environments.
Unmanned aerial vehicle data links
The budget request included $45.4 million in PE 63003A for
Aviation Advanced Technology. The committee notes that recent
operations have highlighted the need for better integration of
unmanned vehicles into military operations, mobile command and
control, and increased situational awareness. Therefore, the
committee recommends an increase of $3.0 million to develop
data links for unmanned aerial vehicles.
Multi-fuel auxiliary power units
The budget request included $229.8 million in PE 63005A for
combat vehicles advanced technology development. The committee
recommends an increase of $3.0 million for research to develop
auxiliary power units capable of using a variety of military
fuels to support the development of smaller, lighter vehicles.
The committee notes that reducing the cost and logistical
burden of providing power to the battlefield is a key component
of Army transformation.
Combat vehicle technology
The budget request included $229.8 million in PE 63005A for
Combat Vehicle and Automotive Advanced Technology. The
committee recommends an increase of $8.0 million for research
and development on advanced combat vehicle technologies to
support the goals of Army transformation. Of this amount, $3.0
million would be used for research into corrosion control,
lightweight steels, weight and cost reduction, and vehicle
architecture optimization. The remaining $5.0 million would be
used for the expansion of the use of standardized product data
sets for design and life cycle support activities.
Mobile parts hospital
The budget request included $229.8 million in PE 63005A for
advanced automotive technologies. The committee recommends an
increase of $8.0 million for the development of a self-
contained, mobile manufacturing center that can produce spare
parts at the point of need. The committee notes that this type
of mobile maintenance and logistics support is critical to the
transformation of the Army into a lighter, more rapidly
deployable force.
Rapid prototyping
The budget request included $229.8 million in PE 63005A for
combat vehicles advanced technology development. The committee
recommends an increase of $2.0 million for research to develop
new rapid prototyping techniques for the design, development
and manufacturing of vehicle parts for future Army systems.
Aircrew coordination training
The budget request included $3.5 million in PE 63007A for
advanced technologies for manpower, personnel, and training.
The committee recommends an increase of $2.0 million for
aircrew coordination training.
Echelon surveillance and reconnaissance
The Defense Emergency Response Fund request included $20.0
million in PE 63125A to demonstrate echelons of surveillance
and reconnaissance via sensor suites. The committee recommends
a decrease of $5.0 million to this account, reflecting a
concern that this program is not part of the overall research
and development effort underway by the Army and the Defense
Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) to develop Future
Combat Systems technology. The committee recommends that
counterterrorism and force protection activities to develop
sensor networks be coordinated as part of broader joint and
Army efforts.
Proton Exchange Membrane Fuel Cell Demonstration
The budget request included $2.9 million for advanced
military engineering technologies. The committee recommends an
increase of $5.0 million in PE 63734A for the Army Proton
Exchange Membrane (PEM) Fuel Cell Demonstration program. New
power sources, including fuel cells, are a necessary component
of Army transformation.
Low-cost interceptor technology
Army theater air and missile defense long-range
interceptors are very capable, but expensive. While some cruise
missile threats are sophisticated, most are not, making it more
cost effective to deploy large numbers of lower-cost, less
capable interceptors for less sophisticated threats. The
committee agrees that the Low Cost Interceptor (LCI) technology
is necessary for theater air and missile defense. Therefore,
the committee recommends an additional $8.0 million for PE
63308A for the research and development of the LCI technology.
The proposed funding would promote proof-of-concept LCI flight
test demonstrations against a representative low-cost cruise
missile threat.
Supercluster Distributed Memory Technology
The computational resources needed to support the Army's
Theater Missile Defense (TMD) Computational Fluid Dynamics
(CFD) simulations significantly exceed the availability and
capability of existing supercomputers. Supercluster Distributed
Memory Technology (SDMT) interconnects a number of commercial,
high performance workstations into a parallel processing system
thatwould be tailored to the performance requirements of modern
CFD codes. CFD software codes have already been written for use with
SDMT, which would have the same power as a traditional supercomputer at
one-tenth the cost. The committee recognizes the importance of SDMT in
the Army's TMD CFD simulations. Therefore, the committee recommends an
increase of $4.0 million to PE 63308A for the development and research
of SDMT.
Family of Systems Simulation
The budget request included no funding in PE 63308A for
Army Family of System Simulation (FOSSIM). The committee
understands that FOSSIM provides a common infrastructure for
integrating simulation models for use in system level
engineering analysis as well as a laboratory environment for
simulations that support prototyping. As such, FOSSIM can
improve the fidelity of modeling and simulations for Army
theater air and missile defense systems and provide more
thorough assessments to support both operational effectiveness
and acquisition efficiency. To ensure the continuation of this
important effort, the committee recommends an increase of $2.0
million for FOSSIM.
Advanced Tank Armament System
The budget request included $124.1 million in PE 63653A for
Interim Armored Vehicle (IAV) design refinement efforts and for
live fire test and evaluation, initial operational test and
evaluation, and production qualification testing on the
nuclear, biological and chemical reconnaissance vehicle and the
mobile gun system. However, there was no funding requested for
the Common Remote Sensor Suite (CRS3) for the reconnaissance
vehicle and the fire support vehicle.
The current IAV cupola-mounted system limits the weapon
field of fire and the mission equipment package field of view,
requiring the soldier to operate both the primary weapon and
the mission equipment package from an exposed position. The
CRS3, however, allows the soldier to operate both the primary
weapon and the mission equipment package from under armor and
provides full 360-degree field of fire and field of view for
each system. This is a critical capability for soldier
protection and mission effectiveness.
Therefore, the committee recommends $3.0 million for the
Common Remote Sensor Suite, a total authorization of $127.1
million.
Army technology for environmental enhancement
The budget request included $9.3 million in PE 63779A for
demonstrations and validation of environmental quality
technology. The committee recommends an additional $1.0 million
to complete development and validation of the Managing Army
Technologies for Environmental Enhancement (MANATEE) program,
an integrated, environmental-monitoring, management and control
system. The purpose of MANATEE is to manage facility
capabilities to prevent hazardous waste spills and other
environmental compliance problems.
Javelin
The budget request included $0.5 million in PE 64611A for
Javelin Counter-Active Protection Systems (CAPS) software and
hardware improvements. The committee recommends an increase of
$6.5 million for the CAPS program, a total authorization of
$7.0 million.
Armored systems modernization--engineering development
The budget request included $59.9 million in PE 64645A to
begin system development and demonstration of the Future Combat
Systems (FCS), the centerpiece of the Army's transformation
effort to create the Objective Force. The committee believes
that transformation should be the Army's highest priority and
is concerned that the Army has not fully funded the necessary
research and development effort needed to effect that
transformation as quickly as possible. The committee fully
supports the Army's attempt to field FCS earlier than
previously envisioned, with a first unit equipped date of 2008
and an initial operational capability of 2010. The committee
therefore recommends an additional $105.0 million for FCS, a
total allocation of $164.9 million. This level of funding still
leaves the Army FCS program with a $95.0 million unfunded
research and development requirement for fiscal year 2003.
Joint Simulation System Core Program
The budget request included $24.2 million in PE 64738A for
the Joint Simulation System (JSIMS), the next generation
modeling and simulation tool to support training for the
commanders in chief, their components, Joint Task Force staffs,
other joint organizations, Department of Defense agencies, and
the services. The committee notes that additional funding is
required for further development of the Common Component
Workstation and therefore recommends an increase of $3.0
million for the Common Component Workstation portion of the
JSIMS Core Program, a total authorization of $27.2 million.
Automatic test equipment development
The budget request included $11.8 million in PE 64746A for
the development of automatic test equipment, including $7.1
million for the Army Diagnostics Improvement Program (ADIP).
ADIP is comprised of embedded diagnostics, the Health and Usage
Monitoring System (HUMS), and anticipatory maintenance. HUMS
enables self-diagnosis of an aviation platform and the
automatic notification of platform degradation or failure to
the commander and maintenance personnel. HUMS utilizes advances
in electronics, sensors, and automation to improve the speed
and accuracy of aviation equipment fault isolation resulting in
increased savings over the current labor-intensive process. The
Army has validated a potential for $1.1 billion in savings once
HUMS is procured and fielded. The committee notes that there is
a requirement for the HUMS program and urges the Army to
accelerate the development of HUMS. Therefore, the committee
recommends an increase of $4.0 million for the Health and Usage
Monitoring System, a total authorization of $15.8 million.
Multi-mode top attack threat simulators
The budget request included $15.3 million in PE 64256A for
threat simulator development. The committee recommends an
additional $3.0 million for the development and fielding of
realistic, top attack, indirect fire weapons system threat
simulators and virtual threat simulations. The committee notes
that advanced simulation technologies are critical for the
complex technology development and training programs that are
integral for Army transformation efforts.
Studies and analyses
The budget request included $22.1 million in PE 65103A for
the RAND Arroyo Center. The committee recommends a decrease of
$5.0 million to this account. The committee notes that the Army
had over $100.0 million in unfunded science and technology
requirements to support the development of the Objective Force.
The committee believes that these investments should be a
higher priority than further studies addressing the national
security debate.
Battle Labs cooperative research
The budget request included $22.6 million in PE 65326A for
the Concepts Experimentation Program. The committee recommends
an increase of $3.0 million for collaboration with university
researchers on the development of Future Combat Systems,
unmanned robotics, and new and legacy vehicle technologies. The
committee notes that collaboration between the Battle Labs and
the science and technology community and early experimentation
with new technologies and concepts of operation are critical
for technology transition and to accelerate the transformation
of the Army.
Aerostat for missile defense
Aerostat technology is used in the Joint Land Attack Cruise
Missile Defense Elevated Netted Sensor (JLENS) system, an
airborne sensor platform which would provide over-the-horizon
detection and tracking for land attack cruise missile defense.
However, the vulnerability of the JLENS aerostat in extreme
climatic conditions is a significant problem for the system.
The Aerostat Design and Manufacturing (ADAM) program advances
the performance of the aerostat in extreme conditions while
reducing costs. The committee agrees that ADAM is important to
the JLENS program and recommends an increase of $4.0 million in
PE 12419A for ADAM.
Aircraft engine component improvement program
The budget request included $3.7 million in PE 23752A to
develop, test, and qualify improvements to aircraft engine
components but included no funding to continue the work funded
in fiscal year 2002 to further develop the Universal Full
Authority Digital Engine Control (FADEC) and the Liquid-or-
Light-Air (LOLA) Boost Pump.
The Universal FADEC would apply to all current and future
Army turbine engines, significantly reducing procurement costs
while enhancing engine and aircraft operability. The Army
estimates that qualifying and installing the FADEC would result
in cost savings exceeding $100.0 million. More importantly, it
would greatly increase the safety of Army aviators through
reduced pilot workload.
Similarly, installing the LOLA Boost Pump would increase
the safety of Army aviators by preventing potential engine
flame-outs and onboard or post-crash fires. Cost savings are
estimated at $13.0 million for every $1.0 million invested.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $5.0
million to continue the development and qualification of a
Universal FADEC and an increase of $3.0 million to develop the
LOLA Boost Pump, a total authorization of $11.7 million.
Technology for language training
The Army is deficient in language specialists for certain
critical languages because many specialists are currently
dedicated to intelligence functions and therefore are
unavailable to interpret for operational personnel. Computer
software is being developed to aid these operational personnel
so that they can converse with inhabitants in the Central Asia
region. The software would translate and develop the vocabulary
of the operational personnel while they are deployed. The
committee agrees that the ability to communicate effectively
with people from Central Asian countries is imperative.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $5.2 million
in PE 33028A for development of the technology for specialized
field communication and language training for non-linguist
personnel in Central Asian languages.
Information Systems Security
The budget request included $71.9 million in PE 33140A for
the Information Systems Security program. The committee
recommends an increase of $3.5 million for the development of
information security systems which distribute, protect, and
fuse Army digitized information.
Navy
Robotic countermine technology
The budget request included $393.6 million in PE 61153N for
general research addressing naval applications. The committee
recommends an additional $3.0 million for research specific to
autonomous robotic countermine technology. This technology
would support the development of effective countermine
capabilities in very shallow water and in surf zones.
Marine mammal detection and mitigation
The budget request included $393.6 million in PE 61153N for
basic research to support naval applications. The committee
recommends an additional $2.0 million for basic research on a
system that would detect the presence of marine mammals and
take mitigating action to allow Navy sonar training in the open
sea and littorals to continue. This research is critical in
light of recent Navy studies that have indicated that active
sonar training may have a negative effect on marine mammals.
Corrosion research
The committee notes the huge expense incurred by the
Department of Defense annually to pay repair and maintenance
costs due to the effects of corrosion on platforms, weapons
systems, facilities, and other infrastructure. New research in
corrosion prevention technologies, including new materials,
paints, coatings, sensors for inspection and monitoring, and
manufacturing technologies can help to reduce these costs for
future systems and develop technologies that can be quickly
transitioned into operational systems. Fundamental research on
corrosion processes and corrosion mitigation technologies will
also serve in developing technologies for use in the commercial
sector as well as in training the next generation of corrosion
engineers.
In order to support these efforts, and as part of the
larger corrosion initiative described in Title III, the
committee recommends an increase of $23.5 million across the
Department of Defense in corrosion research. This includes an
increase of $5.0 million to PE 61153N for fundamental research
on corrosion processes and materials technologies to reduce
corrosion; $2.5 million in PE 63236N for the development of
glass technologies to improve the corrosion resistance of
metals; $2.5 million in PE62123N for research on coating
technologies and repair techniques to address corrosion
maintenance and airframe readiness issues; and an additional
$4.0 million in PE 63712N for the development of new
technologies and coordination of information on surface
coatings and their applications to naval systems.
The committee also recommends an additional $9.5 million in
Army and Air Force corrosion and coating research as described
elsewhere in the report.
Data fusion
The budget request included $89.3 million in PE 62123N for
Force Protection Applied Research. The committee recommends an
increase of $3.0 million for the development of a dedicated
data fusion processor and its algorithms, which will lead to
the ability to fuse hyperspectral and panchromatic data.
Advanced power systems
The budget request included $89.4 million in PE 62123N for
applied research in force protection technologies. The
committee recommends an additional $2.0 million for research on
materials, including power semiconductors and superconductors,
and control systems to support the development of the next
generation of all-electric power systems for the Navy.
Polymer composites research
The budget request included $89.4 million in PE 62123N for
applied research in force protection technologies. The
committee recommends an additional $1.0 million for research on
the design and manufacturing of fiber reinforced polymer
composites for naval applications.
Bioenvironmental hazards research
The budget request included $68.9 million in PE 63236N for
Warfighter Sustainment Applied Research. The committee
recommends an increase of $2.0 million for bioenvironmental
hazards research, including the development of biosensors and
biomarkers.
Navy materials research
The budget request included $68.9 million in PE 62236N for
applied research on warfighter sustainment technologies. The
committee recommends an increase of $2.0 million for applied
research on ceramic and carbon-based composite materials for
use in strategic missiles and hypersonic vehicles.
Electronics research for naval applications
The budget request included $56.3 million in PE 62271N for
applied research in radio frequency systems. The committee
recommends an increase of $12.5 million for applied research in
materials and electronics that will enable future naval
technologies. Of this amount, $2.5 million would be used for
research on wide bandgap semiconductor materials and devices
for application in advanced power electronics, communications,
and sensor systems; $3.0 million for research on high
brightness electron sources for vacuum electronics
applications; $2.5 million for silicon carbide materials and
device research; $1.5 million for advanced semiconductor
materials research for high power amplifiers; and $3.0 million
for the development of nanoscale magneto-electric structures
and devices for data storage and sensing applications.
Low acoustic signature motors and propulsors
The budget request included $71.3 million in PE 62747N for
applied research to support the development of undersea warfare
technologies. The committee recommends an increase of $3.5
million for research on high power battery systems, motors,
propulsors, and power converters for torpedoes.
Ship service fuel cell technology
The budget request included $57.6 million in PE 63123N for
Force Protection Advanced Technology. The committee supports
the development of energy-efficient power plants for future use
on naval vessels to reduce costs. The committee recommends an
increase of $2.0 million for the development of a ship service
fuel cell power plant to be deployed on future surface
combatants.
Unmanned surface vehicles
The budget request for the Defense Emergency Response Fund,
Counter Terrorism/Force Protection activity included $36.0
million for unmanned surface vessels (USVs). These funds would
be used to convert three existing rigid hull inflatable boats
(RHIBs) into USVs. The Navy believes that such vehicles could
be applied to force protection missions and intelligence,
surveillance and reconnaissance (ISR) activities. The Navy also
believes that such USVs could be outfitted with weapons to
provide security functions in naval harbor and port facilities.
Although the committee believes that these potential
applications are worth exploring, it is not clear why the Navy
needs to convert three RHIBs to USVs before developing the
concepts of operations and employment and before conducting a
more limited demonstration with a couple of such vessels.
Therefore, the committee recommends a decrease of $12.0 million
in this activity. The committee recommends that the remaining
$24.0 million be transferred to PE 63123N, as requested by the
Department.
Multifunction antenna systems
The budget request included $65.1 million in PE 63271N for
advanced technologies for radio frequency systems. The
committee recommends an additional $2.0 million for modeling
and hardware to support integrated multifunction antenna
technologies for current and future naval platforms.
Laser welding and cutting for ship manufacturing
The budget request included no funds in PE 63508N for
demonstration and validation of laser welding and cutting to
reduce the cost of building ships. A laser cutting technique
was proven through the maritime technology program as a viable
means of reducing the costs of preparing materials for naval
ship construction welding. The Navy is in the process of taking
the next step in applying laser cutting techniques to
challenging shapes for components for naval ships.
Improvements in laser welding and cutting technology have
the potential to reduce the cost of manufacturing the smaller
ship components that require more precision than larger sheets
of steel or aluminum. The current process that cuts small
components out of I-beams creates an amount of useless scrap
and is not precise. More effective use of laser welding and
cutting has the potential to reduce the scrap and cut precise
parts by cutting components from sheets of metal instead of I-
beams. Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $6.0
million in PE 63508N to continue the development and testing of
laser welding and cutting to reduce the cost of ship
construction.
Ocean modeling research for mine and expeditionary warfare
The budget request included $43.7 million in PE 63782N for
various mine and expeditionary warfare advanced technology
efforts, including ocean modeling and simulation to provide
concept-based assessments for organic mine countermeasures. The
committee recommends an increase of $3.0 million to expand the
network of sensors and continue ocean modeling research. The
Navy established a limited network of sensors for ocean
modeling and simulation to collect key information including
current and eddy flow, bottom contour and content, thermal
layer behavior, and cold water phenomena. The Navy needs
additional sensors toprovide effective undersea and
expeditionary warfare environmental information in the form of
situational awareness predictions for regional commanders in chief
(CINCs) and tactical commanders.
Aviation survivability
The budget request included $7.5 million in PE 63216N for
aviation survivability but included no funding for developing
the Navy's integrated common display helmet concept. This
helmet concept would consist of a common inner helmet shell to
which mission-specific equipment would attach, making it more
efficient for the Navy to field newer technologies. Such a
common helmet approach could help reduce stress on aircrews and
make it easier for the Navy to field newer technologies more
efficiently.
The committee recommends an increase of $4.0 million in PE
63216N for the development and flight evaluation of the Navy
common display helmet, a total authorization of $11.5 million
for aviation survivability. The committee also encourages the
Navy to take Air Force requirements into account in this
development to allow for joint service applications.
Gas turbine engine electric start to reduce ship maintenance
The budget request included no funds in PE 63513N for
demonstration and validation of an electric start system for
gas turbine engines on Navy ships. An electric start capability
has the potential to reduce maintenance costs and provide a
more flexible emergency start capability for gas turbine
generators and propulsion engines. Therefore, the committee
recommends an increase of $5.0 million in PE 63513N for the
development and test of electric start for gas turbine
generators and propulsion engines on Navy ships.
Surface vessel torpedo tubes
The budget request included no funds in PE 63513N for
developing better torpedo tube technology for surface ships.
The Navy has been managing a Small Business Innovative Research
(SBIR) project to develop a modular, gas generator launch
canister. This project is employing commercial, off-the-shelf
(COTS), automobile-style air bags for launch energy. Employing
such long shelf life COTS components could greatly reduce the
maintenance burden of keeping air flask-based torpedo tubes in
operational condition. Therefore, the committee recommends an
increase of $5.0 million in PE 63513N for the development of an
improved launch capability for surface vessel torpedo tubes.
Electromechanical actuators
The budget request included no funds for continuing a Small
Business Innovation Research (SBIR) initiative to replace
maintenance-intensive, hydraulic valve actuators with
electromechanical actuators. The SBIR program demonstrated the
potential for electromechanical actuators to increase
reliability, decrease maintenance, and reduce total operating
costs for ships and submarines. Therefore, the committee
recommends an increase of $1.9 million in PE 63561N to continue
the SBIR initiative to replace hydraulic actuators with
electromechanical actuators.
Reducing maintenance by improving brushes on electric motors
The budget request included $1.7 million in PE 63561N to
install a set of advanced metal fiber brushes on a ship service
motor generator set in a submarine. Metal fiber brushes have
demonstrated, through a Navy-sponsored, phase II Small Business
Innovative Research (SBIR) program, the capability to
significantly enhance performance and reduce maintenance costs
on Navy motors and generators. The systematic approach for
certifying the technology requires certification for varying
motor and generator capacities. Therefore, the committee
recommends an increase of $4.0 million to test and certify
advanced metal fiber brush technology to reduce maintenance and
improve reliability of motors and generators.
Reducing unspecified development
The budget request included $17.7 million in PE 63609N for
conventional fuze and warhead package improvements. Of this
amount, $7.0 million is included to initiate unspecified
conventional munitions advanced warhead developments. In
addition to the efforts included in PE 63609N, conventional
munitions warhead development is included in other procurement
and research and development efforts for specific weapons
authorized elsewhere in this bill.
Warhead improvements to fielded systems based on evolving
threats and correction of reported problem areas are strongly
supported by the committee. However, the committee is not
inclined to support what appears to be funding that is
duplicated elsewhere in the budget. Therefore, the committee
recommends a decrease of $4.0 million in PE 63609N for
unspecified warhead development.
Lightweight 155mm howitzer
The budget request included $11.6 million in PE 63635M for
developing and testing the lightweight 155mm howitzer. The
Marine Corps is developing this system on its own behalf and on
behalf of the Army to provide greater firepower and mobility
for its artillery forces.
The Marine Corps plans to begin low-rate initial production
in fiscal year 2003, leading to operational testing of
production guns in fiscal year 2004. The committee believes
that the potential improvements promised by this howitzer
program are important and that the Marine Corps should conduct
developmental testing to ensure a smooth transition to a
successful operational evaluation. Such testing should include
additional firings and other testing to demonstrate that
endurance and other maintainability goals will be achieved.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $2.8 million
in PE 63635M to conduct additional testing within the
lightweight 155mm howitzer program.
Navy fuel cell technology demonstration
The budget request included $5.1 million in PE 63724N for
the Navy Energy Program. The committee recommends an increase
of $5.0 million for the development of proton exchange membrane
(PEM) fuel cells. PEM fuel cell systems are highly efficient,
low-temperature fuel cells that can operate on traditional
hydrocarbon fuels using an electrochemical process that
produces near-zero emissions. A residential PEM fuel cell
system typically provides 5 kW of base load power, with a 10 kW
peak load and a 15 kW surge, which is sufficient to run the
electrical systems of a small building. These attributes make
this technology well suited for placement at military sites and
for serving remote or inaccessible locations.
The committee believes that demonstration of these fuel
cell systems in stationary applications will also help to
advance the state of technology development for transportation
applications, particularly on vehicles that can run on diesel
fuel for military applications.
Facilities improvement
The budget request included $2.1 million in PE 63725N for
aircrew systems development but included no funding for
developing renewable energy sources for major Navy
installations. This program provides the Navy with new civil
engineering capabilities that are required to overcome specific
performance limitations of naval shore facilities while
reducing the cost of sustaining the naval shore infrastructure.
The program focuses available resources on satisfying facility
requirements where: (1) the Navy is a major stakeholder; (2)
there are no tested, validated commercial, off-the-shelf (COTS)
solutions available; and (3) a timely solution will not emerge
without a Navy-sponsored demonstration and validation. The
committee understands that the Office of Naval Research has
entered into a partnership to demonstrate solar energy as a
source of electric power and conduct planning and design for
research and demonstration of renewable energy, hydrogen, and
fuel cells. From this partnership, the Navy hopes to derive
recurring energy cost savings and to have a more reliable
source of energy. Therefore, the committee recommends an
increase of $2.5 million in PE 63725N to develop renewable
energy sources for major Navy installations.
Urban operations environment research
The budget request included $24.1 million in PE 63851M for
demonstration and validation of non-lethal weapons. The
committee recommends an additional $2.0 million for
demonstration and validation of environmental remediation
capabilities to minimize the environmental effects of the use
of non-lethal weapons systems.
Duplication of research and development efforts
The budget request included $81.5 million in PE 64231N for
upgrades to Navy command, control, communications, computers
and intelligence (C4I) systems and processes. Included within
that amount was $20.0 million to start a new program, Forcenet,
to provide the architecture and building blocks to connect Navy
systems electronically. The budget justification material
indicates that the Navy intends for the program to attempt to
create a ``highly adaptive, human-centric, comprehensive system
that operates from seabed to space, from sea to land.'' The new
program appears to be overly ambitious in the ramp-up of
funding for such a broadly described effort. It also appears to
be premature based on the limited deployment of a Navy and
Marine Corps intranet, the cooperative engagement concept
programs, and the research and development still required for
the seven projects requested in this program element and the
naval fires network. Therefore, the committee recommends a
decrease of $12.0 million in PE 64231N for the Forcenet program
initiation.
Power node control centers
The budget request included no funds for the continued
development of power node control centers (PNCC). PNCCs
integrate shipboard power functions, including
conversion,switching, distribution, and protection. The technology is
applicable to all ship classes and will be a building block of the Navy
transition to an all-electric ship. Therefore, the committee recommends
an increase of $3.0 million in PE 64300N to install, test, and evaluate
PNCCs.
Initiative to reduce destroyer life cycle costs
The budget request included no funds in PE 64307N for
development, demonstration, and validation of new initiatives
to reduce the manning on Arleigh Burke (DDG-51) class
destroyers. Previous initiatives under the 1995 smart ship
project fell short of expectations for reducing manning, but
resulted in efficiencies which reduced the crews' workload.
The committee believes that the Navy could take steps to
reduce the average crew size of 350 personnel by taking
advantage of research and development activities already
underway as part of the future destroyer program. Although
reduction of crew size is a worthy goal, the development and
backfit costs could negate the potential savings. For this
reason, the Navy should carefully evaluate technologies for
risk of development and payback in crew reduction prior to
development. Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of
$5.0 million in PE 64307N for the development and test of
technologies to reduce destroyer life cycle costs by reducing
assigned personnel.
Standard missile advanced optical correlator
The budget request included no funds for the standard
missile advanced optical correlator. Optical correlation
enhances the ability to recognize and track targets. This
enhanced ability translates into significantly better
performance of ship self-defense systems. Therefore, the
committee recommends an increase of $5.0 million in PE 64366N
for continued development of an optical correlator to improve
the standard missile performance.
Submarine combat systems modernization
The budget request included $14.0 million in PE 64562N to
develop and integrate software upgrades to integrate improved
weapons capabilities within the various submarine combat
control systems (CCSs). This program also develops improvements
to submarine hardware which has become increasingly difficult
and costly to maintain.
The thrust of the CCS improvement program is the fleet
introduction of an improved CCS system within which the Navy
will converge multiple submarine combat system developments
into a single effort to minimize submarine life cycle costs.
Current plans include converging CCS systems for the SSN-688-
class, the SSN-688I-class, and the SSBN-726-class.
Additional funding would allow the Navy to: (1) implement
an engineering change proposal to incorporate into the CCS MK2
software architecture the capability to fire Tactical Tomahawk
missiles; and (2) continue converting the CCS MK2 software
architecture to a fully commercial design.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $20.0
million in PE 64562N to achieve commonality in combat control
systems sooner among all the various submarine classes and
configurations within those classes.
Elimination of redundant studies
The budget request included $2.9 million in PE 64567N to
commence manpower and training studies for an unspecified
future ship. The Congress has authorized and appropriated
significant funding in previous Navy budget requests for the
DD-21 program, the CVN program, the new attack submarine
program, the military sealift program, and the smart ship
program. All of these programs included components that were
supposed to investigate, test and install methods for reducing
manpower and improving training on Navy ships. Interviews with
program managers have revealed that the Navy does not have an
adequate process by which the information gathered and the
``lessons learned'' from these efforts is made available to the
managers of other ship programs. Although the committee has
fully supported other manpower reduction and training
improvement efforts included in this budget request, the
unspecified effort included in this program element appears
redundant to previous and ongoing efforts. Therefore, the
committee recommends a decrease of $1.9 million in PE 64567N
for unspecified manpower and training studies and directs the
Secretary of the Navy to ensure that the Navy makes information
on manpower reduction and improvements in training generated
within specific programs available to other program offices
with similar requirements.
Lightweight torpedo development
The budget request included $7.8 million in PE 64610N to
design, integrate, and test the lightweight hybrid torpedo (MK-
54 MOD 0). This torpedo would be comprised of hardware and
software from the MK-46 torpedo, MK-50 torpedo, and MK-48 ADCAP
torpedo. The Navy expects the lightweight hybrid torpedo to
provide performance improvements in shallow water, littoral,
and countermeasure-filled environments.
The committee believes that, with additional funding, the
Navy could develop and test hardware and software design
changes that would realign the lightweight and heavyweight
torpedo baselines to achieve greater commonality. Such
commonality could accelerate the process of implementing future
block improvement changes and should reduce other operating and
support costs. Therefore, the committee recommends an increase
of $5.5 million in PE 64610N to achieve these objectives.
Outboard system improvements
The budget request included no funds in PE 64721N for
development, demonstration, and validation of improvements to
Outboard, the surface ship signals exploitation and information
collection system. The cooperative Outboard logistics upgrade
(COBLU) program was designed in 1995 using analog commercial,
off-the-shelf-based (COTS-based) components. By developing
digital enhancements, the Navy could take advantage of digital
technology to permit Outboard to detect and exploit a wider
range of signals. Therefore, the committee recommends an
increase of $5.0 million in PE 64721N for the development,
test, and rapid fielding of COBLU system digital enhancements.
SEARAM ship self-defense system
The budget request included no funds in PE 64755N for
demonstration and validation of a ship self-defense system
which would combine the capabilities of the close-in weapons
system (CIWS) and the rolling airframe missile (RAM). On May 4,
2001, the Navy initiated an engineering change proposal (ECP)
to upgrade the RAM-guided missile weapons system to a SEARAM
configuration. The SEARAM configuration would combine the CIWS
radar with an eleven-round RAM missile launching system. The
SEARAM system would provide surface ships improved detection
and kill capabilities against anti-ship missile threats.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $5.0 million
in PE 64755N to continue the development and testing of the
SEARAM ECP.
NULKA anti-ship missile decoy system
The budget request included $25.9 million for ship self-
defense soft-kill systems development in PE 64757N, including
$1.0 million to develop an improved capability to prevent loss
of the technology through reverse engineering by developing
anti-tamper capability for the NULKA payload.
The Navy has identified a series of development activities
associated with the NULKA system that are required to
understand and deal with emerging threats:
(1) an improved payload that would provide radio
frequency coverage of more than one band of the
spectrum to deal with anti-ship missiles;
(2) an expanded anti-tampering program effort;
(3) an improved guidance and propulsion system to
allow more precise positioning of the decoy during
operations;
(4) an effort to design an infrared payload to enable
NULKA to deal with newer anti-ship missile homing
technologies;
(5) an analysis of NULKA payload effectiveness when
operating in a high electromagnetic interference
environment against missile seekers employing low
probability of intercept technologies; and
(6) systems engineering and software support for
updating the NULKA launcher training, system evaluation
and test facility.
The committee recommends an increase of $9.2 million for
the NULKA development program to continue these efforts.
Radar absorbing tiles for ship self-defense
The budget request included no funds in PE 64757N for
development, demonstration, and validation of applying radar-
absorbing tiles to improve the self-defense capabilities of
Navy ships. Radar-absorbing tiles could reduce the ships'
detectability by radars, contributing to ship stealth and self-
defense capability. Therefore, the committee recommends an
increase of $1.0 million in PE 64757N for the development and
test of radar-absorbing tiles for Navy ships.
Navy integrated human resources strategy
The budget request included $43.2 million in PE 65013N for
information technology development. The committee recommends an
additional $7.0 million to support development of
architectures, processes, web-based tools, and the re-
engineering of Navy legacy systems to improve information
management within the Department of the Navy.
Navy studies and analyses
The budget request included $45.4 million in PE 65154N for
the Center for Naval Analyses. The committee recommends a
reduction of $5.0 million to this account. In addition, the
committee notes that the Navy's science and technology budget
was reduced with respect to the fiscal year 2002 budget
requestand appropriated levels. The committee recommends that the Navy
place a higher priority on retaining a stable investment in science and
technology than on studies and analyses programs.
Combating terrorism wargaming and research
The budget request included $50.8 million in PE 65853N for
management, technical, and international support. The committee
recommends an increase of $2.0 million to support the
development of new wargaming techniques, research, and
collaboration to support Navy activities in combating
terrorism.
F/A-18E/F engine durability improvements
The budget request included no funds in PE 24136N for
testing and validating improved components and advanced
technologies in the F/A-18E/F engine, the F414. Such
improvements in the F414 compressor and high-pressure turbine
have the potential to increase engine durability and thrust.
Increased durability would translate directly to operating and
support savings. Increased thrust would improve current flying
performance and provide an important hedge against future
upgrades of the aircraft. Therefore, the committee recommends
an increase of $15.0 million in PE 24136N to test core and
high-pressure turbine improvements in the F414 engine.
Precision target aided navigation
The budget request included $94.3 million in PE 24229N for
continued development of the Tomahawk weapons system but
included no funding for developing an alterative guidance
system called precision target aided navigation (PTAN). The
Navy believes that the PTAN program could lead to a guidance
capability that would be equal to the current system based on
the global positioning system (GPS). Missiles using a PTAN-
based approach would, however, not be vulnerable to an enemy
who might be employing GPS jamming or spoofing defenses. The
committee believes that further development of this PTAN
capability would be a prudent hedge against such a possibility.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $5.0 million
in PE 24229N to the PTAN development program.
Improving information provided to the warfighter
The budget request included $6.2 million in PE 24575N for
development of information system technologies which directly
support the mission planning for tactical commanders. The
virtual integration environment for the warfighter uses
commercial visualization and related information technologies
interfaced with real-time databases to evaluate commercial
information technology's integration with databases. Therefore,
the committee recommends an increase of $2.0 million in PE
24575N for the virtual integration environment for the
warfighter.
Marine Corps ground combat/supporting arms systems
The budget request included $36.0 million in PE 26623M for
Marine Corps ground combat/supporting arms systems, including
$14.6 million for the Marine Corps ground weaponry product
improvement program (PIP). The target location designation and
hand-off system (TLDHS) is a modular, man-portable equipment
suite that will provide the ability to acquire targets in a
wide range of weather conditions, day and night. The TLDHS
should greatly improve the ability of Marine Corps operators to
call for fire support from aviation, ground, and naval surface
fire support assets. In fiscal year 2003, the Marine Corps
expects to reach a fielding decision for the target hand-off
system component of the TLDHS.
Although previous budgets for the ground weaponry PIP have
included requests for the TLDHS program, the budget request for
fiscal year 2003 included no funds for TLDHS. Additional
funding in fiscal year 2003 would permit the Marine Corps to
undertake a number of important development tasks, including:
(1) supporting additional development and testing of the naval
surface fire support capability; and (2) incorporating
additional close air support features. Therefore, the committee
recommends an increase of $1.9 million in PE 26623M for the
TLDHS, a total authorization of $37.9 million.
Interoperability support of the warfighter
The budget request included $3.3 million in PE 35188N for
joint command, control, communications, computers,
intelligence, and surveillance (C4ISR) projects for the joint
battle center (JBC). The Navy established a project in fiscal
year 2001 to improve interoperability through reducing total
cost of ownership, using commercial innovations and services,
and developing timely requirements relating to homeland
security. The committee believes that the Navy should expand
the initial project to support focused actions for the regional
commanders in chief, including improving joint task force
decision-making and rapidly applying new technology for
interoperability. Therefore, the committee recommends an
increase of $5.0 million for a strategic interoperability
initiative that would allow the Navy to build upon the solid
foundation of the work previouslycompleted.
Unmanned Aerial Vehicle Tactical Control System
The budget request included $9.1 million for research and
development of the Tactical Control System (TCS), which is
being designed to receive, process and disseminate data from
all current and future tactical and high-endurance Unmanned
Aerial Vehicles (UAVs), such as Predator and Global Hawk. The
TCS would also serve as a common command and control system for
all UAVs.
The Navy is purchasing Global Hawk UAVs in fiscal year 2003
with the ultimate goal of integrating them into the TCS. The
proposed fiscal year budget for TCS, however, does not fund
such integration. Therefore, instead of using TCS to support
the Global Hawks, the Navy now plans on using the existing,
dedicated Global Hawk ground stations which are designed to
work exclusively with Global Hawks.
The committee believes that integration of Global Hawk into
the TCS should occur as soon as possible to ensure TCS
commonality within the set of Navy UAVs and recommends that
$10.0 million be added to PE 35204N for this purpose.
Furthermore, the committee urges the Air Force to work with the
Navy to support the Navy's TCS activities.
Modeling and simulation
The budget request included $7.8 million in PE 38601N for
Navy modeling and simulation development activities. The Navy
has been using modeling and simulation to provide important
information to make smarter acquisition and program decisions,
thereby reducing the research, development, test and evaluation
costs for Navy programs. The Navy has found that they are able
to eliminate a number of acquisition and program possibilities
using computer simulation based on validated models. Narrowing
the range of possibilities has yielded proven cost savings.
The committee believes that the Navy could benefit from
additional funding to expand these important activities.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $4.7 million
in PE 38601N to continue enhancements to, and usage of,
computer modeling and simulation in Navy research and
development activities.
Maritime manufacturing technology
The budget request included $9.9 million in PE 78730N for
maritime manufacturing technology. The committee recommends an
additional $4.0 million for the development of advanced
hardware, software, and engineering practices for new design
and manufacturing technologies to support shipyard and industry
needs.
Air Force
Aerospace materials manufacturing and research
The budget request included $75.3 million in PE 62102F for
applied materials research. The committee recognizes the
critical role that materials research and materials processing
technology play in extending the life of aging equipment,
especially by addressing corrosion issues and in developing the
new weapons systems and platforms that will transform the
military. Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of
$14.5 million in funding in this important research area.
Of this amount, $3.0 million would be used for improvements
in the manufacturing of specialty aerospace materials; $3.0
million for the development and application of a high power,
tunable, ultraviolet laser processing tool for the fabrication
of micro-engineered components; $2.0 million for the
development of wear-resistant, nanostructured materials that
can protect mechanical parts and extend their operational
lives; $3.0 million for the development of multifunctional,
durable aircraft coating systems; $2.5 million for the
development of low-cost composite materials for use on unmanned
aircraft; and $1.0 million for the development of fire
retardant polymer materials.
Lithium ion batteries for unmanned vehicles
The committee recommends an increase of $2.0 million in PE
62203F for applied research for the development of lithium ion
batteries for use in unmanned air vehicles. The committee notes
that lighter weight and lower cost batteries would provide
unmanned air vehicles programs with many benefits, including
increased mission time, increased payload capability, and
support future systems enhancements and expansion.
Wireless ISR technology
The budget request included $75.8 million in PE 62204F for
applied research on aerospace sensors. The committee recommends
an increase of $3.0 million for the development of
microelectromechanical systems (MEMS) wireless technology that
enables detection, sensing, and monitoring of hostile threats.
Space technology research
The budget request included $58.6 million in PE62601F for
applied research in space technology. The committee recommends
an additional $6.0 million for this research, which includes
$3.0 million for the development of clusters of microsatellites
for defense operations; $1.0 million for the development of
novel structural materials for large, lightweight space
structures; and $2.0 million for the development of control
systems for autonomous space systems.
Cyber security research
The committee notes that cyberattacks are an emerging
threat to both our nation's defense systems and commercial
infrastructure. The private sector has reported billions of
dollars of annual losses to computer crimes. Network attacks
from terrorists, foreign nations, and domestic hackers have
compromised defense operations and threatened the lives of
military personnel. The committee notes that a greater emphasis
must be placed on the development of security standards for
both commercial and military information systems, including
networks and software. This must be matched by strong support
for the critical research needed to develop safer and more
robust information systems. The committee also notes the
critical need to train more information security specialists to
design, operate, and maintain government and commercial
information systems.
As a result of these threats and needs, the committee
recommends an additional investment of $33.0 million in
Department of Defense research and training programs in the
area of information security. Of this amount, the committee
recommends an additional $5.0 million in PE 62702F for applied
research in information assurance and network security and $3.0
million for research toward securing national security
information through techniques including steganography and
digital watermarking. The committee urges the Air Force to
robustly fund research in this critical technology area.
The budget request included $9.4 million in PE 33140F for
information systems security. The committee notes the critical
role that this type of research will play in combating global
cyber-terrorist threats. Therefore, the committee recommends an
increase of $7.5 million for research on computer system
vulnerabilities and threats, including the transition of
technology for operational use.
In addition to these programs, the committee also
recommends an additional $17.5 million in cybersecurity
research and training as described elsewhere in the report.
Aluminum aerostructures
The budget request included $32.7 million in PE 63112F for
aerospace technology development and demonstration. The
committee recommends an increase of $4.0 million for research
on the use of aluminum aerostructures for aerospace components,
which improve processing technologies and reduce installment
andlife cycle costs.
Crew systems and personnel research
The budget request included $29.7 million in PE 63231F for
crew systems and personnel protection technology. The committee
recommends an increase of $1.5 million to demonstrate new
technologies that will enhance logistics and improve design,
deployability, performance and support of current and future
weapons systems. The committee recommends an additional $2.5
million for the development of systems that deliver nitrogen
and oxygen for safe aircraft operation and reduce ground
support requirements.
Unmanned Aerial Vehicles in controlled airspace
The committee is encouraged by the Department's substantial
commitment to procure Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAVs) in fiscal
year 2003 and in future years. In parallel with the procurement
of UAVs, however, technologies and procedures need to be
developed to harmonize the operation of UAVs with the operation
of manned aircraft.
Currently, in order to operate UAVs in the National Air
Space (NAS), the Department must obtain a Certificate of
Authorization from the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA)
through a process that can be cumbersome and time consuming. A
primary reason for FAA certification is the prevention of mid-
air collisions: FAA rules require that UAVs provide a ``see and
avoid'' capability comparable to that of a manned aircraft.
Since UAVs are not currently equipped with an onboard ``see and
avoid'' capability, chase planes are typically required to
ferry UAVs through the NAS, thus complicating such flights.
The Department has begun development of Detect and Avoid
(DAA) technology, which uses low-cost, lightweight optical
sensors to automatically detect aircraft in the vicinity of a
UAV, thereby enabling operator action to avoid a collision. The
committee is encouraged by this effort and recommends an
increase of $4.0 million to PE 63270F to fund continuation of
DAA technology development, to demonstrate this technology on
the Global Hawk UAV, and to implement an interim system for the
Predator UAV that meets FAA standards for flight in the NAS
without a chase aircraft.
In addition, the committee strongly supports the
Department's efforts to work with the FAA on this issue and is
aware of similar efforts underway at the National Air and Space
Administration (NASA). Therefore, the Assistant Secretary of
Defense for Command, Control, Communications and Intelligence
should continue to support the joint Defense Department/FAA
study on integrating remotely operated aircraft into civil
airspace. In addition, the Secretary should broaden the study's
membership to include representatives from NASA and industry
and ensure that the study receives the resources required to
expeditiously achieve the goal of flying UAVs through
controlled airspace using the same quick and efficient
procedures that are currently used for manned aircraft.
Advanced spacecraft technology
The budget request for the Air Force included $14.1 million
in PE 63401F for advanced spacecraft technology research and
development. The committee recommends an additional $10.0
million in PE 63401F for high specific power thin film multi-
junction amorphous silicon solar arrays on flexible substrates
for space applications. This technology has the potential to
produce solar arrays that are ten times cheaper and 3 to 5
times lighter than current solar arrays. The committee further
directs the Air Force to study the potential applications for
this technology in ongoing and future space applications and to
submit a report to the Committees on Armed Services of the
Senate and the House of Representatives on the results of the
study and to identify the potential future applications of this
innovative and transformational technology.
Advanced Wideband System satellite program
The budget request included $195.0 million in PE 63436F and
$5.0 million in PE 63845F for research and development for the
Advanced Wideband System (AWS) satellite program. This new
program is a groundbreaking effort to use laser communications
technology in space, thereby increasing the bandwidth of
satellite communications by orders of magnitude. The committee
strongly supports this program, because the Department's
reliance upon satellite communications is expected to continue
to grow rapidly over the next decade. The committee is
concerned, however, that $200.0 million is a large amount of
initial funding for a new program, regardless of its
importance. Air Force documentation indicates that of this
funding, $120.0 million is for concept development and for
laser technology development and integration. An additional
$80.0 million is for detailed engineering level pre-acquisition
activities. The committee believes that it is not prudent to
conduct detailed pre-acquisition activities for a program prior
to completion of concept and technology development. Therefore,
the committee recommends a reduction of $80.0 million in PE
63436F.
Furthermore, the committee notes that PE 63436F is an Air
Force science and technology funding line. The funding in
thisprogram element, however, is clearly intended to develop a major
satellite system. The committee believes it is not appropriate to
categorize the program element as science and technology funding.
Therefore, the committee recommends that the remaining $115.0 million
in PE 63436F be transferred to PE 63845F, a Demonstration and
Validation line.
Low-cost autonomous attack system
The budget request included $38.0 million in PE 63601F for
conventional weapons technology, including $11.0 million for
the low-cost autonomous attack system (LOCAAS). Fiscal year
2003 LOCAAS efforts include flight testing with a live warhead,
safe aircraft separation, and continued development of
automatic target recognition algorithms.
The committee believes that LOCAAS offers the potential to
make significant improvements in warfighting capabilities.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $7.0 million
in PE 63601F to accelerate LOCAAS development.
B-2 Spirit bomber
The budget request included $225.3 million in PE 64240F for
research and development for the Air Force for the B-2 Spirit
bomber. The Air Force has said $27.0 million is not executable.
The committee recommends a $27.0 million decrease, of which
$25.2 million is transferred to Aircraft Procurement, Air Force
for the B-2 in line 24, to correct a funding mismatch.
The committee recommends a $10.0 million increase in PE
64240F for low-observability maintenance improvements, a total
authorization of $208.3 million.
Precision location and identification program
The budget request included $65.1 million in PE 64270F for
electronic warfare development, including $10.6 million for
engineering and manufacturing development (EMD) for the
precision location and identification (PLAID) program. The
PLAID program is intended to lead to modernization of several
families of radar warning receivers.
Under the previous schedule, the Air Force had planned to
begin production of PLAID-derivative hardware in fiscal year
2003. However, delays in receiving funding, among others, have
pushed operational testing into early fiscal year 2004. This
has resulted in a requirement for additional EMD funding in
fiscal year 2003 to conduct further risk reduction activities
for PLAID. Because of the potential for this system to
contribute to aircrew and passenger protection in higher threat
environments, the committee recommends an increase of $14.7
million in PE 64270F to fund additional risk reduction
activities.
Space-based Infrared System-High component
The budget request included $814.9 million in PE 64441F for
the Space-based Infrared System-High (SBIRS-High) system.
SBIRS-High is the replacement for the nation's current space-
borne early warning system for ballistic missile launches. This
funding level almost doubles last year's appropriated funding
level of $438.7 million.
The SBIRS-High program sustained a Nunn-McCurdy cost breach
in December 2001 when the unit cost estimate for the program
increased by more than 70 percent, indicating more than $2.0
billion in cost growth. The program has also experienced an 18-
to 24-month schedule slip. An independent review team
established by the Air Force found significant problems with
the management of the SBIRS-High program, including less than
optimal systems engineering and requirements development
processes.
In compliance with the Nunn-McCurdy statute (10 U.S.C.
2433), the Department of Defense reviewed SBIRS-High and re-
certified the program with a new overall program cost estimate.
The required funding for fiscal year 2003 has not yet been
agreed upon by the Department. The committee understands,
however, that the Office of the Secretary of Defense's Cost
Analysis and Improvement Group (CAIG) recommended re-
certification of SBIRS-High assuming a fiscal year 2007 launch
for the first satellite. The fiscal year 2003 cost to support
such a launch date is approximately $100.0 million less than
the amount requested in the budget for SBIRS-High. Therefore,
the committee recommends a reduction of $100.0 million in PE
64441F for SBIRS-High.
Deployable oxygen systems
The budget request included $0.3 million in PE 64617F for
developing deployable oxygen-generating systems for supporting
aeromedical aircraft operations. Passenger aircraft that are
used by medical support forces can consume larger quantities of
oxygen. As the Armed Forces deploy onboard oxygen-generating
systems (OBOGS) to most military aircraft, bases no longer need
to maintain oxygen-generating capability for the fighting
forces. In order to prevent the strategic airlift forces from
having to spend scarce airlift resources carrying large, bulky
oxygen-generating systems into theaters of operation just to
support aeromedical aircraft operations, the Air Force needs
todevelop deployable oxygen systems. The committee, therefore,
recommends an increase of $2.5 million in PE 64617F to accelerate
development of a deployable oxygen-generating capability for supporting
aeromedical aircraft operations.
Integrated medical information technology system
The budget request included no funding in PE 64617F to
continue the integrated medical information technology system
(IMITS). The IMITS development effort is intended to design a
new state-of-the-art clinical network architecture that
supports electronic multimedia health records through the Air
Force Medical Service. This would include a demonstration of
the capability in the National Tele-radiology project and the
Biomedical Surveillance project. The committee recommends an
increase of $6.0 million in PE 64617F to accelerate IMITS
development.
Fixed aircrew standardized seats
The budget request included $0.9 million in PE 64706F for
the development of life support systems, but included no
funding for the continuing development of fixed aircrew
standardized seats (FASS). The FASS program develops modern,
standardized aircrew seats capable of meeting the dynamic load
standards required of commercial carriers. The Air Force is
completing standardized seat design studies and has begun the
development of prototype seats. Given the importance of
maintaining acceptable safety standards in Air Force aircraft,
the committee recommends an increase of $2.5 million in PE
64706F to continue the development of FASS.
Aircrew rescue signaling systems
The budget request included $0.9 million in PE 64706F for
the development of life support systems but included no funding
for developing systems to improve survivors' visibility to
rescuers. The committee understands that the chances of a
successful rescue can be greatly improved if air rescuers are
given additional opportunities to see survivors.
The committee believes that the Air Force should
investigate the potential for acquiring or developing improved
capability for survivors to draw the attention of air rescuers,
including such approaches as streamers, dye markers, and
infrared markers. The committee recommends an increase of $4.0
million in PE 64706F for the Air Force to investigate these
issues and conduct testing on potential candidate systems
available on the commercial market.
Common low observable verification system
The budget request included $4.8 million in PE 64762F for
continuing development of the common low observable
verification system (CLOVerS). CLOVerS would provide
maintenance personnel with a system to verify an aircraft's
stealth capability on the flight line rather than having to
rely only on flying an aircraft across an instrumented range.
The system is designed to allow maintenance personnel to
detect, locate, and resolve small surface defects that could
degrade an aircraft's stealth capability.
During engineering and manufacturing development (EMD), the
Air Force and the contractor team have realized increased risk
in completing the EMD on schedule. The Air Force requires
additional funding to restructure the program and complete the
EMD program in time to begin low-rate initial production in
fiscal year 2004. Therefore, the committee recommends an
increase of $13.0 million in PE 64762F to maintain the CLOVerS
development schedule.
Maglev upgrade program
The budget request included $46.3 million in PE 64759F for
major test and evaluation investment. As part of the
committee's overall initiative to support testing and
evaluation in the Department of Defense, the committee
recommends an additional $2.5 million for the continued
development of high-speed test facilities for development and
qualification testing, including flight testing and lethality
impact testing.
Joint directed energy combat operations and employment
The budget request included $46.3 million in PE 64759F for
test and evaluation support. As part of the committee's test
and evaluation initiative, the committee recommends an
additional $1.0 million for the development of a coordination
plan for technology development and test range usage for
testing directed energy weapons systems.
Air Force studies and analyses
The budget request included $25.5 million in PE 65101F for
RAND Project Air Force. The committee recommends a decrease of
$5.0 million to this account. The committee believes that
accelerating the modernization of the Air Force by funding
science and technology programs at stable levels is a higher
priority than continued studies and analyses.
Theater airborne reconnaissance system improvements
The budget request included no funding for continuing a
program to upgrade the F-16 theater airborne reconnaissance
systems (TARS) capability. The Air Force has identified several
improvements that would enhance the ability of the F-16 TARS
aircraft to perform more effectively. These include providing a
data link, replacing the current mission tape recorders with a
solid state recorder, and expanding the ability to operate in
adverse weather by integrating a synthetic aperture radar (SAR)
into the TARS pod.
The Air Force received funding in fiscal year 2002 to
acquire two new pods with solid state recorders and data link
capability, one with electro-optical capability and one with a
SAR sensor. However, the Air Force needs additional funding to
pay for nonrecurring engineering (NRE) for the data link and
ground station upgrades. The Air Force also could use
additional funds to buy SAR-equipped pods to field an improved
all-weather reconnaissance capability. The committee recommends
an increase of $25.2 million for accelerating these TARS
capability improvements, including $13.6 million in PE 27217F
for data link and ground station NRE, and $11.6 million in
Aircraft Procurement, Air Force to buy additional TARS pods
equipped with SAR sensors.
Global Positioning System Jammer Detection and Location
Military personnel rely on the Global Positioning System
(GPS) to support navigation, air control, precision approach
and landing, time-critical targeting and precision engagement
under all-weather conditions. Because of its dependence on GPS,
the military must protect itself from enemy GPS jammers. The
GPS Jammer Detection and Location System (JLOC) would identify
the location of enemy jammers in order to neutralize their
jamming capabilities. JLOC has completed Phase II of
development and is ready to begin the next phase. Therefore,
the committee recommends an increase of $3.0 million to PE
27247F for the next phase of development for GPS-JLOC.
Joint air-to-surface standoff missile development
The budget request included $42.1 million in PE 27325F for
continued development and testing of the joint air-to-surface
standoff missile (JASSM). JASSM has entered low-rate initial
production and is scheduled to complete initial operational
testing and evaluation (IOT&E) in early fiscal year 2003.
Testing to date has had impressive results.
The Air Force had planned to develop an extended range
cruise missile (ERCM) to replace the conventional air-launched
cruise missile (CALCM) which is available in only limited
numbers. Two years ago, the Air Force asked for support in
accelerating the ERCM program. Congress provided additional
funding for the ERCM program, but for a number of reasons, the
program did not move forward.
Now the Secretary of the Air Force has decided to proceed
with an extended range version of the JASSM weapon, the JASSM
ER, to meet the ERCM requirements. That decision is dependent
on several factors, including: (1) successful completion of the
JASSM IOT&E; (2) proven JASSM production capability; and (3)
the JASSM prime contractor's development of an adequate
business case for developing and producing a JASSM ER.
The committee believes that all of the above conditions
should be met in early fiscal year 2003. Given the urgency of
augmenting the current CALCM inventory, the committee believes
that the Air Force should not wait until fiscal year 2004 or
later to begin a program to do this. Therefore, the committee
recommends an increase of $15.0 million in PE 27325F to begin
JASSM ER development.
Multi-sensor command and control constellation
The budget request for the Defense Emergency Response Fund
(DERF), Security, Communications and Information Operations
activity included $488.0 million for the multi-sensor command
and control constellation (MC2C) program. The budget request
also included $191.1 million in PE 27449F for the same program,
reflecting a total request of $679.1 million.
This is a new program effort that now includes the
development of an improved radar system derived from the joint
surveillance/target attack radar system (JSTARS) program. The
new radar system is called the multi-platform radar technology
insertion program (MP-RTIP). The Air Force intends to field
this MP-RTIP sensor suite on a number of air vehicles,
including the Global Hawk unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV). The
Air Force conducted an analysis and concluded that the newer
technology affords the opportunity to consolidate a number of
battle management and intelligence, surveillance, and
reconnaissance missions in a smaller number of platforms types
than are currently in service.
The Air Force has concluded that, rather than buying
additional JSTARS aircraft, they will transition the JSTARS
mission to a Boeing 767-400ER. The analysis indicates that this
aircraft could accommodate the JSTARS ground moving target
indicator (GMTI) mission and the airborne warning and control
system (AWACS) air moving target indicator (AMTI) mission.
TheAir Force intends to pursue a spiral acquisition approach to
fielding this MC2C capability, with the first spiral fielding GMTI
capability and the second spiral fielding AMTI capability.
The DERF budget request included $150.0 million within the
$488.0 million in the DERF requests to buy a test bed aircraft
and $100.0 million to integrate MP-RTIP into the B-767
aircraft. The budget also included $15.0 million for deciding
the configuration of the B-767 that would be common to any
fleet of aircraft the Air Force would acquire. Based on Air
Force documentation, however, this aircraft will have been
delivered as much as two years before the MP-RTIP radar will be
delivered and ready to begin aircraft integration, even with an
accelerated MP-RTIP development schedule.
The committee believes that the Air Force should continue
the accelerated development of MP-RTIP and the other aspects of
developing the MC2C program, including deciding on a common
configuration. However, the committee sees no reason to support
funding to buy an aircraft or conduct MP-RTIP integration until
the sensor development schedule indicates the aircraft and the
integration effort need to be funded. Therefore, the committee
recommends a decrease of $250.0 million in this activity. The
committee recommends that the remaining $238.0 million be
transferred to the new program element, PE 27449F, as requested
by the Department.
Global Positioning System satellite program
The budget request included $324.1 million in PE 35165F for
research and development for the Global Positioning System
(GPS) satellite program. This funding included $50.0 million to
increase the power level of the last six GPS Block IIF
satellites, making it more difficult for an enemy to jam the
GPS signal. Following the budget submission, however, the
Department of Defense decided not to increase the overall power
level of these satellites, but rather to add a capability to
shift the existing available satellite power between different
GPS signals. This, coupled with some modifications to the GPS
user equipment, will provide similar anti-jam capability at
less cost. Under this new plan, the full $50.0 million
requested is no longer needed. Therefore, the committee
recommends a reduction of $40.0 million in PE 35165F for Block
IIF power level increases.
Furthermore, the impact of shifting the existing available
power between different GPS signals on the full range of GPS
users is still unclear. Therefore, the committee directs the
Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology and
Logistics, in coordination with the Under Secretary of the Air
Force, to assess the potential impacts of power shifting
between GPS signals on the full range of GPS receivers,
including those carried by ground troops and vehicles, naval
and commercial vessels, and military and civilian aircraft.
The committee also understands that recent GPS satellite
lifetime calculations have revealed the need to launch an extra
GPS satellite in fiscal year 2003 to reduce the risk of the
constellation dropping below the desired number of on-orbit
satellites. Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of
$10.0 million in PE 35165F for a fiscal year 2003 GPS launch,
as requested by the Air Force.
Spacelift range system
The budget request included $82.1 million in PE 0305182F
for the Air Force for the spacelift range system. The committee
recommends an additional $8.0 million for systems engineering
support, planning and scheduling systems, and communications
systems.
Manufacturing technologies
The budget request included $37.6 million in PE 78011F for
manufacturing technology programs. The committee recommends an
additional $2.0 million for manufacturing technology
development and testing of aircraft batteries. The committee
notes that new manufacturing technologies and a robust defense
technology industrial base are critical for both the national
economy and for the rapid transition of new technologies for
the military.
Defense-wide
Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency fundamental research
The budget request included $175.6 million for basic
research at the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency
(DARPA). Because of the importance of DARPA's fundamental
research activities, the committee recommends an increase of
$11.5 million for basic research at universities and in
industry. Of this amount, $3.0 million shall be available for
optoelectronics research, $4.0 million for nanotechnology
research for advanced biomedical devices and sensors, $2.0
million for the development and modeling of nanotechnology-
based logic circuits, and $2.5 million for photonic materials
and device research.
Many of the technologies that have enabled our current
economic prosperity and increased our national security have
their roots in university research supported by the DARPA. For
example, the Internet, graphical user interfaces, and global
positioning systems are all the result of long-term, cutting-
edge, university-based research, supported decades ago by
DARPA. DARPA has been recognized as the high-risk, high-payoff
defense agency ever since its inception. The committee,
however, is concerned about recent trends in the agency-
sponsored research that appear more shortsighted in their
approach, particularly the emphasis on 12- and 18-month reviews
in order to attempt to eliminate non-promising technologies.
The committee supports effective internal oversight and
commends DARPA for pursuing truly innovative technologies.
However, annual reviews may not be appropriate for all basic
and applied defense-related research programs. Additionally,
these reviews have a discouraging effect on the intended long-
term payoff of the research and are especially inconsistent
with the time frames and pace of university research. The
committee is concerned that this near-term approach to basic
and applied research will have detrimental consequences on the
ability to develop innovative solutions to future threats.
Therefore, the committee urges DARPA to re-evaluate its
policies for reviewing and terminating awards in scientific and
technical areas where the Department of Defense is dependent on
DARPA's ability to do revolutionary research that requires some
time to develop and mature.
The committee notes that the DARPA budget was significantly
increased in the President's Budget Request and now represents
approximately 25 percent of the overall defense science and
technology program. The committee believes that this amount of
funding and the critical role that DARPA now plays in
transitioning new technologies, such as Future Combat Systems
and Unmanned Combat Air Vehicles, to the services and in
developing revolutionary new capabilities, for example in
nanotechnology and artificial intelligence, demand extensive
planning and coordination throughout the Department. In a 1999
report, the Defense Science Board recommended that DARPA ``plan
deliberately for the future'', including establishing a
``systemic approach to strategic planning that provides clear
definition of long-term Agency objectives in support of
evolving national defense threats.'' This is especially
important in light of new Department activities supporting
efforts in combating terrorism and homeland security.
The committee supports this recommendation and directs that
DARPA develop a strategic plan and investment strategy as
described by the Defense Science Board. The committee directs
that DARPA communicate that plan to the Director of Defense
Research and Engineering and the Joint Staff and provide a copy
of the plan to Congress with the fiscal year 2004 budget
request.
University research initiatives
The budget request included $221.6 million in PE 61103D8Z
for university-based research programs. Fundamental research
performed at universities provides the foundation for the next
generation of defense technologies and trains the next
generation of scientists, engineers, and technology
entrepreneurs. Therefore, the committee recommends an
additional $4.0 million to support university research in
support of military transformation. The committee recommends an
additional $2.0 million for the development of advanced remote
sensing systems for environmental monitoring and analysis and
an additional $2.0 million for the development of technologies
for the optimization of military personnel management.
Nanotechnology incentive fund
The budget request included $175.6 million in PE 61103D8Z
for university research initiatives. As part of the
nanotechnology research and development program authorized in
section 245, the committee recommends an additional $10.0
million in this account for use as a nanotechnology incentive
fund to sponsor research performed at universities, in
industry, and at government laboratories and test centers in
support of meeting the challenges and goals established by the
program.
The committee requires the Director of Defense Research and
Engineering to use this funding for research projects in
nanoscale science and technology. The incentive fund should be
used to provide supplemental funding to services and agencies
that collaborate on interagency research teams, projects, and
activities in research areas central to the accomplishment
ofthe challenges and goals of the program.
Medical free electron laser
The budget request included no funding in PE 62227D8Z for
the medical free electron program due to a transfer of the
program to the National Institutes of Health (NIH). This
transfer occurred despite the fact that this program has been
developing valuable technology for military medical
applications for 18 years, and NIH did not request or recommend
this programmatic change.
Laser medical research is not an area previously managed by
NIH. The committee is concerned that NIH does not have the
expertise or institutional culture to manage this unique and
important program. The committee directs the Department of
Defense to work with the National Institutes of Health (NIH) to
ensure that future funding for this program is requested in the
defense budget. Therefore, the committee recommends an increase
of $8.0 million for continued work by the Department of Defense
on medical free electron lasers.
Computing systems and communications technology
The budget request included $424.9 million in PE 62301E for
computing systems and communications technology, which
represents an increase of over $65.0 million to this account.
The committee recommends a decrease of $5.0 million to this
account. The committee believes that the Bio-Surveillance
program is redundant with other efforts currently underway
within the government. The committee also recommends that the
new start in the Genisys database development program be
reduced.
Chemical-Biological Defense Program funding
The budget request included $932.9 million for research,
development, test and evaluation for the Chemical-Biological
Defense Program (CBDP), including $262.2 million in PE 62384BP
and $249.8 million in PE 63384BP. This represents an increase
of $425.2 million, almost 85 percent above the fiscal year 2002
requested level. This significant funding increase for homeland
security projects is planned for only one year, with planned
funding returning to $503.4 million in fiscal year 2004 and
dropping to $408.1 million by fiscal year 2007.
The committee recommends a number of specific adjustments
to the chemical and biological defense program funding account.
These adjustments would provide for an overall authorization of
$932.9 million, the amount requested for Chemical-Biological
Defense research and development in the budget request.
The committee is concerned that the one-year spike in
requested funding will not be executable in one fiscal year,
especially with no follow-on funding planned through the Future
Years Defense Program (FYDP). Therefore, the committee
recommends an overall reduction of $25.0 million in PE 62384BP
for applied microbial threat assessment research and an overall
reduction of $25.0 million in PE 63384BP for new homeland
security projects for the biological counterterrorism research
program. The committee also recommends that the Department of
Defense adjust its spending plans to be better defined and more
executable across future years.
The committee recommends an increase of $5.0 million in PE
602384BP for continued testing of non-toxic, non-corrosive,
bio-defense nanoemulsion decontamination material that can act
as a decontaminant for equipment, personnel, structures,
terrain and humans to respond to the threat of biological
warfare agents. Such decontaminants would be less caustic and
damaging than current decontamination solutions.
The committee recommends an increase of $2.0 million in PE
62384BP for research on efforts to combine nanotechnology and
micro-manufacturing to produce systems for effective detection
and deactivation of biological warfare agents and an increase
of $2.5 million to support continued Navy research on portable
biological agent sensors based on nanotechnology. Such
nanotechnology holds promise for wide application in chem-bio
defense.
The committee recommends an increase of $5.0 million in PE
62384BP to support the Army's development of a rapid detection
system to identify the presence of chemical or biological
threat agents and other toxic pollutants in water. This system
would help ensure the safety of water for both military
personnel and civilian populations.
The committee recommends an increase of $3.0 million in PE
62384BP for continued work on bioinformatics. This funding
would continue an effort to integrate genomic and other
biological data about high-priority pathogens, underlying
scientific research and bioinformatics tools.
The committee recommends an increase of $1.0 million in PE
62384BP for materials fabrication to develop affordable, rapid
and sensitive detectors for biological warfare agents.
The committee recommends an increase of $1.2 million in PE
62384BP for expanded research in diagnosing and treating the
symptoms of exposure to organophosphorus compounds and nerve
agents using ultra-sensitive ion-trap technology and biomarkers
to analyze chemical agents.
The committee recommends an increase of $5.0 million in PE
62384BP to support Marine Corps efforts to develop, test
andfield nanoparticle-based countermeasures, decontamination agents,
and protection technologies for chemical and biological threats.
The committee recommends an increase of $7.0 million in PE
63384BP for equipping and validating a biological process
development facility using current Good Manufacturing Practices
that can produce biological materials for Phase I and II
clinical testing of candidate vaccines and therapeutic products
to defend against biological warfare agents. Such a facility
would help accelerate the testing of potential medical defenses
to biological warfare.
The committee recommends an increase of $5.0 million in PE
63384BP to support continued rapid development and testing by
the Combating Terrorism Technical Support Working Group of
electrostatic decontamination system technology. This
technology holds potential for rapid and man-portable
decontamination of surfaces and sensitive equipment with a non-
corrosive, non-toxic technology and could serve both military
and non-military users.
The committee recommends an increase of $2.3 million to PE
63384BP to support continued Marine Corps efforts to develop
and demonstrate emergency response technologies for use by
first response units such as its Chem-Bio Incident Response
Force (CBIRF). These technologies may also have utility to
state and local first response units.
The committee recommends an increase of $3.0 million to PE
63384BP to develop more stable vaccines that are less
susceptible to degradation from temperature and other
environmental factors. Stabilized vaccines would be
particularly useful in remote locations where environmental
controls are lacking.
The committee recommends an increase of $3.0 million in
63384BP to support Marine Corps efforts for environmental
testing, concept-of-operations development, and research and
development to rapidly field operational systems utilizing
nanotechnologies that are capable of clearing facilities of
chemical and biological agent contamination.
Finally, the committee recommends an increase of $5.0
million to PE 63384BP for biological terrorism and
agroterrorism risk assessment and prediction, including a
comprehensive assessment of potential biological agents that
could be of interest to terrorists for human or agricultural
attacks.
Tactical technology
The budget request included $181.0 million in PE 62702E for
applied research in tactical technologies. The committee
recommends a decrease of $10.0 million to this account and
recommends that programs in hypersonics technology and
aeronautics technology be reduced or delayed.
Materials and electronics technology
The budget request included $440.5 million in PE 62712E for
applied research in materials and electronics technology, which
represents an increase of nearly $100.0 million to this
account. The committee recommends a decrease of $5.0 million to
this account. The committee also recommends that new starts in
biologically-based materials and devices and microelectronic
device technologies be reduced.
Weapons of mass destruction defeat technology
The budget request included $146.1 million in PE 62716BR
for applied research to develop weapons of mass destruction
(WMD) defeat technologies. The committee recommends an increase
of $3.0 million for research on enhancing the blast resistance
of concrete and other structures against terrorist attack. The
committee also recommends an increase of $3.0 million for the
development and proof of concept demonstration of technology
for penetrating and neutralizing hard and deeply buried targets
such as command centers or weapons storage facilities for
weapons of mass destruction.
Combating Terrorism Technology Support Working Group
The budget request included $49.0 million in PE 63122D8Z
for the activities of the Combating Terrorism Technology
Support Working Group (TSWG). The committee recommends an
additional $5.0 million for blast mitigation testing, including
the development of new materials for protecting buildings and
other infrastructure and new testing techniques and
technologies for the qualification of new structural designs.
The committee commends TSWG for its leadership in
developing the leading-edge technologies that the Nation uses
in the war against terrorism. TSWG's successful interagency
coordination and rapid transition of technologies into the
hands of warfighters, first responders, and other personnel
should be models for the rest of the Department of Defense and
the Federal Government.
The committee notes the key role the TSWG has played in
attempting to find the best technology, including from small
businesses and non-traditional defense contractors, available
for use in the fight against terrorism. The committee commends
TSWG's role in the very successful combating terrorism broad
agency announcement of 2001 and urges the group to continue
itsefforts to evaluate and fund those proposals it deems meritorious.
The committee notes that many of these proposals would be funded out of
the Defense Emergency Response Fund.
Wafer-scale planarization technology
Future defense electronic systems require new methods to
place more transistors on ever-shrinking silicon and gallium
arsenide chips. Multiple technologies are being developed for
this purpose, but advancement of planarization technology is
not being adequately addressed. Therefore, the committee
recommends an increase of $5.0 million to PE 63175C for
research and development in wafer-scale planarization
technology.
Bottom Anti-Reflective Coatings for circuit boards
Bottom Anti-Reflective Coatings (BARC) are used for ultra
high-density circuits to reduce the feature size on circuit
boards. If the BARC program is successful, printed circuit
cards could be reduced in size by as much as 40 percent,
ultimately allowing the size and weight of computers in missile
defense components, such as interceptors, to be reduced
commensurately. The committee recommends an increase of $5.0
million in PE 63175C for BARC.
Nanophotonics system fabrication facility
Nanophotonics is a combination of nanofabrication and
photonics focused on the development of devices embedded in
semiconductor chips that control photons, or light, at the
nanometer level. Photonic hit indicators are used on ballistic
missile defense test targets to determine precisely where the
interceptor hits the target. The nanophotonics systems
fabrication facility would focus on the development,
integration, and packaging of devices for photonic systems,
with methods based on those utilized in the integrated circuit
industry. The committee believes in the potential of photonic
systems and recommends an increase of $3.7 million in PE 63175C
for the development of a nanophotonics systems fabrication
facility.
Wide-bandgap semiconductor
There is an increasing need for semiconductors that can
withstand high electricity and high temperature, especially for
the compact, lightweight electronics required for ballistic
missile defense systems. The wide-bandgap semiconductor program
researches the use of Gallium Nitride, which can function at
higher temperatures than conventional materials. The committee
agrees on the importance of Gallium Nitride as a semiconductor
for the projects within the Missile Defense Agency and in other
areas. Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $10.0
million in PE 63175C for the wide-bandgap semiconductor
program.
Vehicle fuel cell program
The budget request included $25.5 million in PE 63712S for
logistics technology demonstrations. As a component of the
legislative initiative described elsewhere in this title, the
committee recommends an additional $10.0 million to carry out a
cost-shared program to identify and support technological
advances that are necessary to develop fuel cell technology for
use in vehicles. The committee directs that this program be
coordinated with the Secretary of Energy, other appropriate
federal agencies, and private industry. The committee also
directs the Secretary of Defense to ensure that at least half
of the total cost of the program be borne by industry, either
in cash or in kind.
The vehicle fuel cell program shall include continued
development of fuel cell auxiliary power units and vehicle
propulsion technologies as well as pilot demonstration of such
technologies as appropriate. The program shall also include
development of technologies necessary for a hydrogen fuel
infrastructure.
Technology transition initiatives
The budget request included $25.4 million in PE 63826D8Z
for Quick Reaction Special Projects. The committee supports the
Department of Defense's attempts to establish innovative
programs to rapidly transition technologies into operational
systems. Section 242 of this title would add an additional
$25.0 million in this account only for use as part of the
Technology Transition Initiative authorized by that provision.
The committee directs the Director of Defense Research and
Engineering to report to Congress on the execution of the Quick
Reaction and Transition Initiative funds, document technology
transition successes that resulted as a consequence of the
funds, and make recommendations for new funding mechanisms to
further promote rapid and efficient technology transition.
Instructional technologies for first responders
The budget request included $49.9 million in PE 63832D8Z
for the Joint Wargaming Simulation Management Office. The
committee recommends an additional $4.0 million for
planning,designing, and developing a national network for delivering
Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD) training and to support research on
simulation-based training systems that can improve WMD training.
The committee notes that preparing military medical
personnel to respond effectively to incidents involving use of
weapons of mass destruction is an essential part of a balanced
response to new threats. The Department of Defense must be able
to provide continuous training, as well as rapid training
updates, to large numbers of globally distributed personnel,
including medics and personnel in military hospitals. New
information technologies are essential to serve this critical
mission.
The committee recommends that the Director of Defense
Research and Engineering direct and manage this program. The
committee also recommends the formulation of a national
strategy to develop and deliver training materials for this
mission. The program's activities should leverage new
information technologies and adapt to newly available
capabilities as well as conform as appropriate to the best
commercial and university practices available, both for the
development of the content of the material and for the
technical standards used. Due to recent acceleration of
government-wide efforts in homeland security, the committee
directs the Department to work closely with other agencies
supporting WMD training to take advantage of their ability to
provide training content and certification and to ensure
interoperability of technologies employed.
Unexploded ordnance remediation
The budget request included $28.3 million in PE 63851D8Z
for the Environmental Security Technical Certification Program.
The committee recommends an increase of $5.0 million to develop
technologies to remediate unexploded ordnance (UXO) and related
constituents at active, inactive, closed, transferred, and
transferring ranges.
The budget request included $60.5 million in PE 63716D8Z
for the Strategic Environmental Research Program. The committee
recommends an increase of $3.0 million for science and
technology efforts to enhance UXO remediation capabilities.
Ballistic missile defense systems engineering
The budget request included $371.1 million in PE 63880C for
ballistic missile defense systems engineering and integration,
an 83 percent increase over last year's funding level. While
the committee accepts the value of systems engineering, it is
not clear why such a large increase is necessary over last
year's level. Furthermore, despite repeated queries, the
Missile Defense Agency has not adequately explained why such a
high funding level is required for systems engineering and
integration or what products are to be delivered with the
funding.
Therefore, the committee recommends a reduction of $140.0
million in PE 63880C for systems engineering and integration.
The remaining funding level of $231.0 million represents 10
percent growth from the current level.
Ballistic missile defense test and evaluation
The budget request included $382.0 million in PE 63880C for
ballistic missile defense test and evaluation, a decrease of
more than $40.0 million from the amount appropriated in fiscal
year 2002. The Department of Defense, however, has decided to
put a high priority on ballistic missile defense testing, which
the committee strongly supports. It is not clear to the
committee why the requested test and evaluation funding has
decreased so substantially given this priority. Therefore, the
committee recommends an increase of $30.0 million in PE 63880C
for test and evaluation.
Arrow
The budget request included $66.0 million in PE 63881C for
the Arrow ballistic missile defense system. The Arrow program
is a U.S.-Israeli joint program critical to the defense of
Israel against existing and growing regional ballistic missile
threats. The system would also serve to protect U.S. forces in
the region during a conflict and is intended to be
interoperable with U.S. theater missile defense systems.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $40.0
million in PE 63881C for the Arrow program. The committee urges
the Department to direct this extra funding toward Arrow
capability and interoperability upgrades.
High power discriminator radar
For a number of years the Department of Defense has pursued
two separate radar development efforts for the Navy Theater-
Wide ballistic missile defense system, now called the Sea-based
Midcourse system. Both efforts, one focusing on X-band radar
technology and the other on S-band technology, have lacked a
coherent focus and plan. Congress has repeatedly requested that
the Department provide the overall plan for Sea-based Midcourse
radar development. Last year's committee report urged the
Ballistic Missile Defense Organization, now the Missile
DefenseAgency (MDA), to focus the radar development efforts and funding
on the radar technology that the MDA determines is best suited for
ballistic missile defense. The report also discussed the unique value
of X-band radar technology for ballistic missile defense and quoted
Lieutenant General Ronald Kadish, Director of the Missile Defense
Agency, who stated that ``in order to do the [ballistic missile
defense] countermeasure problem you are going to need the kind of fine
discrimination capability afforded by the X-band.''
Despite urging by Congress during fiscal year 2002, the
Department did not focus on a single radar technology and
instead continued to fund both S- and X-band efforts.
Furthermore, the X-band effort was not funded at a level
commensurate with making adequate progress. The X-band high
power discriminator radar effort received only $12.0 million in
fiscal year 2002, resulting in the termination of many of the
engineers working on the program, despite the fact that the
high power discriminator technology is mature enough to be
installed and demonstrated on a ship.
The budget request for fiscal year 2003 included only $15.0
million in PE 63882C for X-band high power discriminator radar
development. The committee believes that the X-band high power
discriminator radar is essential to any robust near-term Sea-
based Midcourse capability and is concerned that the proposed
funding level is significantly lower than the level required to
conduct prototype development and installation on a ship, the
logical next step for the program. Therefore, the committee
recommends an increase of $40.0 million in PE 63882C for X-band
high power discriminator development, leading toward
installation of a prototype X-band high power discriminator
radar on an Aegis ship.
Midcourse systems engineering and integration
The budget request included $95.0 million in PE 63882C for
Midcourse Defense Segment systems engineering and integration,
more than double the amount appropriated in fiscal year 2002
for this activity. The committee finds it difficult to justify
such a large increase in funding when more than $400.0 million
of systems engineering and integration funding is already
proposed for fiscal year 2003 in the Ballistic Missile Defense
System Segment and within the individual programs which
comprise the Midcourse Defense Segment. Furthermore, the fiscal
year 2003 funding request would support the same activities
that were funded in fiscal year 2002, so such a large increase
seems unnecessary. Therefore, the committee recommends a
reduction of $45.0 million in PE 63882C for Midcourse Defense
Segment systems engineering and integration which would still
provide a 10 percent increase, after inflation, for that
activity.
Small kill vehicle technology development
The potential for enemy decoys and countermeasures poses a
significant problem for ballistic missile defense systems.
These decoy devices are often difficult to distinguish from the
actual warheads themselves. However, by placing many small kill
vehicles on a single interceptor missile, it may be possible to
engage both the warhead and any decoys present; each small kill
vehicle is designed to destroy a different object. To further
the development of this concept, the committee recommends an
increase of $10.0 million to PE 63882C for small kill vehicle
technology development.
Sea-based boost defense
The budget request included $55.0 million in PE 63883C for
a sea-based boost ``critical experiment'' in fiscal year 2003.
However, the Missile Defense Agency could not identify the
experiment, so it is unlikely that it would actually occur as
early as fiscal year 2003. Therefore, the committee recommends
a reduction of $55.0 million in PE 63883C for the undefined
fiscal year 2003 experiment.
Space-based boost defense
The budget request included $30.0 million in PE 63883C for
a space-based boost ``critical experiment'' in fiscal year
2003. However, the Missile Defense Agency could not identify
the experiment, so it is unlikely that it would actually occur
as early as fiscal year 2003. Therefore, the committee
recommends a reduction of $30.0 million in PE 63883C for the
undefined fiscal year 2003 experiment.
Airborne Laser
The budget request included $30.0 million in PE 63883C for
purchase of the second Airborne Laser prototype aircraft. The
committee notes, however, that the first Airborne Laser
prototype aircraft is not scheduled to be tested until fiscal
year 2005. Furthermore, the first prototype is only a half-
power version, and the Missile Defense Agency is not yet able
to determine when a full-power version will become available.
Finally, the Airborne Laser program has experienced significant
cost growth, with the cost of the first prototype aircraft
rising to over $1.0 billion from an original estimated cost of
less than half that amount.
The committee fully supports the research, development and
testing of the first Airborne Laser aircraft, and believes that
a fully-tested, full power version would be a truly
revolutionary weapons system. The committee also believes,
however, that the Missile Defense Agency should focus on test
completion of the first prototype aircraft before buying the
second prototype aircraft. Therefore, the committee recommends
a reduction of $30.0 million in PE 63883C for the second
Airborne Laser aircraft.
Airborne Infrared Surveillance system
The proposed Airborne Infrared Surveillance system (AIRS)
would integrate a high-performance, infrared telescope and data
collection system on a Global Hawk Unmanned Aerial Vehicle
(UAV) or Gulfstream V high altitude aircraft to detect, track
and discriminate ballistic missile warheads in the midcourse
phase of flight. The system would also provide infrared
detection and detailed imaging of ground targets. The U.S.
currently has no near-term plans to provide infrared tracking
and discrimination data to missile defense systems. The Space-
based Infrared System-Low (SBIRS-Low) satellite system will
eventually perform that function; however, the data quality and
resolution of SBIRS-Low may not be as high as that of AIRS. The
Missile Defense Agency also recently delayed the planned
deployment date for SBIRS-Low.
Furthermore, no systems currently provide intelligence data
on the infrared signatures of foreign missile warheads in
midcourse. Such data would be essential in helping predict the
difference between an incoming warhead and the decoys
surrounding it. Both the intelligence community and the Missile
Defense Agency have commented on the severe shortage of
infrared signature data on foreign warheads, and the Central
Measurements and Signals Intelligence Organization has endorsed
AIRS as a near-term solution to this problem.
The telescope and data collection systems for AIRS have
already been successfully integrated and tested on a test
aircraft, and they performed well during a recent Integrated
Flight Test of the Ground-based Midcourse national missile
defense system. Therefore, the committee recommends that $22.0
million be added to PE 63884C for engineering and concept
studies for AIRS. The committee also urges the Missile Defense
Agency to aggressively pursue this program.
Russian-American Observation Satellite (RAMOS) solar arrays
The committee recommends an additional $10.0 million in PE
63884C to further develop lightweight and flexible amorphous
silicon alloy triple-junction thin film technology for
lightweight, low-cost, radiation hardened solar arrays with a
stainless steel substrate. The committee encourages the
Department of Defense to conduct this effort as a joint U.S.-
Russian partnership within the RAMOS program.
The committee also notes that of the $54.5 million
appropriated for RAMOS in fiscal year 2002, only $2.0 million
has been provided to Russia, primarily because of the lack of
an official agreement to proceed between Russia and the United
States. The committee urges the Department of Defense to work
with Russia to sign the agreement with the Russian Federation
on RAMOS as soon as possible so that this important joint
program can continue to proceed toward the planned launch of
two satellites in 2006.
Technical studies and analyses
The budget request included $30.0 million in PE 65104D8Z
for technical studies, support and analysis. The committee
recommends a reduction of $5.0 million to this account. The
committee notes that the Department has requested that Congress
substantially reduce reporting requirements. The committee also
notes that the goal of defense transformation places
modernization programs at a higher priority than studies and
analyses.
Information security scholarship program
The budget request included $5.0 million in PE 65710D8Z,
Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, Defense-Wide for
the information assurance scholarship program. This program was
established by section 922 of the Floyd D. Spence National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2001.
The committee strongly supports moving forward with this
program. Department of Defense officials have indicated that
they fully support the intent of the program to bolster the
number of, and training for, personnel in the Defense
Department's information assurance career field. The committee
believes that the Department is being too tentative in its
implementation and that making more funds available would
result in more near-term progress.
The committee recommends an additional $10.0 million to
increase the number of grants and scholarships that the
Department would be able to implement during fiscal year 2003.
Information security
The budget request included $394.3 million in PE 33140G
forthe Information Systems Security Program. The committee notes that
the Nation's military and commercial information systems continue to be
extremely vulnerable to attack; the capability for launching a
catastrophic attack has spread throughout the world to nations,
terrorist groups, and even private individuals. Therefore, the
committee recommends an additional $33.0 million across the
Department's research and development activities to enhance research
and training to meet these emerging threats.
The committee also recommends an additional $4.0 million in
PE 33140G to facilitate cooperation for protecting information
and information systems so as to increase national awareness of
the dynamic threat and strengthen common defense across the
Nation.
National Imagery and Mapping Agency feature level database
The U.S. military increasingly relies on data from
surveillance platforms such as Unmanned Aerial Vehicles and
satellites. Data from these platforms is most useful to the
military if it can be fused together. This enables each
individual surveillance platform to be interoperable with the
other platforms, greatly enhancing the usefulness and accuracy
of the surveillance data. To support such interoperability, the
National Imagery and Mapping Agency (NIMA) is developing a
feature level database to enable the fusion of data from
disparate surveillance platforms. The committee supports this
effort and recommends an increase of $4.1 million in PE 35102BQ
for feature level database development.
Intelligent spatial technologies
The budget request included $115.2 million in PE 35102BQ
for the Defense Imagery and Mapping Program but did not include
continued funding for intelligent spatial technologies for
smart maps, a promising technology that will allow military
operators and planners to better use and integrate geospatial
data. The National Imagery and Mapping Agency (NIMA) has been
very supportive of this program, assessing it to be of high
military value. However, competing priorities precluded NIMA
from continuing funding for this important capability. The
committee recommends an increase of $1.0 million in PE 35102BQ
for the continued development of geospatial data integration
technologies.
Broadcast-Request Imagery Technology Experiment
At the request of U.S. Special Operations Command (SOCOM),
the National Reconnaissance Office (NRO) began development of
the Broadcast-Request Imagery Technology Experiment (BRITE), a
unique capability to disseminate timely, tailored imagery
products to forward-deployed special operations elements via
existing communications architectures. Once development of
BRITE was completed, the NRO transferred responsibility for the
program to the National Imagery Mapping Agency (NIMA) for
fielding and sustainment. Now in use in Afghanistan, this
system allows soldiers to view satellite imagery data in near
real-time and has been a key asset in our continuing military
effort in that region. Despite its effectiveness, NIMA has not
yet funded the fielding of the BRITE system.
The committee strongly supports BRITE and recommends an
increase of $4.0 million to PE 35102BQ to facilitate timely
fielding of BRITE to operational elements. In addition, the
committee urges NIMA to fund the fielding of this system in
future budget submissions.
Laser additive manufacturing initiative
The budget request included $13.1 million in PE 78011S for
manufacturing technology programs. The committee recommends an
increase of $5.0 million to develop laser additive
manufacturing technologies to produce high performance military
and commercial titanium components.
Advanced technologies for special operations
The budget request included $6.7 million in PE 1160279BB
for special operations technology development. In testimony to
the Emerging Threats and Capabilities Subcommittee, Special
Operations Command officials stated that, ``Special Operations
Forces depend on leading edge technology to provide the
critical advantage and to support participation in a growing
number of technologically complex missions and operations.''
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $5.0 million
for the development of new technologies in established
technology thrust areas including signature reduction,
communications, unmanned systems, power systems, remote
sensing, advanced training systems, bioengineering, and
directed energy weapons.
The committee notes and commends the recent efforts of the
U.S. Special Operations Command (SOCOM) to leverage the science
and technology efforts of the military services and defense
agencies. The committee also commends SOCOM on its success in
rapidly transitioning new technologies from both inside and
outside the Department of Defense into the hands of
warfighters. This transition success may provide a useful model
for many other organizations within the Department.
Joint Threat Warning System
The budget request included no funding for research and
development on the Joint Threat Warning System (JTWS) in PE
116404BB. The JTWS is a system that provides force protection,
integrated threat warning, and situational awareness equipment
for Special Operations Forces (SOF). The system supports
worldwide ground, maritime, and airborne missions, providing
information to operators through the Integrated Broadcast
System. The system will replace current, non-standard,
sometimes unsupportable equipment serving air, maritime, and
ground operations. Replacing the old systems with JTWS is a
Special Operations Command priority. Therefore, the committee
recommends an increase of $1.8 million for PE 116404BB for
research and development of the JTWS.
Embedded Integrated Broadcast Service Receivers
The budget request included no funding for research and
development on the embedded Integrated Broadcast Service (IBS)
receivers. The embedded IBS receivers offer tactical, real-time
intelligence broadcast data to warfighters for threat avoidance
and situational awareness. The IBS receivers will replace the
current Multi-mission Advanced Tactical Terminal (MATT) system,
which is approaching the end of its service life due to aging
design, parts obsolescence, producibility issues, and exposure
to a harsh operating environment. Replacing the old system with
these receivers is a Special Operations Command priority.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $2.2 million
for PE 116405BB for Special Operations Intelligence Systems
Development/Project S400.
Test and evaluation science and technology program
The budget request included $6.0 million in PE 63941D8Z for
test and evaluation science and technology programs. As part of
the committee's overall initiative to support testing and
evaluation, the committee recommends an additional $5.0 million
for the development of new technologies to support test and
evaluation. This program will allow test technologies to keep
pace with evolving weapons technology and is critical to
ensuring the capability to test future weapons systems.
Central test and evaluation investment program
The budget request included $123.3 million for the central
test and evaluation investment program (CTEIP). As a component
of the test and evaluation initiative described in this title,
section 233 would add $50.0 million and section 232 would
transfer an additional $70.0 million to this critical program,
which has developed a coordinated process for making test and
evaluation investments that leverage service programs and
encourage joint development and use of new test capabilities.
The committee commends CTEIP for its efforts to develop new
test technologies and instrumentation, improve interoperability
between service efforts, integrate modeling and simulation into
test activities, and provide resources to respond to near-term
shortfalls in operational test capabilities.
In addition, the committee recommends an increase of $8.0
million for technology development to support test and
evaluation. Of this amount, $3.0 million shall be used for the
development of digital imagery motion tools to support testing
activities.
The committee also recommends an additional $5.0 million to
support the activities of the Big Crow program. The committee
notes the important role that the Big Crow support aircraft
played in recent operations in Afghanistan. The committee
directs the Secretary of Defense to update Congress on
Department plans for future funding of this important asset, so
that it can be a test resource and operational electronic
warfare platform for the services.
Live fire test and training
The budget request included $10.1 million in PE 65131D8Z
for live fire testing. As part of the initiative to robustly
fund testing and evaluation in the Department of Defense, the
committee recommends an increase of $5.0 million for the Live
Fire Test and Training Program. The committee recommends an
additional $1.5 million for testing and development of fire
fighting training systems.
OTHER ITEMS OF INTEREST
Crusader artillery system
The budget request included $475.6 million for the Crusader
artillery system to complete program definition and risk
reduction and begin system development and demonstration.
During the committee's markup of the National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2003, the Secretary of
Defense suddenly announced his decision to terminate the
Crusader program. The Director of the Office of Management and
Budget has informed the committee of the President's intention
to amend the fiscal year 2003 budget request as it pertains to
the Crusader program. The committee has not had an opportunity
toreview the reasons for the decision to terminate the Crusader
program with Office of the Secretary of Defense officials or the impact
of the decision on the Army's future modernization plans with Army
officials.
The committee bill recommends $475.6 million for continued
research and development of the Crusader, the amount requested
in the fiscal year 2003 budget. The committee will carefully
review the decision to terminate the Crusader program with the
Secretary of Defense and the Chief of Staff of the Army in an
upcoming hearing and will meet to determine whether to offer a
committee amendment at the time this bill is debated on the
Senate floor.
Future launch and spacelift concepts
The committee is aware that the Department of Defense has
identified responsive, low-cost space launch as a key to
meeting a variety of military needs. Recently, the Air Force
completed the Operationally Responsive Spacelift Mission Need
Statement, the first step in the formal requirements process
for future launch and on-orbit systems. The Air Force believes
that operationally responsive spacelift is the key enabler for
conducting a broad range of future space missions.
Working together, the Air Force and the National
Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) also completed a
number of joint studies to help identify and define operational
requirements and concepts and to develop a technology roadmap.
Included in the technology concept study was a range of
potential vehicle options to meet the range of future Air Force
and NASA needs. One of the tasks of the study was to harmonize
Air Force and NASA reusable launch vehicle technology programs
against Air Force and NASA requirements and architectures. The
study concluded that, although the needs of the two
organizations differ, both can receive significant benefits by
working together toward future launch requirements.
The committee directs the Secretary of the Air Force to
continue the process of defining requirements for future
operationally responsive spacelift and report back to this
committee. The report shall be provided to the committee no
later than February 15, 2003. In the report, the Secretary
should assess whether any such requirement can be met with
evolutions of the evolved expendable launch vehicle (EELV), the
shuttle transport system, current generation light launch
vehicles, and the current launch infrastructures. In carrying
out the assessment, the Secretary should also look at the
comparative maturity, utility, and potential development and
operational costs of expendable and reusable launch vehicles
alternatives with current launch vehicles. The comparative
analysis should also include launch processes and
infrastructure.
In conducting the review the committee directs the
Secretary to continue the cooperative relationship with NASA
and explore the possibility of a joint development project that
could meet requirements of each organization. The committee
would welcome a jointly funded proposal to begin such an effort
for future spacelift requirements.
Hybrid engine military vehicles
The committee notes that the cost of delivery of fuel
within theaters of operation is now estimated at $150 per
gallon. The Defense Science Board has identified this problem
as one that the Department of Defense needs to address in order
to reduce fuel cost burdens, specifically through aggressive
high-level leadership, development of incentives for production
and acquisition, and advanced technology development.
Hybrid engine technology can significantly increase fuel
economy and reduce pollution for military vehicles. Hybrid
engine technology is also consistent with efforts to transform
the military into a lighter, lethal, more deployable force. The
committee notes that significant improvements have been made in
hybrid technology, but the transition of this technology into
operational systems is limited by economic factors, including
the initial costs of developing new systems and replacing
existing standard engines. The conversion to hybrid electric
systems could benefit all of the services and will likely
require the military to make initial investments.
In order to promote a Department-wide effort to develop
military hybrid vehicle systems, the committee directs the
Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology and
Logistics to conduct a study of the feasibility of (1)
converting 10 percent of the non-combat defense fleet to hybrid
vehicles by fiscal year 2009; and (2) converting to an all-
hybrid engine fleet for both non-combat and combat vehicles
over a longer period. The feasibility study should include a
projection of funding requirements, technical milestones and
goals, and planned technology insertions, and should be
submitted to Congress along with the fiscal year 2004 budget
request.
Magdalena Ridge Observatory
The Magdalena Ridge Observatory is a facility supporting
missile defense testing and evaluation. The facility is used to
provide detailed imagery to understand lethality and kill
mechanisms during intercept tests for the national missile
defense, Theater High Altitude Area Defense, and
PatriotAdvanced Capability-3 missile systems at the White Sands Missile
Range and Fort Wingate Launch Range. The committee is supportive of
continued research and development on telescopes and other equipment to
support these Department of Defense missions.
Patents and licensing
The ability of the private sector to license and exploit
technologies developed internally by Department of Defense
(DOD) research and engineering organizations has been a
cornerstone of the nation's high-tech industry. The licensing
agreements established under legislation such as the Bayh-Dole
Act and the Stevenson-Wydler Act have helped fuel our nation's
technical innovation and have produced many of the defense
technologies that the military uses today.
The committee notes that a recent study by the Director of
Defense, Research, and Engineering examined the value of
licensing and patent marketing to DOD laboratories. The report
concludes that licensing of DOD inventions provides three major
benefits: new commercial products available to DOD, new working
relationships with private industry, and revenue for DOD
laboratories. In addition, royalty income can provide an
excellent incentive to inventors at DOD laboratories and can
stimulate technical innovation.
The study also concluded, however, that the Department of
Defense does a poor job in managing and marketing its
intellectual property. It notes that DOD receives less than
$2.0 million annually from its licensing agreements as compared
to the National Institutes of Health, which earns over $45.0
million in royalties annually. The study concludes that ``with
more aggressive patent marketing by the DOD laboratories that
licensing could increase, leading to an increase in royalty
income for the labs.'' This is particularly true for
biomedical, advanced electronics, and computer technologies
currently being developed by defense laboratories.
The committee directs the Department to develop a plan and
to report to Congress on specific strategies for marketing its
intellectual property more aggressively and for exploiting the
findings of the Director of Defense Research and Engineering's
report. The plan and subsequent report to the committee should
include recommendations on staffing levels for appropriate
intellectual property experts, discussion on the role of the
Offices of Research and Technology Applications (ORTAs),
descriptions of planned cooperative activities with the private
sector and other government agencies, and analyses of any
regulatory or statutory barriers to fully marketing DOD
intellectual property. The report should also forecast the
potential for increased revenues to the Department's
laboratories as a result of more aggressive marketing efforts.
National Consortium for Biodefense
The committee recognizes that the threat of bioterrorism
and biowarfare is real and growing. Accordingly, the committee
urges the Department of Defense (DOD) to study the feasibility
of establishing, on a national basis, a university, public
health, and industry consortium on biodefense research and
analysis. The consortium would be intended to serve various
functions: to evaluate the potential of various biological
threat agents to humans, animals, and crops; to provide
analysis of possible genetic engineering of biological agents;
to evaluate possible production and deployment methods used by
terrorists, including the signatures of possible production
facilities; to conduct research in, but not limited to, the
areas of medical microbiology, molecular biology, epidemiology,
and immunological methods for the development of protection
against biological agents; to research early detection,
warning, and monitoring of biological outbreaks; to study
disinfection of large contaminated areas or buildings; to
evaluate technical countermeasures to biological aerosols and
agents; and to undertake a program of strategy, policy, and
management studies and public education and public health
education and training for biodefense, including conflict
analysis and resolution in biowarfare and bioterrorism. Such a
feasibility study should include a projection of the costs that
would be associated with establishing such a national
consortium.
Patriot Advanced Capability-3
The committee is aware that the Department of Defense has
considered requesting authority for a multiyear procurement of
Patriot Advanced Capability-3 (PAC-3) missiles. Consistent with
its long support for the deployment of robust theater missile
defenses, the committee encourages the Department to develop a
PAC-3 acquisition plan that will maximize production
efficiencies and reduce acquisition costs in the future.
Rotorcraft external airbag protection system
Each year, Navy rotorcraft experience an average of 11.4
non-combat related mishaps, with an average of almost 20
fatalities per year. The Navy accident reviews have classified
a large majority of these mishaps as ``survivable,'' yet 84
percent of all fatalities occur in these potentially survivable
mishaps. Mishaps over water are particularly deadlysince
rotorcraft landing gear provides no cushioning effect on water impact
and water quickly envelops the fuselage.
The committee understands that one possible alternative for
alleviating this situation is a promising technology that would
position airbags on the underside of the rotorcraft. Such a
device would activate in proximity to the ground or water when
the aircraft is subjected to an emergency descent.
The committee believes the Navy should investigate using
this technology approach to saving lives. The Navy should
investigate whether: (1) the technology has the potential for
reducing fatalities in ``survivable'' accidents; and (2) the
costs and potential weight penalties would make this an
affordable system. Since all military services operate
rotorcraft, the Navy should share the results of its efforts
with the other services.
Sensor instrumentation
Many weapons systems are dependent upon gas turbine engines
for power and propulsion. In order to adequately monitor high
temperature components of these systems, new instrumentation
must be developed. The committee encourages the military
services to explore the development of photonic sensor systems
for gas turbine engines in order to increase efficiency,
reliability, and performance.
Space-based Laser
The committee is aware that the Missile Defense Agency is
finalizing its Affordable Concept Study for the development of
Space-based Laser technologies. This study was undertaken after
the cancellation of the Space-based Laser Integrated Flight
Experiment (IFX) in the Department of Defense Appropriations
Act for Fiscal Year 2002 (P.L. 107-117). The committee agrees
that a thorough evaluation is necessary. The committee believes
that any plan must include the preservation of high energy
laser risk reduction activities and facilities which, if lost,
would be costly to regenerate.
Treatment of decompression sickness
The budget request included no research and development
funds for the investigation of treatments for decompression
sickness experienced by submariners or Navy diving personnel
when they are moved suddenly from one atmospheric pressure to
another. Decompression sickness would most likely occur as a
result of an emergency situation that would not allow for the
slow decompression of gases in the blood and tissues. Current
treatment for decompression sickness requires recompression
followed by slow decompression in a special chamber.
Preliminary results indicate that blood substitutes have the
potential to prevent the adverse effects of sudden
recompression, which include neurological injury, muscle and
joint pains, circulatory disaster, heart attack, pulmonary
dysfunction, and death. Therefore, the committee strongly
supports and encourages Navy development, with private and
public partners, of initiatives which could lead to better
treatment and prevention of decompression sickness.
TITLE III--OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE
Explanation of tables
The following tables provide the program-level detailed
guidance for the funding authorized in title III of this Act.
The tables also display the funding requested by the
administration in the fiscal year 2003 budget request for
operation and maintenance (O&M) programs and indicate those
programs for which the committee either increased or decreased
the requested amounts. As in the past, the administration may
not exceed the authorized amounts (as set forth in the tables
or, if unchanged from the administration request, as set forth
in the Department of Defense's budget justification documents)
without a reprogramming action in accordance with established
procedures. Unless noted in the report, funding changes to the
budget request are made without prejudice.
The President's budget request included $20.1 billion in
the operation and maintenance title for the Defense Emergency
Response Fund (DERF). Of this amount, $10.1 billion was
requested for specific programs and $10.0 billion was requested
as unspecified contingency funding for continuing the war on
terrorism into fiscal year 2003. The authorization for this
unspecified $10.0 billion, which would fund the costs of
ongoing military operations as well as the additional pay and
benefits of mobilized guard and reserve personnel, thus
involving multiple appropriation accounts, has been transferred
to title X of this Act. Funds transferred to the accounts in
this title from the DERF are displayed on the tables that
follow as increases to the amount requested for those programs
in the O&M accounts. Programs for which funds were transferred
from the DERF are annotated to indicate that funds were
originally requested in the DERF.
Of the specified $10.1 billion, approximately $4.3 billion
was requested for programs that fall in the operation and
maintenance title, including O&M and revolving fund accounts.
The committee's recommended authorizations for those programs
are included in this title. Authorizations reflecting the
committee's actions on the balance of the $10.1 billion can be
found in their respective titles of this Act.
The budget request also proposed to change the accounting
structure for various health and retirement benefits of federal
civilian employees to an accrual basis. As discussed elsewhere
in this report, the committee did not agree with this proposed
change. The operation and maintenance accounts in this title
have been reduced by $2.3 billion to reflect the appropriate
funding levels for defense programs under current accounting
procedures. The authorizations for revolving and management
funds in this title have been reduced by $839.1 million for
this same reason. These reductions would not entail any change
to the benefits of federal civilian employees funded by either
direct appropriations or through the working capital funds.
SUBTITLE A--AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS
Armed Forces Retirement Home (sec. 303)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
the appropriation of $69.9 million from the Armed Forces
Retirement Home Trust Fund for fiscal year 2003.
Range enhancement initiative fund (sec. 304)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
$20.0 million for a Range Enhancement Initiative Fund that is
described in more detail in the training range enhancement
initiative section of this title. Amounts in this fund would be
available to purchase restrictive easements, including
easements entered into under agreements with private entities
that would directly or indirectly enhance or protect military
training operations. The committee has included a provision
providing permanent authority to enter into such agreements in
title XVIII of this act. Purchases of title to lands, as
opposed to the purchase of easements, by the military
departments for similar purposes would continue to be requested
and authorized as military construction projects. The committee
intends to evaluate the annual funding levels required for this
fund in future years based on the experience with this fund in
fiscal year 2003.
SUBTITLE B--ENVIRONMENTAL PROVISIONS
Enhancement of authority on cooperative agreements for environmental
purposes (sec. 311)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
the Secretary of Defense to enter into and fund cooperative
agreements with Federal, State and local agencies, as well as
Indian tribes, to obtain services to assist the Secretary in
carrying out the Defense Environmental Restoration Program.
This provision would extend to environmental cooperative
agreements the authority granted in section 2410a of title 10,
United States Code, to contract for severable services for a
period that begins in one fiscal year and ends in the next
fiscal year.
Modification of authority to carry out construction projects for
environmental responses (sec. 312)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Defense to fund environmental restoration projects
through the Environmental Restoration Accounts of the
Department of Defense (DOD).
Since the beginning of the DOD environmental restoration
program, restoration projects have been classified as repair
and funded through the Department's Environmental Restoration
Accounts. Earlier this year, the Department interpreted a
provision of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal
Year 1998 to require that environmental restoration projects be
classified as military construction. This new interpretation
had the effect of imposing notification and funding
requirements on environmental restoration projects that are
likely to result in a backlog of projects and an inability to
meet legally enforceable deadlines applicable to such projects.
The committee directs DOD to fund environmental restoration
projects through the Environmental Restoration Accounts,
thereby reinstating the historic funding approach taken by the
Department.
Increased procurement of environmentally preferable products and
services (sec. 313)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Defense to establish a program for the acquisition
of procurement items that are environmentally preferable or are
made with recovered materials. At a minimum, the program would
include three elements: (1) the establishment of goals for the
increased purchase of procurement items that are
environmentally preferable or are made with recovered
materials; (2) a tracking system to enable the Department to
monitor its progress in achieving these goals; and (3) training
and education programs that the Secretary of Defense considers
appropriate to ensure that Department of Defense (DOD)
officials and contractors are aware of these goals.
Last year, the General Accounting Office (GAO) issued a
report which criticized the performance of federal agencies,
including the Department of Defense, in purchasing
environmentally preferable products. The report concluded:
Even today, many procuring officials and other
federal purchasers either do not know about or
implement the [requirements of the Resource
Conservation and Recovery Act of 1976] for establishing
affirmative procurement programs, particularly
promotion and review and monitoring. * * *
[Federal agencies] have not developed systems to
track their purchases of such products, relying instead
on inadequate estimates. Nor have they put programs in
place to review and monitor progress. * * * [The Department
of] Defense, the largest procuring agency, believes efforts
to monitor and report on recycled-content product purchases
conflict with the streamlining goals of procurement reform.
The committee recognizes that the review and monitoring of
purchases of procurement items that are environmentally
preferable or are made with recovered materials entails
administrative costs but agrees with the GAO conclusion that an
effective program requires such review and monitoring. For this
reason, the goals and tracking system required by the provision
recommended by the committee would apply only to direct DOD
purchases of procurement items, not to products and services
purchased by DOD contractors and subcontractors (even if they
are incorporated into procurement items purchased by the
Department). The committee understands that the administration
has modified the Federal Procurement Data System to collect
limited information on products and services purchased by
contractors and subcontractors and encourages the
administration to continue this effort.
The provision would also exclude credit card purchases and
other local purchases that are made outside the Department's
requisitioning system, because the committee understands that
the Department currently lacks the ability to track such
purchases. The committee directs the Department to review its
local purchasing practices and take appropriate steps to ensure
compliance with the preference for procurement items that are
environmentally preferable or are made with recovered
materials.
In addition, the committee directs the Department to
conduct a review of other DOD purchasing practices to determine
the extent to which these practices are consistent with the
objective of increasing the procurement of items that are
environmentally preferable or are made with recovered
materials. At a minimum, the Secretary should:
(1) review sample purchases of inventory items by the
Defense Logistics Agency to determine the type of
packaging being used for such items and the extent to
which such packaging is made with recovered materials;
(2) review sample construction and renovation
contracts to determine whether the contracts provide
appropriate direction on the disposal and recycling of
materials and/or any preference for the use of products
that are made with recovered materials and other
environmentally preferable products;
(3) review sample purchases of information technology
products to determine the type of packaging being used
for such items and the extent to which such packaging
is made with recovered materials; and
(4) review sample fleet management contracts to
determine the extent to which these contracts provide a
preference for the use of re-refined motor oil.
The results of these reviews should be included in the
Secretary's initial report required by subsection (d) of this
provision.
Cleanup of unexploded ordnance on Kaho'olawe Island, Hawaii (sec. 314)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of the Navy to continue cleanup activities on
Kaho'olawe Island, Hawaii, until the Navy has inspected and
assessed 100 percent of the island; cleared 75 percent of the
island in accordance with Tier One standards; and cleared 25
percent of the island in accordance with Tier Two standards.
Title X of the Department of Defense Appropriations Act for
Fiscal Year 1994 (Public Law 103-139) established the
Kaho'olawe Island Conveyance, Remediation, and Environmental
Restoration Trust Fund (the Kaho'olawe Trust Fund) to ensure
the clearance and removal of unexploded ordnance from
Kaho'olawe Island, Hawaii. Title X authorized the appropriation
of $400.0 million to the Kaho'olawe Trust Fund to carry out the
cleanup.
Finally, Title X provided for the Secretary of the Navy to
retain control over the island ``until either clearance and
restoration are completed or within no more than ten years
after the date of enactment of this Act, whichever comes
first.'' The 10-year period established in Title X is scheduled
to expire in fiscal year 2003.
Title X was implemented through a May 1994 Memorandum of
Understanding between the United States Department of the Navy
and the State of Hawaii (the MOU). Under the MOU, the Navy
agreed to clear up to 25 percent of the surface of the island
to a Tier Two standard and 100 percent of the surface to a Tier
One standard. Tier One and Tier Two standards are defined in
the MOU.
Over the last nine years, Congress has appropriated $307.0
million to the Kaho'olawe Trust Fund. The Navy estimates that:
(1) an additional appropriation of $75.0 million will be needed
to achieve an optimum contractor cleanup effort before the
agreement is closed out; and (2) such an appropriation would
enable the Navy to inspect and assess 100 percent of the
island, clear 75 percent of the island in accordance with Tier
One standards, and clear 25 percent of the island in accordance
with Tier Two standards before the scheduled deadline for
completion of the cleanup.
The committee understands that when Title X was enacted
in1994, insufficient information was available to the Department of the
Navy and the Congress to include a firm performance standard for
completion of the cleanup effort. After nine years of investigation and
remediation, however, the committee believes that a performance
standard is now more appropriate than an arbitrary date as a standard
for completion.
Accordingly, the provision recommended by the committee
would override the deadline established in Title X and the MOU
for completion of the cleanup. Instead, the committee
recommends substituting a performance standard based on the
Navy's estimate of what it should be able to accomplish over
the next year, based on an optimum contractor cleanup effort.
The committee understands that the objectives established
in this provision will be interpreted in the same manner as
similar objectives in Title X and the MOU, to exclude areas
determined to be inaccessible by the Navy and the Kaho'olawe
Island Restoration Committee.
SUBTITLE C--DEFENSE DEPENDENTS' EDUCATION
Assistance to local educational agencies that benefit dependents of
members of the Armed Forces and Department of Defense civilian
employees (sec. 331)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
$30.0 million for continuation of the Department of Defense
assistance program to local educational agencies that benefit
dependents of service members and Department of Defense
civilian employees.
Impact aid for children with severe disabilities (sec. 332)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
$5.0 million for continuation of the Department of Defense
assistance program to local educational agencies that benefit
dependents with severe disabilities.
Options for funding dependent summer school programs (sec. 333)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Defense to provide dependent summer school
programs on the same financial basis as programs offered during
the regular school year. The recommended provision authorizes
the Secretary to charge reasonable fees for all or portions of
such summer school programs to the extent that the Secretary
deems appropriate.
Comptroller General study of adequacy of compensation provided for
teachers in the Department of Defense Overseas Dependents'
Schools (sec. 334)
The committee recommends a provision that would extend from
May 1, 2002 to December 12, 2002 the date for the Comptroller
General to report on a study on whether compensation for
teachers in the Department of Defense dependents' education
program is adequate for recruiting and retaining high quality
teachers, and whether changes in the methodology for computing
teacher pay are necessary. The recommended provision would also
require the Comptroller General, in carrying out the study, to
consider whether the process for setting teacher compensation
is efficient and cost-effective.
SUBTITLE D--OTHER MATTERS
Use of humanitarian and civic assistance funds for reserve component
members of Special Operations Command engaged in activities
related to clearance of landmines (sec. 341)
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 401(c) of title 10, United States Code, to allow up to
10 percent of the funding for a fiscal year for humanitarian
and civic assistance to be expended for the pay and allowances
of reserve component personnel of the Special Operations
Command (SOCOM) performing duty in connection with training and
activities related to the clearing of landmines for
humanitarian purposes.
Special Operations Forces (SOF) are uniquely qualified to
conduct humanitarian demining training, one of their collateral
missions. However, in recent years humanitarian demining
missions had to be cancelled as active duty SOF have been
unavailable for assignment to conduct humanitarian demining
missions, and the cost of reserve SOF participation in these
missions could not be funded with humanitarian and civic
assistance funds. Allowing humanitarian and civic assistance
funds to cover the pay and allowances of reserve component
SOCOM personnel would further the U.S. Government's foreign and
defense policies and would support the readiness of SOCOM
reserve component personnel by providing critical mission
training in language and cultural skills.
Calculation of five-year period of limitation for Navy-Marine Corps
Intranet contract (sec. 342)
The committee recommends a provision that would
authorizethe Department of Defense to modify the start date of the
Navy-Marine Corps Intranet (NMCI) contract for the purposes of the law
which limits multiyear contracts to five years. Under the provision,
the five-year period would begin on the date that the Under Secretary
of Defense for Acquisition, Technology and Logistics (USD(AT&L)) and
the Chief Information Officer (CIO) of the Department of Defense
jointly approve ordering the ``second increment'' beyond the initial
test population of additional NMCI work stations. In accordance with
the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2002, this
approval is contingent upon successful completion of testing that has
been independently validated and approved by the Institute for Defense
Analyses.
The committee recognizes that the Navy may renegotiate the
NMCI contract to take advantage of the authority provided by
this section. The Committee expects that the Secretary of the
Navy would not agree to any such modification unless he
determines that the terms and conditions would be in the best
interests of the Department of Defense.
Reimbursement for Reserve intelligence support (sec. 343)
The committee recommends a provision that would add a new
section to Chapter 1003 of title 10, United States Code, to
authorize the use of operation and maintenance funds of the
military departments, combatant commands, and defense agencies
to reimburse pay, allowances and other expenses when members of
the National Guard and Reserve provide intelligence or
counterintelligence support to such departments, commands or
agencies.
Clarification of required core logistics capabilities (sec. 344)
In an October 2001 report, the General Accounting Office
(GAO) recommended that Congress clarify the law with respect to
the Department of Defense's non-maintenance core logistics
policies to ensure that the Department maintains the full range
of logistics capabilities necessary to support military weapons
systems and equipment in both peacetime and war. The committee
believes that logistics support functions are an integral part
of the process of maintaining military equipment. Therefore,
the committee recommends a provision to clarify that core
logistics capabilities include acquisition logistics, supply
management, system engineering, maintenance, and modification
management. The committee is also concerned that existing
Department policies on core logistics capabilities do not
provide sufficient direction about the maintenance of future
weapons systems. This limitation inhibits the ability of the
public depot system to plan for future work. Current law
requires the Department of Defense to determine the core
logistics requirements for new weapons systems within four
years after initial operational capability (IOC). The
committee's provision would shorten this time period to two
years. The committee believes that this change would improve
the Department's planning for future workloads in the public
and private logistics sectors and allow for better workload and
workforce planning within the public depots.
Rebate agreements under the special supplemental food program (sec.
345)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
the Secretary of Defense to enter into contracts for rebates
with producers of food products for the exclusive right to
provide food in Navy Exchange Markets as supplemental food for
the Women, Infants, and Children (WIC) Overseas Program. The
Secretary already has this authority for products sold in
commissary stores. The recommended provision would also
increase the maximum period of these exclusive rights contracts
from one year to three years.
ADDITIONAL MATTERS OF INTEREST
Anti-corrosion initiative
The committee continues to be concerned that the Department
of Defense (DOD) is overlooking efficiencies and improvements
to readiness by its lack of focus on prevention and mitigation
of corrosion. Corrosion negatively affects readiness and drains
scarce resources, which in turn cause further readiness
shortfalls. Readiness impacts are obvious: the most recent
Quarterly Readiness Report to the Congress (December 2001)
stated that ``corrosion is a primary degrader to the
maintenance of Marine Corps vehicles,'' and that corrosion
``contributes to increased maintenance costs * * * and to
structural damage.'' A study conducted for the Navy found that
corrosion was a key contributor to ``tired wires'' in the F-14
aircraft and that improvements would likely improve safety,
increase the efficiency of other maintenance efforts, and
dramatically increase aircraft material condition.
The readiness impact of corrosion on facilities has also
been documented. A March 1999 study conducted by the Air Force
Inspector General found buildings that had corroded so badly
that they could not be used for munitions operations, further
depleting scarce munitions storage space. At one
overseasmunitions storage area, trash cans covered corroded ventilator
shafts to prevent moisture from entering the shelter.
The committee notes that the costs of corrosion are also
significant. A recent study conducted for the Federal Highway
Administration in accordance with the Transportation Equity Act
for the 21st Century (Public Law 105-178) estimated that the
Defense Department's annual cost of corroded equipment and
infrastructure was $20.0 billion. The study also stated that
corrosion is ``the number one cost driver in life cycle
costs.'' Another study conducted in 1996 by the DOD Inspector
General found that the Air Force spent approximately $1 billion
annually to repair and prevent corrosion damage on its aircraft
alone. Corrosion prevention can make serious progress toward
avoiding some of these costs. For example, one unit alone, the
3rd Force Service Support Group (3D FSSG) of the III Marine
Expeditionary Force, saved $28.4 million over two years with
the Corrosion Rehabilitation Facility it operates at Camp
Kinser, Okinawa. The committee believes corrosion policies can
be better coordinated within DOD. Therefore, the committee
recommends a provision, discussed more fully in title IX, to
establish a senior official responsible for anti-corrosion
activities. The committee recommends an increase of $3.0
million for the Office of the Secretary of Defense to support
these additional policy development and coordination
responsibilities.
In addition, the committee recommends an increase of $12.0
million for current anti-corrosion programs, including $2.0
million for Operation and Maintenance, Navy to complete testing
of ambient temperature cure glass coatings; $6.0 million for
Operation and Maintenance, Army to continue applications of
corrosion prevention and control coatings for vehicles; and
$1.0 million in Operation and Maintenance for each of the four
military services to continue testing of promising anti-
corrosion technologies.
The committee believes that the services should capitalize
on the opportunities to coordinate existing corrosion treatment
programs with research efforts ongoing in academia to make the
best use of these funds. The committee feels strongly that
anti-corrosion efforts are appropriate throughout the life
cycle of facilities and equipment and recommends further
increases of $23.5 million for research and development
programs to support corrosion prevention throughout the
development of new materials, coatings, and manufacturing
techniques. These increases are discussed in greater detail in
title II.
Enhanced secure communications to reserve components
The budget request for the Defense Emergency Response Fund
included $199.3 million for the reserve components under the
overall heading of Commander in Chief Homeland Security. The
committee supports information technologies programs for the
reserve components, including particularly secure interstate
voice, video, and data transmission for classified traffic. The
committee, nevertheless, does not believe that the full program
as contained in the budget request can be executed within the
next fiscal year. Accordingly, the committee recommends a
reduction in funding for National Guard operation and
maintenance by $40.0 million and Army Reserve operation and
maintenance by $8.0 million.
Additionally, to facilitate future budget decisions, the
committee requests the future combatant commander for homeland
security to conduct a review of the level to which such secure
voice, video, and data transmission needs to be extended for
the National Guard and Army Reserve. The commander shall report
the results of such review to the congressional defense
committees no later than April 30, 2003.
Foreign currency fluctuation
The General Accounting Office has estimated that the
Department of Defense's fiscal year 2003 budget request
overestimates the amounts needed to cover foreign currency
fluctuation by $615.2 million. Therefore, the committee
recommends a decrease of $615.2 million.
Personal gear for service members
The committee recommends an increase of $12.0 million for
the Army National Guard and $4.0 million for the Air National
Guard to purchase individual combat clothing and equipment,
including the Extended Cold Weather Clothing System (ECWCS).
The committee believes that additional outerwear to protect
soldiers and airmen from cold and/or wet weather would improve
their morale and safety in the field.
Training range enhancement initiative
The committee is strongly committed to ensuring that U.S.
military services receive the best possible training. The
committee is concerned that funding to maintain and improve
training ranges is scarce, despite numerous requirements.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $126.0
million for training range enhancements.
Of this amount, the committee recommends an increase of
$20.0 million to establish a Range Enhancement Initiative Fund
within the Office of the Secretary of Defense (OSD). OSD
wouldprovide these funds to the military services as needed to support
the purchase of easements for land near military installations, thereby
improving combat training. This model has already proven successful at
Fort Bragg, where, under terms of a cooperative agreement, the Army
transferred $8.5 million to outside partners, who provided an
additional $7.0 million in private matching funds. These funds were
used to purchase critical conservation lands near Fort Bragg which the
private partners manage and own. In return, the Army retains a
permanent conservation easement and the right to conduct special forces
and airborne training on the land.
The committee understands that many bases still face
challenges ensuring adequate land for training and operations.
To address one such challenge, the committee recommends that
the Department of Defense purchase a restrictive easement that
would protect operations at Campbell Army Airfield at Fort
Campbell, Kentucky. The committee understands that up to $7.3
million would be required if no private funds were available.
The committee further understands that the potential for
partnerships similar to the one at Fort Bragg exists at other
installations. The committee expects OSD to allocate resources
from the Range Enhancement Initiative Fund to those
installations which could realize the highest military value
from such partnerships. The committee has included a provision
in title XXVIII of this act that would provide permanent
authorization for such partnerships. Because the partnerships
must be negotiated with other entities, the committee believes
funds appropriated for these purposes should be available for
obligation for more than one year.
The remaining $106.0 million in operation and maintenance
funds would support improvements to Army, Navy, Air Force, and
Marine Corps training ranges. This includes:
$15.7 million for the Army's integrated training area
management efforts;
$13.2 million for improvements to Army live fire
ranges and targeting systems;
$1.2 million for improvements to the Army's combat
training centers, including civilian support for
exercises;
$15.0 million for the Navy to continue to develop and
implement the fleet Training Resource Strategy;
$8.0 million for the Navy to increase fleet range
operations support;
$23.5 million for Air Force joint training and
deployment preparation exercises such as Red and Maple
Flag and Cope Thunder;
$300,000 for the Air Force's Joint Advanced Weapon
Scoring System;
$4.0 million for improved targets, including urban
training, time critical targets, designs, etc.;
$1.2 million for land planning outreach and
restoration for the Air Force;
$1.5 million for Air National Guard range emitters;
$2.1 million for Air Force airspace control and
information operations range infrastructure
improvements;
$10.4 million to remove range residue and repair
supporting infrastructure ($3.4 million for the active
Air Force, $400,000 for the Air Force Reserve, and $6.6
million for the Air National Guard);
$3.2 million for Air Force security sensor upgrades
and facility repairs;
$2.8 million for primary Air Force range training
infrastructure;
$1.6 million for the Marine Corps to improve the
management, maintenance, and certification of training
areas; and
$2.3 million to adequately maintain equipment for
combined arms exercises at 29 Palms, California.
Travel
The budget request included $3.2 billion for the travel of
Department of Defense (DOD) employees. The committee recommends
a reduction of $159.8 million to return the DOD travel budget
to fiscal year 2002 levels (adjusted for inflation).
Army
Battlefield mobility enhancers
The committee recommends an increase of $5.0 million to
Army operation and maintenance accounts for lightweight
tactical utility vehicles (M-Gators). The committee supports
efforts by the Army to improve casualty evacuation and
resupply.
Information operations
The budget request for the Defense Emergency Response Fund
(DERF) included $28.1 million for at least six separate Army
programs to improve both offensive and defensive information
operations. While the committee supports increased information
security, the committee finds these requests duplicative.
Therefore, the committee recommends a decrease of $10.0 million
to the Operation and Maintenance, Army account.
Aviation training backlog
The committee commends the Army for developing a
comprehensive plan to transform its aviation units, including
pilot training. This transformation is complicated by a current
significant backlog in pilot training. In transitioning newer
aircraft to the Reserves and National Guard, pilots must be
retrained in the new aircraft. At the same time, the Aviation
School has revised its flight school curricula to ensure that
pilots arrive in their field units at higher readiness levels,
having spent more time in their primary combat aircraft.
Finally, the committee understands that maintenance challenges
have resulted in fewer aircraft available for training new
pilots, creating a short-term training backlog.
The committee recommends an increase of $55.0 million to
fund increased training for pilots from those Reserve and
National Guard units scheduled to transition in fiscal year
2003 and to enhance field unit readiness by increasing active
duty pilots' experience in their combat aircraft and reducing
the backlog of pilots awaiting training.
Utilities privatization
The budget request included $15.3 million to accelerate the
Army's plan to complete privatization of all utility systems by
September 30, 2003, a 141 percent increase over fiscal year
2002 levels. The committee understands that the Army's
utilities privatization efforts have been proceeding more
slowly than has been anticipated and believes that significant
funding increases would not be needed. Therefore, the committee
recommends a reduction of $8.9 million to the requested amount.
Facilities sustainment
The budget request included $257.3 million for sustainment,
restoration, and modernization (SRM) of Army infrastructure,
$8.5 million less than fiscal year 2002 levels. This reduction
means that the Army will face even greater challenges as it
attempts to sustain and repair its facilities. The reduction is
even more troubling when viewed in conjunction with the
decreases in military construction, which fell by $328.3
million between fiscal year 2002 and fiscal year 2003. The
committee is concerned that this decrease would harm the
quality of life and work for Army service members and would
have negative effects on readiness. Therefore, the committee
recommends an increase of $86.0 million to sustain and maintain
existing Army infrastructure.
Navy
Ship depot maintenance
The budget request included $3.5 billion for maintenance of
Navy ships. The committee understands that the ongoing war on
terrorism has created additional maintenance needs that were
not anticipated at the time the budget was developed.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $90.0
million for ship depot maintenance.
The committee recognizes that the Navy has a difficult
challenge managing scheduled maintenance when funding is
limited and emergent repairs and new requirements arise. For
example, in fiscal year 2002, war-related requirements caused
the Navy to shift the maintenance availability of the USS
Scranton into fiscal year 2003. This caused the scheduled
maintenance for the USS Annapolis to move into fiscal year 2004
and also moved planned work among private and public sector
shipyards. In planning for depot maintenance activities for
fiscal year 2003, the committee believes that the Navy should
review the impact of past disruptions and work to enhance the
ability of the public and private shipyards to be able to meet
future workloads effectively.
Improved shipboard combat information center
The budget request included $424.0 million for Navy combat
communications. The committee recommends an increase of $8.0
million for improvements to the combat information center
(CIC). The CIC integrates tactical data from shipboard sensors
to provide critical, time-sensitive information for use by
Tactical Action Officers. Improvements will provide a more
user-friendly interface for computers, speed the transfer of
tactical data, and allow the use of three dimensional targeting
information.
Submarine broadcast support
The committee understands that in the past, some Navy
communications antennas have been painted with contaminated
paints. In order to prevent environmental contamination and
return these antennas to operational status as quickly as
possible, the committee recommends an increase of $1.0 million
to accelerate paint removal from naval communications towers.
Mark-45 overhauls
The budget request did not include any funding for
overhauls of the Mark-45 gun system, the Navy's primary battery
on destroyers and cruisers. The committee recommends an
increase of $5.0 million for maintenance overhauls of Mark-45
gun weapons systems, to improve their operational availability,
readiness, and safety.
Critical infrastructure protection for Navy and Marine Corps
Implementation of the Department of the Navy's Critical
Infrastructure Protection (CIP) plan raises the protection
level in Navy and Marine Corps facilities, information
processes, and weapons acquisition activities against terrorist
and other attacks. The committee is aware of the requirement to
accelerate and complete vulnerability assessments and
remediation in the Navy's mission-critical infrastructures and
in the sustaining infrastructures in the private sector.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $6.0 million
to implement the next phase of the Navy's CIP plan.
Configuration management for Navy weapons systems
The committee understands that continued modifications and
upgrades to weapons systems present a challenge for supporting
logistics and maintenance systems. Managing changes in weapons
configuration is critical to ensuring that adequate supplies
and technical skills are available for continuous operation of
critical ships and aircraft. Therefore, the committee
recommends an increase of $13.5 million for data tracking of
platforms and parts, integrating existing data systems, and
improving the Navy's tracking techniques to enhance the overall
readiness of naval weapons systems.
Air Force
Air Force flying hour program
The budget request included $6.2 billion in operation and
maintenance funds for flying hours to support Air Force
training. This amount includes a $450.0 million ``wedge'' to
support unspecified cost increases for spare parts that the Air
Force has little data to support. The committee recommends a
decrease of $287.6 million and has reallocated these funds to
other known, high-priority readiness deficiencies.
Since the mid-1990s, the Air Staff's process for
determining costs per flying hour has systemically
underestimated actual flying hour costs. In its fiscal year
2003 budget request, the Air Force assumed that it would
continue to underestimate true flying hour costs by the past
margin of error (9.7 percent, or $450.0 million). One draft
study conducted for the Air Force found that 3.5 percent of the
9.7 percent growth may be due to higher costs from aging
equipment. To explain the remaining 6.2 percent, the Air Staff
hypothesized that higher-than-budgeted inflation accounted for
an additional 3.3 percent and that 2.9 percent was due to
unanticipated cost drivers such as safety modifications,
expirations of warranties, and other factors.
The committee believes that the Air Force's explanation of
this cost increase is oversimplified and insufficient. In
particular, the committee sees no reason why the other services
would not also experience similar inflation rates or be equally
susceptible to unanticipated cost increases. Neither the Army
nor the Navy, however, included similar unspecified funding
requests in their training budgets.
Therefore, the committee recommends a decrease of 6.2
percent ($287.6 million) to the Air Force flying hour program
to be allocated proportionately across aircraft type models in
various training accounts. This reduction supports the 3.5
percent increase in flying hour costs that was based on
analysis of empirical data but denies funding for the Air
Force's inflation and ``other'' percentage increases. As stated
above, the committee believes these increases lack sufficient
justification and that the Air Force should devote greater
attention to determining the causes of cost growth.
The committee recommends a reallocation of the flying hour
wedge to programs that would improve the Air Force's
understanding of cost drivers and meet actual, validated
readiness requirements. This reallocation includes the
following increases:
(1) $20.0 million to improve maintenance data
collection systems to allow for empirical analyses of
causes of cost growth;
(2) $138.6 million for critical shortfalls in depot
maintenance to improve the reliability and equipment
condition of current aircraft. Of this amount, the
committee recommends that $60.0 million be devoted to
repairs for KC-135 aircraft, $11.5 million be available
for engine overhauls for Air Force Special Operations
Command MH-53 helicopters, and the remaining $67.1 million
directed to other high priority depot-level repairs;
(3) $80.0 million for sustainment, restoration and
modernization of infrastructure that directly supports
flying readiness, to include runways, hangars, and
flight line maintenance facilities; and
(4) $49.0 million for improvements to Air Force
training ranges as part of the training range
enhancement initiative discussed elsewhere in this
report.
Combat air patrols
The budget request for the Defense Emergency Response Fund
(DERF) included $1.2 billion for the flying hour costs
associated with continued combat air patrols (CAPs) over major
U.S. cities. The Air Force based its estimate for fiscal year
2003 CAP missions on a heightened alert posture that has since
been reduced. At the new estimated alert level, the Air Force
estimates that flying hour costs for fiscal year 2003 will be
$380.0 million. Therefore, the committee recommends a reduction
of $820.0 million from the request.
Spacelift range system
The budget request included $281.0 million for Operation
and Maintenance, Air Force for launch facilities. The committee
supports the range modernization program and recommends an
increase of $11.1 million for metric tracking, for activation
of the Western Range operations control center, and for
maintenance issues at both Eastern and Western Ranges. Delays
in the range modernization programs have resulted in increased
operating costs for legacy systems that have to be maintained
for longer periods of time than originally planned, even while
the operations tempo has increased. Sustainment and operating
costs necessary to ensure adequate levels of range safety have
increased.
Utilities costs
The Air Force's fiscal year 2003 budget request included
$392.6 million for utilities purchases, an increase of $61.9
million over inflation. None of the other services projected
similar increases in utilities costs; the Army's utilities
request decreased by $6.6 million, the Navy's increased by $6.2
million, and the Marine Corps' increased by only $1,000 over
fiscal year 2002 levels. The committee recommends a reduction
of $55.0 million to the Air Force operation and maintenance
account to bring the growth in Air Force utilities costs more
in line with those of the other services.
Defense-Wide
Joint recruiting and advertising
The budget request included $41.6 million for the Joint
Recruiting and Advertising Program (JRAP), an increase of
almost $25.0 million over historic execution levels. The
committee is concerned about the execution of such a large
increase and recommends a reduction of $24.3 million, returning
the JRAP to fiscal year 2001 levels (adjusted for inflation).
The committee fully supports the intent and activities of the
JRAP but understands that the program has experienced
consistent underexecution, a problem that may persist given the
large increase in funding requested for fiscal year 2003.
The committee directs the Comptroller General of the United
States to conduct a study of the Department of Defense's
recruiting and advertising programs. The study should include
an evaluation of: (1) the justification for each service's
advertising budget request; (2) metrics used to determine the
cost effectiveness of each of the advertising programs; (3)
whether the advertising mediums are appropriate; and (4) the
relationship of advertising budgets to recruiting outcomes. The
committee directs the Comptroller General to submit to the
Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the House of
Representatives a report on the findings of this study and any
recommendations no later than March 31, 2003.
Training and qualification shortfalls
The budget request did not include any funding to cover
costs associated with increased training requirements and
reorganization of training units to meet current Special
Operations Forces (SOF) training needs. Current operational
tempo and transformation programs have increased training
requirements, which form the critical backbone of SOF
readiness. The Special Operations Command has a requirement for
increased funding for life cycle replacements for parachute,
maritime, trauma resuscitation, and naval special warfare
equipment, and improvements to Special Forces reconnaissance
courses to increase the number of students obtaining training.
The committee strongly supports increasing and improving
training programs and equipment. Therefore, the committee
recommends an increase of $16.7 million in Operation and
Maintenance, Defense-Wide, Budget Activity 3 for SOF training
and qualification shortfalls.
Procurement Technical Assistance Program
The budget request included $19.0 million for
theProcurement Technical Assistance Program (PTAP). The committee has
supported the PTAP program since its establishment in 1985. The program
provides cost-effective technical assistance to small businesses in the
industrial base supporting national defense. The committee recommends
an increase of $5.0 million for the PTAP program.
Logistics reengineering
The budget request included $2.0 million for the Business
Process Reengineering Center (BPRC), which supports the Office
of the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology,
and Logistics (USD(AT&L)) in proposing process, organizational,
and cultural changes in the Department of Defense. The budget
request also included $7.5 million for the Change Management
Center, which also reports to USD(AT&L) and conducts commercial
practices training and enterprise change modeling. The
committee finds these requests duplicative and recommends a
reduction of $2.0 million in the Defense Logistics Agency
budget to consolidate all reengineering efforts in the Office
of the Secretary of Defense.
Cultural and historic activities
The budget request included $287,000 for cultural and
historic preservation activities funded through the Legacy
Resource Management Program. The committee recommends an
increase of $3.0 million to expand the Department of Defense's
efforts to preserve cultural and historic assets.
Base information system
The budget request included $15.0 million in the Defense-
wide operation and maintenance account over fiscal year 2002
levels to increase funding for a base information system to
gather data on the real property inventory of the Department of
Defense (DOD). The committee understands that the data system
to collect this information has been an ongoing effort within
the Department and does not believe that DOD has provided
sufficient rationale for such a sizeable increase. Therefore,
the committee recommends a decrease of $10.0 million and
authorizes a $5.0 million increase for the base information
system.
C3 and Intelligence Mission and Analysis Fund
The budget request included $4.9 million for a new
initiative to provide planning, coordination, and assessments
for the National Command Authority's computer network. The
program would also support analyses of spectrum policy,
information assurance policies, and joint intelligence
capabilities.
The committee recommends a reduction of $4.9 million in the
Office of the Secretary of Defense, Operation and Maintenance,
Defense-Wide account for this initiative. The fiscal year 2003
budget request already included substantial resources for the
many components of this fund: an additional $99.3 million over
fiscal year 2002 levels for increased support for White House
and National Command communications, networks, and network
security; an additional $17.1 million for various spectrum-
related initiatives, including support for a Department of
Defense Spectrum Defense Office; and $163.6 million for
information assurance initiatives ($18.5 million more than in
fiscal year 2002). The fiscal year 2003 request for the Defense
Emergency Response Fund included another $2.6 billion for White
House communications and security, communications, and
information operations enhancements.
The committee believes that the types of functions proposed
to be carried out with funding from the Command, Control,
Communications and Intelligence Mission and Analysis Fund are
important to our national security and worthy of support.
However, the committee believes that the funds already provided
for the programs covered by this initiative are sufficient to
support planning and oversight for these activities.
Psychological operations
The budget request for the Defense Emergency Response Fund
(DERF) included $67.0 million to support the Joint Staff's
Information Operations Task Force and other information
operations activities. The committee recognizes the value of
psychological operations and information/perception management
activities in influencing foreign audiences and in shaping the
information environment in ways that are favorable to U.S.
objectives. These operations and activities are particularly
important when U.S. forces are engaged in hostilities, as in
Afghanistan.
The committee is concerned, however, by some of the
activities that are contemplated under this heading,
particularly those activities that have traditionally been
conducted by other agencies of the U.S. Government. The
committee believes that the Department of Defense should not
seek to duplicate capabilities that are resident elsewhere in
the government, nor should the Department be acquiring
equipment for other departments and agencies of the government.
Accordingly, the committee recommends a decrease of $30.0
million for the Office of the Secretary of Defense.
Commander in Chief for Homeland Security
The budget request for the Defense Emergency Response Fund
(DERF) included $41.0 million to stand up a headquarters for
the new Commander in Chief for Homeland Security. The committee
supports the establishment of this new combatant command but
notes that the justification materials provided by the
Department of Defense only explained how $37.0 million of the
$41.0 million would be used, failing to account for the
remaining $4.0 million. The request also included $10.0 million
to provide salaries for civilian personnel who would be
employed by the new headquarters. The committee understands
that the headquarters would be supported within planned
reductions in headquarters staffs and that civilian employees
would be transferred from other existing billets. Similarly,
the committee expects the funds for the employees' salaries to
be transferred from their current parent organizations.
Therefore, the committee recommends a reduction of $14.0
million to the DERF request and recommends that the remaining
$27.0 million be transferred to Operation and Maintenance,
Defense-Wide for the Joint Staff.
Studies
The budget request included $21.1 million for the Office of
the Secretary of Defense (OSD) Study Program and $22.8 million
for studies by the Joint Staff. This funding represents an $8.8
million increase over fiscal year 2002 levels, despite the fact
that the Department of Defense's major analytic effort, the
Quadrennial Defense Review, concluded last year. Further, none
of the services requested study program increases in fiscal
year 2003; the Army's requested study budget remained constant,
the Navy's decreased by $2.3 million, and the Air Force's
decreased by $16.8 million. Therefore, the committee recommends
a reduction of $1.8 million for OSD studies and $7.0 million
for Joint Staff studies to return the OSD and Joint Staff study
budgets to fiscal year 2001 levels (adjusted for inflation), a
level of funding that should adequately support necessary
analyses.
Commercial imagery to support military requirements
The committee continues to support the use of commercial
sources to help meet the imagery requirements of United States
and coalition forces and the geospatial requirements of the
National Imagery and Mapping Agency (NIMA). Three high level
commissions, the Space Commission, the National Reconnaissance
Office (NRO) Commission, and the National Imagery and Mapping
Agency Commission, have all stated that the Department of
Defense needs to better utilize commercial imagery. The Space
Commission Report recommended that the U.S. Government pay for
a substantial portion of its national security related imagery
requirements by purchasing services from the U.S. commercial
remote sensing industry. NIMA officials have acknowledged that
significant portions of their geospatial information
requirements can be met by current generation satellites
operated by U.S. commercial remote sensing entities and that
considerably more of these requirements could be met by
proposed second generation satellites.
The committee believes that a world-class commercial remote
sensing industry is in the national interests of the United
States. Accordingly, the committee reaffirms its guidance to
NIMA, the Director of Central Intelligence, and the Department
of Defense that a comprehensive commercial imagery strategy
must be developed and implemented. The committee further
believes significant progress has been made in the past year
with respect to understanding the desirability of integrating
commercial remote sensing into a comprehensive national imagery
and geospatial architecture. Unfortunately, little progress has
been made in developing a long-term strategy or in aggressively
integrating commercial capabilities into a comprehensive
architecture. In fact, the strategy that NIMA seemed to have
adopted last year that was designed to assure the commercial
remote sensing industry of the long-term commitment and
reliability of the U.S. Government as a customer appears to
have been abandoned in favor of a return to a ``day-to-day, as
needed'' approach to commercial imagery purchases. Such
indecision is not in the best interests of the U.S. commercial
remote sensing industry or in the national security interests
of the U.S. Government.
To help the U.S. commercial remote sensing industry
succeed, the U.S. Government should become a reliable,
consistent customer of this industry's products. Additionally,
the U.S. Government must facilitate a regulatory framework for
the sale of remote sensing products, services, and technologies
that better serves U.S. national security interests.
In view of the above, the committee directs the Director of
NIMA to develop and implement a comprehensive commercial
imagery strategy that includes a budgeted, multi year spending
plan and a contractual regime for the purchase of commercial
imagery, imagery products, and services from the U.S.
commercial remote sensing industry. To assure the reputation of
the U.S. Government as a consistent, reliable customer the
Director of NIMA is encouraged to consider multi year
procurement authority and the establishment of ``anchor-
tenant'' business relationships with the commercial remote
sensing industry as this commercial imagery strategy is
established. The conference reportaccompanying the National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2002 directed the Secretary
of Defense and Director of Central Intelligence to plan and carry out a
program to purchase a significant portion of their non-time critical,
low and medium resolution satellite imagery requirements from the U.S.
commercial remote sensing industry by 2005. The committee reaffirms
that requirement and encourages the Director of NIMA to establish a
concrete plan as soon as possible that incorporates the anticipated
role and contribution of commercial remote sensing capabilities in the
overall Future Imagery Architecture (FIA). As NIMA moves toward these
future capabilities, the committee encourages NIMA to establish a
related goal that 25 percent of NIMA's geospatial information
requirements be provided by U.S. commercial remote sensing entities by
the beginning of fiscal year 2005.
The budget request, including the Defense Emergency
Response Fund (DERF), included increased funding for the
purchase of commercial imagery products. In order to implement
a comprehensive commercial imagery strategy and to ensure that
commercial imagery plays a key role in fulfilling the
Department's imagery needs, the committee recommends an
increase of $30.0 million in Operation and Maintenance,
Defense-Wide for the purchase of commercial imagery, imagery
products and services from U.S. commercial remote sensing
entities. Considering the overall importance of commercial
imagery activities to integrated U.S. intelligence and
geospatial requirements, the committee strongly urges the
Secretary of Defense and Director of NIMA to establish a new,
separate budget line for commercial imagery activities within
the Department of Defense budget request, beginning with the
fiscal year 2004 budget submission.
Guard and Reserve Components
Army information operations
The budget request included $116.0 million for land forces
readiness operations support for the Army Reserve. The
committee recommends an increase of $3.0 million to increase
the Army Reserve's support to the Department of Defense through
information operations training, future threat assessment, and
improved information attack response capabilities.
Antiterrorism/force protection access control
The budget request for the Defense Emergency Response Fund
(DERF) included $33.8 million for access control and
vulnerability assessments for six Army Reserve installations.
The Army subsequently determined that it does not have a
requirement for $13.8 million of the funding requested for this
purpose. Therefore, the committee recommends a reduction of
$13.8 million from the Operation and Maintenance, Army Reserve
account.
Initial issue
The committee is concerned that the budget request would
not adequately fund personal items for new members of the
Marine Corps Reserve. Many of these items are important for the
safety and comfort of our marines in the field. Therefore, the
committee recommends an increase of $5.0 million for the Marine
Corps Reserve to purchase individual combat clothing and
equipment items, including polar fleece pullovers.
Air Force Reserve Command server consolidation
The Air Force Reserve Command (AFRC) aims to achieve
greater efficiency and reduce total ownership costs by
consolidating its servers. The committee therefore recommends
an increase of $8.0 million for the AFRC to increase storage of
backup data, better protect its information technology
infrastructure, and improve the speed and reliability of its
computer networks through server consolidation.
National Guard support for test and evaluation
The budget request included $2.6 billion for National Guard
flying operations. These funds support flying hours for the Air
National Guard (ANG), including Defense Support Evaluation
(DSE) functions. The DSE program provides target aircraft
support for surface-to-air missile testing. The committee
recommends an increase of $2.0 million to Operation and
Maintenance, Air National Guard to train the ANG pilots that
fly in support of missile tests and evaluation.
Air National Guard medical equipment
The committee understands that the Air National Guard plans
to transition its medical service units from their current
configuration into more rapidly deployable Expeditionary
Medical Support (EMEDS) units. EMEDS units would provide a more
flexible, responsive and robust medical capability in support
of the Expeditionary Air Force and other critical missions, and
the committee fully supports this reorganization. To help
prepare Air National Guard personnel for this transition, the
committee recommends an increase of $350,000 for the Air
National Guard to begin purchasing medical equipment for
training for future EMEDSmissions.
MISCELLANEOUS ADDITIONAL ITEMS OF INTEREST
Formerly Used Defense Sites
The budget request included $212.1 million for
Environmental Restoration, Formerly Used Defense Sites (FUDS).
The committee recommends an increase of $40.0 million to the
FUDS program.
The committee notes that, until this year, the Department
of Defense had been providing a level of funding for the
cleanup of FUDS sites that was intended to result in remedies
in place by 2014. This year, the Department delayed the cleanup
goal by six years, to 2020, in order to reduce funding
requirements. At the same time, the committee understands that
the Department of Defense does not expect to have remedies in
place for unexploded ordnance problems on FUDS sites until 2089
at the earliest.
The committee does not support the six-year delay in the
FUDS cleanup objective, and it does not view 2089 as an
acceptable goal for addressing unexploded ordnance problems.
The committee expects the Department to work with the states to
prioritize FUDS sites and to develop a reasonable time line for
the cleanup of such sites.
Drug interdiction and counterdrug activities
The budget request included $998.7 million for drug
interdiction and counterdrug activities of the Department of
Defense (DOD): $848.9 million in the central transfer account
and $149.8 million in the operating budgets of the military
services for authorized counterdrug operations.
The committee recommends the following fiscal year 2003
budget for the Department's counterdrug activities:
Drug Interdiction and Counterdrug Activities, Central Transfer Account
[In thousands of dollars--May not add due to rounding]
Fiscal Year 2003 Counterdrug Request.......................... $848.9
Goal 1 (Educate America's youth).......................... 27.1
Goal 2 (Increase safety of citizens)...................... 81.8
Goal 3 (Reduce health and safety costs)................... 82.5
Goal 4 (Shield America's frontiers)....................... 335.7
Goal 5 (Break drug sources of supply)..................... 321.9
Increases:
National Guard Support.................................... 25.0
--------------------------------------------------------------
____________________________________________________
Total Fiscal Year 2003 Counterdrug Funding.............. $873.9
National Guard State Plans
The committee believes that the National Guard makes an
important contribution to the national counterdrug effort.
Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $25.0
million for the National Guard State Plans, including the
National Interagency Civil-Military Institute. As a result of
insufficient funding for fiscal year 2002, the State Plans had
to be significantly adjusted. In order to avoid even greater
disruption, DOD reprogrammed $12.2 million and, in an
unprecedented action, the Director of the Office of National
Drug Control Policy (ONDCP) used his authority to transfer $5.0
million from ONDCP's High Intensity Drug Trafficking Areas
program account to DOD and limited its availability to the
Governor's State Plans.
OTHER ITEMS OF INTEREST
Aerial refueling fee-for-service
In fiscal year 2002, the Department of Defense directed the
Navy to conduct a pilot program for aerial refueling including
tanker aircraft. The Navy has contracted aerial refueling
services using commercial aircraft configured for aerial
refueling in the conduct of this pilot program.
In testimony before the Seapower Subcommittee of the
Committee on Armed Services, the Navy Director of Air Warfare
in the Office of the Chief of Naval Operations stated that this
pilot program has been successful and has provided a beneficial
service for air wings during inter-deployment training. The
committee encourages the Department to continue to explore the
benefits of using this type of fee-for-service model in aerial
refueling to achieve potential savings and relieve the strain
on the aerial refueling fleet.
Air Force supersonic ranges
The committee understands that the Air Force currently
operates thirteen supersonic ranges, with varying restrictions
on altitude. The committee believes that additional supersonic
training opportunities may be needed and that the Air Force
should evaluate its requirements in this area. The committee
directs the Secretary of the Air Force to conduct a study of
thecosts and benefits of extending the Melrose flight training
range outside Cannon Air Force Base to include supersonic capabilities
and to report back to Congress no later than March 1, 2003.
Army ammunition plants
The committee is aware of Army proposals to pursue a
consolidated procurement contract for the operation of four
government-owned/contractor-operated ammunition plants. The
committee notes that such consolidation may cause disruption of
ammunition production or cause compression of the Load,
Assemble, and Pack (LAP) sector of ammunition manufacturing.
Therefore, the committee directs the Army to submit a report to
the congressional defense committees providing the details of
the proposed strategy, an analysis of alternatives (to include
long-term leasing), and an assessment of the impact on existing
items manufactured at the plants.
C-130 aircraft force structure
The Air Force has recently completed a comprehensive
mobility force structure plan. One of the elements of this plan
includes upgrading a portion of the C-130 aircraft tactical
airlift fleet, in both the active force and reserve components,
to a standard C-130X configuration. The rest of the force would
receive new C-130J aircraft. The C-130 aircraft is a crucial
component of intra-theater airlift.
The committee supports the general approach of modernizing
the portion of the C-130 aircraft fleet for which this makes
economic sense and replacing the remainder with new C-130J
aircraft. Nevertheless, the committee has questions about the
specific plan that would lead to a reduced inventory objective
for tactical airlift forces.
The Air Force has stated that there is an excess inventory
of C-130s. The committee is concerned about what appears to be
contradictory analysis. The Department completed the Mobility
Requirements Study for fiscal year 2005 (MRS 05) last year. MRS
05 was based on assessing the capability to fight two, nearly
simultaneous major theater wars (2 MTW). The study analyzed the
requirements for both inter-theater and intra-theater airlift
and concluded there would be shortfalls in both categories.
Although the 2 MTW-goal is no longer the basis for deciding on
force structure size or content, commanders in chief have
testified that strategic airlift is still stressed and that the
lift requirements derived in MRS 05 remain valid.
The committee notes that the Air Force intends to implement
the first C-130 force structure realignment beginning in fiscal
year 2004. To better understand the impact of any reductions in
tactical airlift, the committee directs the Secretary of
Defense to submit a report to the congressional defense
committees, no later than March 31, 2003, that would: (1)
determine the required amount of tactical airlift to execute
the national military strategy; and (2) reconcile any
differences between MRS 05 and subsequent Air Force analysis
underpinning the mobility force structure plan.
Commissary benefit
The commissary benefit is one of the most significant
components of the military compensation package and is highly
valued by military members, retirees, and their families. In
addition to providing significant monetary savings,
commissaries foster a sense of community for military families.
Although efficient operation of commissaries is essential,
the committee is concerned that proposed personnel and funding
reductions for the Defense Commissary Agency may adversely
affect the quality of service to customers. Beneficiary groups
have expressed concern that the reductions will result in
additional store closings, reduced hours, longer cashier lines,
and reduced stock on store shelves. These impacts would not be
acceptable.
The committee directs the Department of Defense to monitor
closely the impact of proposed personnel and funding reductions
to ensure that appropriate levels of service in commissaries
are maintained.
Department of Defense support to the Interallied Confederation of
Reserve Officers and the Interallied Confederation of Medical
Reserve Officers
The committee is aware that the Interallied Confederation
of Reserve Officers (CIOR) and the Interallied Confederation of
Medical Reserve Officers (CIORMR) Summer Congress is scheduled
to be held in Washington, DC in July 2004. CIOR is chartered by
the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) Military
Committee to advise NATO and support NATO's political and
military objectives in each of the member nations in the
alliance. The committee notes that historically the Department
of Defense has supported the Summer Congress. In anticipation
of the 2004 Summer Congress, the committee urges the Secretary
of Defense to fully support participation by Reserve Component
personnel in the representational, liaison, education,
training, and organizational activities of CIOR and CIORMR. In
addition to personnel, this support should include facilities
and logistics to carry out the activities of the 2004 Summer
Congress.
Formerly Used Defense Site at Waikoloa and Waimea, Hawaii Island
The Army Corps of Engineers recently determined that a
Formerly Used Defense Site (FUDS) at Waikoloa and Waimea,
Hawaii Island has ``a medium to high potential for human health
and safety risk from unexploded ordnance (UXO).'' The Army
Corps of Engineers estimated that the minimum cost of
addressing this problem would be in excess of $250.0 million.
The committee directs the Secretary of the Army to develop
a comprehensive plan for addressing risks to human health and
safety at the Waikoloa FUDS site and to report to the
congressional defense committees no later than 60 days after
the date of enactment of this bill. The Secretary's report
should include specific milestones for addressing the UXO
problem at the Waikoloa FUDS site and the Department's plans
for funding the clean-up effort.
Funding for efforts to address environmental impacts of unexploded
ordnance, discarded military munitions, and munitions
constituents
Section 312 of the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2002 established a new program element for
remediation of unexploded ordnance (UXO), discarded military
munitions, and munitions constituents in each of the
environmental restoration accounts of the Department of
Defense. The purpose of this provision was to establish a
consolidated account for all UXO-related environmental
expenditures of the Department of Defense.
The committee has since learned that a substantial amount
of funding for efforts to address environmental impacts of UXO,
discarded military munitions, and munitions constituents is
provided through accounts other than the Department's
environmental restoration accounts, and therefore could not be
included in the new program elements. For example, six separate
accounts provide funding for UXO-related environmental
expenditures in the Army alone: the environmental restoration
account; the operation and maintenance accounts of the Army and
the National Guard; the Base Realignment and Closure account;
the Formerly Used Defense Sites account; and the Army research,
development, test and evaluation accounts.
The committee directs the Department to provide a
consolidated exhibit with its budget submission in each of the
next four fiscal years. The exhibit would detail all proposed
funding, in all accounts of the Department, for efforts to
address environmental impacts of UXO, discarded military
munitions, and munitions constituents (including UXO-related
research and development).
Improved justification of service training budgets
The committee is concerned about the military services'
training budget requests and believes that additional progress
is possible in relating funds to training and training to
readiness. The reliability of the services' methods for
relating funding to training outputs varies, complicating the
committee's evaluations of whether requested funding is
sufficient for requisite training. Further, the relationship
between training levels and readiness also remains ambiguous.
The committee understands the complexity involved in clarifying
these relationships and appreciates the Department of Defense's
efforts to further define them. The committee looks forward to
seeing the results of these efforts reflected in future budget
requests.
``Starship'' repair plan
The committee is aware that the Army's 1970 Basic Combat
Training complexes, known as ``starships'', require extensive
structural, roof, and utility repairs. The Army's 2000
Installation Status Report rates these facilities at C-3 or
below, meaning that their condition impairs mission
performance. These facilities are used primarily for initial
entry training, and their poor condition has a negative impact
not only on the quality of training that recruits receive, but
also on the recruits' initial impressions of quality of life in
the military. The committee understands that the goal at Fort
Sill is to repair one of its five ``starships'' annually, with
Sustainment, Restoration, and Modernization (SRM) funds of no
more than $11.0 million. Fort Jackson, which has six starships,
spends almost $3.2 million annually for the most urgent repairs
to these facilities. Fort Benning, which has eight starship
complexes, faces similar challenges.
Since SRM fluctuates annually and is habitually
underfunded, these installations cannot develop a comprehensive
plan for the repair and maintenance of starship facilities. The
committee directs the Secretary of the Army to provide a
briefing to the congressional defense committees no later than
March 30, 2003, to include the status of all existing starship
complexes, the impact of their condition on the Army's training
mission, cost estimates to complete necessary repairs, and a
long-term plan to ensure adequate maintenance of the
facilities.
Status of the Uniform National Discharge Standards
The Uniform National Discharge Standards (UNDS) Program was
established by section 325 of the National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1996 to provide a
comprehensive set ofstandards for controlling incidental
discharges from vessels of the Armed Forces. The program provided the
Secretary of Defense and the Administrator of the Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA) joint regulatory authority on incidental
discharges within the navigable waters of the United States and waters
of the contiguous zone.
Phase I of this program identified 25 discharges that will
require control based upon the potential for adverse
environmental impacts. The committee is aware that the
development of performance standards for controlling discharges
under Phase II of the program requires extensive research and
that the Navy and EPA have attempted to expedite this process.
Unfortunately, the completion of Phase II is not expected until
calendar year 2011.
The committee is concerned about the lack of progress in
the development of performance standards under the UNDS
program. Accordingly, the committee directs the Secretary of
the Navy and Administrator of the EPA to submit a joint report
on the status of the UNDS program and efforts to expedite the
development of performance standards under that program to the
congressional defense committees by no later April 1, 2003.
Training of Navy and Marine Corps units for the global war on terrorism
and to support the global naval forces presence policy
The committee directs the Secretary of the Navy to provide
a report to the congressional defense committees on the plans
for joint task force, combined-arms training of carrier battle
groups and amphibious ready groups during fiscal year 2003.
This report should include a description of the locations where
that training will be conducted, the use of live munitions
during that training, and a description of the naval and
military capabilities to be exercised during training.
The report should also describe the Secretary's progress
regarding the identification of an alternate location or
locations for the training range at Vieques. The committee
directs the Secretary to provide this report no later than
March 1, 2003. The committee understands that, until such time
as a decision is made by the Secretary of the Navy in
accordance with section 1049 of the National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2002 (Public Law 107-107),
Navy and Marine Corps training will continue at Vieques as it
is currently.
TITLE IV--MILITARY PERSONNEL AUTHORIZATIONS
SUBTITLE A--ACTIVE FORCES
End strengths for active forces (sec. 401)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
active duty end strengths for fiscal year 2003, as shown below:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fiscal year--
2002 ----------------------------
authorization 2003 2003
request recommendation
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Army........................ 480,000 480,000 480,000
Navy........................ 376,000 375,700 375,700
Marine Corps................ 172,600 175,000 175,000
Air Force................... 358,800 359,000 359,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------
The committee is concerned that the requested end strength
may not be adequate to meet the number of missions the services
are required to perform. If an increase in end strength is
justified, the committee encourages the Secretary of Defense to
use his authority to increase the authorized end strength by up
to 2 percent to relieve personnel shortfalls, especially in
high demand, low density military skills. In the longer term,
the committee strongly encourages the Secretary of Defense to
conduct a thorough review of force structure and to assign
additional personnel to high demand, low density skill
positions.
The committee is encouraged by the Department's recently
developed human capital strategic plan to ensure that the right
number of military personnel have the requisite skills,
abilities, and motivation to effectively and efficiently
execute assigned missions. The committee will closely monitor
implementation of this plan.
Authority to increase strength and grade limitations to account for
reserve component members on active duty in support of a
contingency operation (sec. 402)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
the Secretary of Defense to increase the limit on active duty
end strength by the number of members of the reserve components
serving on active duty, with their consent, in support of
acontingency operation. The recommended provision would also authorize
the Secretary of Defense to increase the limit on the number of members
in pay grades E-8, E-9, 0-4, 0-5, 0-6 and general and flag officers by
the number of reserve component members in those pay grades serving on
active duty, with their consent, in support of a contingency operation.
Currently, reserve component members involuntarily ordered
to active duty in support of a contingency operation are
excluded from active duty end strength limitations. The
recommended provision would remove the distinction between
reserve component members who consent to serve on active duty
and those who are involuntarily ordered to active duty and
would encourage the services to use volunteers to meet
contingency operation requirements.
Increased allowance for number of Marine Corps general officers in
grades above major general (sec. 403)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
one additional Marine Corps general officer in a grade above
major general. The recommended provision does not increase the
total number of general officers in the Marine Corps.
Increase in authorized strengths for Marine Corps officers on active
duty in the grade of colonel (sec. 404)
The committee recommends a provision that would increase by
40 the authorized strength for colonels on active duty in the
Marine Corps.
SUBTITLE B--RESERVE FORCES
End strengths for Selected Reserve (sec. 411)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
Selected Reserve end strengths for fiscal year 2003, as shown
below:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fiscal year--
2002 ----------------------------
authorization 2003 2003
request recommendation
------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Army National Guard of 350,000 350,000 350,000
the United States..........
The Army Reserve............ 205,000 205,000 205,000
The Navy Reserve............ 87,000 87,800 87,800
The Marine Corps Reserve.... 39,558 39,558 39,558
The Air National Guard of 108,400 106,600 106,600
the United States..........
The Air Force Reserve....... 74,700 75,600 75,600
The Coast Guard Reserve..... 8,000 9,000 9,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------
End strengths for reserves on active duty in support of the Reserves
(sec. 412)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
the full-time support end strengths for fiscal year 2003, as
shown below:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fiscal year--
2002 ----------------------------
authorization 2003 2003
request recommendation
------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Army National Guard of 23,698 23,768 24,492
the United States..........
The Army Reserve............ 13,406 13,588 13,888
The Navy Reserve............ 14,811 14,572 14,572
The Marine Corps Reserve.... 2,261 2,261 2,261
The Air National Guard of 11,591 11,697 11,727
the United States..........
The Air Force Reserve....... 1,437 1,498 1,498
------------------------------------------------------------------------
The committee recommends an increase of 300 in the Army
Reserve, 724 in the Army National Guard, and 30 in the Air
National Guard.
The committee is disappointed that the requested end
strength for reserves on active duty in support of the Reserves
does not include an increase of 300 in the Army Reserve and 724
in the Army National Guard for full-time support.
Full-time support has been identified as the top readiness
issue of the reserve components. It directly impacts the
ability to train, administer and prepare ready units and
individuals for transition from a peacetime to a wartime
posture. The Army has a plan to incrementally increase the
Reserve Component Full-Time Support Program over 11 years to
achieve a level of full-timesupport manning of 90 percent for
units that deploy in less than 30 days; 80 percent for units that
deploy between 30 and 75 days; 70 percent for units that deploy between
75 and 180 days; and 65 percent for units deploying after 180 days.
This is the second year in a row that the requested end strength is
less than required to execute the plan. Failure to budget for and
request the planned-for increased end strength reflects less than full
commitment to the needs of the reserve components. The recommended
increase of 300 in the Army Reserve and 724 in the Army National Guard
would bring the end strength up to the level in the Army's plan for
fiscal year 2003.
The committee directs the Secretary of the Army to report,
no later than February 1, 2003, to the Committees on Armed
Services of the Senate and the House of Representatives, on
whether the Army plan is still valid and on the Army's plans
for the next five years to address full-time manning readiness
requirements of the reserve components.
End strengths for military technicians (dual status) (sec. 413)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
the minimum level of dual status technician end strengths for
fiscal year 2003, as shown below:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fiscal year--
2002 ----------------------------
authorization 2003 2003
request recommendation
------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Army Reserve............ 6,249 6,349 6,599
The Army National Guard of 23,615 23,615 24,102
the United States..........
The Air Force Reserve....... 9,818 9,911 9,911
The Air National Guard of 22,422 22,495 22,495
the United States..........
------------------------------------------------------------------------
The committee is disappointed that the requested end
strength for dual status military technicians does not include
an increase of 487 dual status military technicians in the Army
Reserve and 250 dual status military technicians in the Army
National Guard for full-time support.
Full-time support has been identified as the top readiness
issue of the reserve components. It directly impacts the
ability to train, administer and prepare ready units and
individuals for transition from a peacetime to a wartime
posture. The Army has a plan to incrementally increase the
Reserve Component Full-Time Support Program over 11 years to
achieve a level of full-time support manning of 90 percent for
units that deploy in less than 30 days; 80 percent for units
that deploy between 30 and 75 days; 70 percent for units that
deploy between 75 and 180 days; and 65 percent for units
deploying after 180 days. This is the second year in a row that
the requested end strength is less than required to execute the
plan. Failure to budget for and request the planned-for
increased end strength reflects less than full commitment to
the needs of the reserve components. The recommended increase
of 250 dual status military technicians in the Army Reserve and
487 dual status military technicians in the Army National Guard
would bring the end strength up to the level in the Army's plan
for fiscal year 2003.
The committee directs the Secretary of the Army to report,
no later than February 1, 2003, to the Committees on Armed
Services of the Senate and the House of Representatives, on
whether the Army plan is still valid and on the Army's plans
for the next five years to address full-time manning readiness
requirements of the reserve components.
Fiscal year 2003 limitation on non-dual status technicians (sec. 414)
The committee recommends a provision that would establish
numerical limits on the number of non-dual status technicians
who may be employed in the Department of Defense as of
September 30, 2003, as follows: (1) Army National Guard of the
United States, 1,600; (2) Air National Guard of the United
States, 350; (3) Army Reserve, 995; and (4) Air Force Reserve,
0.
SUBTITLE C--AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS
Authorization of appropriations for military personnel (sec. 421)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize a
total of $94.4 billion for military personnel, an increase of
$56.6 million over the budget request. This includes $32.9
million from the Defense Emergency Response Fund, $33.5 for
increases to Army National Guard and Reserve full time support,
$750 thousand for an increase to Air National Guard full time
support, and a reduction of $10.6 million for programs included
in the budget request but for which legislative authority is
not recommended. An additional $13.9 million was also reduced
from operation and maintenance accounts for the same reason.
TITLE V--MILITARY PERSONNEL POLICY
SUBTITLE A--OFFICER PERSONNEL POLICY
Extension of certain requirements and exclusions applicable to service
of general and flag officers on active duty in certain joint
duty assignments (sec. 501)
The committee recommends a provision that would extend to
December 31, 2003: (1) the requirement that the service
secretaries nominate officers for consideration for appointment
to certain senior joint officer positions; (2) the exemption of
officers serving in these positions in the grade of general or
admiral from the limitation on officers serving on active duty
in grades above major general or rear admiral; and (3) the
authority of the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff to
designate up to 12 general and flag officer positions that are
joint duty assignments for exclusion from the limitation on the
number of general and flag officers serving on active duty.
Extension of authority to waive requirement for significant joint duty
experience for appointment as a chief of a reserve component or
a National Guard director (sec. 502)
The committee recommends a provision that would extend from
October 1, 2003 to December 31, 2003, the authority for the
Secretary of Defense to waive the requirement that the Chairman
of the Joint Chiefs of Staff determine that an officer
recommended for appointment as a chief of a reserve component
or a director of the Army National Guard or Air National Guard
have significant joint duty experience.
The committee does not encourage routine waiver of the
joint duty experience qualification for officers recommended
for appointment as a chief of a reserve component or a National
Guard director. Accordingly, the committee directs that the
Secretary of Defense submit to the Committees on Armed Services
of the Senate and the House of Representatives by May 1, 2003,
a report indicating what steps have been taken to ensure that
Reserve and Guard officers receive significant joint duty
experience. The Secretary should also include in the report the
date by which the waiver will no longer be required.
SUBTITLE B--RESERVE COMPONENT PERSONNEL POLICY
Time for commencement of initial period of active duty for training
upon enlistment in reserve component (sec. 511)
The committee recommends a provision that would extend the
time limit for commencement of an initial period of active duty
for training from 270 days to one year for non-prior service
individuals who enlist in the Army National Guard or the Air
National Guard, or as a reserve for service in the Army
Reserve, Naval Reserve, Air Force Reserve, Marine Corps
Reserve, or Coast Guard Reserve.
The recommended provision would enable individuals to
enlist prior to commencing their last year of high school or a
new year of college and delay their required training until
after completion of these studies.
Authority for limited extension of medical deferment of mandatory
retirement or separation of reserve component officer (sec.
512)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
the service secretaries to defer the mandatory retirement or
separation of a reserve component officer for 30 days after
completion of an evaluation requiring hospitalization or
medical observation to determine the officer's entitlement to
retirement or separation for physical disability.
SUBTITLE C--EDUCATION AND TRAINING
Increase in authorized strengths for the service academies (sec. 521)
The committee recommends a provision that would increase
the authorized strengths of the military academies to 4,400
cadets or midshipmen. The provision would also clarify that the
service secretary can permit a variance above that limitation
by not more than 1 percent.
SUBTITLE D--DECORATIONS, AWARDS, AND COMMENDATIONS
Waiver of time limitations for award of certain decorations to certain
persons (sec. 531)
The committee recommends a provision that would waive the
statutory time limits for award of military decorations to
certain individuals who have been recommended by the service
secretaries for these awards.
Korea Defense Service Medal (sec. 532)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
service secretaries to issue a campaign medal, to be known as
the Korea Defense Service Medal, to all military personnel who
served in the Republic of Korea, or the adjacent waters,
between July 27, 1954, and a termination date determined by the
Secretary of Defense.
SUBTITLE E--NATIONAL CALL TO SERVICE
National call to service (sec. 541 and 542)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
unique incentives to encourage individuals to volunteer to
serve the nation through enlisting in the Armed Forces.
Individuals who volunteer under this program would be required
to serve on active duty for 15 months after completion of
initial entry training and could complete the remainder of
their military service obligation by choosing service on active
duty, in the Selected Reserve, in the Individual Ready Reserve,
or in another national service program designated by the
Secretary of Defense. Participants would be required to meet
all eligibility requirements for military service and would
elect one of the following incentives: (1) a $5000 bonus
payable after completion of 15 months of active duty, (2)
repayment of a qualifying student loan not to exceed $18,000,
(3) an educational allowance at the monthly rate payable under
the Montgomery GI Bill for 12 months, or (4) an educational
allowance of two-thirds of the monthly rate payable under the
Montgomery GI Bill for 36 months. National Service Plan
participants who are otherwise qualified and volunteer to
continue serving on active duty may be considered for
reenlistment or extension on active duty and any additional
benefits for which they may be eligible.
The recommended provision would also encourage and
facilitate service by requiring institutions of higher
education receiving assistance under the Higher Education Act
of 1965 to provide military recruiters: (1) the same access to
students and the institution as is provided to prospective
employers, and (2) upon request, access to the names,
addresses, and telephone listings of students, except for the
information of students who have submitted a request that the
information not be released without prior written consent.
SUBTITLE F--OTHER MATTERS
Biennial surveys on racial, ethnic, and gender issues (sec. 551)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Defense to conduct two separate biennial surveys,
rather than a single annual survey, to identify and assess
racial, ethnic, and gender issues and discrimination among
members of the Armed Forces serving on active duty and the
extent (if any) of ``hate group'' activity among such members.
The recommended provision would require one survey every two
years, a survey on racial and ethnic issues alternating with a
survey on gender issues. The committee believes that these
issues require the continued, focused attention of the military
and civilian leadership of the Department of Defense and that
these surveys play an important role in ensuring that such
attention is provided.
Leave required to be taken pending review of a recommendation for
removal by a board of inquiry (sec. 552)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
the service secretaries to require an officer to take leave
(including excess leave) while awaiting the secretary's action
on a board of inquiry's recommendation that the officer not be
retained on active duty. The officer would be afforded the
opportunity to review and rebut the report of the board of
inquiry prior to commencement of leave. The recommended
provision also requires payment of accrued pay and allowances,
reduced by other income received, if the board's recommendation
is not approved by the secretary concerned.
Stipend for participation in funeral honors details (sec. 553)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
service secretaries to provide transportation or a daily
stipend to military retirees and members of veterans
organizations or other approved organizations for service on
funeral honors details.
OTHER ITEMS OF INTEREST
Career progression of military astronauts
Military officers who have been selected for astronaut duty
with the National Aeronautics and Space Administration have,
throughout the history of the space program, performed with
distinction and made significant contributions to the national
defense. Selection for both the Pilot Astronaut Program and
Mission Specialist Program is extremely competitive, and only
military officers with extraordinary personal qualifications
and professional skills participate in these programs. The
committee is concerned about career progression opportunities
for officers who participate in the astronaut program and the
obstacles they may encounter in advancing to higher rank due to
the unique nature of the duty to which they are assigned.
The committee directs the Secretary of Defense, in
consultation with the Administrator of the National Aeronautics
and Space Administration, to submit a report to the Committees
on Armed Services of the Senate and the House of
Representatives no later than March 1, 2003, providing views on
whether military astronauts should be awarded joint duty credit
for astronaut duty or excepted from the requirement for joint
duty assignment before consideration for promotion to general
or flag officer and the rationale for these views. The report
should also describe typical career patterns of officers
selected for astronaut duties, including data about the
promotion history of military astronauts from each of the
Services, and provide recommendations regarding the management
of this unique community of officers.
Human resources strategy and community support planning
The committee is pleased at the Department's progress in
developing a human resources strategy and the concerted efforts
it has made to plan for success in military and civilian
personnel recruiting, retention, and career development. The
human capital challenges confronting the Department demand a
comprehensive plan aimed at ensuring that the personnel
requirements of the armed services and the civilian employee
workforce are met.
The committee supports the Department's commitment to a
social compact aimed at strengthening the military community
and, through this means, further improving the well being of
military members and their families. In this regard, the
committee urges the Department to continue to identify
additional ways in which military personnel can nurture their
strong familial relationships and better fulfill their
irreplaceable roles as parents.
Integrated personnel readiness system
The committee is aware of initiatives in the Army to field
an effective and efficient system for managing the readiness
and deployment of individual soldiers and units. Some of these
initiatives have already been developed and individually
deployed at the operational level and have enhanced the
readiness processing of personnel. The committee believes these
initiatives could be brought together and managed as an
integrated personnel readiness system.
The committee directs the Secretary of the Army to explore
implementation of an integrated, secure, web-based system for
mobilizing reserves and for deploying personnel. The following
capabilities should be considered: (1) a computerized
mobilization system for alerting and activating reservists and
deploying personnel; (2) a readiness system to automate the
process for determining the individual readiness of a soldier
for deployment; (3) an in-transit visibility system to automate
the tracking of personnel away from their home station,
including a time audit of duty served; and (4) a personnel
logistics system that facilitates common knowledge of
mobilization actions and logistics support.
The committee directs the Secretary of the Army to submit a
report on the potential implementation of such a system to the
Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the House of
Representatives by June 30, 2003.
TITLE VI--COMPENSATION AND OTHER PERSONNEL BENEFITS
SUBTITLE A--PAY AND ALLOWANCES
Increase in basic pay for fiscal year 2003 (sec. 601)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
an across the board military pay raise of 4.1 percent and an
additional targeted pay raise for certain experienced mid-
career personnel. The targeted raise would increase the pay for
members in pay grades: (1) E-5 to E-8, 5.5 to 6.5 percent; (2)
E-9, 6 to 6.5 percent; (3) W-1 to W-3, 5.5 to 6 percent; (4) O-
3, 5 percent; and O-4, 5.5 percent.
Rate of basic allowance for subsistence for enlisted personnel
occupying single Government quarters without adequate
availability of meals (sec. 602)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
payment of an increased amount of basic allowance for
subsistence to enlisted members who are assigned to single
Government quarters without adequate availability of meals from
a Government messing facility.
Basic allowance for housing in cases of low-cost or no-cost moves (sec.
603)
The committee recommends a provision that would extend to
locations outside the United States the authority to pay the
basic allowance for housing based on the member's former duty
assignment when the member's reassignment is a low-cost or no-
cost permanent change of station or permanent change of
assignment. This authority currently applies only to
assignments within the United States.
SUBTITLE B--BONUSES AND SPECIAL AND INCENTIVE PAYS
One-year extension of certain bonus and special pay authorities for
reserve forces (sec. 611)
The committee recommends a provision that would extend
until December 31, 2003, the authority to pay the Selected
Reserve re-enlistment bonus, the Selected Reserve enlistment
bonus, the special pay for enlisted members assigned to certain
high priority units in the Selected Reserve, the Selected
Reserve affiliation bonus, the Ready Reserve enlistment and re-
enlistment bonus, and the prior service enlistment bonus.
One-year extension of certain bonus and special pay authorities for
certain health care professionals (sec. 612)
The committee recommends a provision that would extend
until December 31, 2003, the authority for repayment of
education loans for health profession officers with wartime-
critical medical skills serving in the Selected Reserve. The
provision would also extend, until this same date, payment of
the accession bonus to nurse officer candidates, the accession
bonus for registered nurses, the special pay for nurse
anesthetists, the special pay for Selected Reserve health
professionals in critically short wartime specialties, and the
accession bonus for dental officers.
One-year extension of special pay and bonus authorities for nuclear
officers (sec. 613)
The committee recommends a provision that would extend
until December 31, 2003, the authority for: special pay for
nuclear-qualified officers extending their period of active
service, the nuclear career accession bonus, and the nuclear
career annual incentive bonus.
One-year extension of other bonus and special pay authorities (sec.
614)
The committee recommends a provision that would extend
until December 31, 2003, the authority to pay the aviation
officer retention bonus, the reenlistment bonus for active
members, the enlistment bonus for active members, the retention
bonus for members with critical military skills, and the
accession bonus for new officers in critical skills.
Increased maximum amount payable as multiyear retention bonus for
medical officers of the Armed Forces (sec. 615)
The committee recommends a provision that would increase to
$25,000 the maximum amount of the multiyear retention bonus for
certain medical officers.
Increased maximum amount payable as incentive special pay for medical
officers of the Armed Forces (sec. 616)
The committee recommends a provision that would increase to
$50,000 the maximum amount payable as special incentive pay for
certain medical officers of the Armed Forces for service during
any 12-month period beginning after fiscal year 2002.
Assignment incentive pay (sec. 617)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
the service secretaries, with the concurrence of the Secretary
of Defense, to pay a monthly incentive pay of up to $1,500 to
members serving in designated assignments. The recommended
provision requires an annual report on the administration of
this authority, including an assessment of its utility. Unless
extended, this authority would terminate three years after
enactment of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal
Year 2003.
The committee expects the Secretary of Defense to implement
assignment incentive pay so that it is equitable across the
services and in such a manner that members receiving this pay
who are not exposed to hostile fire and imminent danger do not
receive better compensation than members engaged in combat
operations, taking into account all pays, allowances, and tax
advantages.
Challenging living and working conditions and personal
sacrifice are hallmarks of military service. This type of pay
has significant potential to provide an incentive to members to
volunteer for the most challenging duty stations and enhance
the ability of the services to fill key billets with the best
qualified personnel.
The committee urges the Department to consider the use of
assignment incentive pay for military personnel assigned to
duty in Korea. The committee has received testimony on the need
for improved living conditions and additional incentives for
members ordered to duty in Korea. The committee believes this
new discretionary pay authority would provide such an
incentive.
Increased maximum amounts for prior service enlistment bonus (sec. 618)
The committee recommends a provision that would increase
the maximum amount of the prior service enlistment bonus for
certain former enlisted members who enlist in the Selected
Reserve to $8,000 for persons who enlist for six years; $4,000
for persons who enlist for three years; and $3,500 for persons
who have already received a prior service enlistment bonus for
a previous three-year enlistment period, but who reenlist or
extend the enlistment for an additional three years.
SUBTITLE C--TRAVEL AND TRANSPORTATION ALLOWANCES
Deferral of travel in connection with leave between consecutive
overseas tours (sec. 631)
The committee recommends a provision that would eliminate
the one-year limitation on use of travel and transportation
allowances provided in connection with leave between
consecutive overseas tours.
Transportation of motor vehicles for members reported missing (sec.
632)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
shipment of two privately owned motor vehicles when
transportation of household and personal effects is authorized
at government expense because the member is in a missing
status.
Destinations authorized for Government-paid transportation of enlisted
personnel for rest and recuperation upon extending duty at
designated overseas locations (sec. 633)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
enlisted personnel who agree to extend an overseas tour for a
period of not less than one year the options of round-trip
transportation to: (1) the nearest port in the 48 contiguous
states, or (2) an alternative destination at the same or lesser
cost.
Vehicle storage in lieu of transportation to United States territory
outside Continental United States (sec. 634)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize a
member to elect to store a motor vehicle at government expense
in lieu of transportation of the motor vehicle when laws,
regulations, or other restrictions preclude transportation of
the motor vehicle to the member's new duty station in Alaska,
Hawaii, Puerto Rico, the Northern Mariana Islands, Guam, or any
territory or possession of the United States.
SUBTITLE D--RETIREMENT AND SURVIVOR BENEFITS MATTERS
Phased-in authority for concurrent receipt of military retired pay and
veterans' disability compensation for certain service-connected
disabled veterans (sec. 641)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
concurrent receipt of military retired pay and veterans'
disability compensation by certain military retirees. To
qualify, members must be eligible for non-disability retirement
and for veterans' disability compensation for a service-
connected disability rated at 60 percent or higher. The amount
of retired pay would be phased in over a five-year period,
beginning with 30 percent of the otherwise authorized retired
pay in 2003 and increasing to 45 percent in 2004, 60 percent in
2005, 80 percent in 2006, and 100 percent in 2007.
The committee is pleased that the Budget Resolution
reported by the Senate Budget Committee would provide the
mandatory funding allocation to address the needs of military
retirees with service-connected disabilities rated at 60
percent or higher. The recommended provision would allow these
veterans to receive the full retired pay they earned in a
career of service to the Nation.
Increased retired pay for enlisted reserves credited with extraordinary
heroism (sec. 642)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize a
10 percent increase in the retired pay of an enlisted member of
a Reserve component when the member has been credited with
extraordinary heroism in the line of duty. The amount of
retired pay, including the 10 percent increase, shall not
exceed 75 percent of the member's retired pay base. This is
similar to the authority to increase the retired pay of
enlisted members retired with a regular retirement.
Expanded scope of authority to waive time limitations on claims for
military personnel benefits (sec. 643)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
the Secretary of Defense to waive the statute of limitations
for claims involving uniformed service members' pay,
allowances, travel, transportation, payments for accrued leave,
retired pay, and survivor benefits.
SUBTITLE E--OTHER MATTERS
Additional authority to provide assistance for families of members of
the Armed Forces (sec. 651)
The committee recommends a provision that would make
permanent the temporary authority to provide assistance to
families of members of the Armed Forces serving on active duty
to ensure that the children of such families obtain needed
child care, education, and other youth services. The assistance
would be directed primarily toward providing family support for
children of service members who are deployed, assigned to duty,
or ordered to active duty in connection with contingency
operations.
Time limitation for use of Montgomery GI Bill entitlement by members of
the Selected Reserve (sec. 652)
The committee recommends a provision that would extend from
10 to 14 years the maximum period that a member of the Selected
Reserve can use educational benefits provided under the
Montgomery GI Bill for the Selected Reserve.
Status of obligation to refund educational assistance upon failure to
participate satisfactorily in Selected Reserve (sec. 653)
The committee recommends a provision that would treat an
obligation to pay a refund to the United States for certain
educational assistance as a debt to the United States when the
obligation to pay the refund was incurred because the member
failed to participate satisfactorily in the Selected Reserve.
Prohibition on acceptance of honoraria by personnel at certain
Department of Defense schools (sec. 654)
The committee recommends a provision that would repeal a
limited exemption from the ban on receipt of honoraria by
military and civilian faculty members and students at the three
military academies and certain Department of Defense
professional schools. The exemption limits acceptance of
honoraria to $2,000. The Supreme Court has determined that the
ban on receipt of honoraria violates the First Amendment rights
of executive branch employees. Because the ban itself is no
longer effective, the exemption places a limitation on military
school faculty members and students that does not apply to
other Department of Defense employees.
OTHER ITEMS OF INTEREST
Reserve personnel compensation program review
The committee recognizes that the contributions of the
reserve components have greatly increased in the past decade.
In particular, there are certain mission-critical skills and
units among reserve forces that have been recalled for
contingency operations, placing stress upon the members and
their families. The role of reserves is so integral in the
total force that military operations involving major, extended
missions are required to include reserve participation.
The committee is concerned that the pay and benefits of
reserve personnel must appropriately compensate them for their
service. Today's total force concept, which relies heavily on
National Guard and Reserve forces for both day-to-day and
contingency operations, differs from that envisioned by the
designers of the reserve compensation and retirement system
more than a half-century ago. Accordingly, the committee
directs the Secretary of Defense to conduct a reserve personnel
compensation review aimed at determining the extent to which
personnel and compensation policies and statutes, including the
retirement system that defers eligibility for retired pay to
age 60, appropriately address the demands placed on guard and
reserve personnel. Other topics that should be reviewed include
the number of years of reserve service needed to qualify for
retirement and the comparability and sufficiency of the Reserve
Montgomery GI Bill and Reserve Survivor Benefit Plan programs.
The Secretary should report the results of this review to the
Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the House of
Representatives no later than August 1, 2003.
TITLE VII--HEALTH CARE
Eligibility of surviving dependents for TRICARE dental program benefits
after discontinuance of former enrollment (sec. 701)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
certain surviving dependents to enroll in the TRICARE dental
plan. Eligible dependents include dependents who were either
enrolled in the dental plan on the date of the death of the
military member or who had previously discontinued enrollment
because the member had been transferred to a duty station where
dental care was provided.
Advance authorization for inpatient mental health services (sec. 702)
The committee recommends a provision that would remove the
requirement for pre-admission authorization for inpatient
mental health services when such services are payable under
Medicare. The recommended provision would require the Secretary
of Defense to authorize, in advance, continued inpatient mental
health services when the services are no longer payable under
Medicare.
Continued TRICARE eligibility of dependents residing at remote
locations after departure of sponsors for unaccompanied
assignments (sec. 703)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
continued eligibility of family members for TRICARE Prime
Remote when the sponsoring service member is transferred from a
duty that qualified the family members for TRICARE Prime
Remote, and the family members remain at the current duty
location because they are not authorized to accompany the
member to the new duty assignment.
Approval of Medicare providers as TRICARE providers (sec. 704)
The committee recommends a provision that would require
that Medicare-approved health care providers also be considered
as approved TRICARE providers.
Claims information (sec. 705)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Defense, in new managed care support contracts
entered into under the TRICARE program on or after October 1,
2002, to adopt new claims requirements that are substantially
the same as Medicare claims requirements.
Department of Defense Medicare-Eligible Retiree Health Care Fund (sec.
706)
The committee recommends a provision that would require
that contributions to the Department of Defense Medicare-
Eligible Retiree Health Care Fund (the Fund) be paid from
military personnel funds. The recommended provision would also
require the participation of all the uniformed services in the
Fund.
Technical corrections relating to transitional health care for members
separated from active duty (sec. 707)
The committee recommends a provision that would correct
section 736 of the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2002 to provide transitional health care to the
dependents of members separated from active duty who are
eligible for transitional health care.
OTHER ITEMS OF INTEREST
Research on war-related illnesses
In nearly every U.S. conflict since the Civil War,
significant numbers of military personnel have emerged with
similar, poorly understood illnesses that have lacked a
specific medical diagnosis.
The most recent manifestation of this is the ``Gulf War
Illness'' exhibited by veterans of the Persian Gulf War.
Thousands of military personnel returned from serving their
country in the Gulf and reported a variety of symptoms for
which no cause has been determined. These symptoms are similar
to those of patients in the general population suffering from
chronic fatigue syndrome, fibromyalgia, and multiple chemical
sensitivity. Although environmental exposure in the Gulf War
cannot be ruled out as a cause, many believe that deployment
stress is a likely factor in causing or intensifying at least
some Gulf War illnesses.
The committee believes that it is important for the
Department of Defense to continue extensive research into the
phenomenon of undiagnosed illness, especially how physical and
psychological stress can trigger negative health impacts in the
body. This research takes on additional importance in light of
the current high rate of deployment of military personnel in
support of several ongoing contingency operations.
Reserve health care
The committee is concerned about the dissemination of
information about TRICARE to reserve force service members and
their families. Guard and reserve members who are called to
active duty, and their families, face many challenges in
accessing both information about the military health care
benefit and health care itself. Families are geographically
dispersed, often not within driving distance of a military
treatment facility or TRICARE Service Center. Some families
live in different states and/or TRICARE regions from where the
member's unit is based or from where the member is mobilized.
In locations away from concentrated military populations, many
health care providers are not familiar with TRICARE.
The multitude of types and lengths of call-ups creates
confusion about family member eligibility for each of the
TRICARE options and the reserve family health care
demonstration. Therefore, conveying accurate information about
benefits and options is critical. The committee is aware that
some reservists have not received sufficient, accurate
information on TRICARE program options, transitional health
care benefits, and associated program and cost information
necessary to make informed health care decisions.
The committee urges the Department, especially Lead Agents
of the TRICARE regions, to make a renewed effort to ensure that
reserve force members and their families receive timely and
appropriate information about their health care options.
TITLE VIII--ACQUISITION POLICY, ACQUISITION MANAGEMENT, AND RELATED
MATTERS
SUBTITLE A--MAJOR DEFENSE ACQUISITION PROGRAMS
Buy-to-budget acquisition of end items (sec. 801)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
the Department of Defense to make the best use of limited
resources by conducting ``buy-to-budget'' acquisition. Under
buy-to-budget acquisition, the Department would be permitted to
acquire a higher quantity of an end item than the number
specified in an authorization or appropriations law. The
Department would be required to notify Congress of a decision
to exercise this authority within 30 days of its exercise but
would not be required to seek reprogramming authority. The
purpose of the increased flexibility provided by this section
is to enable the Department to take advantage of production
efficiencies and other cost reductions.
Report to Congress on incremental acquisition of major systems (sec.
802)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Defense to submit to the congressional defense
committees a report on how the Department of Defense plans to
comply with applicable requirements of title 10, United States
Code and Department of Defense regulations when it conducts
programs for the incremental acquisition of major systems.
In testimony before the Readiness Subcommittee, Department
of Defense witnesses stated that the Department is seeking to
reduce weapons systems acquisition cycle time by using
incremental acquisition and spiral development strategies.
The Assistant Secretary of the Air Force (Acquisition)
testified that:
All too often, our long cycle times and our program
breakages have their roots in the way we conceive, plan
and start our acquisitions. Our processes are too
serial and allow each community involved to work too
much in isolation. Too often, the warfighter decides a
capability is needed and works for months or years to
develop a 100 percent solution that is given to the
acquisition community as a requirement. The acquirers
then struggle to come up with an acquisition strategy
that will meet the requirement within a limited budget.
Because we are looking for a ``big bang,'' all-at-once
delivery of capability, the development time line--
which drives both schedule and cost--is long and
fraught with possibilities for things to go wrong * *
*.
There is a better way * * *. By delivering capability
in increments, with a period for the warfighter to
``use and learn'' at each increment, we can incorporate
what is learned in each new spiral. Because the spiral
will be short, schedules and cost estimates will be
more reliable and programs will be less subject to
funding fluctuations. There will be many opportunities
to rapidly inject new technology as a system develops
as well as to look at requirements and re-prioritize as
world events and threats change.
The Deputy Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition,
Technology and Logistics testified that:
``Spiral development allows us to get capability to
our warfighters [faster] and at less cost * * * by
producing and deploying systems based on mature
technologies. When deployed, the first increment of
capability (or block) will meet many, but not all, of
the systems' desired operational requirements.
Subsequent blocks will incorporate new technologies
that have matured as each block of capability is
fielded. The series of blocks represent the ``spirals''
of increasing capability to the warfighter.
The committee supports the Department's effort to build
more flexibility into the acquisition process and develop
weapons systems in more manageable steps. At the same time, the
committee believes that the Department must take a more
disciplined approach to incremental acquisition and spiral
development to avoid losing control over the acquisition
process.
In the committee's view, the terms ``incremental
acquisition'' and ``spiral development'' are not
interchangeable. Incremental acquisition is an acquisition
strategy of gradually improving a capability through a planned
series of block upgrades, each of which is to be acquired and
fielded. Spiral development is a strategy for achieving a new
capability through the phased development of fieldable
prototypes. The committee understands that it may take several
development ``spirals'' before a system is ready for production
and acquisition.
Section 802 would address incremental acquisition programs.
The committee expects the Department to develop a disciplined
approach to ensure that both the specific requirements and the
key objectives of applicable laws and regulations will be met
by all incremental acquisition programs. A separate section
(sec. 803) would address spiral development programs.
Pilot program for spiral development of major systems (sec. 803)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
the Secretary of Defense to conduct a pilot program for the
spiral development of major systems. In testimony before the
Readiness Subcommittee, witnesses for each of the three
military services indicated that they were planning to adopt
spiral development approaches in which new capabilities are
achieved through the phased development of fieldable
prototypes. The committee understands that the Air Force alone
is considering spiral development for thirteen different
systems.
The committee believes that properly structured spiral
development programs can play an important role in enabling the
Department of Defense (DOD) to rapidly field new technologies.
The General Accounting Office (GAO) has undertaken an extensive
review of weapons systems acquisition issues at the request of
the committee and has concluded that a ``an evolutionary, or
phased, approach to developing'' weapons systems could lead to
significantly improved outcomes.
At the same time, GAO has testified that, ``Measures for
success need to be defined for each stage of the development
process so that decision-makers can be assured that sufficient
knowledge exists about critical facets of the product before
investment [of] more time and money.'' The committee believes
that DOD must take a disciplined approach to spiral development
to ensure that both Congress and the Department have the
information they need to make acquisition and budget decisions.
To ensure that the Department develops a disciplined
approach to spiral development, the provision recommended by
the committee would authorize the Secretary of Defense to
conduct spiral development programs on a pilot basis. Under
this pilot approach, the Secretary would be required to issue
guidance on how spiral development programs will be designed to
meet key acquisition system objectives and to approve spiral
development plans laying out the program strategy and the cost,
schedule and performance goals for each spiral development
program.
The committee expects that all spiral development programs
for major systems will be conducted in accordance with the
guidance issued by the Secretary pursuant to this section. The
term ``major system'', as defined in section 2302(5) of title
10, includes any research and development program on which the
total expenditures for research, development, test, and
evaluation will exceed $115.0 million or on which the eventual
total expenditure for procurement of the system will exceed
$540.0 million (based on fiscal year 1990 constant dollars).
Improvement of software acquisition processes (sec. 804)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
secretary of each military department and the head of each
defense agency that manages a major defense acquisition program
with a substantial software component to establish a program to
improve its software acquisition processes.
Many major defense acquisition programs are heavily reliant
on the development of complex computer software. In a number of
cases, mishandling of software acquisition has jeopardized an
entire program. For example, the Navy Area missile defense
program experienced such severe problems with software
integration that the program was cancelled after years of
development effort. Similarly, the V-22 and the Army's Maneuver
Control system have experienced serious problems stemming from
software development.
In a March 2001 report prepared for the committee, the
General Accounting Office recommended that the Department of
Defense address these problems by requiring components that are
responsible for systems/software development, acquisition, and
engineering to implement software acquisition process
improvement programs. The provision recommended by the
committee would implement this recommendation.
Independent technology readiness assessments (sec. 805)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Department of Defense (DOD) to justify any decision not to
conduct an independent technology readiness assessment for a
critical technology on a major defense acquisition program.
Section 804 of the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2002 (FY 2002 NDAA) required the Secretary of
Defense to submit an annual report on the Department's
compliance with the technology maturity requirements
incorporated in DOD Instruction 5000.2. The committee report
explained the need for this provision as follows:
The DOD * * * frequently tries to move technologies
to product development programs before they are mature.
According to the [General Accounting Office (GAO)], the
effort to field immature technologies almost always
leads to schedule delays and cost increases:
[Technology development problems need to be
addressed] at a time when the product should be
undergoing design and manufacturing development. As a
result, the pace of technology advances outruns the
time to develop a weapon system and some of the more
mature components designed into a weapon system become
obsolete before the weapon is manufactured. For
example, the F-22 will have almost 600 obsolete
components by fiscal year 2000 while the aircraft is
still in development.
Paragraph 4.7.3.2.2.2 of DOD Instruction 5000.2 currently
requires that the DOD science and technology components
determinethe technological maturity of each critical technology
to be incorporated into a major defense acquisition program. If the
Deputy Under Secretary of Defense for Science and Technology does not
concur with the determination, an independent technology readiness
assessment is required. These requirements are also stated in section
C7.5 of DOD Regulation 5000.2-R.
Less than four months after the enactment of section 804,
the Department's Business Initiative Council proposed to
``streamline'' these provisions to require such independent
technology assessments only when ``appropriate''.
The committee believes that technological maturity
requirements are the cornerstone of a sound acquisition
process. For this reason, the committee recommends amending
section 804 of the FY 2002 NDAA to require that the Department
explain any decision not to conduct an independent technology
readiness assessment for a critical technology on a major
defense acquisition program.
Timing of certification in connection with waiver of survivability and
lethality testing requirements (sec. 806)
The committee recommends a provision that would modify the
authority of the Secretary of Defense to waive the requirement
for survivability and lethality tests for major weapon
programs.
Current law gives the Secretary the authority to waive such
testing prior to the entry of a program into systems
development and demonstration (known as Milestone B). However,
under the Department's revised acquisition regulations, a
program may now be initiated at Milestone B or even Milestone C
(production and deployment), depending on the maturity of the
program's technology. Under these circumstances, it may not be
practical to make a waiver decision before the beginning of
Milestone B.
In these special circumstances, the provision would give
the Department the authority to make a waiver determination at
the earliest possible point after the beginning of the first
phase of the program (Milestone B or Milestone C). The
amendment would not, however, change the basis for a waiver
determination.
SUBTITLE B--PROCUREMENT POLICY IMPROVEMENTS
Performance goals for contracting for services (sec. 811)
The committee recommends a provision that would establish
annual goals for the Department of Defense to increase the
percentage of services contracts that are: (1) entered on the
basis of competition; and (2) performance-based.
Section 802 of the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2002 established annual goals for Department of
Defense savings to be achieved through improved management of
the Department's $50.0 billion of services contracts. The
statutory provisions establishing the management tools needed
to achieve these savings were provided in Sections 801 and 803
of that Act and included the increased use of performance-based
services contracting and increased competition for task orders
under contracts for services.
The committee is concerned that some elements of the
Department may have cut programs rather than utilizing contract
management tools to achieve savings goals. Therefore, the
provision recommended by the committee would establish specific
targets for the use of these contract management tools, with
the overall goal of ensuring that 80 percent of the
Department's services contracts are both competitive and
performance-based by 2011. This goal is comparable to what the
Department achieved in implementing the Competition in
Contracting Act of 1984 (enacted as Title VII of Division B of
Public Law 98-369) in the 1980's and in adopting performance
specifications for purchases of products in the 1990's.
Grants of exceptions to cost or pricing data certification requirements
and waivers of cost accounting standards (sec. 812)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Department of Defense (DOD) to issue guidance on grants of
exceptions to cost or pricing data certification requirements
and waivers of cost accounting standards. The provision would
also require the Secretary of Defense to report to the
congressional defense committees on certain exceptions to the
Truth in Negotiations Act and waivers of the cost accounting
standards.
Over the last ten years, the Truth in Negotiations Act and
the Cost Accounting Standards have been substantially modified
to provide DOD and other federal agencies additional
flexibility to purchase commercial items without imposing
burdensome requirements on contractors. The committee continues
to believe that this flexibility plays an important role in
ensuring that the Department has rapid access to high-
technology products developed in the private sector.
At the same time, however, the committee is concerned that
the Department has not always exercised this new flexibility in
a responsible manner. Last year, the DOD Inspector General
reviewed sample sole-source contracts valued at $652.0 million
for which the Department did not obtain certified cost or
pricing data. The Inspector General determined that contracting
officials lacked valid exceptions from obtaining certified cost
or pricing data in 32 percent of the contracting actions
reviewedand failed to conduct adequate price analysis to
support price reasonableness in 86 percent of the contracting actions
reviewed.
Earlier this year, at the request of the committee, the
General Accounting Office (GAO) reviewed waivers of certified
cost or pricing data requirements for 20 contracts valued at
$4.4 billion. The GAO determined that: (1) most of the waivers
were based solely on a determination that sufficient
information was available to determine the price to be fair and
reasonable without the submission of cost or pricing data; and
(2) in many of these cases, the Department was not obtaining
sufficient data or conducting adequate price analysis to ensure
price reasonableness. The GAO recommended that the Department
develop guidance to better define when waivers should be used
and how prices should be assessed in the event that they are
used.
The committee has consistently taken the position that a
determination that sufficient information is available to
determine a price to be fair and reasonable without the
submission of cost or pricing data is not alone sufficient to
justify an ``exceptional circumstances'' waiver. The
committee's view, as stated on page 775 of the conference
report on the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal
Year 2000 and page 690 of the conference report on the Strom
Thurmond National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year
1999, is that such a waiver should be granted ``only when a
waiver is necessary to meet the needs of an agency, i.e. when
the agency determines that it would not be able to obtain
needed products or services from the vendor in the absence of a
waiver.''
The DOD Inspector General Report and the GAO report
demonstrate that the Department's approach to ``exceptional
circumstance'' waivers has led to higher prices and increased
risks on DOD contracts. Accordingly, the provision recommended
by the committee would require the Department to take
additional steps to ensure that waivers to cost or pricing data
requirements are granted only when properly justified and that
DOD officials take appropriate steps to ensure price
reasonableness when these requirements are waived.
Extension of requirement for annual report on defense commercial
pricing management improvement (sec. 813)
The committee recommends a provision that would extend for
three years the requirement in section 803(c)(4) of the Strom
Thurmond National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year
1999 that the Secretary of Defense submit to the congressional
defense committees an annual report on price trend analyses for
commercial items purchased by the Defense Logistics Agency
(DLA) and the military departments.
This provision was enacted in response to testimony from
the Department of Defense Inspector General indicating that DLA
had paid undiscounted or marginally discounted catalog prices
for commercial items, resulting in price increases of as much
as 1,430 to 13,163 percent.
The Inspector General reported last year that DLA has
implemented a successful price analysis program that the
Defense Supply Center, Richmond has used to address
unreasonable prices. Earlier this year, the Inspector General
reported that DLA had successfully built a strategic supplier
alliance with one of its key suppliers that will result in
price reductions of $59.0 million, demonstrating the beneficial
effects of aggressive price management. Unfortunately, the
Inspector General report indicated that the Army, Navy, and Air
Force programs have lacked the quantitative depth and analysis
of the DLA effort.
The committee continues to believe that an aggressive price
trend analysis program can play an important role in ensuring
that prices paid on Department of Defense contracts are fair
and reasonable.
Internal controls on the use of purchase cards (sec. 814)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Defense to establish enhanced internal controls
for the use of purchase cards by Department of Defense (DOD)
employees.
In response to a report of the General Accounting Office
(GAO) last year, the committee directed the Department to
ensure that appropriate internal controls were in place for
purchase card purchases. This was the third consecutive year in
which the committee report raised concerns about the potential
misuse of purchase cards by DOD employees.
Earlier this year, the GAO issued another report, in which
it concluded that ``serious weaknesses'' remain in the
Department's internal controls for purchase card purchases.
According to the GAO, these continued weaknesses ``contributed
to additional purchases during fiscal year 2001 that we believe
are fraudulent, improper, abusive or otherwise questionable.''
Among the questionable purchases were purchases of designer
briefcases, Lego robot kits, and high-cost computer bags that
were given away by DOD employees.
On April 18, 2002, the Director of the Office of Management
and Budget responded to the GAO's findings by directing the
heads of all federal departments and agencies to prepare
remedial action plans for their purchase card programs. These
plans are to include a reexamination of the number of purchase
cards issued by the department or agency and detail the
internal controls that the department or agency plans to use to
manage risk. The Department of Defense has established a task
force to address theissue.
While the committee continues to support the use of credit
cards, the Department must take strong action to institute
effective internal controls and address inappropriate credit
card purchases. The provision recommended by the committee
would require the Department to implement controls including:
requirements for independent, documented receipt and acceptance
of goods and services and independent, documented review and
certification of monthly purchase card statements; specific
policies limiting the number of purchase cards to be issued and
establishing credit limits for cardholders; specific criteria
for ensuring the integrity of cardholders; accounting system
changes to ensure that purchase card transactions are properly
recorded in Department of Defense accounting records; and
regular internal review of purchase card statements.
Assessment regarding fees paid for acquisitions under other agencies'
contracts (sec. 815)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Defense to carry out an assessment to determine
the amount paid by the Department of Defense (DOD) as fees for
the acquisition of property and services under contracts
entered by other federal departments and agencies and whether
these amounts could be put to better use.
The committee is concerned that the Department continues to
order excessive quantities of products and services under
contracts entered by other federal departments and agencies. In
many cases, the personnel of other departments and agencies
have considerably less expertise in procurement in general, and
in the specific products and services to be acquired, than DOD
personnel. The committee believes that the assessment required
by this provision is a necessary step to ensure that the
Department has appropriate management control over purchases
conducted through other federal departments and agencies.
Pilot program for transition to follow-on contracts for certain
prototype projects (sec. 816)
The committee recommends a provision that would enable the
Department of Defense to capitalize on successful prototype
projects by bringing the prototypes into production under
standard procurement contracts. The provision would establish a
three-year pilot program to ease the transition of
nontraditional defense contractors from prototype transactions
to standard procurement contracts. Under the pilot program, the
Department would be authorized to enter contracts of $20.0
million or less that would treat items or processes developed
by nontraditional defense contractors under prototype
transactions: (1) as commercial items subject to the
streamlined contracting procedures established in Part 12 of
the Federal Acquisition Regulation; and (2) as items or
processes that are developed with mixed funds for the purpose
of negotiating rights in technical data under section 2320 of
title 10, United States Code.
Waiver authority for domestic source or content requirements (sec. 817)
The committee recommends a provision that would provide the
Secretary of Defense the authority to waive the application of
statutory domestic source requirements and domestic content
requirements, provided that: (1) application of the
requirements would impede the reciprocal procurement of defense
items under a Memorandum of Understanding between the United
States and another country; and (2) the other country does not
discriminate against items produced in the United States to a
greater degree than the United States discriminates against
items produced in that country. This proposed standard is
consistent with the standard previously adopted by the
committee for products covered by the domestic content
restrictions in section 2534 of title 10, United States Code.
SUBTITLE C--OTHER MATTERS
Extension of the applicability of certain personnel demonstration
project exceptions to an acquisition workforce demonstration
project (sec. 821)
The committee recommends a provision that would extend
certain authorities associated with the acquisition workforce
pilot program established in section 4308 of the National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1996. In particular,
the provision recommended by the committee would extend until
2007 the exception authorized in section 4308 to otherwise
applicable limitations on the size and duration of the pilot
program.
Moratorium on reduction of the defense acquisition and support
workforce (sec. 822)
The committee recommends a provision that would establish a
moratorium on further cuts in the acquisition workforce for
three years. The Secretary of Defense would be authorized to
waive this prohibition upon certification to Congress that any
reductions to the workforce would not negatively impact
theability of the workforce to efficiently and effectively carry out
its legally required functions.
Twelve consecutive years of downsizing have left the
Department of Defense (DOD) with a workforce that is smaller
(by 51 percent), older (with an average age of 46.7 years),
more senior (with an average of 20.2 years of service), higher
grade, and rapidly approaching retirement. In August 2000, the
then-Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology,
and Logistics wrote a memorandum in which he stated:
I recommend that DOD not have any further mandated
acquisition workforce reductions as a goal after FY
2001. By any terms, the DOD acquisition workforce has
been drastically reduced while, at the same time the
number of DOD procurement and contracting actions has
increased * * *. We have gone as far as we can in
mandating acquisition workforce reductions without
causing significant adverse impacts on the DOD
acquisition system.
The committee believes that no further cuts should be made
until the Department is prepared to address shortcomings in the
acquisition workforce on a comprehensive basis.
Extension of contract goal for small disadvantaged businesses and
certain institutions of higher education (sec. 823)
The committee recommends a provision that would extend
section 2323 of title 10, United States Code, for three years.
Section 2323 establishes a five percent goal for Department of
Defense contracting with small disadvantaged businesses and
certain institutions of higher education.
Mentor-protege program eligibility for HUBZone small business concerns
and small business concerns owned and controlled by service-
disabled veterans (sec. 824)
The committee recommends a provision that would expand the
list of entities eligible to participate as proteges in the
Department of Defense mentor-protege program to include small
business concerns owned and controlled by service-disabled
veterans and qualified HUBZone small business concerns.
Repeal of requirements for certain reviews by the Comptroller General
(sec. 825)
The committee recommends a provision that would repeal
statutory requirements for certain reviews by the General
Accounting Office (GAO) that are no longer needed.
The committee notes that the authority provided by sections
912, 5312, and 5401 of the National Defense Authorization Act
for Fiscal Year 1996 has never been utilized. For this reason,
the required reports on the manner in which this authority has
been used are unnecessary.
The committee directs the Department of Defense to make a
recommendation to the congressional defense committees as to
whether the authority to conduct programs pursuant to these
sections is likely to be needed in the future or should be
repealed.
Multiyear procurement authority for purchase of dinitrogen tetroxide,
hydrazine, and hydrazine-related products (sec. 826)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
the Secretary of Defense to enter contracts for periods of up
to 10 years for dinitrogen tetroxide, hydrazine, and hydrazine-
related products if the contracts are in support of either
United States national security programs or the United States
space program. The Department of Defense has informed the
committee that this authority is needed to ensure a reliable
domestic industrial base for fuels that are a prerequisite of
assured access to space.
Multiyear procurement authority for environmental services for military
installations (sec. 827)
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 2306c of title 10, United States Code, to cover
environmental remediation services for an active military
installation, an installation being closed or realigned under
base realignment and closure procedures, or a formerly used
defense site.
The Department of Defense proposed a legislative provision
that would authorize a demonstration project using multiyear
contracts for environmental remediation. The new authority
would have been used to test the feasibility of using fixed-
price multiyear contracts with incremental funding to obtain
environmental remediation services.
Section 802 of the Floyd D. Spence National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2001 contained a new section
2306c of title 10, which creates permanent authority for
multiyear contracts for the acquisition of services. Because
permanent authority for multiyear service contracts is already
available under section 2306c, the committee does not believe
that a demonstration program is necessary.
The provision recommended by the committee would clarify
that the authority provided in section 2306c extends to
contracts for environmental remediation services. The committee
encourages the Department to use this authority to issue
competitive,performance-based task orders containing firm,
fixed prices for specific tasks to be performed in accordance with the
policy set forth in section 821 of the Floyd D. Spence National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2001.
OTHER ITEMS OF INTEREST
Consolidation of Contract Requirements
Sections 411 through 413 of the Small Business
Reauthorization Act of 1997 (Public Law 105-135) require
federal agencies to conduct market research to assess the
potential impact of ``bundled contracts'' and to proceed with
such contracts only if the benefits of bundling substantially
exceed the benefits of proceeding with separate contracts.
Unfortunately, it appears that these statutory provisions
have not always had the intended effect of requiring the
Department of Defense and other agencies to carefully weigh the
impact of bundled contracts. For example, the Small Business
Reauthorization Act defined bundling to include only those
consolidated contracts that are ``likely to be unsuitable for
award to a small business concern.'' The General Accounting
Office recently concluded that a contract cannot be considered
unsuitable for award to a small business concern if a team of
contractors, including small business concerns, could bid on
the contract. Since a team of contractors could bid on
virtually any requirement, this interpretation would appear to
exclude virtually all contracts from the application of the
bundling provisions.
The committee believes that there are circumstances in
which the consolidation of contracts can enable the Department
to leverage its market power or otherwise obtain better
products or services at better prices. At the same time,
however, individual small businesses that previously performed
work for the Department may be adversely affected even in cases
where a team of other small businesses is able to bid on the
consolidated requirement. The Department should consolidate
contracts only when the benefits of consolidation significantly
outweigh the benefits of proceeding with separate contracts.
For this reason, the committee directs the Department to
conduct market research into a variety of alternative
approaches and assess the costs and benefits of any
consolidation of contract requirements in excess of $5.0
million, regardless of whether the consolidation constitutes
``bundling'' under the definitions provided in the Small
Business Reauthorization Act. The Department should make
appropriate changes to applicable regulations and guidance to
ensure that the required analysis is carried out.
By requiring the Department to analyze the impact of a
wider range of consolidated contracts, the committee does not
intend to alter statutory reporting and review provisions that
are applicable only to ``bundled'' contracts.
Management of electromagnetic spectrum in the acquisition process
The committee is concerned with the manner in which the
Department of Defense (DOD) currently addresses electromagnetic
radio frequency spectrum requirements during the development
and acquisition of new weapons systems. Nearly all new military
equipment requires access to the spectrum and operates in
electromagnetic environments that may adversely affect its use.
In addition, all electronic systems produce electromagnetic
emanations that can adversely affect other systems.
The statement of managers accompanying the National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2001 expresses the concern
that DOD has pursued the development of weapons systems
utilizing portions of the radio frequency spectrum not
designated for military use, which can lead to unintended
interference between those systems and commercial systems
licensed to use the same spectrum. The conferees noted that the
Department was developing new procedures to address
interference problems and directed the General Accounting
Office (GAO) to review those procedures and their
implementation. In May 2001, GAO reported that it was too early
to evaluate the effectiveness of the new procedures.
The committee continues to believe that spectrum issues
will play a key role in the development of new DOD weapons
systems. Accordingly, the committee directs the GAO to update
its May 2001 report. The GAO review should also address the
effectiveness of the Department's efforts to manage spectrum
issues (including host nation supportability and the impact of
electromagnetic environmental effects) in the acquisition
process.
Polyacrylonitrile carbon fibers
Polyacrylonitrile (PAN) carbon fibers are used in a variety
of defense and space applications such as aircraft, missiles,
launch vehicles, and helicopters. The Department of Defense
(DOD) currently restricts the procurement of PAN carbon fiber
to domestic sources. Two years ago, DOD projected that the
market for PAN carbon fiber would grow in the future with
increased demand for defense and commercial applications. On
this basis, the Department decided to phase out the domestic
source restriction over a five-year period ending May 31, 2005.
The phase-out period was designed to give domestic suppliers
time to adjust to market conditions and to give DOD the
flexibility to adjust its policy if projected circumstances did
not materialize.
Domestic suppliers of PAN carbon fibers believe that the
market projections on which the DOD decision was based are no
longer valid. The committee directs the Secretary of Defense to
review the Department's previous report on PAN carbon fibers
and report to the congressional defense committees by February
1, 2003 on: (1) whether the findings of that report remain
valid; and (2) whether the PAN carbon fiber domestic source
restriction should be maintained or discontinued.
TITLE IX--DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE ORGANIZATION AND MANAGEMENT
Time for submittal of report on quadrennial defense review (sec. 901)
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 118 of title 10, United States Code, to change the
submission date of the report on each quadrennial defense
review to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and
the House of Representatives. Section 118 would no longer
require submission of the report on September 30 of the year in
which the review is conducted; the report shall instead be
submitted no later than the date in the following year on which
the President submits the budget for the next fiscal year to
Congress.
Increased number of deputy commandants authorized for the Marine Corps
(sec. 902)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
an increase in the number of deputy commandants for the Marine
Corps from five to six.
The committee supports this provision in order to establish
the position of Deputy Commandant (Marine Corps Combat
Development Command) as an additional duty for the Commanding
General, Marine Corps Combat Development Command, to assist the
Commandant in executing his responsibilities for developing
Marine Corps warfighting concepts and determining associated
required capabilities. The position would remain at Marine
Corps Base Quantico, Virginia and will not require an increase
in the number of lieutenant generals authorized for the Marine
Corps.
Base operating support for Fisher Houses (sec. 903)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
service secretaries to provide base operating support for
Fisher Houses associated with health care facilities.
Currently, only the Navy is required to provide such support.
The recommended provision includes all of the military
services.
Prevention and mitigation of corrosion (sec. 904)
As discussed in title III, the committee believes that
efforts to prevent and mitigate corrosion can be better
coordinated within the Department of Defense (DOD). The Senate
report on the fiscal year 2002 National Defense Authorization
Act (S. Rept. 107-62) directed DOD to establish a single office
to coordinate and direct anti-corrosion policies and standards;
the House report (H. Rept. 107-194) contained similar
direction. The General Accounting Office reports that no such
office has been established.
Each of the military services makes ongoing efforts to
reduce or mitigate corrosion. However, these efforts tend to be
small, narrowly focused, and uncoordinated within and among the
services. Further, to the extent that anti-corrosion programs
have been supported, they have focused on equipment when the
problem also seriously impacts facilities.
The committee continues to see a need for a centralized
direction within the Office of the Secretary of Defense to
coordinate the Department's corrosion prevention and mitigation
programs, policies, and strategies. Therefore, the committee
recommends a provision directing the Secretary of Defense to
designate a senior official responsible for developing
policies, reviewing the services' budgets to ensure proper
resources are being devoted to corrosion prevention efforts,
and ensuring that anti-corrosion options are considered and
inserted at the appropriate points throughout the life cycle of
facilities and equipment, from initial design to retirement.
The provision further requires DOD to develop a long-term
strategy to include: expanding the emphasis on corrosion
prevention, establishment of common criteria for the military
services when testing and evaluating new technologies, data
collection on the effects and costs of corrosion on military
assets, distribution of useful information about corrosion
prevention, identification of specific corrosion-related
programs worthy of pursuit in future budgets, and establishment
of a coordinated research and development program to help
transition new technologies into operational systems and
current facilities.
TITLE X--GENERAL PROVISIONS
SUBTITLE A--FINANCIAL MATTERS
Transfer authority (sec. 1001)
The committee recommends a provision that would provide for
the transfer of funds authorized in Division A of this Act to
unforeseen higher priority needs in accordance with normal
reprogramming procedures.
Reallocation of authorizations of appropriations from ballistic missile
defense to shipbuilding (sec. 1002)
The committee recommends a provision that would transfer
$690.0 million from ballistic missile defense items to
shipbuilding programs. The committee believes that the proposed
fiscal year 2003 budget does not provide adequate resources to
maintain the Navy's surface fleet or attack submarine force
levels. The committee has received ample testimony from
Department of Defense (DOD) witnesses and numerous DOD and Navy
reports indicating that the Navy should be building eight to 10
ships per year and investing $10.0 to $12.0 billion per year in
shipbuilding to recapitalize the current fleet. A number of
Navy witnesses, including the Chief of Naval Operations, have
indicated that they believe the Navy should be building to a
fleet with as many as 375 ships in order to meet the
requirements the Navy faces today. The current shipbuilding
plan would buy five ships and invest $8.6 billion in fiscal
year 2003, including one ship and $0.4 billion from the
National Defense Sealift Fund for a T-AKE dry cargo/ammunition
ship. Two years ago, the Navy's shipbuilding plan called for 23
ships between 2003 and 2005; this year's plan calls for only
17.
Recognizing these deficiencies in the current plan, the
committee believes that a much higher priority must be given to
recapitalizing the Navy fleet. Therefore, the committee
recommends adding $690.0 million to shipbuilding accounts as
follows:
(1) an increase of $415.0 million for advance
procurement for a Virginia-class attack submarine;
(2) an increase of $125.0 million for advance
procurement for a DDG-51 destroyer; and
(3) an increase of $150.0 million for advance
procurement for an LPD-17 amphibious transport dock.
Although these funds would not buy an additional ship in
fiscal year 2003, they are logical steps that should be taken
to support the Navy's acceleration of the procurement of ships
that would otherwise be bought later in the Future Years
Defense Program (FYDP) or to increase the current rate at which
we are buying ships.
For example, the advance procurement for the Virginia-class
attack submarine would buy an additional shipset of nuclear
propulsion equipment in fiscal year 2003. This shipset of
equipment would support procurement of an additional Virginia-
class submarine in fiscal year 2005, increasing the rate in the
FYDP from the current level of one per year. The Navy will need
to accelerate the submarine construction rate to meet
requirements identified in the 1999 ``Attack Submarine Study''
conducted by the Joint Chiefs of Staff. The study concluded
that the Navy needs to have a minimum of 68 attack submarines
in fiscal year 2015 to meet requirements defined by the
regional commanders in chief and the national intelligence
community. Increasing the current production rate in the fiscal
year 2005 time frame is the only way the Navy will ever achieve
that level.
The committee supports research and development of
ballistic missile defense, but it believes that the proposed
fiscal year 2003 ballistic missile defense budget contains a
substantial amount of funding that is not required in fiscal
year 2003 to further the development of effective missile
defenses. Therefore, the committee recommends a reduction of
$690.0 million in ballistic missile defense funding lines as
distributed below. These reductions are in addition to the
ballistic missile defense reductions recommended elsewhere in
this report.
The budget request included $1.1 billion in the Ballistic
Missile Defense (BMD) System program element, PE 63880C, an
increase of $258.0 million over the current funding level. The
major purpose of this program element is to develop an
integrated architecture of BMD systems. While the committee
believes this is an important goal, the committee notes that
most of the systems that will comprise the BMD architecture are
years away from being deployed, thus making development and
definition of a detailed BMD architecture impossible at this
point. After providing more than $800.0 million for this
program element in fiscal year 2002, the Missile Defense Agency
has yet to provide to Congress an indication of what the
overall BMD architecture might be. A substantial increase was
requested in Battle Management/Command and Control, BMD System
Communications, Production Manufacturing and Technology, BMD
System Program Operations and BMD Systems Engineering and
Integration for this program element for fiscal year 2003, yet
no compelling justification for such an increase was provided.
Therefore, in addition to the $140.0 million reduction to BMD
Systems Engineering and Integration recommended elsewhere in
this report, the committee recommends a reduction of $222.0
million in PE 63880C, to be taken from among the following
areas: Battle Management/Command and Control, BMD System
Communications,Production Manufacturing and Technology, BMD
System Program Operations, and BMD Systems Engineering and Integration.
The budget request included $3.2 billion in the Midcourse
Defense program element, PE 63882C. The committee recommends a
reduction of $166.0 million in this program element as follows:
(1) a reduction of $52.0 million to the budget
request of $147.9 million for Sea-based Midcourse
concept development, studies and risk reduction. More
than $90.0 million would remain in this program element
for such concept development work, which is a
substantial level of funding given that no development
plan or path forward has yet been established for this
system. Sea-based Midcourse test program funding would
remain at the budget request level to continue the
current set of Aegis Leap Intercept flight tests.
(2) A reduction of $50.0 million for Midcourse
Systems Engineering and Integration (SE&I) not
associated with a specific BMD system. This reduction
is in addition to the reduction of $45.0 million
discussed elsewhere in this report. These reductions
would leave more than $170.0 million of SE&I funding
elsewhere in this program element, which is a
substantial amount of funding, especially considering
the basic architecture for midcourse defense has yet to
be defined.
(3) A reduction of $64.0 million for Midcourse
Program Operations, which is the requested funding
level. According to the fiscal year 2003 budget
justification documentation, this funding ``provides
management and support for overhead/indirect fixed
costs such as civilian payroll, travel, rents and
utilities and supplies.'' More than $150.0 million of
government program management and operations funding is
requested in the individual BMD systems' budget lines
in this program element, which is where such funding is
ordinarily accounted for. The committee believes this
is an adequate level of funding for such activities.
The budget request included $796.9 million in the Boost
Defense program element, PE 63883C, an increase of $197.0
million over the current funding level. The committee
recommends a reduction of $135.0 million in this program
element, as follows:
(1) a reduction of $105.0 million for detailed design
of the second Airborne Laser (ABL) aircraft to the
budget request of $598.0 million for the ABL. Detailed
design of a second ABL is premature; the first aircraft
is experiencing technical difficulties and schedule
slips and is not scheduled to be tested until 2005.
(2) A reduction of $10.0 million to the budget
request of $34.8 million for Space-based Laser (SBL).
More than $24.0 million would remain in this program
element for SBL program definition and risk reduction,
which the committee believes is adequate in the absence
of a plan on how to proceed with this program.
(3) A reduction of $20.0 million for Boost Defense
Program Operations, which is the requested funding
level. According to the fiscal year 2003 budget
justification documentation, this funding ``provides
management and support for overhead/indirect fixed
costs such as civilian payroll, travel, rents and
utilities and supplies.'' More than $60.0 million of
government program management and operations funding is
requested in the individual BMD systems' budget lines
in this program element, which is where such funding is
ordinarily accounted for. The committee believes this
is an adequate level of funding for such activities.
The budget request included $117.7 million in PE 63869A for
the Medium Extended Air Defense System (MEADS), a joint program
involving the United States, Germany and Italy. The budget
request represents an increase of $48.0 million over the
current funding level. Since there is currently no
internationally agreed-upon plan for MEADS, it would be
premature to substantially increase program funding. Therefore,
the committee recommends a reduction of $48.0 million in PE
63869A for MEADS, leaving $70.0 million in this program element
to continue funding MEADS at the current level.
The budget request included $170.0 million in the Terminal
Defense program element, PE 63881C. The committee recommends a
reduction of $14.0 million for Terminal Program Operations,
since no funding for this overhead function was requested last
year and there was no justification provided for initiating
such funding in fiscal year 2003.
The budget request included $934.7 million in the Theater
High Altitude Air Defense (THAAD) program element, PE 64861C,
including $40.0 million for 10 extra THAAD missiles. These
missiles are not required for the THAAD test program, and if
bought now they would be untested and unproven since THAAD
flight testing is not scheduled to begin until fiscal year
2004. The committee believes it would be premature to fund
extra THAAD missiles prior to the completion of successful
flight testing, and recommends a reduction of $40.0 million in
PE 64861C for these missiles.
The budget request included $373.4 million in the Sensors
program element, PE 63884C, an increase of $39.0 million over
the current funding level. The committee recommends a reduction
of $65.0 million in this program element, as follows:
(1) A reduction of $55.0 million to the budget
request of $294.0 million for Space-based Infrared
System, Low component (SBIRS-Low). Subsequent to the
budget submission, SBIRS-Low was restructured to
maintain only one contractor instead of two in fiscal
year 2003. The recommended reduction reflects the
savings obtained in 2003 by only funding a single
contractor.
(2) A reduction of $10.0 million for Sensors Program
Operations, which is the requested funding level.
According to the fiscal year 2003 budget justification
documentation, this funding ``provides management and
support for overhead/indirect fixed costs such as
civilian payroll, travel, rents and utilities and
supplies.'' More than $20.0 million of government
program management and operations funding is requested
in the individual BMD systems' budget lines in this
program element, which is where such funding is
ordinarily accounted for.
Authorization of appropriations for continued operations for the war on
terrorism (sec. 1003)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
the appropriation of $10.0 billion for the conduct of
operations in continuation of the war on terrorism in
accordance with the Authorization for the Use of Military Force
(P.L. 107-40), subject to certain conditions.
This money was expressly requested by the President to fund
continued operations for the war on terrorism. As the Secretary
of Defense explained in a March 14, 2002, letter to the
committee:
Consistent with our assumptions, the $10.0 billion is
targeted at increased operating and transportation
costs, special pays, reserve/guard call-up, enhanced
intelligence efforts, and other costs related to the
war on terrorism.
The committee believes that there is no more important
purpose to which this funding could be dedicated than the
continuation of the war on terrorism. However, the Department
is not yet in a position to state how long the war on terrorism
will continue, or in what form, or to specify the specific
programs for which the requested funds would be used.
For this reason, the provision recommended by the committee
would authorize for appropriation the $10.0 billion requested
by the President upon receipt of a budget request which: (1)
designates the requested amount as being essential to the
continued war on terrorism; and (2) specifies how the
administration proposes to use the requested funds, consistent
with the Authorization for the Use of Military Force.
Authorization of emergency supplemental appropriations for fiscal year
2002 (sec. 1004 )
On March 21, 2002, the President submitted to Congress a
request for $27.1 billion in supplemental appropriations for
fiscal year 2002. Of that amount, $14.0 billion was for the
Department of Defense and the intelligence community to
continue to prosecute the global war on terrorism, including
Operations Enduring Freedom and Noble Eagle. The committee
recommends a provision that would authorize supplemental
appropriations for the Department of Defense for fiscal year
2002.
The committee believes that supplemental appropriations for
fiscal year 2002 are necessary for, and should be provided for,
the purposes specified in the Authorization for Use of Military
Force (Public Law 107-40). The committee also believes that
these funds, and any future appropriations for such purposes,
should be transferred to specific accounts within the
Department of Defense for obligation, rather than being
obligated directly from the Defense Emergency Response Fund.
The committee believes that this would improve the efficiency
and accountability of the expenditure of these funds and notes
that the President has also recommended this change in his
supplemental request.
United States contribution to NATO common-funded budgets in fiscal year
2003 (sec. 1005)
The resolution of ratification for the Protocols to the
North Atlantic Treaty of 1949 on the Accession of Poland,
Hungary and the Czech Republic contained a provision (section
3(2)(c)(ii)) that requires a specific authorization for U.S.
payments to the common-funded budgets of the North Atlantic
Treaty Organization (NATO) for each fiscal year, beginning in
fiscal year 1999, in which U.S. payments exceed the fiscal year
1998 total. The committee recommends a provision to authorize
the U.S. contribution to NATO common-funded budgets for fiscal
year 2003, including the use of unexpended balances from prior
years.
Development and implementation of financial management enterprise
architecture (sec. 1006)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Defense to develop a comprehensive financial
management enterprise architecture for all budgetary,
accounting, finance and data systems of the Department of
Defense (DOD). The provision would also prohibit significant
expenditures on financial system improvements that would be
inconsistent with the new architecture.
The committee understands that the Department has already
initiated an effort to develop a comprehensive enterprise
architecture by March 2003 as required by this provision. At a
hearing of the Readiness Subcommittee, the Comptroller General
of the United States testified that the Department should limit
the additional business systems development that it undertakes
before a new enterprise architecture has been approved. The DOD
Comptroller agreed and stated that he has already taken
somesteps to limit spending on business systems development until the
proposed architecture and transition plan have been completed.
The provision recommended by the committee would condition
any obligation of more than $1.0 million for a defense
financial system improvement upon a determination of compliance
with the new architecture. Until the new architecture has been
developed, expenditures would be limited to those that are
necessary to address critical national security requirements or
prevent significant adverse effects on ongoing projects.
Departmental accountable officials in the Department of Defense (sec.
1007)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
the Secretary of Defense to designate certain Department of
Defense employees and members of the Armed Forces as
departmental accountable officials. A departmental accountable
official could be held pecuniarily liable for illegal,
improper, or incorrect payments when the official who certified
payment relied on information provided through fault or
negligence of the departmental accountable official.
Department-wide procedures for establishing and liquidating personal
pecuniary liability (sec. 1008)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
any officer of the Armed Forces or any civilian employee of the
Department of Defense designated by regulation to act on
reports of survey and vouchers pertaining to the loss,
spoilage, unserviceability, unsuitability, destruction of, or
damage to, property of the United States under the control of
the Department of Defense. Currently, reports of survey
procedures apply only to the Army and Air Force.
The recommended provision would also make members of all
services liable for damage or cost of repairs caused by the
members to any arms or equipment. Currently, only members of
the Army and Air Force are so liable.
Travel card program integrity (sec. 1009)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
direct payment to the issuer of a Defense travel card of
official travel or transportation expenses charged on the
Defense travel card by a Department of Defense employee or
member. The recommended provision would also authorize
withholding or deduction from the pay of a Department of
Defense employee or member of the Armed Forces funds for
payment of delinquent travel card charges when the employee or
member is delinquent in the payment and does not dispute the
amount of the delinquency.
SUBTITLE B--NAVAL VESSELS AND SHIPYARDS
Number of Navy surface combatants in active and reserve service (sec.
1021)
The committee recommends a provision which would require
the Secretary of the Navy to report to Congress:
(1) within 90 days after enactment of this Act, if
the number of surface combatants is below the 116
vessels described as the current force in the September
30, 2001 Quadrennial Defense Review Report (2001 QDR);
or
(2) in the future, at least 90 days prior to reducing
the number of active duty and reserve force surface
combatants any further whenever the number of surface
combatants is below 116 surface combatant vessels.
In either case, the report would have to include a risk
assessment that uses the 2001 QDR assumptions.
In addition, the Secretary would be required to retain on
the Naval Vessel Register a sufficient number of ships which
could be reactivated within 120 days notice to provide a surge
capability to regain the level of 116 surface combatants
described in the 2001 QDR.
The Navy budget request recommends reducing the surface
combatant force structure to 108, a number that would be eight
fewer than the number in the current force described in the
2001 QDR. The 2001 QDR states that the current force of 116
surface combatants ``were judged as presenting moderate
operational risk, although certain combinations of warfighting
and smaller scale contingency scenarios present high risk.''
The committee received no information on the risk
assessment associated with reducing the force structure below
that noted in the 2001 QDR. Therefore, the committee concludes
that the risk resulting from the Navy's proposed force
structure would be higher than that noted in the 2001 QDR.
Previously, the Navy has sold, leased, and granted ships
with remaining service life shortly after decommissioning those
ships. Prior to the completion of an analysis of attack
submarine force structure, the Navy decommissioned a number of
attack submarines due to budget constraints, only to find out
later that the analysis had indicated a requirement for having
a higher number of attack submarines.
The committee concludes that it is not prudent to risk
repeating the same mistake the Navy made with reducing attack
submarines. Therefore, the provision would require the
Secretary of the Navy to: (1) provide a risk assessment prior
to reducing the force structure; and (2) maintain the
capability to reconstitute the force on short notice, if
needed.
Plan for fielding the 155-millimeter gun on a surface combatant (sec.
1022)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of the Navy to submit a plan for fielding the Navy's
155mm gun in a Navy ship on an expedited schedule, but no later
than fiscal year 2006. That plan's attributes would have to
include assurances of safe operation while providing the Marine
Corps fire support.
The committee received testimony which indicated that the
155mm gun is the only weapons system in development that would
be capable of providing the Marine Corps the required fire
support from the sea. Unfortunately, the Navy budget request
recommends another significant delay in providing the Marine
Corps the 155mm gun capability.
The Spruance-class destroyers were designed to accommodate
an eight-inch naval gun. Another factor in the committee's
consideration is that the Navy intends to produce an
engineering development model of the 155mm gun within the
advanced gun system program. With the Navy's planned early
retirement of some of the ships in the class, it would appear
that there may be an opportunity to use a Spruance-class
destroyer as the test ship for the advance gun system.
This approach would provide a rapid prototype gun that
could be used in a contingency operation while testing the
feasibility of backfitting Spruance-class destroyers with a
version of the advanced gun system. Such an approach would also
be in keeping with the Department's avowed interest in
transformation and spiral development while making use of ships
with useful service life remaining.
Most important, however, would be the fact that the
application of the advanced gun system to the Spruance-class
destroyer could provide, until DD(X) destroyers are fielded in
numbers, the Marine Corps the fire support capability that has
been missing since the decommissioning of the battleships in
the early 1990s.
Report on initiatives to increase operational days of Navy ships (sec.
1023)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Assistant Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology and
Logistics to report to the congressional defense committees,
with submission of the President's budget request for fiscal
year 2004, on the feasibility and projected impact of
initiatives to maximize ship operational days.
The Chairman and Ranking Member of the Subcommittee on
Seapower sent a letter to the Secretary of the Navy and the
Chief of Naval Operations requesting the Navy to explore, at
least, the following four focus areas to determine whether
additional operational days could be made available to the
regional commanders in chief without increasing the number of
ships and without increasing the length of six-month
deployments:
(1) Assign additional ships and submarines to
homeports closer to their areas of operation. This is
sometimes referred to as forward homeporting.
(2) Assign a ship to remain in a forward area of
operations and rotate crews. Although not typically
rotated in forward operating areas, the dual-crewing or
``blue'' and ``gold'' crews on ballistic missile
submarines (SSBNs) are an example of such a concept.
(3) Retain ships to the end of their full service
life by investing in the support funding needed to keep
them. For example, keeping DD-963s in active service
might make sense for the capabilities they provide
(such as presence and antisubmarine warfare
capability), rather than retiring them because they are
not adequate to meet certain threats (because they do
not have the very latest anti-air warfare systems).
(4) Preposition additional ships in forward operating
areas that would be maintained by very small crews
during normal circumstances. This concept would be
analogous to the manner in which certain Ready Reserve
Force (RRF) ships are kept ready to begin operations in
just a few days.
The Seapower Subcommittee followed that letter with a
hearing on the subject. The Navy witness in that hearing
testified that some of the suggestions will be tested later
this year because the Navy believes they will be productive.
However, that testimony also led members to conclude that the
Navy does not intend to investigate all of the focus areas
suggested in the letter. This conclusion raised concerns that
were amplified when it was revealed in written testimony that
the Navy ship acquisition plan may be understated regarding
requirements because the Navy is using an estimated ship
service life of 35 years for planning but is executing a 20 to
22 years-of-age ship life decommissioning plan for destroyers
and frigates.
According to the Congressional Research Service, the
difference in estimated ship service life would cause the Navy
to face an additional 15-ship backlog just between now and
fiscal year 2007. That additional backlog would result in the
requirement to build 15.5 new construction ships each year,
starting in fiscal year 2008, merely to keep the force
structure at about 300 battle force ships.
The Congressional Budget Office Study, ``Increasing the
Mission Capability of the Attack Submarine Force'' validates
the potential for one of the above focus areas.
Therefore, the committee concludes that: (1) there may be
other means of increasing operational days for the
regionalcommanders in chief; and, (2) all the possible alternatives
should be thoroughly investigated and, when appropriate, tested.
SUBTITLE C--REPORTING REQUIREMENTS
Repeal and modification of various reporting requirements applicable
with respect to the Department of Defense (sec. 1031)
The committee recommends a provision that would repeal or
modify 28 obsolete or superceded reporting requirements
presently imposed by statute upon the Department of Defense
(DOD). The reports recommended for repeal include:
(1) Prohibition on Certain Civilian Personnel
Management Constraints (10 U.S.C. 129);
(2) Advisory Committees of the Department of Defense:
Annual Report (10 U.S.C. 183);
(3) Amounts for Declassification of Records (10
U.S.C. 230);
(4) Authorized Strength: General and Flag Officers on
Active Duty (10 U.S.C. 526(c));
(5) General and Flag Officers: Limitations on
Appointments, Assignments, Details Outside an Officer's
Own Service (10 U.S.C. 721(d));
(6) Health Care Services Recovered on Behalf of
Covered Beneficiaries: Collection from Third-Party
Payers (10 U.S.C. 1095(g));
(7) Child Care Services and Youth Program Services
for Dependents: Financial Assistance for Survivors (10
U.S.C. 1798(d));
(8) Child Care Services and Youth Program Services
for Dependents: Participation by Children and Youth
Otherwise Ineligible (10 U.S.C. 1799(d));
(9) Performance Based Management: Acquisition
Programs (10 U.S.C. 2220);
(10) Cooperative Research and Development Projects-
subsection (g) (10 U.S.C. 2350a(g)(4));
(11) Procurement of Communications Support and
Related Supplies and Services (10 U.S.C. 2350f(c));
(12) Armed Forces Relocation in Foreign Nation Report
(10 U.S.C. 2350k(d));
(13) Federally Funded Research and Development Center
Workload Effort (10 U.S.C. 2367(d));
(14) Military Base Reuse Studies and Community
Planning Assistance (10 U.S.C. 2391(c));
(15) Department of Defense Technology and Industrial
Base Policy (10 U.S.C. 2504);
(16) Asia-Pacific Center for Security Studies:
Acceptance of Foreign Gifts and Donations (10 U.S.C.
2611);
(17) Leases: Non-excess Property of Military
Departments (10 U.S.C. 2667(d)(3));
(18) Acquisition of Existing Facilities in Lieu of
Authorized Construction-Notice (10 U.S.C. 2813(c));
(19) Relocation of Military Family Housing Units (10
U.S.C. 2827(b));
(20) Sale of Electricity from Alternate Energy and
Cogeneration Production Facilities (10 U.S.C. 2867(c));
(21) Academy of Health Sciences: Admission of
Civilians in Physician Assistant Training Program (10
U.S.C. 4416(f));
(22) Temporary Promotions in Certain Navy
Lieutenants: Limitation on Number of Eligible Positions
(10 U.S.C. 5721(f));
(23) Prohibition on Imposition of Additional Charges
of Fees for Attendance at Certain Academies (P.L. 103-
337; 108 Stat. 2772; 10 U.S.C. 6951 note);
(24) Weapons Development and Procurement Schedules
(P.L. 104-106; 110 Stat. 229, 231; 10 U.S.C. 2431
note).
In addition to those reports to be repealed in full, the
committee recommends repeal after 2004 of the report,
Contracted Properties and Services: Prompt Payment of Vouchers
(P.L. 106-398 Appendix; 114 Stat. 1654A-247; 10 U.S.C. 2226
note). The committee also recommends that section 483 of title
10, United States Code, be repealed two years after enactment
of the present provision. The Secretary of Defense currently
submits to the congressional defense committees reports on
funding transfers from high-priority readiness items. The
committee notes that the Department of Defense provides various
other detailed reports to Congress, including the rebaseline
report, reprogramming requests, and monthly execution status
reports; these reports also provide information on funding
transfers from high-priority readiness items. The committee is
concerned, however, that DOD has not provided any reports that
include funding transfers on high-priority readiness items to
the committee in a consistent and timely manner. The committee
makes this recommendation with the understanding that DOD will
provide all reports which include funding transfers on high-
priority readiness items to the committee in accordance with
statutory requirements.
In addition to various repeals, the committee recommends
that certain required reports be modified to reflect the most
current and relevant reporting requirements. Sections 2486 (b)
and 2492 (c) of title 10, United States Code, would be amended
to no longer require annual submission of these various
commissary reports. In section 2486 (b), the provision would
require submission of the report only when changes are proposed
or madeto merchandise categories proposed to be made for sale
in commissaries. Similarly, in section 2492(c), the provision would
require submission of the report only when changes are proposed or made
to host nation laws or conditions in host nations that affect
restrictions on commissary purchasing in stores located outside of the
U.S.
The committee carefully reviewed the Department's request
to repeal these various reports. The criterion for the review
was to relieve the Department of the burden of preparing a
report whenever possible, consistent with the committee's
oversight and legislative responsibilities. The committee
notes, however, that there are a number of important reporting
requirements for which either no report or only an interim
report has been received. Foremost among such reports is the
Secretary of Defense's annual report to the President and to
Congress as required by section 113(c) of title 10, United
States Code. The Secretary's annual report, which traditionally
incorporates a number of other statutory reports, is a major
source of important information for Congress. The committee
also notes the continuing absence of a National Security
Strategy, required to be submitted by the President in the
annual national security strategy report under section 108 of
the National Security Act of 1947 as added by the Goldwater-
Nichols Department of Defense Reorganization Act of 1986.
Without these important reports, Congress cannot gain a clear
understanding of the Administration's national security
strategy or its long-term plans for our Armed Forces. The
Committee looks forward to receipt of the Secretary's annual
report to the President and to Congress and the President's
national security strategy.
Annual report on hardened and deeply buried targets (sec. 1032)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Defense, in conjunction with the Secretary of
Energy and the Director of Central Intelligence, to submit a
report on the research and development activities under their
respective jurisdictions during the preceding fiscal year to
develop a weapon to defeat hardened and deeply buried targets.
The report would be submitted no later than April 1 of each
year.
The committee is concerned that each of the three agencies
is spending substantial amounts of money for a wide variety of
hardened and deeply buried target-related activities within
each agency. The committee is concerned that there is no
central coordination or even any centralized knowledge of these
many programs and their scope and cost. Dealing with the issue
of hardened and deeply buried targets is a significant
technical challenge, but it is not a new one. The issue has,
however, come to the forefront as a result of the recent
actions in Afghanistan. The committee is concerned that these
programs do not appear to be well coordinated. The committee
believes this report will be useful to ensure that this issue
is addressed in a coordinated way to meet established
requirements and that the funds are spent efficiently.
Revision of date of annual report on counterproliferation activities
and programs (sec. 1033)
The committee recommends a provision that would revise the
submission date for the annual report of the
Counterproliferation Program Review Committee (CPRC) from
February 1 of each year to May 1 of each year. This later date
was the original date by which the CPRC annual report was
required. In fiscal year 2000, Congress revised the submission
date to February 1, but the Department of Defense has not
submitted the CPRC annual reports until May of each year. The
committee understands that the annual report is prepared after
the budget request is submitted each year in order to make use
of funding figures from the Future Years Defense Program
(FYDP); the report therefore cannot be submitted along with the
budget request. The committee believes that an achievable
report deadline is preferable to an unachievable one. The
committee recommends this change with the expectation that the
Department of Defense will provide briefings to the
congressional defense committees on the updated elements of the
annual report, such as the Areas for Capability Enhancements
(ACEs), when they have been decided by the CPRC. The committee
directs the Department to notify the congressional defense
committees each year when the CPRC has decided these elements
prior to submission of the final report.
Quadrennial quality of life review (sec. 1034)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Defense to conduct a quadrennial quality of life
review to examine the quality of life of members of the Armed
Forces. The review would alternate with the quadrennial defense
review so that one of these reviews would occur every two
years. The recommended provision requires the Secretary of
Defense to submit a report on each quadrennial quality of life
review to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and
the House of Representatives no later than September 30 of the
year in which the review is conducted.
SUBTITLE D--HOMELAND DEFENSE
Homeland security activities of the National Guard (sec. 1041)
The committee recommends a provision that would add a new
section to title 32, United States Code, to authorize the
Governor of a State, at the request of the head of a federal
law enforcement agency and with the concurrence of the
Secretary of Defense, to order personnel of the National Guard
of a State to perform full-time National Guard duty for the
purpose of carrying out homeland security activities. The
intent would be to temporarily provide trained and disciplined
personnel to a federal law enforcement agency until that agency
is able to recruit and train sufficient personnel to perform
the homeland security activities. The duration of the use of
the National Guard of a State would be 179 days, but the
Governor of a State could, with the consent of the Secretary of
Defense, extend the period for an additional 90 days to meet
extraordinary circumstances. The Secretary of Defense would
provide funds to the State Governor to fund the costs of the
use of the National Guard personnel and would require the head
of the federal law enforcement agency receiving the support to
reimburse the Department of Defense. Finally, the Secretary of
Defense and the Governor of a State would enter into a
memorandum of agreement, with each federal agency involved,
covering specified matters including certifications by
appropriate state officials as to the authorization under state
law of the performance by the National Guard of the State of
the homeland security activities involved.
The committee is aware that the Department of Defense has
detailed approximately 1,600 personnel of the National Guard
under their title 10, United States Code, federal status to
several federal law enforcement agencies to perform homeland
security activities along the borders of the United States. The
National Guard personnel involved are under the overall
supervision of, and perform duties under the direction and
control of, the federal law enforcement agencies to which they
are detailed. The Department of Defense and the federal
agencies involved consider this arrangement to be consistent
with the Posse Comitatus Act (18 U.S.C. 1385).
The committee believes that it is preferable to use
National Guard personnel under their title 32, United States
Code, status and under the authority of the State Governor, as
has been the practice for more than a decade in connection with
counterdrug activities authorized under the provisions of
section 112 of title 32, United States Code.
Conditions for use of full-time reserves to perform duties relating to
defense against weapons of mass destruction (sec. 1042)
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 12310(c)(3) of title 10, United States Code, to strike
a reference to the Department of Defense Consequence Management
Program Integration Office (COMPIO). This amendment reflects
the fact that the Deputy Secretary of Defense disestablished
COMPIO on February 14, 2001, directing that its functions be
integrated into existing Department of Defense organizations
and processes to ensure greater effectiveness and oversight of
programs.
The amended paragraph would authorize reserve personnel to
perform duties described elsewhere in the section only while
assigned to a reserve component Weapons of Mass Destruction-
Civil Support Team in the United States, its territories, the
District of Columbia and the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico.
Weapon of mass destruction defined for purposes of the authority for
use of Reserves to perform duties relating to defense against
weapons of mass destruction (sec. 1043)
The committee recommends a provision that would change the
definition of the term ``weapon of mass destruction'' in
sections 12304 and 12310 of title 10, United States Code, so as
to include any large conventional explosive that is designed to
produce catastrophic loss of life or property.
Report on Department of Defense homeland defense activities (sec. 1044)
Studies conducted by the Comptroller General over the last
year and testimony from Department of Defense (DOD) officials
have indicated that the Department still needs to clarify the
structure, strategy, roles and responsibilities, and
relationships among the various DOD entities that carry out the
missions related to combating terrorism, homeland security, and
homeland defense.
The committee believes that, in light of the proposed
changes to the Unified Command Plan, expected changes to the
structure of the Office of the Secretary of Defense, and the
continued lack of clarity concerning the relationship between
the Defense Department and other agencies or offices of the
federal government responsible for homeland security or
defense, a deeper examination of the Department's role in and
capabilities for fulfilling its homeland defense mission is
needed. Therefore, the committee recommends a provision that
would direct the Secretary to submit a detailed report on how
DOD should be and is fulfilling its homeland defense mission.
Strategy for improving preparedness of military installations for
incidents involving weapons of mass destruction (sec. 1045)
A Department of Defense (DOD) study of the Installation
Pilot Program, mandated by the Floyd D. Spence National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2001 (PL 106-398), revealed a
lack of preparedness of military installations to manage the
consequences of a weapon of mass destruction (WMD) incident.
The study demonstrated that standards, priorities and
implementation schedules varied from service to service and
from installation to installation. In a follow-up study,
mandated by the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal
Year 2002 (PL 107-333), the Comptroller General found that DOD
does not have an overall management framework to improve WMD
preparedness at military installations and that overall funding
of WMD preparedness at military installations lacks visibility.
The study concluded that without a clear WMD preparedness
strategy for military installations there is a potential for
duplication, inappropriate allocation of resources, and
reduction or loss of preparedness. In addition, without a
performance plan that includes goals, objectives, and
performance measures, Congress and DOD managers cannot measure
the results of programs and identify funding levels and
priorities. The Comptroller General recommended that DOD
prepare a comprehensive strategy and plan for improving the
preparedness of military installations in responding to attacks
involving weapons of mass destruction.
Therefore, the committee recommends a provision that would
direct the Secretary of Defense to develop a comprehensive plan
to improve the preparedness of military installations for
incidents involving weapons of mass destruction (WMD). The plan
would: (1) include a strategy identifying long-term objectives
and resource requirements; (2) describe how local, regional and
national military response capabilities will be developed and
used and how DOD will coordinate the use of military
capabilities with local, regional, and national civilian
capabilities, including private industry, where appropriate;
(3) include a performance plan designed to achieve the
objectives of the strategy, as well as a timetable for
implementation; and (4) establish measurable goals, describe
the process and resources required to attain those goals,
identify performance measures required to attain those goals,
and describe the process for evaluating results.
The plan would be submitted to the congressional defense
committees no later than 180 days after this legislation comes
into effect. No later than 60 days after the Secretary submits
the plan to Congress, the Comptroller General would be required
to review it and submit a report assessing the plan to the
congressional defense committees.
The Secretary would be directed to inform Congress of
progress under and updates to the plan for a total of three
years in the materials the Secretary submits to Congress in
support of the President's annual budget request.
SUBTITLE E--OTHER MATTERS
Continued applicability of expiring governmentwide information security
requirements to the Department of Defense (sec. 1061)
The committee recommends a provision that would continue
the applicability of expiring governmentwide information
security requirements to the Department of Defense (DOD).
Subtitle G of Title X of the Floyd D. Spence National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2001 enacted a new
Government Information Security Reform Act (GISRA), addressing
the responsibilities of the Office of Management and Budget and
federal agencies (including DOD) in the area of information
security. These provisions are scheduled to expire later this
year.
The DOD Inspector General's annual report to Congress
recommends that the expiring requirements of GISRA be extended.
The report states:
Although implementing GISRA has been difficult, the
OIG, DOD, believes that its mandatory reporting
requirements have refocused the Department's attention
on this critical area. Until it was passed, we were
very concerned that information security was a
declining priority. * * *
[W]e believe that the information assurance threat is
greater than ever, and mandatory self assessments, with
independent review, serve the Department's best
interest. Therefore we recommend continuation of the
core GISRA requirements.
The provision recommended by the committee would implement
the Inspector General's recommendation.
Acceptance of voluntary services of proctors for administration of
Armed Services Vocational Aptitude Battery (sec. 1062)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
the service secretaries to accept voluntary services of
secondary school faculty and other personnel to serve as
proctors for the administration of the Armed Services
Vocational Aptitude Battery.
Extension of authority to sell aircraft and aircraft parts for use in
responding to oil spills (sec. 1063)
The committee recommends a provision that would extend
untilSeptember 30, 2006, the authority in section 740 of the
Wendell H. Ford Aviation Investment and Reform Act for the 21st Century
(P.L. 106-181) to the Secretary of Defense to sell excess aircraft and
aircraft parts to a person or entity that provides oil spill response
services.
Amendments to impact aid program (sec. 1064)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
continued eligibility of certain local education agencies for
impact aid during temporary reductions in qualified students
during the conversion of military housing units to private
housing.
Additional Matters of Interest
Improved management of Department of Defense contracting for services
On June 22, 2001, the Secretary of Defense launched a
Business Initiative Council to bring about better business
practices and achieve savings within the Department of Defense
(DOD). Testifying before this Committee on June 28, 2001, the
Secretary stated:
We have an obligation to taxpayers to spend their
money wisely. Today we're not doing that. * * * Mr.
Chairman, I have never seen an organization, in the
private or public sector, that could not, by better
management, operate at least five percent more
efficiently if given the freedom to do so. Five percent
of the DOD budget is over $15 billion!
The Secretary testified that $15.0 billion of savings from
management efficiencies could be used to: increase ship
procurement from six to nine ships a year; procure several
hundred additional aircraft annually, rather than 189; meet the
target of a 67-year facility replacement rate; and increase
defense-related science and technology funding from 2.7 percent
to 3 percent of the DOD budget.
The committee is disappointed that, to this date, the
Business Initiative Council has identified only an estimated
$121.0 to $132.0 million of the $15.0 billion annual savings
projected by the Secretary. Despite the largest proposed
increase in defense spending in 20 years, the budget request
would fund just five ships and 166 aircraft, replace facilities
at a 122-year rate, and leave the rate of defense-related
science and technology funding unchanged at just 2.7 percent of
the DOD budget. The committee concludes that, despite the
proposed $48.0 billion increase in defense spending, management
efficiencies are needed now more than ever to ensure that the
taxpayers' money is wisely spent.
Section 802 of the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2002 (FY 2002 NDAA) established annual goals for
Department of Defense savings to be achieved through improved
management of the Department's $50.0 billion of services
contracts. The Secretary of Defense was required to report to
the congressional defense committees no later than March 1,
2002, on the Department's progress toward this goal.
Unfortunately, this report, which was not submitted until May
1, 2002, states that the Department is unable to provide the
required information.
Sections 801 and 803 of the FY 2002 NDAA established the
management tools needed to achieve these savings, including the
increased use of performance-based services contracting;
required competition for task orders under contracts for
services; enhanced data collection, program review, and
spending analyses; and an improved management structure for
services contracts. These tools would be enhanced by section
811 of this Act, which establishes specific goals for
competitive contracting and performance-based contracting.
The statutory goal for fiscal year 2003 is a savings of 4
percent, or $1.7 billion. The budget request does not provide
for any of these savings. While $1.7 billion is far less than
the Secretary's goal of $15.0 billion in annual savings for
management efficiencies, the committee believes that this level
of savings should be achievable in fiscal year 2003. To ensure
that the military services and defense agencies have an
incentive to achieve these savings, the committee bill would
permit them to retain half of the required savings.
Accordingly, Titles I, II and III of the bill include
reductions totaling $850.0 million, to be achieved through
improved management of the Department's services contracts. The
specific reductions reflected in these titles are as follows:
Army Procurement Accounts--$31.0 million;
Navy Procurement Accounts--$24.4 million;
Air Force Procurement Accounts--$2.1 million;
Defense-Wide Procurement Accounts--$1.5 million;
Research and Development, Army--$13.7 million;
Research and Development, Navy--$6.9 million;
Research and Development, Air Force--$45.2 million;
Research and Development, Defense-wide--$25.2
million;
Operation and Maintenance, Army--$192.5 million;
Operation and Maintenance, Navy--$152.3 million;
Operation and Maintenance, Air Force--$211.4 million;
Operation and Maintenance, Marine Corps--$16.3
million;
Operation and Maintenance, Defense-Wide--$127.5
million.
The Committee expects the Department to distribute these
reductions across budget activities and programs within the
relevant appropriations accounts, based on the dollar value of
contracts within those budget activities and programs to which
improvements may be appropriately applied.
Information technology investments for functional area applications
Less than a year ago, the Department of Defense (DOD)
initiated an ambitious effort to address shortcomings in the
Department's financial management systems, operations, and
controls. The Department's time line called for the development
of a comprehensive enterprise architecture and a transition
plan for implementing the proposed architecture by March 2003.
The proposed architecture would then be implemented over a
period of four years or more.
The committee strongly supports the Department's efforts to
address shortcomings in its financial systems on a
comprehensive basis. The committee shares the Department's view
that problems with the reliability of financial and feeder
systems data and interfaces between these systems must be
addressed in order to ensure proper accountability and control
over its physical assets, proper accounting for the costs of
operations, and proper recording and reconciling of
disbursements.
The committee also recognizes that the implementation of a
new enterprise architecture for DOD financial management,
accounting, and feeder systems will require substantially
increased funding on such systems over the course of the Future
Years Defense Plan. Until the proposed architecture has been
developed, however, excessive spending on such systems is
likely to be wasteful.
The Comptroller General of the United States testified
before the Readiness Subcommittee that the Department should
limit the additional business systems development that the
Department undertakes before a new enterprise architecture has
been approved. The DOD Comptroller testified that he agreed
with this statement and that he had already taken some steps to
limit spending on business systems development until the
proposed architecture and transition plan have been completed.
Section 1006 would help enforce these limitations by
requiring that any such expenditures be approved in advance by
the Department's Financial Management Modernization Executive
Committee. In accordance with the testimony of the Comptroller
General and the DOD Comptroller, this provision would limit
expenditures to those that are necessary to address critical
national security requirements or prevent significant adverse
effects on ongoing projects.
The budget request included more than $2.0 billion for
information technology investments for functional area
applications, an amount that is barely reduced from the $2.1
billion provided in fiscal year 2002. This amount includes
funding for a large number of programs that may require
fundamental restructuring depending on the outcome of the
Department's current financial management review and the system
architecture that the Department develops.
For example, the budget request included $196.5 million for
the Defense Logistics Agency (DLA) business systems
modernization program, which is expected to cost more than $1.0
billion by the time that it is completed. The General
Accounting Office (GAO) reported last year that this program is
being conducted ``without having either a DLA enterprise
architecture or a DOD-wide logistics management enterprise
architecture.'' The GAO report concluded that
By allowing the services and DLA * * * to proceed
separately with new logistics management systems in the
absence of a DOD-wide enterprise architecture, DOD will
not be in a position to optimize logistics operations
and system performance across the department, and thus
is unlikely to successfully meet its strategic
logistics management goals.
Similarly, the budget request included $128.4 million for
Defense Finance and Accounting Service (DFAS) development
modernization, $439.4 million for Army functional area
application development modernization, $367.4 million for Navy
functional area application development modernization, and
$229.8 million for Air Force functional area application
development modernization. These expenditures are the leading
edge of a much larger investment, which, the DOD Inspector
General concluded earlier this year, is unlikely to lead to
properly integrated systems. The Inspector General's report
concludes:
DOD continues to develop [the DFAS Corporate Database
(DCD)] and other financial management systems, which will not
establish an integrated financial management system.
Specifically,
The Defense Logistics Agency stated its $1 billion
supply chain management system could not work with DCD
and other standard systems;
The Army and Navy did not determine whether their
$975 million financial management systems could work
with DCD and other standard systems.
The Defense Finance and Accounting Service Denver
personnel want to develop a $16 million Air Force-
specific financial management system to replace DCD.
As a result, DOD components are spending more than $2 billion
to develop systems with no assurance that the financial
portions of the systems will function as an integrated
financial management system.
The committee shares the concern of the DOD Inspector
General that DOD components are requesting more than $2.0
billion to develop new financial systems with no assurance that
these systems will function as an integrated financial
management system. For this reason, the committee believes that
the level of funding provided for functional area applications
in advance of the development of a comprehensive system
architecture is excessive.
Accordingly, the committee recommends reductions in Titles
I, II and III of the bill totaling $400.0 million, in
proportion to proposed spending on information technology
development modernization for functional area applications in
each accounts. The specific reductions reflected in these
titles are as follows:
Other Procurement, Army--$53.2 million;
Other Procurement, Navy--$20.6 million;
Other Procurement, Air Force--$12.0 million;
Procurement, Marine Corps--$3.4 million;
Other Procurement, Defense-Wide--$3.5 million;
Research and Development, Army--$17.7 million;
Research and Development, Navy--$25.6 million;
Research and Development, Air Force--$27.2 million;
Research and Development, Defense-Wide--36.6 million;
Defense Health Programs--$32.1 million;
Defense Working Capital Fund Operations--$148.6
million;
Operation and Maintenance, Defense-Wide--$19.5
million.
The committee expects the Department to achieve these
reductions by implementing the requirements of section 1006 and
restricting the development of Department of Defense business
systems until the Department has completed its proposed
architecture and transition plan and is in a position to ensure
that business system expenditures will be consistent with that
architecture and plan.
Defense Emergency Response Fund
The President's budget request included $20.1 billion in
the operation and maintenance title for the Defense Emergency
Response Fund (DERF) for fiscal year 2003. Of this amount,
$10.1 billion was requested for specific programs and $10.0
billion was requested as unspecified contingency funding for
continuing the war on terrorism into fiscal year 2003.
The decision to appropriate funding to, and obligate
funding directly from, the DERF in fiscal year 2002 was well
intentioned and unavoidable under the unique circumstances that
prevailed in the fall of 2001. However, the committee is
concerned that obligation of funds directly from the DERF in
fiscal year 2002 has reduced management oversight and
accountability of thosefunds without any significant offsetting
benefits, such as greater efficiency.
The $10.1 billion that was requested for specific programs
in the DERF represented funding that normally appears
throughout the defense authorization bill, including the
procurement, research and development, operation and
maintenance, military personnel, and military construction
accounts. The committee believes that these programs should be
funded and executed in their normal accounts. The committee
found no compelling reason to authorize funding for programs
through the DERF in fiscal year 2003 and recommends that all
funding requested for specific programs in the DERF be
transferred to the traditional appropriations accounts.
The committee's action with respect to the unspecified
$10.0 billion contingency fund, which would be available to
fund the costs of ongoing military operations as well as the
additional pay and benefits of mobilized guard and reserve
personnel, is discussed separately in this section of the
report. The committee believes that any subsequent
appropriation of all or part of this $10.0 billion contingency
should make such funds available for transfer to the
traditional appropriation accounts before they are obligated.
The table that follows details the committee's action with
respect to the DERF. The table lists each program for which
funding was requested in the DERF, the amount the committee has
authorized for that program, if any, and the account in which
the funds have been authorized.
The report language following the table discusses those
programs requested in the DERF for which no funds were
authorized. Report language describing changes to other
programs requested in the DERF can be found under the heading
of the account to which the funds were transferred.
Modernization of strategic systems
The Defense Emergency Response Fund request included a $7.3
million increase to PE 62114N for accelerating technology to
modernize strategic systems. The committee recommends a
decrease of $7.3 million in this account to reflect the limited
value that applied research in this area will have on currently
approved Future Naval Capabilities thrust areas. The committee
recommends that the Navy develop a coordinated plan for the
role that basic and applied research programs will play in the
overall modernization strategy for the Navy's strategic
systems.
Stand off surveillance camera
The Defense Emergency Response Fund request included $2.0
million in PE 63750D8Z for stand off surveillance camera
technology. The committee recommends a decrease of $2.0 million
to this account to reflect a concern that this technology is
commercially available, is not appropriate for a science and
technology program, and does not fit well into an Advanced
Concept Technology Demonstration.
Aerospace propulsion research
The Defense Emergency Response Fund (DERF) request included
a $5.7 million increase to PE 62203F and a $4.4 million
increase to PE 63216F for research support to the Department of
Defense's Technology for the Sustainment of Strategic Systems
effort, as part of the Nuclear Posture Review. The committee
recommends a decrease of $5.7 million in PE 62203F and a
decrease of $4.4 million in PE 63216F. The committee recommends
that the Department develop a coordinated research plan for
monitoring the aging of solid rocket propulsion materials and
systems. The committee notes that technology development on
strategic systems is already funded in the budget request and
the DERF in the Ballistic Missile Technology account.
Air Force defensive information operations
The budget request included an increase of $26.8 million
over fiscal year 2002 levels for Air Force defensive
information operations: $6.8 million for engineering
installation support for a program to detect and respond to
network intrusions; $15.0 million for a program to sustain
information assurance and allow for dynamic detection of
network intrusions; and $5.0 million for a program to develop
automated tools to detect network intrusions.
The fiscal year 2003 Defense Emergency Response Fund (DERF)
request also included $9.5 million ($4.6 million for
procurement and $4.9 million for operation and maintenance) to
acquire the latest technology, equipment, and software for
computer network defenses, including development of new tools
for exploitation and denial of enemy intrusions while
protecting critical information systems.
The committee finds these requests duplicative. Therefore,
the committee recommends a reduction to the DERF request of
$9.5 million.
SINCGARS family of radios
The budget request for the Defense Emergency Response Fund
(DERF), Counter-Terrorism and Force Protection Activity,
included $22.1 million to purchase the Single Channel Ground-
to-Air Radio System (SINCGARS) family of radios for the Weapons
of Mass Destruction-Civil Support Teams (WMD-CSTs). The budget
request also included $30.1 million for SINCGARS, reflecting a
total request of $52.2 million. The committee recommends a
decrease of $22.1 million to this activity because the WMD-CSTs
already have the capability that the SINCGARS would provide.
Each of the teams has a Unified Command Suite (UCS) as their
primary communications vehicle. The UCS contains several radio
systems, including the PRC-117F, which have the SINCGARS
capability. According to the Department of Defense, ``There is
not a shortfall of SINCGARS for the WMD-CST program.''
Major equipment for hardened and deeply buried targets
The budget request for the Defense Emergency Response Fund
(DERF) included $3.8 million in Procurement, Defense-Wide for
Major Equipment in PE 91598D8Z. The committee recommends no
funds for this line in the DERF because the justification for
the request failed to identify what, if any, specific items
will be procured. The justification for this procurement
request included with the budget stated, ``Specific procurement
items cannot be identified at this time.'' While the committee
generally supports work on hardened and deeply buried targets,
the committee notes that the DERF includes over $400.0 million
in funding for hardened and deeply buried targets. When there
is a decision made as to what items would be required, the
committee would consider a reprogramming request if necessary
to buy needed equipment.
C3I Intelligence programs
The Defense Emergency Response Fund (DERF) included $9.0
million for Research, Development, Testing and
Evaluation,Defense-wide for C3I Intelligence programs. This request,
according to the Department of Defense justification documents for the
DERF, ``will provide analysis of the potential for wars, their
deterrence, dissuasion, and termination courses of action to include:
modeling of economic, political and social vulnerabilities to peace * *
*''. The committee believes these actions are already being performed
by the Intelligence Community and recommends a reduction of $9.0
million, the amount of the request in this line, DERF PE 35190D8Z.
Management and organizational headquarters
The request included $1.0 million in the Defense Emergency
Response Fund (DERF) for management and organizational
headquarters Strategic Command. This line appears to be a
duplicate request. The committee, therefore, recommends no
funds for this activity in this line.
Air Force tactical deception personnel
The budget request for the Defense Emergency Response Fund
(DERF) included $1.0 million to provide military deception
personnel at selected Air Force units. These personnel would
integrate military deception into Air Force operational
planning. The committee understands that funds requested for
the DERF are intended to support activities associated with the
global war on terrorism. The committee does not understand,
however, why military deception, an integral part of planning
any military operation, is a new requirement. Therefore, the
committee recommends a reduction of $1.0 million in the
Operation and Maintenance, Air Force account.
OTHER ITEMS OF INTEREST
Comptroller General study of Special Operations Command forces language
requirements, training and proficiencies
The committee directs the Comptroller General to study and
provide a report to the Congress on Special Operations Forces
(SOF) language requirements, training, and means of achieving
and retaining proficiencies. The report shall include an
evaluation of the process of developing and meeting language
requirements and retaining the required language skills among
SOF individuals and units. The report should also examine how
the Special Operations Command could make better use of other
national assets to anticipate future language needs and
maintain a dynamic requirements and training strategy in order
to meet these needs.
The committee also directs the Comptroller General to
include within the report recommendations for improvements to
SOF language training, if necessary, and an assessment of the
resources required to make any such improvements. The report
should be submitted to Congress no later than March 5, 2003.
Department of Defense STARBASE Program
The Department of Defense STARBASE Program is a very
effective community outreach program for youths ages six
through 18 that is aimed at improving math and science skills.
It also addresses drug use prevention, health, self-esteem, and
life skills and exposes youth, parents, and teachers to the
value of military service. It currently operates at 39
locations associated with active, guard, and reserve commands
throughout the United States. At least seven additional
locations are seeking STARBASE programs.
The committee commends the Department's efforts to ensure
that each STARBASE academy adheres to established program
guidelines to meet the program's mission and objectives but is
concerned about reports of failure to obligate STARBASE funds
in a timely manner and of efforts to use STARBASE funding for
other programs. The committee directs the Department to
strengthen its oversight of the STARBASE program to improve
training, standardization, and compliance with program
guidelines.
TITLE XI--DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE CIVILIAN PERSONNEL POLICY
Extension of authority to pay severance pay in a lump sum (sec. 1101)
The committee recommends a provision that would extend from
October 1, 2003 to October 1, 2006 the authority of the
Secretary of Defense and the service secretaries to pay
severance pay in a lump sum.
Extension of voluntary separation incentive pay authority (sec. 1102)
The committee recommends a provision that would extend from
September 30, 2003 to September 30, 2006, the authority of the
Secretary of Defense to pay voluntary separation incentive pay
to civilian employees.
Extension of cost sharing authority for continued FEHBP coverage of
certain persons after separation from employment (sec. 1103)
The committee recommends a provision that would extend for
three years the authority to permit certain Department of
Defense civilian employees who are separated due to a reduction
in force to elect continued health care coverage under the
Federal Health Care Plan program. The recommended provision
would require the separation to occur before October 1, 2006,
or before February 1, 2007, if specific notice of the
separation is given before October 1, 2006.
Eligibility of nonappropriated funds employees to participate in the
Federal Employees Long-Term Care Insurance Program (sec. 1104)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
nonappropriated funds employees to participate in the Federal
Employees Long-Term Care Insurance Program.
Increased maximum period of appointment under the experimental
personnel program for scientific and technical personnel (sec.
1105)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
the Secretary to extend from four to five years the initial
terms of appointments made under a previously authorized
experimental hiring program. The committee notes that the
Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency has made excellent
use of these authorities to bring in senior technical talent in
high level positions. The committee also notes that the
authority has been granted to the military services'
laboratories, although they have shown very limited progress in
implementing the program.
The extension in the terms of appointment authorized by the
program addresses a concern that the four-year appointments
resulted in a discontinuity in retirement and health benefits
for the employees involved. The ability to offer attractive
retirement and health insurance benefits will enable defense
agencies and laboratories to better compete for the highly
trained technical personnel that are required to meet mission
needs.
Qualification requirements for employment in Department of Defense
professional accounting positions (sec. 1106)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
the Secretary of Defense to require Department of Defense
civilian employees in professional accounting positions to be
certified public accountants. The recommended provision would
exempt from this requirement employees currently employed in
professional accounting positions.
Housing benefits for unaccompanied teachers required to live at
Guantanamo Bay Naval Station, Cuba (sec. 1107)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Navy to make excess military family housing at Guantanamo Bay
Naval Station, Cuba, available for lease to Department of
Defense Education Activity teachers assigned to teach at that
station. The recommended provision would require payment of a
housing allowance to teachers who lease such housing.
TITLE XII--MATTERS RELATING TO OTHER NATIONS
SUBTITLE A--COOPERATIVE THREAT REDUCTION WITH STATES OF THE FORMER
SOVIET UNION
Specification of Cooperative Threat Reduction programs and funds (sec.
1201)
The committee recommends a provision that would define the
Cooperative Threat Reduction (CTR) programs, define the funds
as those authorized to be appropriated in section 301 of this
act, and authorize the CTR funds to be available for obligation
for three fiscal years.
Funding allocations (sec. 1202)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
$416.7 million, the amount included in the budget request, for
the Cooperative Threat Reduction (CTR) programs. The provision
would also establish the funding levels for each of the program
elements of the CTR program and provide limited authority to
vary the amounts authorized for specific program elements.
The committee continues to support the CTR program and
believes it is one of the most important national security
efforts to reduce the threats posed by offensive nuclear
weapons and delivery systems, weapons grade plutonium and
uranium, and chemical and biological weapons and materials in
states of the Former Soviet Union.
Authorization of use of Cooperative Threat Reduction funds for projects
and activities outside the Former Soviet Union (sec. 1203)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
the Secretary of Defense to conduct Cooperative Threat
Reduction (CTR) programs outside of the countries of the Former
Soviet Union (FSU) to address critical and emerging
proliferation issues. The Secretary would be able to conduct
these activities using fiscal year 2003 CTR funds or CTR funds
for a fiscal year prior to 2003 that remain available to be
obligated as of the date of enactment of the National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2003. The amount that may be
obligated may not exceed $50.0 million in any fiscal year. The
provision would also direct the Secretary to use funds from a
range of CTR program accounts if the new authority were
exercised. The provision also directs the Secretary to seek, in
the following year's CTR budget request, sufficient funds in
the CTR program to pay back those funds used for countries
outside of the FSU. The Secretary could obligate the CTR funds
outside of the FSU 30 days after providing notice of his
intended actions to the congressional defense committees. In
the event the action is an emergency, the Secretary could
obligate the funds immediately and provide the congressional
defense committees notice within 72 hours after obligating the
funds.
In the event the Secretary uses the expanded CTR authority
in any two fiscal years, the Secretary shall submit to Congress
a report on the advisability of establishing one or more new
CTR programs. The committee believes that there may be
opportunities to expand the scope of the CTR program to include
countries outside of the FSU. This authority would allow the
Secretary to conduct a test program to determine if there are
new cooperative opportunities to reduce the threats from
proliferation of weapons of mass destruction knowledge,
weapons, and materials.
Waiver of limitations on assistance under programs to facilitate
Cooperative Threat Reduction and nonproliferation (sec. 1204)
The committee recommends a provision, that would provide
the President with permanent authority to waive the annual
certifications required for both the Cooperative Threat
Reduction (CTR) programs and the Freedom Support Act
nonproliferation programs, as requested by the administration.
The provision would amend section 1203 of the Cooperative
Threat Reduction Act of 1993 (22 U.S.C. 5952) and section 502
of the Freedom Support Act (22 U.S.C. 5852) and provide the
President the authority to waive the restrictions in any given
fiscal year for any given country if such a waiver is important
to the national security interests of the United States.
If the President chooses to exercise the waiver for either
the Cooperative Threat Reduction Act or Freedom Support Act
preconditions, this waiver would be effective only when the
President submits to Congress a report describing the activity
or activities that prevent the President from making the
certification or certifications required by the Act, and the
strategy, plan, or policy of the President to promote the
relevant State's future commitment to the preconditions.
ADDITIONAL MATTERS OF INTEREST
Cooperative Threat Reduction with the States of the Former Soviet Union
The budget request for the Cooperative Threat Reduction
(CTR) program included $40.0 million to initiate a new effort,
the Weapons of Mass Destruction Proliferation Prevention
program. The committee supports this new effort aimed at
providing equipment and training to improve border control
capabilities to all Former Soviet Union (FSU) countries other
than Russia. Nevertheless, the committee is concerned that
there may be potential for duplication of efforts with other
similar programs within the Department of Defense (DOD), as
well as with the Department of Energy's National Nuclear
Security Administration (NNSA) activities. The committee urges
the Department of Defense to coordinate this new effort with
all existing programs within the Department, the Department of
Energy, the Department of State, the U.S. Customs Service, the
Federal Bureau of Investigation, and the U.S. Coast Guard. The
committee also expects DOD to coordinate with the NNSA in the
area of weapons of mass destruction detection technology. The
committee directs DOD to report to the committee the results of
this coordination and to present a strategic and budgetary plan
describing how this new effort will complement, rather than
duplicate, any similar ongoing efforts.
Pilot program for scientific exchange with the countries of the Former
Soviet Union
The committee has been supportive of the work that the
Department of Energy (DOE) and the Department of Defense (DOD)
have done to engage the former biological and chemical weapons
scientists in the countries of the Former Soviet Union (FSU)
but believes that more can be done. Therefore, the committee
directs the Secretary of Energy and Secretary of Defense to
establish one or more pilot programs that would bring former
biological and chemical weapons scientists from the FSU to the
United States and bring U.S. scientists to the Former Soviet
Union's chemical, biological, veterinary, and medical
institutes. Each Department could establish a separate pilot
program, or the two agencies could work together to establish a
joint pilot program. The committee believes that there are
significant, mutual, civil-scientific benefits that could be
gained from long-term cooperative joint research projects and
exchange programs. The committee believes that this exchange
program is a logical next step to the current threat reduction
programs in DOE and DOD. The committee urges the Secretaries to
work closely with universities, industries, the national
laboratories and other relevant federal and state agencies to
establish the pilot program.
The committee directs the Secretaries to report to the
congressional defense committees, no later than January 15,
2004, on the status of the pilot program or programs and the
feasibility of establishing a permanent exchange program,
including the funding requirement and any statutory or
regulatory hurdles to implementing a permanent program.
SUBTITLE B--OTHER MATTERS
Administrative support and services for coalition liaison officers
(sec. 1211)
In the future, the United States Armed Forces are likely to
conduct operations as part of coalitions involving the military
forces of allies and friends. Operation Enduring Freedom (OEF),
the first major operation of the 21st century, illustrates this
point. As General Tommy Franks, Commander in Chief, U.S.
Central Command, who is leading this operation, noted during
his testimony before the committee on February 12, 2002, the
OEF ``coalition has grown to more than 50 nations, with 27
nations having representatives at our headquarters.'' The
nations involved in the coalition are assisting by providing
military forces and capabilities; basing, staging and
overflight rights; search and rescue; and planning, logistics,
and intelligence support.
Accordingly, the committee recommends a provision that
would authorize the Secretary of Defense to provide
administrative services and support to coalition liaison
officers while they are temporarily assigned to the
headquarters of a combatant command, component command, or
subordinate operational command in connection with the planning
for, or conduct of, a coalition operation. Additionally, the
Secretary would be authorized to pay the travel, subsistence,
and similar personal expenses of a liaison officer of a
developing country in connection with the assignment of that
liaison officer to the headquarters of a combatant command if
the assignment is requested by the commander of the combatant
command. The Secretary would be authorized to provide the
services and support with or without reimbursement.
Use of Warsaw Initiative funds for travel of officials from partner
countries (sec. 1212)
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 1051 of title 10, United States Code, to authorize the
Secretary of Defense to pay for the travel-related expenses of
personnel from a developing country participating in the
NorthAtlantic Treaty Organization's (NATO) Partnership for Peace (PfP)
program. This provision specifically addresses those travel-related
expenses incurred when such personnel travel to the territory of any of
the countries participating in the PfP program or any of the NATO
member countries to attend a bilateral or regional conference, seminar,
or similar meeting.
Support of United Nations-sponsored efforts to inspect and monitor
Iraqi weapons activities (sec. 1213)
The committee recommends a provision that would extend,
through fiscal year 2003, the authority of the Department of
Defense to support United Nations-sponsored inspection and
monitoring efforts to ensure Iraqi compliance with its
international obligations to destroy its weapons of mass
destruction programs and associated delivery systems. The
provision would limit the assistance that could be provided by
the Secretary of Defense to $15.0 million for fiscal year 2003.
Arctic and Western Pacific environmental cooperation program (sec.
1214)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
the Secretary of Defense to conduct a cooperative program with
countries in the Arctic and Western Pacific regions. The
Secretary, with the concurrence of the Secretary of State, may
provide cooperative assistance or provide assistance on
environmental matters in the Arctic and Pacific regions, with
certain exceptions. The primary focus of the program would be
on technology projects and activities related to radiological
threats and contamination. To reflect this focus the provision
limits the availability of program funds to no more than 20
percent of such funds on non-radiological matters. The
provision would also require the Secretary to submit an annual
report on the program that would include a discussion of the
activities, the funding, the life cycle costs of any projects,
the participants, and any contributions from other agencies or
countries. The committee urges the Secretary of Defense to work
with the Secretary of State to obtain an agreement with
cooperating partners as soon as possible to facilitate program
implementation.
DIVISION B--MILITARY CONSTRUCTION AUTHORIZATIONS
Explanation of funding tables
Division B of this Act authorizes funding for military
construction projects of the Department of Defense. It includes
funding authorizations for the construction and operation of
military family housing and military construction for the
reserve components, the defense agencies, and the North
Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) Security Investment
program. It also provides authorization for the base closure
account that funds environmental cleanup and other activities
associated with the implementation of previous base closure
rounds.
The following tables provide the project-level
authorizations for the military construction funding authorized
in Division B of this Act and summarize that funding by
account. The tables also display the funding requested by the
administration in the fiscal year 2003 budget for military
construction and family housing projects.
Funds transferred to the accounts in this title from the
DERF are displayed on the tables that follow as increases to
the amount requested for those programs in the military
construction accounts. Programs for which funds were
transferred from the DERF are annotated to indicate that funds
were originally requested in the DERF.
As noted earlier in this report, the amounts requested for
national defense were decreased by $3.5 billion to reflect the
accounting adjustment necessary to fund federal civilian
retirement and health benefits under current law, rather than
under the accrual basis requested in the administration's
budget. The following tables include a reduction of $39.9
million to reflect that portion of this accounting change
included in the military construction and family housing
accounts.
FISCAL YEAR 2003 AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS FOR MILITARY
CONSTRUCTION
TITLE XXI--ARMY
Summary
The Army requested authorization of $1,476.5 million for
military construction and $1,405.6 million for family housing
for fiscal year 2003. The committee recommends authorization of
$1,602.0 million for military construction and $1,397.4 million
for family housing for fiscal year 2003.
The amounts authorized for military construction and family
housing reflect a reduction of $18.6 million to be achieved
from savings in the foreign currency account and $29.4 million
from accrual accounting adjustments. This reduction shall not
cancel any military construction authorized by title XXI of
this bill.
Authorized Army construction and land acquisition projects (sec. 2101)
This section contains the list of authorized Army
construction projects for fiscal year 2003. The authorized
amounts are listed on an installation-by-installation basis.
The state list contained in this report is the binding list of
the specific projects authorized at each location.
Family housing (sec. 2102)
This section would authorize new construction and planning
and design of family housing units for the Army for fiscal year
2003. It would also authorize funds for facilities that support
family housing, including housing management offices and
housing maintenance and storage facilities.
Improvements to military family housing units (sec. 2103)
This section would authorize improvements to existing Army
family housing units for fiscal year 2003.
Authorization of appropriations, Army (sec. 2104)
This section would authorize specific appropriations for
each line item contained in the Army's military construction
and family housing budget for fiscal year 2003. This section
also provides an overall limit on the amount the Army may spend
on military construction projects.
Modification of authority to carry out certain fiscal year 2002
projects (sec. 2105)
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
sections 2101 and 2104 of the Military Construction Act for
Fiscal Year 2002 (division B of Public Law 107-107) to increase
the funding authorization for barracks projects at Fort Carson,
Colorado and Fort Jackson, South Carolina by a total of $4.0
million.
Modification of authority to carry out certain fiscal year 2000 project
(sec. 2106)
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 2401 of the Military Construction Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2000 (division B of Public Law 106-65) to increase
the project authorization for a chemical demilitarization
facility at Blue Grass Army Depot, Kentucky, by $36.3 million.
Modification of authority to carry out certain fiscal year 1999 project
(sec. 2107)
The committee recommends a provision that would amend the
Military Construction Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1999
(division B of Public Law 105-261) to increase the total
project authorization for a chemical demilitarization facility
at Newport Army Depot, Indiana by $102.3 million.
Modification of authority to carry out certain fiscal year 1997 project
(sec. 2108)
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 2401 of the Military Construction Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 1997 (division B of Public Law 104-201), as
amended, to increase the total project authorization for the
Chemical Weapons and Munitions Destruction facility at Pueblo
Chemical Activity, Colorado by $57.5 million.
TITLE XXII--NAVY
Summary
The Navy requested authorization of $895.1 million for
military construction and $1,243.5 million for family housing
for fiscal year 2003. The committee recommends authorization of
$1,237.3 million for military construction and $1,240.8 million
for family housing for fiscal year 2003.
The amounts authorized for military construction and family
housing reflect a reduction of $4.0 million to be achieved from
savings in the foreign currency account and $10.5 million from
accrual accounting adjustments. This reduction shall not cancel
any military construction authorized by title XXII of this
bill.
Authorized Navy construction and land acquisition projects (sec. 2201)
This section contains the list of authorized Navy
construction projects for fiscal year 2003. The authorized
amounts are listed on an installation-by-installation basis.
The state list contained in this report is the binding list of
the specific projects authorized at each location.
Family housing (sec. 2202)
This section would authorize new construction and planning
and design of family housing units for the Navy for fiscal year
2003. It would also authorize funds for facilities that support
family housing, including housing management offices and
housing maintenance and storage facilities.
Improvements to military family housing units (sec. 2203)
This section would authorize improvements to existing Navy
and Marine Corps family housing units for fiscal year 2003.
Authorization of appropriations, Navy (sec. 2204)
This section would authorize specific appropriations for
each line item in the Navy's military construction and family
housing budget for fiscal year 2003. This section also provides
an overall limit on the amount the Navy may spend on military
construction projects.
Modification of authority to carry out certain fiscal year 2000
projects (sec. 2205)
The committee recommends a provision that would amend the
Military Construction Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2002
(division B of Public Law 107-107) to increase the total
project authorization for the projects at Naval Station,
Norfolk, Virginia by $280,000. The provision would also correct
the number of housing units authorized for a project at
Quantico, Virginia from 60 units to 39 units.
The committee notes that the table on page 755 of the star
print of the statement of managers accompanying the National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2002 (H. Rept. 107-
333) contained a similar error on the number of units. That
table also incorrectly stated the number of units of family
housing to be constructed at Marine Corps Base Kaneohe, Hawaii
as 212 units rather than the 172 units authorized in section
2202.
In addition, the reference in that table to housing
construction at ``NCBC Gulfport'' in Mississippi should have
read ``Naval Station, Pascagoula''. Section 2202 of that act
was so modified by section 1003 of the Department of Defense
and Emergency Supplemental Appropriations for Recovery from and
Response to Terrorist Attacks on the United States Act, 2002
(Public Law 107-117).
TITLE XXIII--AIR FORCE
Summary
The Air Force requested authorization of $644.1 million for
military construction and $1,521.1 million for family housing
for fiscal year 2003. The committee recommends authorization of
$1,055.3 million for military construction and $1,542.0 million
for family housing for fiscal year 2003.
The amounts authorized for military construction and family
housing reflect a reduction of $19.1 million to be achieved
from savings in the foreign currency account. This reduction
shall not cancel any military construction authorized by title
XXIII of this bill.
Authorized Air Force construction and land acquisition projects (sec.
2301)
This section contains the list of authorized Air Force
construction projects for fiscal year 2003. The authorized
amounts are listed on an installation-by-installation basis.
The state list contained in this report is the binding list of
the specific projects authorized at each location.
Family housing (sec. 2302)
This section would authorize new construction and planning
and design of family housing units for the Air Force for fiscal
year 2003. It would also authorize funds for facilities that
support family housing, including housing management offices
and housing maintenance and storage facilities.
Improvements to military family housing units (sec. 2303)
This section would authorize improvements to existing Air
Force family housing units for fiscal year 2003.
Authorization of appropriations, Air Force (sec. 2304)
This section would authorize specific appropriations for
each line item in the Air Force's budget for fiscal year 2003.
This section would also provide an overall limit on the amount
the Air Force may spend on military construction projects.
OTHER ITEMS OF INTEREST
Training facilities for military operations in urban terrain
The committee understands and has supported the
construction of facilities to train our forces for military
operations in urban terrain (MOUT) at the combat training
centers as well as for home-station training. The fiscal year
2003 budget request for the Defense Emergency Response Fund
included $19.0 million for two MOUT facilities at Lackland Air
Force Base.
The committee recommends authorization of these projects
but directs that no funds be obligated for the construction of
these projects until the Secretary of Defense submits a report
describing the requirement for MOUT facilities. The report
would include the desired distribution and total number of such
facilities, the extent to which MOUT facilities can be shared
among the military departments and active and reserve
components, and whether such facilities are required at
installations, such as Lackland Air Force Base, conducting
basic and advanced training in addition to operational units.
TITLE XXIV--DEFENSE AGENCIES
Summary
The defense agencies requested authorization of $687.5
million for military construction and $49.9 million for family
housing for fiscal year 2003. The committee recommends
authorization of $722.0 million for military construction and
$49.9 million for family housing in fiscal year 2003.
The amounts authorized for military construction and family
housing reflect a reduction of $3.0 million to be achieved from
savings in the foreign currency account. This reduction shall
not cancel any military construction authorized by title XXIV
of this bill.
Authorized defense agencies construction and land acquisition projects
(sec. 2401)
This section contains the list of authorized defense agency
construction projects for fiscal year 2003. The authorized
amounts are listed on an installation-by-installation basis.
The state list contained in this report is the binding list of
the specific projects authorized at each location.
Improvements to military family housing units (sec. 2402)
This section would authorize improvements to existing
defense agency family housing units for fiscal year 2003.
Energy conservation projects (sec. 2403)
This section would authorize the Secretary of Defense to
carry out energy conservation projects. The committee
recommends an increase of $1.0 million to the budget for this
program for the integration of photovoltaic power systems into
new construction or facility renovation projects. The committee
directs the Department of Defense to study which locations and
facilities offer the greatest potential for incorporating
photovoltaic projects and to select those projects and
technologies that offer the best performance and reliability.
Authorization of appropriations, defense agencies (sec. 2404)
This section would authorize specific appropriations for
each defense agency military construction program for fiscal
year 2003. This section also would provide an overall limit on
the amount that may be spent on such military construction
projects.
OTHER ITEMS OF INTEREST
Bio-defense research laboratory facility at Fort Detrick
The budget request included $5.0 million in the Defense-
wide military construction account for planning and design of a
new Center for Biological Counterterrorism Research at Fort
Detrick, Maryland as part of the Chemical-Biological Defense
Program (CBDP). This proposed new center, which would begin
with one-year additional funding in the CBDP to address
homeland security concerns, is intended to take advantage of
the world-class scientific and technical expertise at the U.S.
Army Medical Research Institute of Infectious Diseases
(USAMRIID) located at Fort Detrick. According to the budget
request, the Office of Homeland Security envisions that the
center would conduct biological threat assessment research,
investigate countermeasures to those threats, and perform
biological forensics in support of the Department of Defense
and other national requirements.
The committee directs the Army to expand its planning and
design effort to include consideration of a possible new
USAMRIID facility that would permit USAMRIID to accomplish its
full range of assigned missions in support of the warfighter
and to accomplish additional missions assigned in light of the
terrorist attacks of 2001. In addition, the committee directs
the Department of Defense and the Army to explore collaboration
and cooperation with the Department of Health and Human
Services and the National Institutes of Health (NIH) and the
Office of Homeland Security to determine whether a single new
facility at Fort Detrick could meet the needs of each agency
for its biological defense research and development
requirements.
Following the anthrax mail attacks on the Senate and
elsewhere in 2001, USAMRIID played a critical role in the
Nation's response. It analyzed the anthrax that was sent to the
Senate, determined which antibiotics would work against the
anthrax illness, and analyzed more than 16,600 samples of
suspicious materials that may have contained biological warfare
agents. This work was managed in conjunction with USAMRIID
completing its assigned missions to support U.S. Armed Forces.
This predicament caused difficult space and personnel
conditions.
In the conference report to accompany H.R. 3338, the
Department of Defense Appropriations Act for Fiscal Year 2002
(H. Rept. 107-350), the Army was required to conduct a
feasibility study to finalize the mission of USAMRIID and
determine the infrastructure requirements and associated costs
needed to accommodate USAMRIID's expanded role. The Army is
completing this study but has not submitted it to Congress as
of May 9, 2002. The committee is aware that USAMRIID has
already outgrown its existing facilities and is in need of
expanded and modernized facilities to accomplish its critical
mission. This situation will be exacerbated should USAMRIID's
workload and space requirements be increased. There are some 14
vaccines under development, each of which will require testing,
in addition to a growing number of therapeutics and new
technologies being developed or investigated.
Rather than planning for two or more new or expanded
facilities for USAMRIID and for an additional NIH facility at
Fort Detrick, the committee believes it would be better for
both agencies to collaborate and try to design one facility
that could meet their combined needs.
TITLE XXV--NORTH ATLANTIC TREATY ORGANIZATION INVESTMENT PROGRAM
Summary
The Department of Defense requested authorization of $168.2
million for the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO)
Security Investment Program for fiscal year 2003. The committee
recommends an authorization of $168.2 million for fiscal year
2003.
Authorized North Atlantic Treaty Organization construction and land
acquisition projects (sec. 2501)
This section would authorize the Secretary of Defense to
make contributions to the North Atlantic Treaty Organization
(NATO) Security Investment Program in an amount equal to the
sum of the amount specifically authorized in section 2502 of
this title and the amount of recoupment due to the United
States for construction previously financed by the United
States.
Authorization of appropriations, North Atlantic Treaty Organization
(sec. 2502)
This section would authorize appropriations of $168.2
million for the United States' contribution to the North
Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) Security Investment Program
for fiscal year 2003.
TITLE XXVI--GUARD AND RESERVE FORCES FACILITIES
Summary
The Department of Defense requested a military construction
authorization of $297.3 million for fiscal year 2003 for
National Guard and Reserve facilities. The committee recommends
authorizations for fiscal year 2003 of $568.6 million to be
distributed as follows:
Army National Guard..................................... $183,000,000
Air National Guard...................................... 204,000,000
Army Reserve............................................ 63,000,000
Air Force Reserve....................................... 59,900,000
Naval and Marine Corps Reserve.......................... 58,700,000
--------------------------------------------------------
____________________________________________________
Total............................................. 568,600,000
Authorized Guard and Reserve construction and land acquisition projects
(sec. 2601)
This section would authorize appropriations for military
construction for the National Guard and Reserve by service
components for fiscal year 2003. The state list contained in
this report is the binding list of the specific projects
authorized at each location.
TITLE XXVII--EXPIRATION AND EXTENSION OF AUTHORIZATIONS
Expiration of authorizations and amounts required to be specified by
law (sec. 2701)
This section would provide that authorizations for military
construction projects, repair of real property, land
acquisition, family housing projects, contributions to the
North Atlantic Treaty Organization infrastructure program, and
National Guard and Reserve military construction projects would
expire on October 1, 2005, or the date of enactment of an act
authorizing funds for military construction for fiscal year
2006, whichever is later. This expiration would not apply to
authorizations for projects for which appropriated funds have
been obligated before the later of October 1, 2005, or the date
of enactment of an act authorizing funding for military
construction for fiscal year 2006.
Extension of authorizations of certain fiscal year 2000 projects (sec.
2702)
This section would extend the authorizations for certain
fiscal year 2000 military construction projects until October
1, 2003, or the date of enactment of an act authorizing funds
for military construction for fiscal year 2004, whichever is
later.
Extension of authorizations of certain fiscal year 1999 projects (sec.
2703)
This section would extend the authorizations for certain
fiscal year 1999 military construction projects until October
1, 2003, or the date of enactment of an act authorizing funds
for military construction for fiscal year 2004, whichever is
later.
Effective date (sec. 2704)
This section would provide that titles XXI, XXII, XXIII,
XXIV, XXV, and XXVI of this act shall take effect on October 1,
2002, or the date of enactment of this act, whichever is later.
TITLE XXVIII--GENERAL PROVISIONS
SUBTITLE A--MILITARY CONSTRUCTION PROGRAM AND MILITARY FAMILY HOUSING
CHANGES
Lease of military family housing in Korea (sec. 2801)
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 2828(e) of title 10, United States Code, to increase,
from 800 to 1,175 units, the number of family housing units the
Secretary of the Army may lease in Korea for which the maximum
annual lease cost per unit is $25,000. The provision would also
newly authorize the Secretary to lease no more than 2,400
family housing units for which the maximum annual lease cost is
$35,000 per unit. Further, the provision would make certain
conforming changes.
The committee directs the Secretary of the Army, as
executive agent for housing in Korea, and the Commander, United
States Forces Korea, to ensure that these additional leased
housing units are allocated in order to make additional housing
available for commands or military units that are currently
significantly under the authorized 10 percent level of
accompanied tours.
Repeal of source requirements for family housing construction overseas
(sec. 2802)
The committee recommends a provision that would repeal
section 803 of the Military Construction Authorization Act,
1984 (Public Law 98-115), which requires the use of housing
manufactured or fabricated in the United States in family
housing constructed in foreign countries.
SUBTITLE B--REAL PROPERTY AND FACILITIES ADMINISTRATION
Agreements with private entities to enhance military training, testing,
and operations (sec. 2811)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
the Secretary of Defense or the secretaries of the military
departments to enter into agreements with private entities that
would enhance or protect military training. These entities
would acquire interests in lands adjacent to military
installations that would serve to limit development or preserve
habitat.
This authority would be used to enter into agreements
intended to enhance or protect military training and operations
by making additional lands available either for training
directly on such lands or as buffer zones between military
training or operating areas and the surrounding civilian
population. Such buffer zones may in some cases also serve to
create or preserve habitat that would reduce the burden on
military installations to provide such habitat. These
authorities are not intended to be used broadly to acquire
interests in lands for any and all land use needs that military
installations might have; rather, they should be used to
protect training and other military operations or to provide
habitat that is compatible with environmental requirements and
military training operations.
The committee has included a separate provision that would
authorize $20.0 million for a Range Enhancement Initiative Fund
that would be available to finance the cost of agreements
entered into under this authority in a separate provision in
title III of this act. The committee intends that funds in this
account would be used primarily to purchase restrictive
easements on property adjacent to military installations rather
than to acquire the lands to be owned and managed by the
military departments. The committee directs the Department of
Defense to use this authority, and the funding in the Range
Enhancement Initiative Fund, to implement those agreements that
have the highest potential to enhance or protect military
training.
Conveyance of surplus real property for natural resource conservation
(sec. 2812)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
the secretaries of the military departments to convey surplus
real property to State or local governments or to private
entities who have as their primary purpose the conservation of
open space or natural resources. Property would be conveyed
under this authority under the condition that it be used to
preserve open space or the natural resources on such property.
Any property conveyed that was no longer being used for such
purposes would revert to the United States.
Real property would be eligible for conveyance under this
authority if it is suitable for natural resource conservation;
surplus property for purposes of title II of the Federal
Property and Administrative Services Act of 1949 (40 U.S.C. 471
et seq.); and has been available for public benefit conveyance
for a sufficient period of time. The real property may be
conveyed only if the conveyee agrees that the property will be
used and maintained for natural resource conservation. Any
subsequent conveyance would be subject to written secretarial
approval, prior notification to Congress, and to the condition
that theproperty be maintained for natural resource
conservation in perpetuity. Any property that was no longer being
maintained in accordance with these provisions would revert to the
United States.
Modification of demonstration program on reduction in long-term
facility maintenance costs (sec. 2813)
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 2814 of the Military Construction Act for Fiscal Year
2002 (division B of Public Law 107-107) to authorize the
Department of Defense to expand the number of demonstration
projects on reduction of long-term facility maintenance costs
from three to 12. The provision would amend the Act to expand
the program to the Department of the Navy and the Department of
the Air Force while providing for the continuation of ongoing
Army demonstration projects.
SUBTITLE C--LAND CONVEYANCES
Conveyance of certain lands in Alaska no longer required for National
Guard purposes (sec. 2821)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
the Secretary of the Army to convey lands that are under the
jurisdiction of the Department of the Army in the State of
Alaska to the State, any local government entity, Native
Corporation, or Indian tribe in the State of Alaska, as the
Secretary determines to be in the public interest.
The Secretary may convey any property in the State of
Alaska if he determines that the real property is any of the
following: (1) currently under the jurisdiction of the
Department of the Army; (2) was under the jurisdiction of the
Department of the Army for use of the Alaska National Guard
before December 2, 1980; (3) is located in a unit of the
National Wildlife Refuge System designated in the Alaska
National Interest Lands Conservation Act (94 Stat. 2371: 16
U.S.C. 1301 note); (4) is excess to the needs of the Alaska
National Guard and Department of Defense; and (5) the cost of
retaining the property exceeds the value of the property or
such property is unsuitable for retention by the United States.
The provision would authorize the Secretary to convey the
property with or without consideration. Any amounts received in
consideration could be used, subject to appropriations, to pay
any costs associated with the conveyance.
Land conveyance, Fort Campbell, Kentucky (sec. 2822)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
the Secretary of the Army to convey, without consideration, to
the City of Hopkinsville, Kentucky, a parcel of real property
consisting of approximately 50 acres and containing an
abandoned railroad spur at Fort Campbell, Kentucky. The purpose
of the conveyance would be for storm water management,
recreation, transportation, and other public purposes. As a
condition of the conveyance, the City would be required to pay
all associated costs.
Modification of authority for land transfer and conveyance, Naval
Security Group Activity, Winter Harbor, Maine (sec. 2823)
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 2845 (b) of the Military Construction Act for Fiscal
Year 2002 (division B of Public Law 107-107) to modify the
authority of the Secretary of the Navy to convey 485 acres
located at the former Naval Security Group Activity, Winter
Harbor, Maine. The provision would authorize the Secretary to
convey to the State of Maine, political subdivision of the
State, or any tax-supported agency in the State, without
consideration, approximately 50 acres known as the Corea
Operating Site and approximately 23 acres comprising three
parcels containing family housing. The provision would further
authorize the Secretary to convey approximately 404 acres of
the Corea site to the Secretary of the Interior for inclusion
in the National Wildlife Refuge System.
The committee further recommends that the conveyance be
exempt from the requirement to screen the property for further
federal use pursuant to section 2696 of title 10, United States
Code. The committee recommends this exemption only because this
property has already been screened for purposes of carrying out
the underlying provision that this provision would modify. The
conveyance of part of this property to the Secretary of the
Interior under this section reflects the interest expressed by
the Department of the Interior under that screening.
Land conveyance, Westover Air Reserve Base, Massachusetts (sec. 2824)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
the Secretary of the Navy to convey, without consideration, to
the City of Chicopee, Massachusetts, property consisting of
30.4 acres, including 188 housing units and other improvements
that are no longer required for defense purposes, located at
Westover Air Reserve Base, Massachusetts. The property would be
used by the city for economic development. The provision would
authorize the Secretary to require the City of Chicopee to
reimburse the Navy for the administrative costs related to the
conveyance.
Land conveyance, Naval Station Newport, Rhode Island (sec. 2825)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
the Secretary of the Navy to convey to the State of Rhode
Island, or any political subdivision thereof, a parcel of real
property consisting of approximately 34 acres, together with
any improvements thereon, known as the Melville Marina site.
The conveyance would be by sale for fair market value.
Land exchange, Buckley Air Force Base, Colorado (sec. 2826)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
the Secretary of the Air Force to convey to the State of
Colorado property consisting of approximately 72 acres,
including improvements, known as the Watkins Communication Site
in Arapahoe County, Colorado. In exchange, the State would
convey to the Air Force real property consisting of
approximately 41 acres, including improvements, that is
contiguous to Buckley Air Force Base, Colorado. The property
conveyed to the Air Force would be used to build additional
housing and would not be subject to general land laws,
including mining and mineral and geothermal leasing laws. The
provision would authorize additional terms and conditions,
which may include a payment by one party to the other to
reflect the difference in the value of the two parcels of
property. Because the acquisition of this land has not yet
received the approval normally required by the Office of the
Secretary of Defense, the provision specifies that this
exchange would require the concurrence of the Secretary of
Defense.
Land acquisition, Boundary Channel Drive Site, Arlington, Virginia
(sec. 2827)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
the Secretary of Defense, using amounts authorized to be
appropriated by section 2401, to acquire approximately 7.2
acres of real property in Arlington County, Virginia, known as
the Boundary Channel Drive Site. The provision would direct
that, upon the purchase of the site, the property shall be
included in the Pentagon Reservation as defined in section 2674
(f)(1) of title 10, United States Code.
Land conveyances, Wendover Air Force Base Auxiliary Field, Nevada (sec.
2828)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
the Secretary of the Interior to convey, without consideration,
to the City of West Wendover, Nevada two parcels of real
property that are no longer required. The purpose of the
conveyance would be to establish a runway protection zone and
to develop an industrial park. The provision would also provide
for a separate conveyance of the portion of these lands that
lie in Utah to Tooele County, Utah for a runway protection and
aircraft accident prevention zone.
SUBTITLE D--OTHER MATTERS
Transfer of funds in lieu of acquisition of replacement property for
National Wildlife Refuge system in Nevada (sec. 2841)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
the Secretary of the Air Force to transfer $15.0 million in
funds appropriated for the acquisition of land at Nellis Air
Force Base, Nevada that are authorized to be appropriated in
this Act to the Secretary of Interior, on behalf of the United
States Fish and Wildlife Service, to fulfill the Air Force's
obligations to replace National Wildlife Refuge lands that were
withdrawn for use by the Air Force in section 3011 of the
Military Lands Withdrawal Act of 1999 (Title XXX of the
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2000, Public
Law 106-65). This provision would allow the Air Force to
fulfill its obligations under the Memorandum of Agreement
between the Air Force and the Fish and Wildlife Service dated
July 26, 2000.
OTHER ITEMS OF INTEREST
Accompanied tours in Korea
General Thomas Schwartz, Commander of United States Forces,
Korea, has stated a goal of significantly increasing the supply
of family housing for United States military forces stationed
in the Republic of Korea to allow the percentage of personnel
stationed in Korea on accompanied tours to increase from the 10
percent level currently authorized to 25 percent within 10
years.
While the committee believes that such an initiative has
the potential to improve retention, improve quality of life and
morale, and reduce turbulence in the personnel system, such
benefits would require a significant expenditure of resources.
The committee believes the costs of such a proposal must be
understood in advance so that the Department of Defense and
Congress can weigh the costs and benefits.
Therefore, the committee directs the Under Secretary of
Defense for Personnel and Readiness to report to the
congressional defense committees, no later than March 1, 2003,
on the additional costs of providing the facilities and
services necessary to support accompanied tours for 25 percent
of ourforces in Korea, including family housing, medical and
child care facilities and services, and force protection. The report
should also contain the Secretary's views on such a proposal, a
discussion of a schedule for implementing any proposal the Secretary
endorses, and a discussion of the cost-sharing of any such proposal
between the United States and the Republic of Korea.
Aircraft carrier basing plans
The Committee notes that the Navy is considering extending
the life of the USS Constellation beyond its scheduled
decommissioning in fiscal year 2003 to meet operational
requirements and stabilize rotation schedules. This and other
possible extensions, the completion of the USS Ronald Reagan,
and the development and construction of CVNX-1 raise the
possibility that the Navy will have more than the current
twelve aircraft carriers in service at one time in the coming
years. Given the cost of manning, operating, maintaining and
basing aircraft carriers, the committee directs the Chief of
Naval Operations to report to the congressional defense
committees within 180 days of enactment of this bill on the
Navy's basing plans for aircraft carriers through the year
2015.
Availability of excess lands for school construction
In some cases, military installations may have excess land
that could be used by State or local governments for the
construction of public schools, including the construction of
charter schools, as evidenced at the Naval Air Station Joint
Reserve Base, Belle Chasse, Louisiana. The committee requests
that the Department of Defense study the feasibility and
advisability of supporting local communities by identifying any
excess property at military installations that could be
transferred to the Secretary of Education for conveyance to
state and local school districts for the construction of new
schools.
DIVISION C--DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY NATIONAL SECURITY AUTHORIZATIONS AND
OTHER AUTHORIZATIONS
TITLE XXXI--DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY NATIONAL SECURITY PROGRAMS
SUBTITLE A--NATIONAL SECURITY PROGRAMS AUTHORIZATIONS
Atomic energy defense activities
Title XXXI authorizes appropriations for the atomic energy
defense activities of the Department of Energy for fiscal year
2003, including: the purchase, construction, and acquisition of
plant and capital equipment; research and development; nuclear
weapons; naval nuclear propulsion; environmental restoration
and waste management; operating expenses; and other expenses
necessary to carry out the purpose of the Department of Energy
Organization Act (Public Law 95-91). The title would authorize
appropriations in five categories: National Nuclear Security
Administration (NNSA); defense environmental management;
defense environmental management privatization; other defense
activities; and defense nuclear waste disposal.
The budget request for fiscal year 2003 for atomic energy
defense activities totaled $15.4 billion, a 4.4 percent
increase over the adjusted fiscal year 2002 level. Of the total
amount requested: $8.2 billion was for NNSA; $6.4 billion was
for defense environmental management activities; $158.4 million
was for defense environmental management privatization; $479.6
million was for other defense activities; and $315.0 million
was for defense nuclear waste disposal.
The committee recommends $15.7 billion for atomic energy
defense activities, an increase of $300.1 million to the budget
request. The committee recommends $8.1 billion for the National
Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA), an increase of $121.3
million to the budget request. The amount authorized for NNSA
is as follows: $6.0 billion for weapons activities, an increase
of $118.8 million to the budget request; $1.1 billion for
defense nuclear nonproliferation, an increase of $15.5 million
to the budget request; $707.0 million for naval reactors, a
reduction of $1.0 million below the budget request; and $335.7
million for the Office of the Administrator, a reduction of
$12.0 million below the budget request. The committee further
recommends $6.9 billion for defense environmental management,
including defense facility closure projects, an increase of
$261.1 million to the budget request. The committee recommends
$158.4 million for defense environmental management
privatization, the amount of the budget request. The committee
recommends $489.9 million for other defense activities, an
increase of $17.7 million to the budget request; and $215.0
million for defense nuclear waste disposal, a reduction of
$100.0 million to the budget request.
The following table summarizes the budget request and the
committee recommendations:
National Nuclear Security Administration (sec. 3101)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
$8.2 billion to be appropriated to the Department of Energy
(DOE) for fiscal year 2003 for the National Nuclear Security
Administration (NNSA) to carry out programs necessary to
national security.
Weapons activities
The committee recommends $6.0 billion for weapons
activities, a $118.8 million increase above the amount
requested for fiscal year 2003. The amount authorized is for
the following activities: $1.2 billion for directed stockpile
work, a decrease of $15.5 million to the budget request; $2.1
billion for campaigns, an increase of $22.7 million above the
request; $1.7 billion for readiness in the technical base, an
increase of $46.9 million above the request; $157.1 million for
secure transportation assets, an increase of $1.7 million above
the request; $575.0 million for safeguards and security, an
increase of $65.0 million above the request; and $242.5 million
for facilities and infrastructure, the amount of the request.
The amounts authorized are reduced by $30.0 million, an offset
for security charges for reimbursable work and $1.0 for
civilian personnel accrual.
Directed stockpile work
The committee recommends $1.2 billion for directed
stockpile work, a reduction of $15.5 million to the budget
request. The directed stockpile account supports work directly
related to weapons in the stockpile, including day-to-day
maintenance as well as research, development, engineering, and
certification activities to support planned life extension
programs. It also includes fabrication and assembly of weapons
components, weapons dismantlement and disposal, training, and
support equipment. The committee recommends no funds for the
Robust Nuclear Earth Penetrator.
The committee believes that as the reductions in
operationally deployed nuclear warheads occur, as announced in
the December 2001 Nuclear Posture Review (NPR), there will be
an increased demand for weapons dismantlement associated with
the W-62 warhead, which is being retired from the Minuteman III
land based Intercontinental Ballistic Missile, and there may be
additional increases in demand in the future. The NNSA has
indicated that the capacity at the Pantex plant in Texas is
fully utilized with the planned life extension programs and the
planned W-79 and W-56 dismantlement efforts. This NNSA plan
anticipates that all weapons in the stockpile as of today, with
the exception of the W-62, will require life extension. The
plan also assumes the direction in the NPR that no warheads
will be taken out of the stockpile with the exception of the W-
62.
The committee directs NNSA to study alternatives to
existing facilities at Pantex for dismantlement. The Nevada
Test Site has a new modern facility that was completed in the
early 1990s to support nuclear weapons testing before the
United States imposed a unilateral moratorium on underground
nuclear weapons testing. This facility has capabilities similar
to those of the Pantex plant. The facility, known as the Device
Assembly Facility (DAF), is substantially underutilized. Its
current mission is to deal with damaged nuclear weapons and to
support subcritical experiments; however, DAF has the potential
to be the main weapons dismantlement facility, thus relieving
some of the pressure on the Pantex facility cited in the NPR.
The DAF also has the potential to conduct the stockpile
surveillance mission, either by taking over the surveillance
mission or by supplementing the Pantex capabilities.
The committee directs the Administrator to conduct a study
on the full range of potential uses for DAF, including
dismantlement and surveillance, and report to the congressional
defense committees on the result of this study no later than
March 1, 2003. In looking at the DAF the Administrator should
take into consideration the security, transportation, personnel
and other costs of dismantlement at the DAF, as well as the
cost of additional facilities that would be needed at Pantex.
The Administrator should also make sure that no program added
to the DAF will delay our test readiness capabilities, nor
should the Administrator make the DAF unsuitable for ongoing
subcritical tests.
Campaigns
The committee recommends $2.1 billion for campaigns, an
increase of $22.7 million above the amount requested. The
campaigns focus on science and engineering efforts involving
the three weapons laboratories, the Nevada Test Site, and the
weapons plants. Each campaign is focused on a specific activity
to support and maintain the stockpile without underground
nuclear weapons testing. These efforts maintain and enhance the
safety, security, and reliability of the existing stockpile.
The campaigns are divided into three major categories: science
campaigns, readiness campaigns, and engineering campaigns.
The committee recommends $7.0 million, a $5.0 million
increase, for the pit manufacturing and certification campaign
to allow the Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for a new pit
facility to go forward. The EIS work can begin now because it
isneeded to support analysis for a number of facility options
and facility sizes. The committee notes that the only validated pit
requirement is for a small number of W-88 pits, which could be produced
at the Los Alamos National Laboratory. Moreover, the committee urges
NNSA to ensure that the requirements are well understood for this $2-$4
billion facility.
The committee urges NNSA and Department of Defense (DOD) to
establish a valid annual pit requirement. The NNSA should not
begin construction activities on this billion-dollar facility
until there is a valid requirement that has been approved by
DOE and DOD.
The committee recommends a reduction of $1.0 million in the
high explosives campaign and a reduction of $2.0 million in the
non-nuclear readiness campaigns. These reductions are available
as some of the planned work in these campaigns is not
adequately linked to requirements in the February 2001 NNSA
stockpile life extension plan.
The committee recommends an increase of $10.7 million in
the High Energy Density Physics (HEDP) campaign to keep the
cryogenic target and National Ignition Facility (NIF)
diagnostics on schedule with the planned NIF ignition schedule
and to provide for the petawatt laser initiative.
Finally, the committee notes that no funding was requested
for the High Average Power Laser (HAPL) program. The HAPL is a
promising laser program that has both energy and defense
potential. The hybrid nature of the HAPL is one of the reasons
that it is not funded in either DOE science programs or NNSA.
The committee urges the DOE to review the potential national
value of the HAPL and to determine if there is an overriding
national interest in funding the HAPL through a joint program
or project office.
The committee provides an additional $10.0 million in the
NIF construction line item to account for a funding reduction
taken in the program two years ago.
Readiness in the technical base
The committee recommends $1.7 billion in readiness in the
technical base and facilities (RTBF), an increase of $46.9
million. This account funds facilities and infrastructure in
the weapons complex to ensure the operational readiness of the
complex and includes construction funding for new facilities.
The budget request included $10.0 million in the operations
of facilities sub-account in RTBF for the Center for Combating
Terrorism. The committee recommends an increase of $40.0
million for the Center. This center serves as a test bed for a
variety of technologies and will allow the unique capabilities
of NNSA to be brought to bear on one of the nation's most
urgent priorities. One of the results of NNSA center and work,
in conjunction with DOD, was the successful testing of the
thermobaric bomb.
The budget request included $37.7 million in the special
projects sub-account in RTBF. The committee recommends an
increase of $6.9 million to allow NNSA to make the annual
payment to the Los Alamos Foundation established by section
3167(a) of the 1998 National Defense Authorization Act, to
support schools in the Los Alamos, New Mexico area.
The budget request included two project engineering and
design lines (PE&D) in the RTBF. The NNSA uses these accounts
to fund project engineering and design activities that support
conceptual design work for construction projects before funding
is requested in a specific construction line item. Each year
there is a new PE&D account request that would provide funds
for design work planned to begin in the year requested.
The budget request included two projects in the fiscal year
2002 PE&D account, 02-D-103, that would begin in fiscal year
2003. The committee recommends a reduction of $2.3 million in
construction line 02-D-103 and an increase of $2.3 million in
construction line 03-D-103 to reflect the transfer of these two
projects to the fiscal year 2003 PE&D account. The committee
directs DOE and NNSA to include in a PE&D for any fiscal year
only those projects that would receive initial funding in that
year.
The committee also notes that there are a substantial
number of very large construction projects that are included in
the PE&D accounts for fiscal years 2002 and 2003. The committee
is concerned that the out-year costs of all of these projects
may be unaffordable. Moreover, these projects would increase
the overall size of the NNSA complex at a time when Congress
has been supportive of NNSA efforts to reduce the number of
buildings in the complex and catch up on years of deferred
maintenance. Almost none of the projects in the PE&D accounts
explain how the costs of tearing down current buildings to make
way for the new buildings will be covered.
The committee is concerned that the large number of the new
projects that are requested, without any plan to tear down the
buildings that are being replaced, will place NNSA in a never-
ending maintenance backlog cycle. The committee directs NNSA to
include the costs of tearing down the facilities that are being
replaced in the costs of all new projects. The committee also
directs the Administrator to submit a report to the
congressional defense committees certifying that the new
buildings planned in the fiscal year 2002 and 2003 PE&D
accounts are fully funded in the NNSA future years budget plan.
The report should also include a plan for a net reduction of
the square footage of buildings under the control of the NNSA.
The committee is also concerned about the
MicrosystemsEngineering and Science Applications (MESA) complex. The
budget request includes $75.0 million to support construction of all
five phases of the full MESA complex. An established requirement exists
for the first three phases: the utilities upgrades, the retooling of
the Microelectronics Development Laboratory (MDL), and the Microsystems
Fabrication building, which is the replacement for the older Compound
Semiconductor Research Laboratory. There is no approved requirement for
the remaining two phases, the Microsystems Laboratory and the Weapons
Integration Facility.
The committee directs that before NNSA commits to the
391,000-square-foot full MESA project at a cost of $504.0
million dollars, the NNSA Administrator shall certify that the
full complex is required for the Stockpile Life Extension
Program outlined in the February 2001 NNSA Stockpile Life
Extension Plan.
Secure transportation asset
The committee recommends $157.1 million for the secure
transportation asset, a $1.7 million increase above the amount
requested. The secure transportation asset is responsible for
transportation of nuclear weapons, weapons materials and
components, and other materials requiring safe and secure
transport. The committee has provided an additional $1.7
million to maintain increased security for this most important
mission. This increase is part of an overall $199.7 million
increase recommended by the committee to ensure that security
is adequately funded and maintained at DOE. The committee is
concerned that, as discussed in recent press reports, there are
significant and serious shortfalls in security funding at DOE.
Safeguards and security
The committee recommends $575.0 million for weapons
safeguards and security, an increase of $65.0 million above the
request. The weapons safeguards and security account provides
funding for all safeguards and security at all the NNSA complex
sites. As a result of the attacks of September 11, NNSA is
working on a new design basis threat (DBT) against which to
design its security posture of the future. In the meantime,
however, the fiscal year 2003 budget request funds only a pre-
September 11 level of security. The committee recommends the
additional $65.0 million to maintain at least the level of
security maintained in 2002, until the new DBT is in place and
to provide improvements to NNSA's cyber-security posture. This
$65.0 million increase is part of the overall $199.7 million
increase for security.
Facilities and Infrastructure
The committee recommends $242.5 million for the facilities
and infrastructure activities, the amount of the request. The
committee notes that NNSA has recently established standards
and criteria to begin to address the real property maintenance
backlog in the NNSA complex. The committee supports this much
needed effort. NNSA must also work to ensure that the NNSA
complex does not continue to have a maintenance backlog in the
future. In order to prevent this situation, NNSA is
establishing a strong cadre of professional facilities managers
to ensure that the real property assets of NNSA are adequately
maintained. The committee supports NNSA and urges it to expand
its efforts in this area.
Defense Nuclear Nonproliferation
The committee recommends $1.1 billion for Defense Nuclear
Nonproliferation, a $15.5 million increase above the amount of
the budget request. The Office of Defense Nuclear
Nonproliferation provides management and oversight for the
nonproliferation programs in the National Nuclear Security
Administration (NNSA). The amount authorized would fund the
following activities: $298.9 million for nonproliferation and
verification research and development; $92.7 million for
nonproliferation and international security; and $894.2 million
for nonproliferation programs with Russia and the states of the
Former Soviet Union, including $233.1 million for international
nuclear materials protection and cooperation, $39.3 million for
the Russian transition initiatives, $17.2 million for Highly
Enriched Uranium (HEU) transparency, $14.6 million for
international nuclear safety, $49.3 million for the elimination
of weapons grade plutonium production, and $448.0 million for
fissile materials disposition.
Of the amount recommended for nonproliferation and
verification research and development, the committee includes
$15.5 million for research to develop a new generation of
radiation detectors for homeland defense missions.
Of the amount recommended for the Russian transition
initiative, the committee recommends $16.7 million for the
Nuclear Cities Initiative (NCI) program, the amount of the
request. The committee supports both of the programs under the
Russian transition initiatives but believes that they serve
different missions in support of the same goal. The committee
urges NNSA to set aside a portion of the Initiatives for
Proliferation Prevention (IPP) program funds to be used for
specific IPP commercialization projects in the Russian cities
under the NCI program. On the other hand, the committee
believesthat the NCI program should focus on working with the
Russian cities to support broader economic development missions that
are not within the purview of the IPP program. In carrying out the NCI
program, the committee urges NNSA to work with other federal agencies
with expertise in economic development and with local communities to
further the ongoing Sister Cities efforts between U.S. and Russian
cities.
Naval Reactors
The committee recommends $707.0 million for Naval Reactors,
a reduction of $1.0 million below the amount of the request.
Office of Administrator
The committee recommends $335.7 million for program
direction for the National Nuclear Security Administration a
reduction of $12.0 million below the amount of the request.
This account includes program direction funding for all
elements of the National Nuclear Security Administration with
the exception of the Naval Reactors Program and the Secure
Transportation Asset.
Defense Environmental Management (sec. 3102)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
$6.7 billion to be appropriated to the Department of Energy
(DOE) for fiscal year 2003 for environmental management
activities, an increase of $261.1 million above the amount
requested. This amount includes a reduction of $14.0 million to
reflect the civilian personnel accrual adjustment.
The amount requested is for the following activities:
$793.9 million for site and projection completion, an increase
of $6.0 million above the amount of the request; $2.6 billion
for post 2006 completion, an increase of $2.1 million above the
amount of the request, and including $897.9 million for the
Office of River Protection; $92.0 million for science and
technology, the amount of the request; $1.3 million for excess
facilities, the amount of the request; $441.0 million for
multi-site activities, a reduction of $38.9 million below the
amount of the request; $278.3 million for safeguards and
security, an increase of $50.0 million above the amount of the
request; $396.1 million for program direction, an increase of
$37.9 million above the request; $1.0 billion for environmental
management cleanup reform, an increase of $200.0 million above
the request; and $1.1 billion for defense closure projects, an
increase of $18.0 million above the amount of the request.
Closure projects
The committee recommends $1.1 billion for closure projects,
an increase of $18.0 million above the request. The closure
projects account provides funds for the cleanup of those sites
that will complete cleanup and close by the end of 2006. The
committee recommends the additional funds to cover additional
security costs that may be needed at the Rocky Flats site if
there is any delay in shipping plutonium to the Savannah River
Site. The committee notes that the Rocky Flats plant may be
closed as early as 2005 and supports the effort to accelerate
closure.
Site and projection completion
This account funds those projects that will be completed by
2006 at sites that will continue to be DOE sites beyond 2006.
The committee recommends $793.9 million for site and project
completion, an increase of $6.0 million above the request. Last
summer the Office of Environmental Management completed a new
modern hazardous waste storage building at Lawrence Livermore
National Laboratory (LLNL). This new building will house both
hazardous and radioactive waste. LLNL submitted the safety
basis documents needed to operate the facility in June 2001.
Because the DOE Office of Environmental Management has not yet
finished its review of the documents, the waste remains stored
outside. The budget request for fiscal year 2003 fails to
provide the needed funds to complete the safety basis review
process and move the waste into the new buildings. The
committee recommends the additional $6.0 million in the
construction line for the facility 86-D-103, in order to
complete the necessary documents and move the radioactive and
hazardous waste into the building. Continuing to store the
waste outside is contrary to safety, environmental, and
security best practices.
Post 2006 completion
The committee recommends $2.6 billion for post 2006
completion, an increase of $2.1 million above the budget
request. This account funds cleanup projects that will require
funding beyond 2006. The committee recommends an additional
$2.1 million to support the continuing process to transfer
excess land at the Los Alamos National Laboratory to the
community.
Included in the post 2006 completion account is a sub-
account for the Office of River Protection. The Office of River
Protection provides funds to treat the tank waste and
ultimately close the tanks at the Hanford, Washington site. The
committee recommends $897.9 million for the Office of River
Protection, theamount of the request.
Science and technology
The committee recommends $92.0 million for science and
technology for environmental management, the amount of the
request. This account supports research and development to
develop new or improved technologies for cleanup and waste
treatment. The funding level contained in the budget request is
significantly less than the fiscal year 2002 appropriated level
of $247.8 million. The committee is concerned that DOE has
underfunded this account to the long-term detriment of the
cleanup process. Many of the sites continue to have cleanup
challenges for which the current technology is either too
expensive or not available. The committee urges DOE to revisit
the approach to research and development over the course of the
coming year.
Excess facilities
The committee recommends $1.3 million for excess
facilities, the amount of the request. This account provides
funds to stabilize facilities that are being transferred by
other DOE programs to the Office of Environmental Management
for future disposal.
Safeguards and security
The committee recommends $278.3 million for safeguards and
security, an increase of $50.0 million. The committee
recommends this increase as part of the overall increase of
$199.7 million for DOE to ensure that the security of weapons
and materials is maintained. The Office of Environmental
Management has responsibility for a wide range of material that
includes weapons grade materials as well as other hazardous and
radioactive materials. The committee is concerned that the
amount of funding included in the fiscal year 2003 budget
request for security for environmental management is not
adequate to maintain the post-September 11 level of security at
environmental sites and facilities.
Multi-site/Uranium enrichment decontamination and
decommissioning fund
The committee recommends $441.0 million for the
contribution to the uranium decontamination and decommissioning
fund, a reduction of $38.9 million. The committee recommends
$37.9 million for multi-site activities be transferred to
program direction ``to provide management and direction for
various crosscutting initiatives, establish and implement
national and departmental policy; and to conduct analyses and
integrate activities across the DOE complex.'' The committee
believes that these are the same functions that are carried out
in the program direction account and sees no reason why there
should be two separate accounts.
Environmental management cleanup reform
The committee recommends $1.0 billion for environmental
management cleanup reform, an increase of $200.0 million. This
account is a new account to supplement the site and project
base funding after new or amended cleanup agreements are
reached with state and federal regulators. The committee is
concerned that DOE has substantially underfunded the cleanup
accounts and is at risk of violating several of the cleanup
agreements. In section 3131 of this Act, the committee
recommends a provision that would establish criteria for this
account before funds from it could be obligated.
Program direction
The committee recommends $396.1 million for program
direction, an increase of $37.9 million transferred from multi-
site activities as discussed above.
Other Defense Activities (sec. 3103)
The committee authorizes $489.9 million for other defense
activities, an increase of $17.7 million to the budget request.
Energy Security and Assistance
The fiscal year 2003 budget request included $27.7 million
for Energy Security and Assistance. The committee recommends no
funds for these activities. The activities contained in this
request are largely ongoing activities that are part of the
non-defense activities of the Department of Energy (DOE). While
the committee shares the view that energy security is
important, the activities that would be funded in this account
include: the development of a national strategy for energy
assurance, attendance at energy assurance-related forums, the
maintenance of energy-related databases, and monitoring the
national energy supply. The committee believes these activities
should continue to be funded out of the Energy, non-defense
accounts at DOE, particularly when the defense-related security
accounts are substantially underfunded. The committee notes
that the programis fully authorized at $25.0 million for fiscal
year 2003 in section 1261 of H.R. 4, as amended, the Senate Energy
bill.
Office of Security
The budget request included $187.2 million for the Office
of Security. The committee notes that this amount is a 30
percent reduction from the fiscal year 2002 appropriated level.
The committee recommends an additional $65.0 million for
nuclear safeguards and security. This request is part of an
overall increase of $199.7 million for DOE and NNSA for nuclear
security. The committee is very concerned that the budget
request for security is significantly lower than the fiscal
year 2002 appropriated level. This concern is heightened by the
recent press reports that DOE had requested, but was denied by
the Office of Management and Budget, approximately $300 million
in additional funding for fiscal year 2002. The committee
understands that of this additional $300.0 million requested,
about $198.0 million was for defense facilities. It is clear
that the amount requested for fiscal year 2003 is inadequate to
maintain the current fiscal year 2002 level of security
funding, which, apparently, does not even provide adequate
protection.
Intelligence
The committee recommends $43.6 million for Intelligence, an
increase of $2.0 million above the amount of the budget
request.
Counterintelligence
The committee recommends $48.0 million for
counterintelligence, an increase of $2.0 million above the
amount of the request. The committee notes that a portion of
the funding for the Office of Counterintelligence in the
National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) is funded from
this account. While it is important that the DOE and NNSA
offices of counterintelligence work closely, the committee
believes that the funding for the two offices should be
separate. The committee directs the Secretary of Energy to
transfer the $5.0 million that is contained in this account for
NNSA directly to the Administrator at the beginning of the
fiscal year, to be obligated by the NNSA office of
counterintelligence. The committee directs that in the future
the NNSA Office of Counterintelligence be adequately funded in
the NNSA accounts.
Independent oversight and performance assurance
The committee recommends $22.6 million for Office of
Independent Oversight, the amount of the request. The committee
supports the work of the office and believes that it plays a
valuable role in ensuring the safety and security of DOE and
NNSA facilities.
Environment safety and health
The committee recommends $104.9 million for environment,
safety and health, an increase of $5.0 million above the amount
requested. The committee recommends $2.5 million to continue
pollution prevention efforts, formerly conducted by the Office
of Environmental Management, to identify ways to reduce the
amount of waste generated by the DOE complex. The committee
also recommends $2.5 million for enhanced medical screening of
current and former workers at DOE nuclear facilities, including
the three gaseous diffusion plants. The committee believes DOE
should take the steps necessary to ensure that medical
screening, including the use of advanced techniques for early
lung cancer detection, is made available to the current and
former workers. The committee encourages the DOE to request
sufficient funds in the future to conduct the medical screening
on all current and former workers who wish to have the
screening.
Worker and community transition
The committee recommends $25.8 million for worker and
community transition, the amount of the budget request.
National nuclear security administrative support
The budget request included $25.6 million for national
security programs administrative support. The committee
recommends no funds for national security administrative
support. For the second year in a row, DOE has failed to
provide any justification materials for this request. The
committee believes that the NNSA program direction adequately
supports NNSA.
Defense environmental management privatization (sec. 3104)
The committee recommends $158.4 million for environmental
management privatization, the amount of the budget request.
Defense Nuclear Waste Disposal (sec. 3105)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
$215.0 million for defense nuclear waste disposal, a $100.0
million reduction below the budget request of $315.0 million.
Recent delays in the program have deferred the requirements
forthe defense contribution to the waste fund this year.
SUBTITLE B--RECURRING GENERAL PROVISIONS
Reprogramming (sec. 3121)
The committee recommends a provision that would prohibit
the reprogramming of funds in excess of 115 percent of the
amount authorized for the program or in excess of $5.0 million
above the amount authorized for the program, whichever is less,
until: (1) the Secretary of Energy submits a report to the
congressional defense committees; and (2) a period of 30 days
has elapsed after the date on which the report is received. The
committee recommends reinstating reprogramming authority for
the Department of Energy. The committee notes that the
threshold level for reprogramming actions had been $10.0
million prior to 1995 when it was reduced to $1.0 million in
the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1995.
The committee believes that $5.0 million is a realistic
reprogramming threshold.
Limits on minor construction projects (sec. 3122)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
the Secretary of Energy to carry out minor construction
projects using operation and maintenance funds or facilities
and infrastructure funds if the total estimated cost of the
minor construction project does not exceed $5.0 million. In
addition, the provision would require the Secretary to submit
an annual report identifying each minor construction project
undertaken during the previous fiscal year. The committee
directs the Secretary to submit this report at the same time
the Secretary submits the Department of Energy budget request
for fiscal year 2004, or as soon thereafter as possible.
Limits on construction projects (sec. 3123)
The committee recommends a provision that would permit any
construction project to be initiated and continued only if the
estimated cost for the project does not exceed, by 25 percent,
the higher of either the amount authorized for the project or
the most recent total estimated cost presented to Congress as
justification for such a project. The Secretary of Energy may
not exceed such limits until 30 legislative days after the
Secretary submits to the congressional defense committees a
detailed report setting forth the reasons for the increase.
This provision would also specify that the 25 percent
limitation would not apply to projects estimated to be a minor
construction project under $5.0 million.
Fund transfer authority (sec. 3124)
The committee recommends a provision that would permit
funds authorized by this Act to be transferred to other
agencies of the government for performance of work for which
the funds were authorized and appropriated. The provision would
permit the merger of such transferred funds with the
authorizations of the agency to which they are transferred. The
provision would also limit, to no more than 5 percent of the
account, the amount of funds authorized by this Act that may be
transferred between authorization accounts within the
Department of Energy.
Authority for conceptual and construction design (sec. 3125)
The committee recommends a provision that would limit the
Secretary of Energy's authority to request construction funding
until the Secretary has completed a conceptual design. This
limitation would apply to construction projects with a total
estimated cost greater than $5.0 million. If the estimated cost
to prepare the construction design exceeds $600,000, the
provision would require the Secretary to obtain a specific
authorization to obligate such funds. If the estimated cost to
prepare a conceptual design exceeds $3.0 million, the provision
would require the Secretary to request funds for the conceptual
design before requesting funds for construction. The provision
would further require the Secretary to submit to Congress a
report on each conceptual design completed under this
provision. The provision would also provide an exception to
these requirements in the case of an emergency.
Authority for emergency planning, design, and construction activities
(sec. 3126)
The committee recommends a provision that would permit the
Secretary of Energy to perform planning and design with any
funds available to the Department of Energy pursuant to this
title, including those funds authorized for advance planning
and construction design, whenever the Secretary determines that
the design must proceed expeditiously to protect the public
health and safety, to meet the needs of national defense, or to
protect property. The provision would require the Secretary of
Energy to submit to Congress a report on each construction
project to be completed under this provision prior to
exercising the authority that would be provided by this
provision.
Funds available for all national security programs of the Department of
Energy (sec. 3127)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize,
subject to section 3121 of this Act and appropriations acts,
amounts appropriated for management and support activities and
for general plant projects to be made available for use in
connection with all national security programs of the
Department of Energy.
Availability of funds (sec. 3128)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
amounts appropriated for operating expenses or for plant and
capital equipment for the Department of Energy to remain
available until expended. Program direction funds would remain
available until the end of fiscal year 2004.
Transfer of defense environmental management funds (sec. 3129)
The committee recommends a provision that would provide the
manager of each field office of the Department of Energy with
limited authority to transfer up to $5.0 million in fiscal year
2003 defense environmental management funds from one program or
project, including site project and completion and post 2006
completion funds. Each manager would be able to use this
authority up to three times in a fiscal year. Each transfer
shall not exceed $5.0 million, and the transfers shall not be
aggregated.
Transfer of weapons activities funds (sec. 3130)
The committee recommends a provision that would provide the
manager of each Department of Energy/National Nuclear Security
Administration (DOE/NNSA) office with limited authority to
transfer up to $5.0 million in fiscal year 2003 weapons
activities funds from one program or project under the
manager's jurisdiction to another. Each manager would be able
to use this authority up to three times in a fiscal year. Each
transfer shall not exceed $5.0 million, and the transfers shall
not be aggregated.
SUBTITLE C--PROGRAM AUTHORIZATIONS, RESTRICTIONS, AND LIMITATIONS
Availability of funds for environmental cleanup reform (sec. 3131)
The Department of Energy (DOE) budget request for fiscal
year 2003 included $800.0 million for a new initiative, the
environmental cleanup reform account. The committee recommends
an additional $200.0 million for the account. According to the
DOE budget justification material, the purpose of the new
account is ``to enable the Department, the States and the
American taxpayer to begin realizing the benefits immediately
of alternative cleanup approaches that will produce more real
risk reduction, accelerate cleanup, or achieve much needed cost
and schedule improvements.'' While the committee supports the
goal of faster cleanup, DOE has not provided any details as to
how this goal will be achieved by the creation of this new
account or how the money that would be in the account will be
spent, nor have they identified the ``alternative cleanup up
approaches'' that would be funded by the account.
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Energy to establish and publish selection criteria
for the environmental management cleanup reform account. The
provision would also provide the Secretary of Energy authority
to dissolve the account, in the event the Secretary opts not to
establish selection criteria, and redistribute the funds in the
account to the sites and projects on a pro rata basis according
to fiscal year 2002 funding levels.
The overall budget request for fiscal year 2003 for
Environmental Management for DOE is $6.6 billion, slightly
higher than the $6.5 billion appropriated for fiscal year 2002.
To create the cleanup reform account within an essentially flat
budget, the DOE reduced almost all of the DOE cleanup site
budgets below their fiscal year 2002 appropriated levels. DOE
plans to have the various sites, in essence, compete for the
funds in the cleanup reform account. How the sites would do
this, or on what time table this would happen, is not clear.
DOE has provided no guidance or direction to Congress, the
States, or the sites on how this competition is to occur or to
be judged.
Most of the DOE cleanup effort is required by agreements
between DOE and the various host States or the Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA). In some instances DOE, the State, and
the EPA are all parties to the agreements. These agreements
establish cleanup schedules and standards for each site. These
agreements also include provisions that require that DOE and
its operating contractors pay fines and penalties if the
schedule for work required by the agreements is not met. By
under-funding each site, DOE is potentially at risk of
violating a number of these agreements.
The committee supports the idea of DOE, the States, and
theEPA reviewing the various agreements to ensure that the cleanup at
each site is being conducted as efficiently as possible. On the other
hand, the committee does not support any effort to reduce the cleanup
standards and potentially put at risk the health and safety of
communities or the DOE workers in order to reduce cleanup costs.
The committee notes that the cleanup effort at Rocky Flats
in Colorado was a successful partnership among the State, the
community, the DOE, and the EPA, to accelerate cleanup
significantly ahead of the original schedule. This accelerated
cleanup will save money in the long run, as the total cost of
cleanup will be significantly reduced. Rocky Flats is a success
story because substantial additional funds were provided to the
site to accelerate the cleanup, not because funds were withheld
from the site.
The committee supports innovative approaches to accelerate
cleanup and reduce costs. Providing additional funds for the
sites may, in fact, generate the accelerated cleanup sought by
DOE. The committee is concerned that the approach announced by
the Department may be premature.
The committee supports the general idea of providing the
possibility of additional funds to accelerate cleanup. In
providing the funds however, DOE must spell out clearly, and
with input from the States, the communities, and the
regulators, how the funds will made available. The provision
recommended by the committee would require such criteria be
established before funds from the cleanup reform account could
be obligated.
In the event that the idea of the cleanup reform account is
premature for fiscal year 2003, then the Secretary could
dissolve the account and transfer the money to the sites and
projects based on the level of funding the sites and projects
received in fiscal year 2002. The committee encourages DOE to
continue to explore the idea of providing additional funds to
accelerate cleanups at as many sites as possible.
Robust Nuclear Earth Penetrator (sec. 3132)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Defense, in consultation with the Secretary of
Energy, to submit a report to the congressional defense
committees no later than February 3, 2003, on the Robust
Nuclear Earth Penetrator (RNEP) that sets forth (1) the
military requirements for the RNEP; (2) the nuclear weapons
employment policy for the RNEP; (3) the detailed categories or
types of targets that the RNEP is designed to hold at risk; and
(4) an assessment of the ability of conventional weapons to
address the same types of categories of targets that the RNEP
is designed to hold at risk.
The budget request included $15.5 million for the RNEP. The
committee recommends no funds for the RNEP.
Database to track notification and resolution phases of significant
finding investigations (sec. 3133)
The committee recommends a provision that would establish
at the national laboratories of the National Nuclear Security
Administration (NNSA) a database to track the notification and
resolution phases of significant finding investigations (SFIs).
The provision would require the Administrator of NNSA to
develop and implement a laboratory-wide database to monitor the
laboratories' progress on resolving SFIs. The Department of
Energy's Inspector General (DOE-IG) recommended a central SFI
tracking system in a December 2001 report. The DOE-IG
determined that DOE was plagued with a system that frequently
missed self-imposed time frames for initiating and conducting
investigations of defects and malfunctions in nuclear weapons.
The committee believes that DOE should place a high priority on
correcting this problem.
Requirements for specific request for new or modified nuclear weapons
(sec. 3134-3135)
The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Energy specifically to request funds before
beginning research and development and engineering and
production activities to support any new or modified nuclear
weapon. The committee also recommends a provision that would
require a specific authorization for these funds before they,
or any other national security program funds or activities
under the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, could be obligated or
expended.
The provision would apply to new weapons and to
modifications to existing weapons to meet a new military
requirement. The provision would require a specific request in
a specific line item or items at two distinct points in time
for any new or modified nuclear weapon. This requirement is
consistent with past practices at the Department of Energy
(DOE) and similar to current acquisition practices for major
weapons systems at the Department Defense (DOD), and similar to
the way DOE budgets for construction projects.
A new weapon would be defined by the provision as any
weapon that contains a pit or secondary which is not in the
stockpile or not in production on the date of enactment of this
Act. Development of nuclear weapons is conducted using a formal
phased acquisition process. This process was developed jointly
by the Atomic Energy Commission, the predecessor to DOE, and
DOD in a memorandum of understanding signed in 1953. There are
eightphases (numbered 1, 2, 2A, 3, 4, 5, 6 and 7) in the
development process starting with the first phase, which is concept
development, and ending in phase 7, which is warhead retirement or
storage.
Under the provision recommended by the committee, the
requirement for specific authorization for the first phase of a
new nuclear weapon would apply to research and development
activities leading to and including phase 1 and 2, the concept
development phase. A specific request and authorization would
also be required before engineering and manufacturing
activities could begin to support phase 2A and beyond,
development and engineering.
Modifications to nuclear weapons use a similarly phased
acquisition process. In the process applicable to weapons
modifications, the phase begins with phase 6, which is quantity
production and stockpile, and overlays phases 1-7 onto phase 6.
Thus, when modifications are made to existing nuclear weapons,
the first phase would be phase 6.1, the concept development
phase, and would continue through phase 6.6, for an existing
weapon.
Under the provision recommended by the committee, a
specific request for funds would have to be received from the
Secretary of Energy and a specific authorization would have to
be provided by Congress for activities to support work leading
to and including phase 6.1 and 6.2, concept development for
modifications, and again for phase 6.3 and beyond, development
and engineering for modifications to existing nuclear weapons.
The specific line item for the work leading to and
including phase 1 and 2 and phase 6.1 and 6.2 would be
analogous to the current practice with respect to planning,
engineering, and design money for construction activities. The
line items for the work for phases 2A and beyond, and 6.2A and
beyond, would be analogous to construction line items for
individual construction projects. The committee expects each
individual weapon would have a dedicated line item when it
moves to phase 2A or 6.2A.
The provision would not apply to the stockpile life
extension programs (SLEPs) that are scheduled for each of the
weapons that will remain in the stockpile. In February 2002,
the Administrator of the National Nuclear Security
Administration (NNSA) submitted the Comprehensive Stockpile
Life Extension Program plan to Congress. This plan lays out the
refurbishment schedule for the existing nuclear weapons
stockpile. Under this plan, NNSA and DOD have identified
detailed schedules and activities for each of the weapons in
the stockpile through 2025.
The provision would not be construed to modify, repeal, or
in any way affect the provisions of section 3136 of the
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1994.
Limitation on availability of funds for program to eliminate weapons
grade plutonium production (sec. 3136)
The committee recommends a provision that would limit the
amount of money that could be obligated or expended for the
program to eliminate weapons grade plutonium production before
an agreement with Russia is signed. The provision would
prohibit the Administrator of the National Nuclear Security
Administration from obligating or expending more than $100.0
million until 30 days after the Administrator submits a copy of
the agreement to the congressional defense committees.
SUBTITLE D--PROLIFERATION MATTERS
Administration of program to eliminate weapons grade plutonium
production in Russia (sec. 3151)
The committee recommends a provision that would direct the
transfer of the program to eliminate weapons grade plutonium in
Russia from the Department of Defense (DOD) to the Department
of Energy (DOE). The provision would also direct that the
funds, which had been previously appropriated to DOD, be
transferred to and merged with DOE funds. In addition, the
provision would allow DOE to spend the funds for the program
without regard to the restrictions that had been placed on the
funds when DOD managed the program.
The program to eliminate weapons grade plutonium production
in Russia would shut down the remaining three plutonium
producing reactors in Russia. The program was originally
created to modify the reactor cores so they would not produce
plutonium. Due to technical difficulties in changing the
reactor cores and the age of the reactors, the program shifted
from converting the reactor cores to building alternative power
sources. The three reactors, in addition to producing
plutonium, also produce energy for the communities in which
they are located. In order to shut down the reactors, an
alternative power supply must be provided.
The 2003 budget request transferred this program from DOD
to the DOE National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) as a
result of concern in Congress that this program should not be a
DOD program, but rather a DOE effort. In order to implement the
program at DOE, the various restrictions that were put on the
program at DOD must be removed. This provision would allow NNSA
to carry out the program without the funding limitations and
restrictions placed on the program when it was a DOD program.
The committee notes that this program is a very complicated
program to implement, involving substantial
financialcontributions and coordination with the Russian government.
There are many unresolved issues that NNSA will have to resolve with
Russia before any actual construction activities can begin. The
committee directs the Secretary of Energy and the Administrator of NNSA
not to begin any construction work on the alternative power sources
until there is an agreement or agreements in place with Russia that
include a firm commitment to shut down the reactors and a firm schedule
for Russian actions that support the shutdown, including the portions
of the program that must be completed by Russia before the reactors can
be shut down.
A related aspect of this program is an ongoing NNSA program
to upgrade the reactors until they can be shut down. The
reactor upgrade program was an NNSA program already underway
and is not part of the transfer from DOD. The committee remains
concerned that any upgrades to the reactors be for short-term
safety improvements and will not extend the life of these
reactors.
Security of nuclear materials and facilities worldwide (sec. 3152)
The committee recommends a provision that would express the
sense of Congress that the Secretary of Energy, in consultation
with the Secretaries of State and Defense, should work to
develop a program of activities, with Russia, other G-8
countries, and allies, to encourage all countries to secure
stockpiles of highly enriched uranium (HEU) and plutonium and
to adhere to or adopt standards equivalent to the International
Atomic Energy Agency standards on the Physical Protection of
Nuclear Materials and Nuclear Facilities. The provision would
also direct the Secretary of Energy, acting through the
Administrator of the National Nuclear Security Administration
(NNSA), to conduct a study to determine the feasibility and
advisability of developing a program to secure radiological
materials outside the United States, other than HEU and
plutonium, that present a threat to U.S. national security and
to submit a report to Congress on the review one year after the
date of enactment. Finally, the provision would direct the
Secretary of Energy, in consultation with the Chairman of the
Nuclear Regulatory Commission, to conduct a study on the
feasibility and advisability of various actions to reduce risks
associated with terrorist attacks on nuclear power plants
outside the United States. The Secretary would be required to
submit to Congress a report on the results of this study nine
months after the date of enactment of the National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2003.
Repeal of requirement for reports on obligation of funds for programs
on fissile materials in Russia (sec. 3153)
The committee recommends a provision that would repeal the
semi-annual report on the Department of Energy fissile
Materials Protection, Control and Accounting (MPC&A) program
required by section 3131 of the National Defense Authorization
Act for Fiscal Year 1996. This report is no longer needed as
the information is included in the annual MPC&A report.
Expansion of annual reports on status of nuclear Materials Protection,
Control and Accounting program (sec. 3154)
The committee recommends a provision that would amend the
annual reporting requirement for the Department of Energy (DOE)
Materials Protection, Control and Accounting (MPC&A) program to
include countries other than Russia. The DOE MPC&A program
works to protect weapons grade nuclear materials in the
countries of the Former Soviet Union, including Russia. The
provision would also amend the MPC&A report to require the
Secretary of Energy to identify the nature of the work
performed in each country outside of Russia, the amount of
material secured, the amount of material remaining to be
secured, and the total amount spent by country.
Export Control Operations program
The budget request included $92.7 million for the
Nonproliferation and International Security program. This
request included $15.5 million for the Export Control
Operations program in the Office of the Deputy Administrator
for Defense Nuclear Nonproliferation. The program conducts
proliferation reviews of U.S. dual-use export licenses,
regulates U.S. nuclear technology transfers, plays a leading
role in implementing multilateral export control regimes, and
works with governments worldwide by providing assistance and
training to develop effective and enforceable national systems
of nuclear export control. Because of the terrorist attacks of
September 11, 2001, and heightened concerns that countries that
support terrorism are increasing efforts to acquire dual-use
technologies and nuclear materials, the committee is very
concerned that weak export control systems and ineffective
enforcement worldwide pose a danger to U.S. national security.
Therefore, the committee recommends that the Export Control
Operations program accelerate its efforts to promote the use of
nonproliferation export controls with emerging supplier states
and regions of concern, work with transit states to train and
equip experts in identifying illicit transfers of controlled
nuclear and other weapons of mass destruction-related exports,
and strengthen the National Nuclear Security Administration's
role in the technical evaluation of proliferation threats and
of exports and imports reviewed by U.S. Customs. The committee
recommends an additional$3.0 million above the budget request
to be used to support these efforts.
SUBTITLE E--OTHER MATTERS
Indemnification of Department of Energy contractors (sec. 3161)
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 170d(1)(A) of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 to allow
the Department of Energy to continue to enter into contracts
for indemnification for an additional 10 years, through August
1, 2012.
Worker health and safety rules for Department of Energy facilities
(sec. 3162)
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 234B of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 (42 U.S.C. 2282b)
to require the Secretary of Energy to impose fines and
penalties against contractors and subcontractors of the
Department of Energy (DOE) who violate DOE construction health
and safety regulations that the Secretary is required to
promulgate. The regulations must be promulgated pursuant to the
Administrative Procedure Act not later than 270 days from the
date of enactment of this Act. The regulations would take
effect one year from the date they are promulgated. The
Secretary may provide in the regulations variances or
exemptions to the extent necessary to avoid serious impairment
of the national security of the United States. The provision
would also require the Secretary to establish a process under
which the variance or waiver would be granted. In enforcing the
regulations on the structures, buildings facilities or other
improvements that are being closed, demolished or transferred,
the Secretary shall evaluate on a case by case basis whether
they should or should not be brought into conformance. The
committee includes this direction to the Secretary to prevent
improvements to such facilities. In making any such
determination the decision shall not diminish or effect the
worker health and safety regulations applicable to the
surveillance, decontamination or demolition work on such
facilities. Penalties may be assessed up to $0.1 million per
day per violation. The provision provides that a non-profit or
not-for-profit entity shall not be assessed fines and
penalties, that, when aggregated with all other fines and
penalties, would exceed the amount of the contract fee.
One-year extension of authority of Department of Energy to pay
voluntary separation incentive payments (sec. 3163)
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 3161(a) of the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2000 to provide a one-year extension of the
Department of Energy (DOE) authority to make voluntary
separation incentive payments. The committee is aware that DOE
would like to extend the ability to encourage voluntary
separations and avoid any future need to conduct a reduction in
force. This provision would allow DOE to do long-term planning
for reductions as a result of future reorganizations.
Support for public education in the vicinity of Los Alamos National
Laboratory, New Mexico (sec. 3164)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
$6.9 million to be paid by the Department of Energy (DOE) to
the Los Alamos Education Foundation in fiscal year 2003. The
committee recommends an additional $6.9 million in readiness in
the technical base, special projects, for this payment. The
foundation was established by section 3167(a) of the National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1998. The foundation
provides for educational support to students and schools in the
Los Alamos area.
The budget request for the National Nuclear Security
Administration (NNSA) includes $8.0 million for the Los Alamos
Public Schools to offset the cost of living for school teachers
teaching in the public schools. The contract between NNSA and
the Los Alamos schools, pursuant to which this annual payment
is made, expires at the end of fiscal year 2003. The provision
would also amend section 3136 of the National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2002 to allow NNSA to extend
the current contract with the Los Alamos Public Schools to
provide for cost of living adjustments for the school teachers
through fiscal year 2013. This amendment is necessary to allow
NNSA to include the annual payment in its fiscal year 2004
budget request and in subsequent years budget requests.
SUBTITLE F--DISPOSITION OF WEAPONS-USABLE PLUTONIUM AT SAVANNAH RIVER,
SOUTH CAROLINA
Disposition of weapons-usable plutonium at Savannah River, South
Carolina (sec. 3181-3183)
The committee supports the ability of the United States to
meet its obligations under the Plutonium Disposition Agreement
with Russia, signed in September 2000. The United States and
Russia agreed to dispose of 34 metric tons each of excess
weapons grade plutonium, all of which the Department of Energy
hasplanned to dispose of by 2019 through the conversion of the
plutonium to a mixed oxide (MOX) fuel for use in commercial nuclear
reactors. This conversion would take place at the Savannah River Site's
MOX plutonium conversion facility at Aiken, South Carolina. Because of
the importance of the MOX facility for plutonium disposition, the
committee has created a detailed set of certifications, plans,
corrective processes, and, if necessary, monetary payments to be made
by the Secretary of Energy to ensure the effective functioning of the
MOX facility. The provision also defines the term ``MOX production
objective'' as production at the MOX facility at the Savannah River
Site of MOX fuel from defense plutonium and defense plutonium materials
at an average rate equivalent to not less than one metric ton of MOX
fuel per year. This average rate would be based on measurements of
production at the MOX facility from the date on which the Nuclear
Regulatory Commission (NRC) declares the MOX facility operational
through the date of assessment.
The committee included a section that would direct the
Secretary of Energy, no later than February 1, 2003, to submit
to Congress a plan for the construction and operation of a MOX
plutonium facility at the Savannah River Site. The committee
recommends that the plan include a schedule for construction
and operations to ensure that as of January 1, 2009, and
thereafter, the production of MOX fuel and that production of
one metric ton of MOX fuel is achieved by December 31, 2009.
This schedule must also ensure the delivery of 34 metric tons
of defense plutonium and defense plutonium materials to the
Savannah River Site to be processed into MOX fuel by January 1,
2019.
To ensure that the MOX fuel construction and operation
schedule as mandated is on-time and on-budget, the committee
recommends that, starting in 2004, not later than February 15
of each year, and continuing for as long as the MOX facility at
the Savannah River Site is in use, the Secretary of Energy
shall submit to Congress a report on the implementation of the
plan described above. For those reports submitted to Congress
under this section before the year 2010, the Secretary must
include an assessment of compliance with the schedule contained
in the plan and a certification by the Secretary that the MOX
production objective can be met by January 2009. For each
report after 2009, the Secretary must address whether MOX
production objectives have been met and also the status of U.S.
obligations under the Plutonium Management and Disposition
Agreement with the Russian Federation. For reports submitted
after 2017, the Secretary must continue to include assessments
of compliance with the MOX production objective, and if for any
reason compliance with the production objective is not met, the
Secretary must supply a plan for compliance with the MOX
production objective and the removal of all remaining defense
plutonium and defense plutonium materials from the State of
South Carolina.
Due to the unique nature and obvious benefits of the MOX
facility, the committee recommends a process for corrective
actions taken if any of the reports due before January 1, 2009,
indicate that construction or operation of the MOX facility is
behind the planned schedule by 12 months or more. In such a
circumstance, the section directs the Secretary to submit to
Congress, no later than August 15 of the year in which the
report is submitted, a plan to be implemented that will ensure
that the MOX facility is capable of meeting the MOX production
objective by January 1, 2009. If the plan submitted is in any
year after 2008, it must include corrective actions to be
implemented by the Secretary ensuring that the MOX production
objective is met. Any such plan for corrective action must also
include established milestones for compliance with MOX
production goals.
If before January 1, 2009, the Secretary determines that
MOX milestones as set forth by the Secretary's corrective
action plan will not be met by 2009, all transfers of defense
plutonium and defense plutonium materials must be suspended
until the schedule risk is addressed by the Secretary and the
Secretary certifies that MOX production objectives can be met
by 2009. If after January 1, 2009, the Secretary determines
that milestones under the Secretary's corrective action plan
have been slipped and the MOX production objective cannot be
met, the Secretary must suspend further transfers of defense
plutonium and defense plutonium materials until the Secretary
can certify that the MOX production objective can be met. In
either case, either before or after January 1, 2009, if the
Secretary makes such determinations, then the Secretary must
submit to Congress a plan specifying options for the removal
from the State of South Carolina an amount of defense plutonium
or defense plutonium materials equal to the amount of such
materials transferred to the State of South Carolina after
April 15, 2002. These reports must be specific in setting forth
options, including the costs and schedules of implementation
for each of the options examined, and any consideration of
requirements for removal under the National Environmental
Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.), and commensurate
with the submittal, any analyses which may be required under
the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 must also be
initiated.
In the eventuality that the MOX production schedule is not
met, and the Secretary makes any of the determinations under
this section that would require removal of defense plutonium
and defense plutonium materials from the State of South
Carolina in compliance with the National Environmental Policy
Act of 1969 and any other applicable laws, the committee
recommends several requirements for that removal process. If
the MOX production objective is not met by January 1, 2009, the
Secretary mustremove, no later than January 1, 2011, no less
than one metric ton of all defense plutonium and defense plutonium
materials from the State of South Carolina, and no later than January
1, 2017, the amount of defense plutonium or defense plutonium materials
transferred to the Savannah River Site between April 15, 2002, and
January 1, 2017, but not yet processed at the MOX facility.
If the MOX production objective is not met on January 1,
2011, the committee has included a section that would require
the Secretary to make payments to the State of South Carolina
each year, starting on or after that date, until 2016, in order
to assist with the economic impact on the State of not meeting
the MOX production objective. The amount of the payment is $1.0
million per day until the passage of 100 days in such a year,
the MOX production objective is achieved, or the Secretary has
removed from the State of South Carolina in such a year at
least 1 metric ton of defense plutonium or defense plutonium
materials. If the MOX production objective has not been met by
January 1, 2017, the Secretary will make payments to the State
of South Carolina each year, beginning on or after that date,
through 2024 of $1.0 million per day until the passage of 100
days in such a year, the MOX production objective is achieved,
or the Secretary has removed an amount of defense plutonium or
defense plutonium materials from the State of South Carolina
equal to the amount of defense plutonium or defense plutonium
materials transferred to the Savannah River Site between April
15, 2002 and January 1, 2017, but not yet processed by the MOX
facility. All payments made according to this section would be
from amounts authorized to be appropriated to the Department of
Energy.
In case any injunctions obtained by the State of South
Carolina would prevent the Department of Energy from taking
actions necessary under these sections, the committee
recommends that any deadlines specified be extended for the
period of time during which the court-ordered injunction is in
effect.
If on July 1 of each year, beginning in the year 2020, and
continuing for as long as the MOX facility at the Savannah
River Site is in use, the planned plutonium disposition
obligation under the agreement with the Russian Federation of
34 metric tons is not met through processing at the MOX
facility, the Secretary must submit to Congress a plan for the
complete processing of the full 34 metric tons of defense
plutonium and defense plutonium materials at the MOX facility
or the removal of all such material from the State of South
Carolina in an amount equal to all such material transferred to
the Savannah River Site after April 15, 2002, but not yet
processed into MOX fuel.
The committee further directs that if after one year of the
date on which the MOX facility ceases operation any MOX fuel
remains at the Savannah River Site, the Secretary must submit
to Congress a report detailing when such fuel would be
transferred for use in commercial nuclear reactors or a plan
for its removal from the State of South Carolina.
Engineering, construction, and project management
The committee continues to support the Department of Energy
(DOE) and National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)
efforts to improve project management. The Office of
Engineering and Construction Management (OECM) within DOE and
the Office of Project Management (OPM) within NNSA have been
integral to the progress that DOE has made in the last several
years in significantly improving project and construction
management. The management discipline these two offices have
brought to both construction and other types of projects, such
as NNSA approach to weapons pit manufacturing and
certification, have enabled DOE and NNSA to manage costs and
schedules better and to improve long-term planning. The
committee notes that the close working relationship of the two
offices has been key to the overall success of each.
More remains to be done however. The committee believes
that each office could benefit from a small amount of
additional resources. The committee urges the Administrator of
NNSA to provide at least $5.0 million for the NNSA OPM to allow
the OPM to continue its own project oversight work but also to
provide training and mentoring programs to improve the skills
of DOE project managers. The committee believe this training
should include training for key DOE managers so that they can
become certified project managers.
Disposition of special nuclear material from the Rocky Flats Site
The committee is concerned about possible delays in
removing Special Nuclear Material (SNM) from the Department of
Energy (DOE) Rocky Flats Site. These delays could ultimately
threaten the scheduled closure of the Rocky Flats Site by
December 15, 2006. The committee directs the Secretary of
Energy to provide a report describing how the DOE proposes to
remove all SNM from the Rocky Flats Site on a schedule to
enable the closure of the Rocky Flats Site by December 15,
2006. The report shall be submitted to the congressional
defense committees 90 days after the date of enactment of this
Act. The report shall be initiated and developed within the
Department of Energy by the Assistant Secretary of
Environmental Management.
This report shall include:
(1) an assessment by the Secretary of the current
cost and schedule for the closure of the Rocky Flats
Site and whether the project to close the Site is on
track to complete closure by December 15, 2006, and
what steps, if any, are needed to keep the project on
schedule to close Rocky Flats by December 15, 2006.
(2) an assessment by the Secretary of the cost and
schedule impacts, if any, to the effort to close the
Rocky Flats Site by December 15, 2006 that are the
result of delays in removing SNM from Rocky Flats.
(3) the DOE strategy and schedule for removing all
SNM from the Rocky Flats Sites to achieve closure of
the Rocky Flats Site by December 15, 2006, including
the destination of all SNM removed from the Rocky Flats
Site, the short and long term plan and schedule for
disposition of the SNM removed from the Rocky Flats
Site, and any additional funding that may be needed to
achieve closure of Rocky Flats Site by December 15,
2006.
(4) a strategy and schedule for closure of the Rocky
Flats Site at the earliest possible date in the event
the Secretary determines that it is not possible to
close the Rocky Flats Site by December 15, 2006, and
funds that would be need to achieve closure by the
revised date.
The Secretary shall provide to the congressional defense
committees updates to this report, every 60 days, until the
Rocky Flats Site is closed. The updates shall include cost and
schedule impacts from delays in removing the SNM from the Rocky
Flats Sites, any changes to the SNM disposition plans and
schedules, and any additional funds that would be needed at the
Rocky Flats Sites or elsewhere to address any schedule or cost
differences.
TITLE XXXII--DEFENSE NUCLEAR FACILITIES SAFETY BOARD
Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board (sec. 3201)
The committee recommends $19.5 million, the amount of the
fiscal year 2003 request, for the Defense Nuclear Facilities
Safety Board (DNFSB).
Authorization of appropriations for the Formerly Used Sites Remedial
Action Program in the Corps of Engineers (sec. 3202)
The committee recommends $141.0 million for the Formerly
Used Sites Remedial Action (FUSRAP) program in the Corps of
Engineers for fiscal year 2003, the amount requested.
LEGISLATIVE REQUIREMENTS
Departmental Recommendations
By letter dated April 19, 2002, the General Counsel of the
Department of Defense forwarded to the President of the Senate
proposed legislation ``To authorize appropriations for fiscal
year 2003 for military activities of the Department of Defense,
to prescribe military personnel strengths for fiscal year 2003,
and for other purposes.'' The transmittal letter and proposed
legislation were officially referred as Executive Communication
6576 to the Committee on Armed Services on April 25, 2002.
Executive Communication 6576 is available for review at the
committee. Senators Levin and Warner introduced this
legislative proposal as S. 2225, by request, on April 23, 2002.
Committee Action
In accordance with the Legislative Reorganization Act of
1946, as amended by the Legislative Reorganization Act of 1970,
there is set forth below the committee vote to report the
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2003.
In favor: Senators Levin, Kennedy, Byrd, Lieberman,
Cleland, Landrieu, Reed, Akaka, Nelson of Florida, Nelson of
Nebraska, Carnahan, Dayton, Bingaman, Thurmond, McCain,
Collins, and Bunning.
Opposed: Senators Warner, Smith, Inhofe, Santorum, Roberts,
Allard, Hutchinson, and Sessions.
Vote: 17-8.
The roll call votes on amendments to the bill which were
considered during the course of the markup have been made
public and are available at the committee.
Congressional Budget Office Cost Estimate
It was not possible to include the Congressional Budget
Office cost estimate on this legislation because it was not
available at the time the report was filed. It will be included
in material presented during floor debate on the legislation.
Regulatory Impact
Paragraph 11(b) of rule XXVI of the Standing Rules of the
Senate requires that a report on the regulatory impact of the
bill be included in the report on the bill. The committee finds
that there is no regulatory impact in the case of the National
Defense Authorization Bill for Fiscal Year 2003.
Changes in Existing Law
Pursuant to the provisions of paragraph 12 of rule XXVI of
the Standing Rules of the Senate, the changes in existing law
made by certain portions of the bill have not been shown in
this section of the report because, in the opinion of the
committee, it is necessary to dispense with showing such
changes in order to expedite the business of the Senate and
reduce the expenditure of funds.
ADDITIONAL VIEWS OF SENATOR CARNAHAN
Upon considerable reflection and advice from fellow members
of the Committee, I have decided to vote against the Santorum
amendment to strike measures pertaining to ``core logistics
capabilities.'' I have thoroughly reviewed the provision at
issue in light of claims that it would divert work from the
private sector to Department of Defense Depot Maintenance
facilities.
However, having consulted with other members of the
Committee as well as the professional Committee staff, I
determined that this provision does not require any reductions
in private sector jobs in the areas of acquisition logistics,
supply management, systems engineering, maintenance, and
modifications management.
The provision at issue requires the Secretary of Defense,
in consultation with the Joint Chiefs of Staff, to consider a
broader, more explicit set of functions when determining which
services shall be considered ``core logistics capabilities''
than currently exists under the law. It is my understanding
that in spite of this authorization, this Administration is not
likely to expand the type of logistical work conducted at the
military's depot facilities.
I intend to continue consulting my constituents on this
matter following completion of mark-up of the Fiscal Year 2003
National Defense Authorization Bill. I may reconsider my
position if it becomes clear that work conducted by logistics
and maintenance contractors in Missouri would be jeopardized.
Jean Carnahan.
ADDITIONAL VIEWS OF SENATOR McCAIN
Overall, the Senate Armed Services Committee has produced a
bill which is supportive of the outstanding servicemen and
women in our armed forces--in terms of training, pay, family
quality-of-life benefits, and providing modern equipment and
weapon systems. Building upon evaluations and recommendations
regarding growing readiness and modernization problems
throughout the services, the Committee has done an admirable
job of addressing some of the more pressing issues contributing
to the multiple problems that have been brought to its
attention over the past several years.
On most issues, I support the Committee's recommendation in
drafting of the FY 2003 defense authorization bill. However, I
have additional views on several issues addressed in this bill.
LEASING BOEING 767 AERIAL REFUELING TANKER AIRCRAFT
I forcefully endorse the Committee's inclusion of an
amendment that will direct the Secretary of the Air Force to
obtain specific authorization and appropriation to lease 100
Boeing 767 tanker aircraft that was previously approved by the
Department of Defense Appropriations Act of Fiscal Year 2002.
However, I am disappointed that the Report language
accompanying this legislative provision was drafted in such a
way as to not adequately reflect the full discussion during the
mark-up of this critical issue.
Specifically, a majority of the members present felt as I
do, that the payment of leasing of major weapon systems--
aircraft, vessels, and combat vehicles--should not come from
critical funds providing for readiness spending, such as
training, spare parts, flying hours, and maintenance of weapons
systems and barracks. There appeared to be a sense of agreement
that any lease for major weapon systems should instead be
funded from the procurement accounts.
During posture hearings, the Service Secretaries and Chiefs
confirmed that readiness unfunded requirements still exist and
submitted lists to meet their readiness requirements. Robbing
``Peter to pay Paul'' so that the Air Force can modernize their
tanker fleet is questionable at best and several recent reports
by the GAO, OMB and CBO bear this out. I regret that the
Chairman and Ranking Member did not reflect this in the Report,
despite the fact that considerable debate occurred related to
the lease in question.
BALLISTIC MISSILE DEFENSE (BMD) FUNDING
The Committee failed to provide full funding of President
Bush's missile defense program--cutting $812 million.
Particularly disturbing is the fact that Republicans attempted
several times to restore critical funding in the ballistic
missile defense programs but were opposed by the Chairman and
his colleagues. In an age of missile proliferation, we need a
fully funded and vigorous missile defense program, the
deployment of which becomes more urgent as each year passes.
NATIONAL SERVICE PLAN (CALL TO SERVICE ACT)
I fully support the Committee's unanimous inclusion of the
``National Call to Service Act,'' which provides for strong
incentives to encourage young Americans to enlist in the Armed
Services.
The Committee adopted provision is the military component
of the ``Call to Service Act,'' introduced by Senator Evan Bayh
(D-IN) and myself, which also expands civilian service
opportunities in AmeriCorps and SeniorCorps and in other
service organizations.
This is a very significant boost to a bill that will give
Americans concrete opportunities to serve in causes greater
than self interest. By encouraging more military enlistments,
this legislation could greatly assist our war against terror.
Under the National Call to Service Act, individuals who
volunteer to serve under this new program would be required to
serve on active duty for 15 months in the Armed Services after
completion of initial entry training and could complete the
remainder of their military service obligation by choosing
service on active duty, in the Selected Reserve or in the
Individual Ready Reserve. The reserve obligation could also be
fulfilled by serving in a civilian national service program
such as the Peace Corps or AmeriCorps.
In return for service, the legislation provides the choice
of incentives including a $5,000 bonus, repayment of a student
loan up to $18,000, an educational allowance under the
MontgomeryGI Bill.
The measure also encourages and facilitates military
service by requiring federally funded institutions of higher
learning to provide the same access to military recruiters as
is provided to other employers.
At this time of national challenge, Americans are yearning
for opportunities to serve. I hope Congress will expeditiously
take action on this entire legislation to create more options
in both the areas of military and civilian service.
Increase in Authorized End Strengths for the Service Academies
I applaud the Committees recommendation that would increase
the authorized end strengths to 4,400 midshipmen or cadets at
the military academies: U.S. Naval Academy, U.S. Military
Academy and U.S. Air Force Academy. The provision would also
clarify that the service secretary can permit a variance above
that limitation by 1 percent. This provision along with the
National Service Plan program should open more opportunities
for young Americans to serve their country in military service.
Force Modernization
It is odd to me that although the President added $48
billion to the defense budget the Navy would buy only 5 ships
in 2003. The Navy is struggling to maintain a fleet of 300
ships, down from over 500 in the early 1990s. The Future Years'
Defense Plan will not support a Navy of even 200 ships. The
Marine Corps saves money in spare parts by retreading light
trucks and Humvees, so as to afford small arms ammunition for
forward deployed Marines. The list goes on and on, but what
must be recognized is the scale of these very serious
modernization problems in the Navy and Marine Corps that
continue to grow and must be reversed if this nation's ability
to execute major operations in the future is to be assured. I
support the Committee's recommendation to add funding for 4
additional F/A-18s and in shipbuilding, particularly CVN(X),
DDG-51, LPD-17 and LHA(R).
Funding LHA(R) was accomplished by redirecting money from
LHD-9 advance procurement after it was discovered that the DOD
Comptroller mistakenly deleted the funding for LHA(R) RDT&E and
added it to the LHD-9 shipbuilding and construction account.
After considerable testimony from the CNO, Marine Corps
Commandant, and other senior Navy and Marine Corps officials,
the Committee was able to amend the defense bill to correct
this unfortunate mistake. I strongly support this provision.
Member-Adds Not Requested by the Defense Department
As usual, this year's defense bill emerged from committee
with a large number of programs totaling more than $2 billion
that were not requested by the Defense Department. This number
is $1 billion more than last year's bill. In the past, there
has been an increasing tendency to manipulate the process by
which the services produce their unfunded priorities lists--
lists which are important to the Committee's ability to
allocate funds added by Congress to the Administration's budget
request. In addition to questionable Member-adds that are
reflected on those lists, there continue to be too many
programs added to the bill that were neither requested nor
included on those lists.
In my view, the Congress should stop compelling the
military to pursue research programs that do not meet their
requirements. Spending nearly $55 million for ``21st Century
Truck,'' previously known as James Bond's ``Smart Truck'' is an
unconscionable waste of taxpayer dollars. These kinds of
programs should be funded by private industry. Even Detroit's
automotive industry can afford to pursue these purely
scientific, high-tech, endeavors that the consumer will only
pay for later on the dealer showroom.
I would like to mention one further example of wasteful
spending. For the last several years, Congress has added money
for Cultural and Historic Preservation Activities, which is
funded through a program call the Legacy Resource Management
Program, fancy terminology for pork. The fiscal year 2003
defense authorization bill will add $3.3 million to this
program. Last year, the Senate Armed Services Committee added
$8 million principally for recovery and preservation of the
C.S.S. Virginia, which ran aground near Craney Island near the
James and Elizabeth Rivers and was set on fire after being
abandoned in May 1862. I enjoy reading history, especially
Civil War history, but there are more pressing readiness and
modernization issues than raising Civil War ironclads.
Personnel Initiatives: Pay Raise, Recruitment, Retention, and
Retirement Benefits
The bill contains a package of benefits for servicemembers
and their families that would go a long way toward addressing
the readiness problems facing all the services. It includes a
4.1 percent across-the-board pay raise for all active and
reserve servicemembers, with an additional targeted pay raise
ranging from 5.5% to 6.5% for sergeants, petty officers and
chiefs.
Military pay, by almost all accounts, has fallen
considerably behind civilian pay. Arguments can be made as to
the precise pay differential, and at which pay grades and
mission areas the gap is greatest, but there is no credible
argument as to whether or not we need to address the issue of
compensation.
Additionally, the Committee approved a provision that would
authorize a new assignment incentive pay of up to $1,500 per
month to encourage servicemembers to serve in difficult-to-fill
assignments, like Korea or the Persian Gulf region.
The Committee approved a significant legislative provision
directing the Secretary of Defense to review personnel
compensation laws and policies, including the Reserve
retirement system, to determine how well they address the needs
of Guard and Reserve servicemembers. This provision is
particularly noteworthy since the Secretary of Defense recalled
nearly 95,000 Reserve Component servicmembers for Operations
Enduring Freedom and Noble Eagle. Often times the collective
memory of our active duty, including active duty reserve
servicemembers, is short and a comprehensive examination of
reserve force policies, if done right, will help address waning
retention of reservists and continued support by employers of
reservists.
Concurrent Receipt
It is tremendously important to me that the committee
included language in the defense authorization bill and report
that would authorize payment of retired pay and disability pay
for military retirees with disabilities rated at 60% or more--a
practice known as ``concurrent receipt.'' For the past 11
years, I have offered legislation on this issue. This matter is
of great significance to many of our country's military
retirees, because it would reverse existing, unfair regulations
that strip retirement pay from military retirees who are also
disabled, and costs them any realistic opportunity for post-
service earnings. I am pleased that the committee, for the
first time, has included an authorization to begin to address a
longstanding inequity in the compensation of military retirees'
pay over previous attempts in the past.
We must do more to restore retirement pay for those
military retirees who are disabled. I have stated this before,
and I am compelled to reiterate now--retirement pay and
disability pay are distinct types of pay. Retirement pay is for
service rendered through 20 years of military service.
Disability pay is for physical or mental pain or suffering that
occurs during and as a result of military service. In this
case, members with decades of military service receive the same
compensation as similarly disabled members who served only a
few years; this practice fails to recognize their extended,
more demanding careers of service to our country.
This is patently unfair, and I will continue to work with
the Committee to diligently correct this inequity for all
career military servicemembers who are disabled.
Enacting this provision is yet another step forward to
ensuring that we recognize the military service of those
military retirees who by no fault of their own become disabled
during their career military service.
Military Construction Projects
Military construction continues to fall victim to funding
gimmicks and undue Congressional management. Congress, once
again, promptly added a number of military construction
projects, totaling around $640 million, that are not priority
items for the Department of Defense. This practice of
Congressional adds is detrimental to the budget process and
continues to make a mockery of other earnest attempts to save
and wisely spend our taxpayers' dollars.
F-16 Engine Fixes
The recent spate of F-16 crashes has focused attention on
vital safety issues involving that aircraft. The Department of
the Air Force identified specific engine component failures
based on shoddy work and defective materials discovered an
aviation depot at Tinker Air Force Base. In addition, its
investigation revealed that certain F-16 components common
throughout the fleet had a high probability to fail. The Air
Force has researched the cost and schedule of fixing or
replacing these components, andhas outlined a required funding
profile.
The F-16 is the Air Force's front line fighter. The total
Air Force F-16 inventory is over 1,400 aircraft, of which a
number are currently deployed to Afghanistan. Additionally, F-
16s continue to enforce both the southern and northern no-fly
zones over Iraq and have been one of the mainstay aircraft of
every conflict since Desert Storm. I continue to support all
efforts to identify and fix the engine problems being
experienced by our F-16 fleet. I firmly believe that the safety
of our aircrew and the combat readiness of our Air Force are
top priority concerns that require our immediate attention. For
that reason, the Committee's decision to add $60 million in
funding for F-16 engine modifications is essential to maintain
that aircraft's readiness.
``Buy America'' Restrictions
I support the Committee's recommendation submitted by the
Administration to waive certain ``Buy America'' restrictions.
The Committee authorized the Secretary of Defense to waive
domestic source or content requirements for close defense
allies that provide reciprocal treatment for our defense
products. ``Buy America'' restrictions divert necessary funds
to ensure our military is properly equipped. An additional $5
billion can be saved per year by eliminating ``Buy America''
restrictions that are protected by the Berry Amendment that
only undermine U.S. competitiveness overseas. Every dollar we
spend on archaic procurement policies, like ``Buy America,'' is
a dollar we cannot spend on training our troops, keeping
personnel quality of life at an appropriate level, maintaining
force structure, replacing old weapons systems, and advancing
our military technology.
Summary
In closing, it should be reemphasized that the Committee
continues to try to address extremely serious near-and long-
term readiness and modernization problems within an
exceptionally constrained budgetary environment. While the
tendency of Members to continue business-as-usual practices of
adding programs and earmarking for parochial reasons needs to
be curtailed, vitally important retention issues have been
addressed that will aid immeasurably in reversing a very
serious decline in the services' ability to retain skilled
personnel. For that, the Committee should be commended.
John McCain.
MINORITY VIEWS OF SENATORS WARNER, SMITH OF NEW HAMPSHIRE, INHOFE,
SANTORUM, ROBERTS, ALLARD, HUTCHINSON, AND SESSIONS
For the second consecutive year, the Senate Armed Services
Committee has divided along party lines, primarily over the
issue of missile defense. Sincere, good-faith efforts were made
by Republican Members to find common ground and compromise on
this issue, but these efforts were voted down. The National
Defense Authorization Bill for Fiscal Year 2003, as reported to
the Senate for floor action, in our view fundamentally alters
the President's national security priorities and fails to send
a clear message, on the issue of missile defense, to America's
allies and adversaries that the Congress will provide the
resources necessary to protect our homeland, our troops
deployed overseas and our allies and friends from all known
threats--including the very real and growing threat of missile
attack.
The world as we knew it changed forever on September 11. We
lost not only many lives and much property that day, but we
also lost our uniquely American feeling of invulnerability; our
feeling of safety within our shores and borders. But from our
darkest hour, our nation has emerged stronger and more united
than ever. Our President has rallied our country and many
nations around the world to fight the evil of terrorism. As we
complete committee deliberations on the National Defense
Authorization Bill for Fiscal Year 2003, our nation is at war.
U.S. soldiers, sailors, airmen and marines, together with their
coalition partners, are engaged on the front lines in the
global war against terrorism, with a mission to root out
terrorism at its source in the hopes of preventing future
attacks.Our armed forces have responded to the call of duty in
the finest traditions of our nation.
Homeland security is now, without a doubt, our top
priority. We have a solemn obligation to protect our nation and
our citizens from all known and anticipated threats--whatever
their source or means of delivery. As a candidate and as
President, George W. Bush promised our nation that homeland
security was his most urgent priority. Missile defense is an
integral part of the overall defense of our homeland and our
deployed troops.
Accordingly, our President submitted a responsible,
prioritized budget request for fiscal year 2003 that addresses
our most important security needs. The request for missile
defense was reasonable. It was a request that represented no
increase over last year's funding level, and that was less than
two percent of the defense budget. As a nation, we have the
wealth, the talent, and the technology to protect ourselves. We
must use these resources to move forward now, without
artificial limitations--either fiscal or legislative--on the
ability of our nation to develop and deploy adequate defenses.
The National Defense Authorization Bill for Fiscal Year
2003 contains a drastic reduction, of over $800 million, from
the President's request for missile defense programs, including
over $400 million in reductions to theater missile defense
programs. In addition, the bill contains a number of
restrictions and excessive reporting requirements that will
further hamper the rapid development of missile defenses.
According to Lieutenant General Ronald Kadish, USAF, Director,
Missile Defense Agency, the reductions contained in this bill,
``* * * fundamentally undermine the Administration's
transformation of missile defense capabilities * * *'' and ``*
* * eliminate the opportunity for earliest-possible contingency
against medium range ballistic missiles abroad.'' One clear and
immediate consequence will be to further delay the fielding of
theater missile defenses our troops needed over a decade ago in
the Persian Gulf War.
Many in the Senate--including the undersigned--have long
been in the forefront of efforts to develop missile defenses to
protect our nation from limited ballistic missile attacks. It
has been a long and arduous struggle, but we are on the
threshold of success. In June, the United States will formally
withdraw from the thirty-year-old Anti-Ballistic Missile (ABM)
Treaty, which has hampered the U.S. missile defense program.
With this action, all artificial restraints will be removed
from the ability of the United States to research, develop and
deploy effective missile defense systems. Congress should not
now apply new limitations on the rapid, cost-effective
development of defenses to protect our nation and deployed
troops from missile attack. The funding reductions and program
constraints contained in the bill reported out of committee are
a significant step backward in our efforts to improve the
security of our nation.
We strongly endorse the President's missile defense
program. The threat of missile attack is real and growing.
According to the January 2002 national intelligence estimate
(NIE) on the missile threat, ``The probability that a missile
with a weapon of mass destruction will be used against U.S.
forces or interests is higher today than during most of the
Cold War, and will continue to grow as the capabilities of
potential adversaries mature.'' Dozens of nations already have
short- and medium-range ballistic missiles in the field that
threaten U.S. interests, military forces, and allies; and
others are seeking to acquire similar capabilities, including
missiles that could reach the United States. Before September
11, who would have predicted that civilian airliners would be
turned into missiles, aimed at thousands of innocent civilians?
We must be prepared for the expected and unexpected.
We are also concerned with other key areas in the bill,
particularly the level of funding for shipbuilding.
Shipbuilding was severely underfunded in the President's budget
request. While additional funds are contained in this bill for
important programs that were not adequately funded in the
request, the committee missed an important opportunity to add
more money and key acquisition authorities for building ships
that would have ultimately saved the U.S. taxpayers millions of
dollars. A shipbuilding restoration initiative proposed by
Republican Committee Members was rejected on a straight party-
line vote. We are all aware that we are not currently building
enough ships to maintain an adequate Navy for the future.
Ultimately, there will be a high price to pay if this trend is
not quickly reversed.
In addition, we note that this bill contains an assortment
of across-the-board reductions, which could well have a
negative impact on programs and readiness. These include an
$850.0 million cut to services contracting, and a $250.0
million tax on research and development programs to fund a test
and evaluation initiative. At this point, it is impossible to
predict the specific impact of such large reductions on
individual weapon systems or on the readiness of our force. In
the case of services contracting, the bill imposes a tax,
mainly in the readiness accounts, for so-called ``savings''
that are to be achieved through services contracting reform in
fiscal year 2003. These savings simply cannot be achieved next
year. The Department of Defense is just beginning reform in
this area and it will be many years before the Department will
be in a position to reap any savings from improved services
contracting. As a result, the Department will be forced to tax
important readiness programs to pay for these ``savings.'' If
the committee chooses to fund needed priorities through
``savings'' initiatives, it would be better to give the
Secretary of Defense the discretion to identify real managerial
efficiencies, as we did last year, thatcan be executed in the
coming fiscal year rather than illusory ones.
Aside from these important concerns, we support much of
what is contained in this bill. The National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2003 contains the largest
defense increase in over 20 years--an increase of $45.0
billion. In line with the request of the President, the bill
significantly increases all major defense accounts, including,
military personnel, procurement, research and development, and
operations and maintenance. The bill also sets aside a $10.0
billion reserve fund, as requested by the Administration, to
pay for ongoing and future military operations in the global
war on terrorism. The threats to our nation and the on-going
war on terrorism demand this increased investment in national
security, both now and in the future.
In addition, the bill contains many key provisions which we
support to improve the quality of life of our men and women in
uniform, our retirees, and their families, including, a 4.1%
pay raise for our uniformed personnel; additional funding for
facilities and services that will greatly improve the quality
of life for our service personnel and their families, at home
and abroad; and the phased repeal of the prohibition on
concurrent receipt of non-disability retired military pay and
veterans disability pay for our military retirees with
disabilities rated at 60% or higher. The committee also
approved a committee amendment, which will be considered by the
full Senate, to repeal fully and immediately the prohibition on
concurrent receipt, a step which will allow all non-disability
retired veterans with VA disability ratings to collect the full
amount they have earned.
Despite the positive aspects of this legislation, we cannot
support the Fiscal Year 2003 Defense Authorization Bill in its
current form. We will continue to work closely with our
colleagues in the Senate during the course of floor
consideration and as we move to a conference with the House of
Representatives, to support the President's defense priorities
and to ensure that our most important capabilities are
adequately funded. The American people and the men and women
who serve in uniform to protect them deserve no less.
John W. Warner.
Rick Santorum.
Wayne Allard.
Tim Hutchinson.
Jeff Sessions.
Jim Inhofe.
Bob Smith.
Pat Roberts.
MINORITY VIEWS OF SENATOR ALLARD
I am again disappointed in the outcome of this year's
defense mark. As the ranking member on the Strategic
Subcommittee, I am worried that some very good provisions may
be at risk due to the serious concerns with this bill.
One of my particular interests for several years has been
the use of commercial imagery to help meet the nation's
geospatial and imagery requirements. I do not believe that the
Department of Defense has been aggressive enough either in
crafting a strategy or in providing funding for this purpose. I
am gratified that the Chairman's mark includes a substantial
increase for commercial imagery acquisition, and some very
helpful words in report language that I expect will drive the
Department toward establishing a sound relationship with the
commercial imagery industry.
I also appreciate the support of the new Department of
Energy environmental cleanup reform initiative that will
incentivize cleanup sites to do their important work faster and
more efficiently. The accelerated cleanup initiative will
reduce risk to the workers, communities and the environment,
shorten the cleanup schedule by decades, and save tens of
billions of dollars over the life of the cleanup. The bill
added $200 million to this cleanup initiative and I expect DOE
will make tremendous strides. In addition, the bill added $200
million for the safeguard and security accounts in order to
address the many security issues which have arisen since
September 11th.
I was also encouraged by the Committee's support for the
Thurmond/Allard mixed oxide fuel amendment. I believe that by
accepting this amendment, the Committee is showing the state of
South Carolina their commitment to the MOX program.
Early in the process, I made it very clear that one of my
top priorities was to assure that ballistic missile defense
programs are adequately funded. I was deeply disappointed that
the majority is proposing a net reduction to missile defense
programs of over $800 million. This represents a 12 percent
decrease to the missile defense request for fiscal year 2003, a
request that was already less than was appropriated for fiscal
year 2002. I believe that reductions of this magnitude are
unjustified and will do extraordinary harm to the effort to
develop and deploy effective missile defenses as efficiently as
we can.
I must also note that more than half of the missile defense
reductions can be reasonably described as pertaining to defense
against shorter range missiles. Reductions to THAAD, MEADS,
ABL, Navy Midcourse, terminal defense segment program
operations, and SBIRS Low will all damage our theater missile
defense effort, as will the reduction to the BMD System program
element. I know this is an area where the Majority have said
they support stronger efforts, yet these reductions seem to be
inconsistent with that support.
In the wake of the events of September 11, I believe that
missile defense is more important than ever. As the Director of
Central Intelligence George Tenet testified before our
committee, we don't have the luxury of choosing the threats to
which we respond, and missile threats have a way of developing
faster than we expect. I strongly urge that these proposed
missile defense reductions be restored. I want to assure my
chairman that I am more than willing to work with him to find
an acceptable solution and I hope we can reach that compromise.
But I believe these reductions do deep and fundamental harm to
our efforts to develop and deploy effective missile defenses.
Senator Warner, Senator Collins and I offered reasonable
compromises which would have moved the $690 million back to
missile defense while adding $1 billion to the shipbuilding
accounts, which would have added over $210 million more for
shipbuilding than the chairman's mark. I believe that the
rejection of this amendment proves that this is not missile
defense versus shipbuilding, but rather a strident ideology
which opposes missile defense at all costs, even at the expense
of shipbuilding.
I honestly believe that unless there is some compromise,
this bill will have a very difficult time getting off the floor
and through conference.
Wayne Allard.