[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.

                                  
