Report text available as:

  • TXT
  • PDF   (PDF provides a complete and accurate display of this text.) Tip ?
105th Congress                                                   Report
                       HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

 2d Session                                                     105-591
_______________________________________________________________________


 
            DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE APPROPRIATIONS BILL, 1999

                               __________

                              R E P O R T

                                 OF THE

                      COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS

                             together with

                            DISSENTING VIEWS

                        [To accompany H.R. 4103]





 June 22, 1998.--Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the 
              State of the Union and ordered to be printed


             DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE APPROPRIATIONS BILL, 1999


                            C O N T E N T S

                              ----------                              
                                                                   Page
Bill Totals......................................................     1
Committee Budget Review Process..................................     4
    Introduction.................................................     4
    Rationale for the Committee Bill.............................     6
Major Committee Recommendations..................................     7
    Addressing High Priority Unfunded Shortfalls.................     7
    Ensuring a Quality, Ready Force..............................     7
    Modernization Programs.......................................     8
    Reforms/Program Reductions...................................    10
    Year 2000 and Information Security Issues....................    11
    Domestic Response to Weapons of Mass Destruction.............    11
    New Start Notification.......................................    14
    Special Interest Items.......................................    15
Committee Recommendations by Major Category......................    15
    Active Military Personnel....................................    15
    Guard and Reserve............................................    15
    Operation and Maintenance....................................    15
    Procurement..................................................    16
    Research, Development, Test and Evaluation...................    16
Forces to be Supported...........................................    17
    Department of the Army.......................................    17
    Department of the Navy.......................................    17
    Department of the Air Force..................................    19
Title I. Military Personnel......................................    21
    Program and Activities Funded by Military Personnel 
      Appropriations.............................................    21
    Summary of Military Personnel Recommendations for Fiscal Year 
      1999.......................................................    21
        Overall Active End Strength..............................    22
        Overall Selected Reserve End Strength....................    22
    Adjustments to Military Personnel Account....................    23
        Overview.................................................    23
        End Strength Adjustments.................................    23
        Military Advance Pay.....................................    23
        Foreign Currency.........................................    23
        Unfunded Requirements....................................    23
        Full-Time Support Strengths..............................    24
        Guard and Reserve Full-Time End Strengths................    24
    Military Personnel, Army.....................................    24
        Program Recommended......................................    24
    Military Personnel, Navy.....................................    26
        Program Recommended......................................    26
    Military Personnel, Marine Corps.............................    28
        Program Recommended......................................    28
    Military Personnel, Air Force................................    30
        Program Recommended......................................    30
    Reserve Personnel, Army......................................    32
        Program Recommended......................................    32
    Reserve Personnel, Navy......................................    34
        Program Recommended......................................    34
        P-3 Squadrons............................................    36
    Reserve Personnel, Marine Corps..............................    36
        Program Recommended......................................    36
    Reserve Personnel, Air Force.................................    38
        Program Recommended......................................    38
    National Guard Personnel, Army...............................    40
        Program Recommended......................................    40
    National Guard Personnel, Air Force..........................    42
        Program Recommended......................................    42
Title II. Operation and Maintenance..............................    45
    Operation and Maintenance Overview...........................    47
        Flying Hour Shortfall....................................    47
        Depot Maintenance........................................    48
        Real Property Maintenance................................    48
        Base Operations Support..................................    48
        Troop Support Equipment..................................    49
        Guard and Reserve Unfunded Requirements..................    49
        Recruiting and Advertising...............................    49
        Fact-of-Life Adjustments.................................    49
        Headquarters and Administrative Costs....................    50
        Civilian Personnel Management............................    50
        Industrial Preparedness..................................    51
        Temporary Duty Travel....................................    51
        Miscellaneous Equipment..................................    51
        Classified Programs......................................    51
        Reprogramming in Operation and Maintenance...............    52
        Baseline for Operation and Maintenance Reprogramming.....    53
        Budget Execution Data....................................    53
        Test Ranges and Training Assets..........................    53
        Chemical-Biological Defense Funding......................    53
        Competitive Banking Procedures...........................    54
    Operation and Maintenance, Army..............................    54
        Readiness Training.......................................    54
        Army Depot Maintenance...................................    54
        Joint Multi-Dimensional Education and Analysis System....    55
        Medium Purpose and Temper Tent Acquisition...............    55
        Lease Reduction..........................................    55
        Fort Atkinson Grave Site.................................    55
        Camp Butner Grave Site...................................    55
        Acquisition Pollution Prevention Initiative..............    56
        Supercomputing Work......................................    56
        Joint Computer-Aided Acquisition and Logistics Support 
          (JCALS)................................................    56
        ADP Legacy Systems Efficiencies..........................    56
        Program Recommended......................................    56
    Operation and Maintenance, Navy..............................    59
        Navy Electricity and Electronics Training Series.........    59
        National Oceanographic Laboratory System.................    59
        ADP Legacy Systems Efficiencies..........................    60
        Program Recommended......................................    60
    Operation and Maintenance, Marine Corps......................    63
        Program Recommended......................................    63
    Operation and Maintenance, Air Force.........................    65
        Realistic Bomber Training................................    65
        Specialized Skill Training...............................    65
        Battle Lab Management Support............................    65
        Air Force Institute of Technology........................    65
        Minority Aviation Training...............................    66
        ADP Legacy Systems Efficiencies..........................    66
        FIRST Program............................................    66
        Program Recommended......................................    66
    Operation and Maintenance, Defense-Wide......................    69
        Special Operations Command...............................    69
        Growth in Administrative and Servicewide Activities......    70
        Civil/Military Programs..................................    70
        Defense Contract Audit Agency (DCAA).....................    70
        Defense Finance and Accounting Service (DFAS)............    70
        Defense Human Resources Activity (DHRA)..................    70
        DHRA-Defense Civilian Personnel Data System..............    71
        Defense Information Systems Agency (DISA)................    71
        DISA--Global Combat Support System (GCSS)................    71
        DLA--Equipment Purchases.................................    71
        DLA--Improved Cargo Methods and Technologies.............    71
        DLA--DPSC Agreement......................................    71
        DLA--Automated Document Conversion.......................    72
        Defense Security Assistance Agency (DSAA)................    72
        DTRTCA--Partnership for Peace............................    72
        Department of Defense Education Activity (DODEA).........    72
        New Parent Support Program...............................    72
        Joint Chiefs of Staff....................................    72
        OEA--Agile Port Capabilities Study.......................    73
        OEA--Planning............................................    73
        Youth Development and Leadership Program.................    73
        OSD--National Performance Review.........................    73
        ADP Legacy Systems Efficiencies..........................    73
        Administrative and Contractor Support....................    73
        Military Personnel Information System....................    74
        Industry Security Locks..................................    74
        National Imagery and Mapping Agency......................    74
        Program Recommended......................................    74
    Operation and Maintenance, Army Reserve......................    76
        Program Recommended......................................    77
        Army/Navy Reserve Centers................................    79
        Commercial Construction and Material Handling Equipment..    79
    Operation and Maintenance, Navy Reserve......................    79
        Program Recommended......................................    79
        Navy Reserve Forces......................................    81
    Operation and Maintenance, Marine Corps Reserve..............    81
        Program Recommended......................................    82
    Operation and Maintenance, Air Force Reserve.................    84
        Program Recommended......................................    84
        WC-130 Weather Reconnaissance Mission....................    86
    Operation and Maintenance, Army National Guard...............    86
        Program Recommended......................................    86
        Distance Learning Demonstration Project..................    88
    Operation and Maintenance, Air National Guard................    88
        Program Recommended......................................    88
        159th Air National Guard Fighter Group...................    90
    Overseas Contingency Operations Transfer Fund................    90
    United States Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces..........    90
    Environmental Restoration, Army..............................    90
        Government-Owned, Contractor-Operated (GOCO) Facilities..    90
        Rocky Mountain Arsenal...................................    91
    Environmental Restoration, Navy..............................    91
    Environmental Restoration, Air Force.........................    91
    Environmental Restoration, Defense-Wide......................    91
    Environmental Restoration, Formerly Used Defense Sites.......    92
        Walla Walla Headquarters Facility........................    92
    Overseas Humanitarian, Disaster, and Civic Aid...............    92
    Former Soviet Union Threat Reduction.........................    92
        Committee Recommendations................................    92
            Authorization Changes................................    92
    Quality of Life Enhancements, Defense........................    93
Title III. Procurement...........................................    95
    Estimates and Appropriations Summary.........................    95
        Classified Programs......................................    97
        Rangeless Training.......................................    97
    Aircraft Procurement, Army...................................    97
        Committee Recommendations................................    98
            Authorization Changes................................    98
        Rotary Wing..............................................    98
            UH-60 Blackhawks.....................................    98
        Modification of Aircraft.................................    98
            AH-64 Modifications..................................    98
        Other Support............................................    98
            Airborne Command and Control.........................    98
            Common Ground Equipment..............................    98
        Program Recommended......................................    98
    Missile Procurement, Army....................................   100
        Committee Recommendations................................   100
        Other Missiles...........................................   100
            Enhanced Fiber Optic Guided Missile (EFOGM)..........   100
            Hellfire.............................................   100
            Multiple Launch Rocket System (MLRS) Rocket..........   101
            Multiple Launch Rocket System (MLRS) Launcher Systems   101
        Modification of Missiles.................................   101
            Avenger..............................................   101
            ITAS/TOW Modifications...............................   101
        Program Recommended......................................   101
    Procurement of Weapons and Tracked Combat Vehicles, Army.....   103
        Committee Recommendations................................   103
        Tracked Combat Vehicles..................................   103
            Bradley Base Sustainment.............................   103
        Modification of Tracked Combat Vehicles..................   103
            M1 Abrams Tank (MOD).................................   103
            Abrams Upgrade Program...............................   103
            Army Tank Modernization Issues.......................   103
            Army Tank Prepositioning.............................   104
        Program Recommended......................................   105
    Procurement of Ammunition, Army..............................   107
        Committee Recommendations................................   107
            Authorization Changes................................   107
        Small/Medium Caliber Ammunition..........................   107
            25mm, All Types......................................   107
        Mortar Ammunition........................................   107
            60mm, Mortar, Practice...............................   107
            120mm Mortar, HE 934.................................   107
            120mm Mortar, ILLUM XM930............................   107
        Tank Ammunition..........................................   107
            120mm/M829A2.........................................   107
        Artillery Ammunition.....................................   108
            105mm DPICM..........................................   108
            105mm M927...........................................   108
            SADARM...............................................   108
            155mm HE M107........................................   108
            155mm HE M795E1......................................   108
        Rockets..................................................   108
            Bunker Defeating Munition............................   108
        Production Base Support..................................   109
            Provision of Industrial Facilities...................   109
        Program Recommended......................................   109
    Other Procurement, Army......................................   111
        Committee Recommendations................................   111
            Authorization Changes................................   111
        Tactical and Support Vehicles............................   111
            High Mobility Multi-Purpose Wheeled Vehicles.........   111
            Family of Medium Tactical Vehicles...................   111
            Line Haul, ESP.......................................   112
            High Mobility Multi-Purpose Wheeled Vehicle, Extended 
              Service Program....................................   112
        Satellite Communications.................................   112
            Smart-T Space........................................   112
        Combat Communications....................................   113
            Army Data Distribution System........................   113
            SINCGARS Family......................................   113
            Tactical Radio.......................................   113
        Information Security.....................................   113
            Information System Security Program..................   113
        Electronic Equipment-TIARA...............................   113
            JTT/CIBS.............................................   113
            IEW Ground Based Sensor..............................   113
            Joint STARS..........................................   114
        Electronic Equipment--Electronic Warfare.................   114
            Shortstop............................................   114
            Night Vision Devices.................................   114
        Electronic Equipment--Tactical Surveillance..............   114
            Modification of In-Service Equipment.................   114
        Electronic Equipment--Tactical C2 Systems................   114
            Gun Laying and Positioning System....................   114
            IYSCON Equipment.....................................   114
        Electronic Equipment--Automation.........................   115
            Army Training XXI and Modernization..................   115
            Automated Data Processing............................   115
        Combat Service Support Equipment.........................   115
            Landwarrior..........................................   115
        Construction Equipment...................................   115
            Hydraulic Excavator..................................   115
        Rail, Float, Containerization Equipment..................   115
            Floating Crane, 100-250 Ton..........................   115
        Generators...............................................   115
            Generators and Associated Equipment..................   115
        Material Handling Equipment..............................   116
            Rough Terrain Handler................................   116
        Training Equipment.......................................   116
            Training Devices, Nonsystem..........................   116
            SIMNET/CLOSE Combat Tactical Trainer.................   116
            Fire Support Combined Arms Tactical Trainer..........   116
        Test Measure and Diagnostic Equipment....................   116
            Integrated Family of Test Equipment..................   116
        Other Support Equipment..................................   116
            Modification of In-Service Equipment.................   116
            R-2000 Engine Flush System...........................   117
        Program Recommended......................................   117
    Aircraft Procurement, Navy...................................   121
        Committee Recommendations................................   121
            Authorization Changes................................   121
        Multiyear Procurement....................................   121
        Combat Aircraft..........................................   121
            F/A-18E/F Hornet.....................................   121
            V-22 (Medium Lift)...................................   121
            CH-60 Helicopter.....................................   122
            KC-130J Tanker Aircraft..............................   122
        Modification of Aircraft.................................   122
            Depot Maintenance....................................   122
            AV-8 Series..........................................   122
            F-14 Series..........................................   123
            F-18 Series..........................................   123
            AH-1W Series.........................................   123
            H-1 Series...........................................   123
            EP-3 Series..........................................   123
            P-3 Series...........................................   123
            E-2 Series...........................................   124
            Common ECM Equipment.................................   124
            Common Avionics Changes..............................   124
        Rescissions..............................................   124
        Program Recommended......................................   124
    Weapons Procurement, Navy....................................   126
        Committee Recommendations................................   126
            Authorization Changes................................   126
        Tactical Missiles........................................   126
            AMRAAM...............................................   126
            JSOW.................................................   126
            SLAM-ER..............................................   126
            Penguin..............................................   126
            Aerial Targets.......................................   127
            Harpoon Modifications................................   127
        Program Recommended......................................   127
    Procurement of Ammunition, Navy and Marine Corps.............   129
        Committee Recommendations................................   129
            Authorization Changes................................   129
        Procurement of Ammunition, Navy..........................   129
            Practice Bombs.......................................   129
        Program Recommended......................................   129
    Shipbuilding and Conversion, Navy............................   131
        Committee Recommendations................................   131
            Authorization Changes................................   131
        Recognition of Vice Admiral Connolly.....................   131
        Aircraft Carrier Reporting...............................   131
        Other Warships...........................................   131
            DDG-51...............................................   131
        Amphibious Ships.........................................   132
            LPD-17...............................................   132
        Auxiliaries, Craft, and Prior Year Programs..............   132
            LCAC Landing Craft...................................   132
            Outfitting...........................................   132
        Program Recommended......................................   132
    Other Procurement, Navy......................................   134
        Committee Recommendations................................   134
            Authorization Changes................................   134
        Navigation Equipment.....................................   134
            Other Navigation Equipment...........................   134
        Communications and Electronic Equipment..................   134
            Radar Support........................................   134
        Electronic Warfare Equipment.............................   135
            C3 Countermeasures...................................   135
        Other Ship Electronic Equipment..........................   135
            Navy Tactical Data System............................   135
            Minesweeping System Replacement......................   135
        Aviation Electronic Equipment............................   135
            National Airspace System.............................   135
            Identificaton Systems................................   135
        Other Shore Electronic Equipment.........................   135
            JMCIS Tactical/Mobile................................   135
            Shore Electronic Items Under $2 Million..............   136
        Shore Communications.....................................   136
            JEDMICS..............................................   136
        Aircraft Support Equipment...............................   136
            Weapons Range Support Equipment......................   136
            Aircraft Launch and Recovery Equipment...............   136
            Meteorological Equipment.............................   136
        Ordnance Equipment.......................................   136
        Ship Gun System Equipment................................   136
            Gun Fire Control Equipment...........................   136
        Ship Missile Systems Equipment...........................   137
            Ship Self-Defense System.............................   137
            Aegis Support Equipment..............................   137
            Surface Tomahawk Support Equipment...................   137
        Fleet Ballistic Missile Support Equipment................   137
            Anti-Ship Missile Decoy System.......................   137
        Other Expendable Ordnance................................   137
            Surface Training Device Modifications................   137
        Personnel and Command Support Equipment..................   137
            Command Support Equipment............................   137
            Operating Forces Support Equipment...................   138
        Other....................................................   138
            Spares and Repair Parts..............................   138
        Program Recommended......................................   138
    Procurement, Marine Corps....................................   142
        Intelligence/Communications Equipment....................   142
            Items Less Than $2.0 Million (INTEL).................   142
        Other Support............................................   142
            Command Post Systems.................................   142
            Communications and Electronic Infrastructure Support.   142
        Tactical Vehicles........................................   142
            Medium Tactical Vehicle Replacement..................   142
            Light Tactical Vehicle Remanufacture.................   142
        Materials Handling Equipment.............................   143
            Command Support Equipment............................   143
            Material Handling Equipment..........................   143
        Program Recommended......................................   143
    Aircraft Procurement, Air Force..............................   145
        Committee Recommendations................................   145
            Authorization Changes................................   145
        Tactical Forces..........................................   145
            F-22.................................................   145
        Operational Trainers.....................................   146
            JPATS................................................   146
        Mission Support Aircraft.................................   146
            Civil Air Patrol.....................................   146
            Predator Unmanned Aerial Vehicle (UAV)...............   146
        Modification of Inservice Aircraft.......................   146
            F-15 Modifications...................................   146
            F-16 Modifications...................................   146
            C-5 Modifications....................................   147
            T-38 Modifications...................................   147
            C-130 Modifications..................................   147
            C-135 Modifications..................................   147
            E-3 Modifications....................................   147
            Passenger Safety Modifications.......................   147
        Aircraft Spares and Repair Parts.........................   147
            Spares and Repair Parts..............................   147
        Aircraft Support Equipment and Facilities................   148
            Common Support Equipment.............................   148
            B-2 Post Production Support..........................   148
            F-16 Post Production Support.........................   149
            Miscellaneous Production Charges.....................   149
            Common ECM Equipment.................................   149
        Program Recommended......................................   149
    Missile Procurement, Air Force...............................   151
        Committee Recommendations................................   151
            Authorization Changes................................   151
        Tactical.................................................   151
            AMRAAM...............................................   151
        Modification of Inservice Missiles.......................   151
            Minuteman III Modifications..........................   151
        Space Programs...........................................   151
            Global Positioning System--Advance Procurement.......   151
            Defense Support Program..............................   152
            Special Programs.....................................   152
        Program Recommended......................................   152
    Procurement of Ammunition, Air Force.........................   154
        Committee Recommendations................................   154
            Practice Bombs.......................................   154
        Program Recommended......................................   154
    Other Procurement, Air Force.................................   156
        Committee Recommendations................................   156
            Authorization Changes................................   156
        Cargo and Utility Vehicles...............................   156
            CAP Vehicles.........................................   156
        Intelligence Programs....................................   156
            Intelligence Data Handling System....................   156
        Electronics Programs.....................................   156
            Theater Air Control Systems Improvement..............   156
        Special Communications Electronics Projects..............   157
            Automatic Data Processing Equipment..................   157
            AF Global Command and Control........................   157
            Combat Training Ranges...............................   157
            Joint Surveillance System............................   157
        Air Force Communications.................................   157
            Base Information Infrastructure......................   157
        DISA Programs............................................   158
            Air Force Satellite Control Network..................   158
        Organization and Base....................................   158
            Tactical C-E Equipment...............................   158
            Combat Survivor/Evader Locator Radio.................   158
            CAP Communications and Electronics...................   158
        Personal Safety and Rescue Program.......................   158
            Night Vision Goggles.................................   158
         Base Support Equipment..................................   158
            Base Procured Equipment..............................   158
            Productivity Investments.............................   159
        Program Recommended......................................   159
    Procurement, Defense-Wide....................................   162
        Committee Recommendations................................   162
            Authorization Changes................................   162
            Major Equipment, OSD.................................   162
            Automatic Document Conversion System.................   162
            Patriot PAC-3........................................   162
            Special Operations Command...........................   163
        Chemical and Biological Defense Program..................   163
            Consequence Management...............................   163
            Military Personnel Information System................   163
        Program Recommended......................................   163
    National Guard and Reserve Equipment.........................   165
        Committee Recommendations................................   165
        Program Recommended......................................   165
    Information Resources Management.............................   167
            Supercomputing Work..................................   167
            Joint Computer-Aided Acquisition and Logistics 
              Support............................................   168
            ADP Legacy Systems Efficiencies......................   168
            Financial Information Resources System (FIRST).......   168
            Defense Civilian Personnel Data System...............   169
            Global Combat Support System (GCSS)..................   169
            Automated Document Conversion........................   169
            Military Personnel Information Systems...............   170
            Distance Learning Demonstration Project..............   171
            Ammunition Automated Identification Technology.......   172
            Joint Engineering Data Management Information and 
              Control System.....................................   172
            Supply Asset Tracking System (SATS)..................   172
            Advanced Distributed Learning........................   172
            On-Line Computer-Based Learning......................   172
            Information Technology--43 Report Formats............   173
            Software Program Managers Network....................   173
            Software Engineering Best Practices..................   173
            Information Technology Management....................   173
Title IV. Research, Development, Test and Evaluation.............   175
    Estimates and Appropriation Summary..........................   175
        Basic Research...........................................   177
        Defense Airborne Reconnaissance Program..................   177
        Tactical Radios..........................................   177
        Federally Funded Research and Development Centers 
          (FFRDCs)...............................................   177
        Advisory and Assistance Services.........................   178
        Dual Use Programs........................................   179
        NATO Research and Development............................   179
        Classified Programs......................................   179
    Research Development, Test and Evaluation, Army..............   179
        Committee Recommendations................................   180
            Authorization Changes................................   180
            Anti-Tank Weapons Master Plan........................   180
            Alternative Propulsion Technology....................   180
        Basic Research...........................................   180
            Defense Research Sciences............................   180
        Applied Research.........................................   181
            Sensors and Electronic Survivability.................   181
            Missile Technology...................................   181
            Modeling and Simulation Technology...................   181
            Combat Vehicle and Automotive Technology.............   181
            Weapons and Munitions Technology.....................   181
            Electronics and Electronic Devices...................   181
            Human Factors Engineering Technology.................   182
            Environmental Quality Technology.....................   182
            Command, Control, Communications Technology..........   182
            Military Engineering Technology......................   182
            Medical Technology...................................   183
        Advanced Technology Development..........................   183
            Warfighter Advanced Technology.......................   183
            Medical Advanced Technology..........................   183
            Diabetes Research....................................   183
            Aviation Advanced Technology.........................   184
            Weapons and Munitions Advanced Technology............   184
            Command, Control, Communications Advanced Technology.   184
            Missile and Rocket Advanced Technology...............   184
            Landmine Warfare and Barrier Advanced Technology.....   184
            Joint Service Small Arms Program.....................   184
            Line-of-Sight Technology Demonstration...............   184
            Strategic Environmental Research and Development 
              Program............................................   185
            Joint Tactical Radio.................................   185
        Demonstration and Validation.............................   185
            Army Missile Defense Systems Integration.............   185
            Armament Enhancement Initiative......................   185
            Army Data Distribution System........................   185
            NATO Research and Development........................   186
            Aviation Advanced Development........................   186
            Artillery Systems Development........................   186
        Engineering and Manufacturing Development................   186
            Comanche.............................................   186
            EW Development.......................................   186
            All Source Analysis System...........................   187
            Family of Heavy Tactical Vehicles....................   187
            Engineer Mobility Equipment Development..............   187
            Combat Feeding, Clothing and Equipment...............   187
            Automatic Test Equipment Development.................   187
            Brilliant Anti-Armor Submunition (BAT)...............   188
            Aviation--Engineering Development....................   188
            Weapons and Munitions--Engineering Development.......   188
            Landmine Warfare.....................................   188
            Sense and Destroy Armament Missile...................   188
            DUAP Commercial Operations and Support Savings.......   188
            Artillery Systems--EMD...............................   188
        RDT&E; Management and Support.............................   188
            Army Technical Test Instrumentation and Targets......   188
            Survivability Lethality Analysis.....................   189
            DOD High Energy Laser Test Facility..................   189
            Munitions Standardization, Effectiveness and Safety..   189
            Environmental Compliance.............................   189
        Operational Systems Development..........................   189
            MLRS Product Improvement Program.....................   189
            Aerostat.............................................   189
            Combat Vehicle Improvement Programs..................   189
            Force XXI, Warfighting Rapid Acquisition.............   190
            Missile/Air Defense Product Improvement Program......   190
            End Item Industrial Preparedness Activities..........   190
        Consequence Management...................................   190
        Tactical Vehicles........................................   190
        Program Recommended......................................   191
    Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, Navy.............   195
        Committee Recommendations................................   195
            Authorization Changes................................   195
            Electromagnetic Propulsion Systems...................   195
        Applied Research.........................................   195
            Air and Surface Launched Weapons Technology..........   195
            Ship, Submarine, and Logistics Technology............   195
            Aircraft Technology..................................   196
            Marine Corps Landing Force Technology................   196
            Historically Black Colleges and Universities.........   196
            Communications, Command and Control, Intelligence 
              Technology.........................................   196
            Human Systems Technology.............................   196
            Materials, Electronics, and Computer Technology......   196
            Electronic Warfare Technology........................   197
            Undersea Warfare Surveillance Technology.............   197
            Oceanographic and Atmospheric Technology.............   197
            Dual Use Applications................................   197
            Project M............................................   197
        Advanced Technology Development..........................   198
            Precision Strike and Air Defense Technology..........   198
            Marine Corps Advanced Technology Demonstration.......   198
            Medical Development..................................   198
            Bone Marrow Registry.................................   198
            Manpower, Personnel and Training Advanced Technology 
              Development........................................   199
            Advanced Technology Transition.......................   199
            C3 Advanced Technology...............................   199
        Demonstration and Validation.............................   199
            Air/Ocean Tactical Applications......................   199
            Aviation Survivability...............................   199
            ASW Systems Development..............................   199
            Advanced Combat Systems Technology...................   199
            Advanced Submarine Combat Systems Development........   200
            Surface Ship Torpedo Defense.........................   200
            Carrier Systems Development..........................   200
            Ship Concept Advanced Design.........................   201
            Advanced Surface Machinery Systems...................   201
            Conventional Munitions...............................   203
            Marine Corps Mine/Countermeasures Systems--Adv Dev...   203
            Cooperative Engagement Capability....................   204
            Environmental Protection.............................   204
            Navy Logistics Productivity..........................   205
            Ship Self-Defense....................................   205
            Land Attack Technology...............................   205
            Non-Lethal Weapons Technology........................   205
        Engineering and Manufacturing Development................   205
            Other HELO Development...............................   205
            AV-8B Aircraft.......................................   206
            H-1 Upgrades.........................................   206
            Acoustic Search Sensors..............................   206
            Air Crew Systems Development.........................   206
            Electronic Warfare Development.......................   206
            Surface Combatant Combat Systems Engineering.........   207
            Navy Theater Ballistic Missile Defense...............   207
            Airborne Mine Countermeasures........................   207
            SSN-688 and Trident Modernization....................   207
            New Design Submarine.................................   208
            SSN-21 Developments..................................   208
            Ship Contract Design/Live Fire Test and Evaluation...   209
            Navy Tactical Computer Resources.....................   209
            Joint Standoff Weapons System........................   210
            Low Cost Standoff Weapon.............................   210
            Medical Development..................................   211
            Distribution Surveillance System.....................   211
        RDT&E; Management Support.................................   211
            Major T&E; Investment.................................   211
            Studies and Analysis Support.........................   211
            Management, Technical, and International Support.....   211
            RDT&E; Science and Technology Management..............   211
            T&E; Support..........................................   211
            SEW Surveillance/Reconnaissance Support..............   212
            Marine Corps Program Wide Support....................   212
        Operational Systems Development..........................   212
            SSBN Security Program................................   212
            F/A-18 Squadrons.....................................   212
            Tomahawk and Tomahawk Mission Planning Center........   212
            Consolidated Training Systems Development............   212
            Aviation Improvements................................   213
            Marine Corps Communications Systems..................   213
            Tactical Unmanned Aerial Vehicles....................   213
            Manned Reconnaissance Systems........................   213
            Shared Reconnaissance Pod............................   213
            Integrated Broadcast Service.........................   214
            Depot Maintenance....................................   214
            Industrial Preparedness..............................   214
        Rescissions..............................................   214
        Program Recommended......................................   214
     Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, Air Force.......   218
        Committee Recommendations................................   218
            Defense Airborne Reconnaissance Program..............   218
            Authorization Changes................................   218
        Basic Research...........................................   218
            Defense Research Services............................   218
        Applied Research.........................................   218
            Materials............................................   218
            Aerospace Propulsion.................................   219
            Command, Control, and Communications.................   219
            Logistics Systems Technology.........................   219
        Advanced Technology Development..........................   219
            Advanced Materials for Weapon Systems................   219
            Crew Systems and Personnel Protection Technology.....   219
            Electronic Combat Technology.........................   219
            Space and Missile Rocket Propulsion..................   219
            Ballistic Missile Technology.........................   219
            Advanced Spacecraft Technology.......................   220
            Advanced Weapons Technology..........................   220
        Demonstration and Validation.............................   220
            Advanced Milsatcom...................................   220
            NATO Research and Development........................   220
            Intercontinental Ballistic Missile DEM/VAL...........   220
            Global Broadcast Service.............................   220
            Air Force/NRO Partnership............................   221
            Space Based Infrared System (SBIRS)..................   221
        Engineering and Manufacturing Development................   221
            EW Development.......................................   221
            Life Support Systems.................................   221
            Combat Training Ranges...............................   221
            Computer Resource Technology Transition..............   221
            Commercial Operations and Support Savings Initiative.   222
            Evolved Expendable Launch Vehicle Program............   222
        Research, Development, Test and Evaluation Management 
          Support................................................   223
            Threat Simulator Development.........................   223
            Major Test and Evaluation Investment.................   223
            Test and Evaluation Support..........................   223
        Operational Systems Development..........................   223
            Region/Sector Operation Control Center Modernization.   223
            AMRAAM...............................................   223
            Aircraft Engine Component Improvement Program (CIP)..   224
            Sensor Fused Weapons.................................   224
            Joint Air-to-Surface Standoff Missile (JASSM)........   224
            JSTARS...............................................   224
            Tactical Information Program.........................   224
            Defense Satellite Communications System..............   225
            Security and Investigative Activities................   225
            Defense Meteorological Satellite Program.............   225
            NAVSTAR Global Positioning System (User Equipment)...   225
            Industrial Preparedness..............................   225
            Compass Call.........................................   226
            Tactical Air Reconnaissance System...................   226
        High Altitude Endurance UAV..............................   226
            Global Hawk UAV......................................   226
        Program Recommended......................................   226
    Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, Defense-Wide.....   230
        Committee Recommendations................................   230
            Authorization Changes................................   230
        Basic Research...........................................   230
            University Research Initiatives......................   230
            Government/Industry Co-sponsorship of University 
              Research...........................................   230
        Applied Research.........................................   231
            Next Generation Internet.............................   231
            Support Technologies--Applied Research...............   231
            Medical Free Electron Laser..........................   231
            Computing Systems and Communications Technology......   231
            Tactical Technology..................................   232
            Integrated Command and Control Technology............   232
            Materials and Electronics Technology.................   232
            WMD Related Technologies.............................   233
            Nuclear Stewardship Program..........................   233
        Advanced Technology Development..........................   233
            Explosives Demilitarization Technology...............   233
            Counterproliferation Support.........................   233
            Support Technologies--Advanced Technology Development   234
            Chemical and Biological Defense Program--Advanced 
              Development........................................   234
            Countermeasures Against Biological Weapons Pathogens.   234
            Verification Technology Demonstration................   234
            Generic Logistics Research and Development...........   235
            Strategic Environmental Research Program.............   235
            Cooperative DOD/VA Medical Research..................   236
            Advanced Electronics Technologies....................   236
            Nanotechology Research...............................   236
            Advanced Concept Technology Demonstration............   236
            High Performance Computing Modernization Program.....   236
            Command, Control, and Communications Systems.........   237
            Sensor and Guidance Technology.......................   237
            Land Warfare Technology..............................   237
            Classifed DARPA Programs.............................   238
        Demonstration and Validation.............................   238
            CALS Initiative......................................   238
            Ballistic Missile Defense............................   238
            Theater High-Altitude Area Defense System............   238
            Navy Theater Wide....................................   239
            Humanitarian Demining................................   240
        Engineering and Manufacturing Development................   241
            Patriot PAC-3........................................   241
        Management Support.......................................   241
            Industrial Capabilities Assessments..................   241
        Operational Systems Development..........................   241
            Partnership for Peace Activities.....................   241
            Special Operations Advanced Technology Development...   241
            Special Operations Intelligence Systems Development..   241
            Special Operations Force Operational Enhancements....   242
            Defense Airborne Reconnaissance Program..............   242
        Program Recommended......................................   242
    Developmental Test and Evaluation, Defense...................   245
        Central Test and Evaluation Investment Development.......   245
        Program Recommended......................................   245
    Operational Test and Evaluation, Defense.....................   245
        Live Fire Testing........................................   245
        Program Recommended......................................   246
Title V. Revolving and Management Funds..........................   247
    Defense Working Capital Funds................................   247
        Commissary Subsidy Divestiture...........................   247
        Recovery of Operating Gains and Losses...................   247
    Reserve Mobilization Income Insurance Fund...................   248
    National Defense Sealift Fund................................   248
        Large, Medium Speed Roll-On/Roll-Off (LMSR) Ships........   248
        Defense Features.........................................   249
        Lighterage Aboard Ship (LASH) Vessel Charters............   249
Title VI. Other Department of Defense Programs...................   251
    Defense Health Program.......................................   251
        Breast Cancer............................................   251
        Prostate Disease.........................................   251
        Ovarian Cancer...........................................   252
        General Medical Officers.................................   252
        Trauma Training..........................................   252
        Post-Polio Syndrome......................................   252
        Smoking and Tobacco Cessation............................   253
    Chemical Agents and Munitions Destruction, Army..............   253
        Committee Recommendations................................   253
            Program Reductions...................................   253
        Program Recommended......................................   253
    Drug Interdiction and Counter-Drug Activities, Defense.......   253
        Committee Recommendations................................   253
            Authorization Changes................................   254
        Program Recommended......................................   254
        Educate America's Youth..................................   254
        Increase Safety of Citizens..............................   255
            Indiana High Intensity Drug Trafficking Area.........   255
            Kentucky High Intensity Drug Trafficking Area........   255
            Gulf States Counter-Drug Initiative..................   255
            Multi-Jurisdictional Counter-Drug Task Force.........   255
            C-26 Aircraft Photo Reconnaissance Upgrade...........   255
        Shield America's Frontiers...............................   255
            National Guard State Plans...........................   255
            Southwest Border Fence Project.......................   256
            Caribbean/Eastern Pacific Surface Interdiction.......   256
            Southwest Border Information Systems.................   256
        Break Drug Sources of Supply.............................   256
            Southern Air Forces Counter-Drug Support.............   256
            Joint Interagency Task Force South...................   256
            Operation CAPER FOCUS................................   256
            Civil Air Patrol.....................................   257
            SOUTHCOM Observation/Spray Aircraft..................   257
    Office of the Inspector General..............................   257
Title VII. Related Agencies......................................   259
    National Foreign Intelligence Program........................   259
        Introduction.............................................   259
        Classified Annex.........................................   259
    Central Intelligence Agency Retirement and Disability System 
      Fund.......................................................   259
    Intelligence Community Management Account....................   260
        Committee Recommendation.................................   260
    Payment to Kaho'alawe Island Conveyance, Remediation, and 
      Environmental Restoration Fund.............................   260
    National Security Education Trust Fund.......................   260
Title VIII. General Provisions...................................   261
    Definition of Program, Project and Activity..................   261
    Civil Air Patrol.............................................   262
    Reserve Component Maintenance Capability.....................   262
    TRICARE Managed Care Contracts...............................   263
Title IX. Emergency Appropriations for Information Systems 
  Technology and Security........................................   265
    Operation and Maintenance....................................   265
        Information Systems Technology and Security Transfer 
          Account................................................   265
        Committee Recommendation.................................   265
        General Provisions--This Title...........................   267
House of Representatives Reporting Requirements..................   269
    Changes in Application of Existing Law.......................   269
        Appropriations Language..................................   269
        General Provisions.......................................   271
    Appropriations Not Authorized by Law.........................   273
    Transfer of Funds............................................   275
    Rescissions..................................................   276
    Constitutional Authority.....................................   276
    Comparison with Budget Resolution............................   277
    Five-Year Projection of Outlays..............................   277
    Financial Assistance to State and Local Governments..........   277
    Votes in Full Committee......................................   278
    Comparative Summary of Budget Authority......................   280
    Dissenting Views.............................................   289



105th Congress                                                   Report
                        HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

 2d Session                                                     105-591
_______________________________________________________________________


            DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE APPROPRIATIONS BILL, 1999

                                _______
                                

 June 22, 1998.--Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the 
              State of the Union and ordered to be printed

_______________________________________________________________________


 Mr. Young of Florida, from the Committee on Appropriations, submitted 
                             the following

                              R E P O R T

                             together with

                            DISSENTING VIEWS

                        [To accompany H.R. 4103]

    The Committee on Appropriations submits the following 
report in explanation of the accompanying bill making 
appropriations for the Department of Defense, and for other 
purposes, for the fiscal year ending September 30, 1999.

                              Bill Totals

    Appropriations for most military functions of the 
Department of Defense are provided for in the accompanying bill 
for the fiscal year 1999. This bill does not provide 
appropriations for military construction, military family 
housing, civil defense, or nuclear warheads, for which 
requirements are considered in connection with other 
appropriations bills.
    The President's fiscal year 1999 budget request for 
activities funded in the Department of Defense Appropriations 
Bill totals $250,998,803,000 in new budget (obligational) 
authority. The amounts recommended by the Committee in the 
accompanying bill total $250,727,097,000 in new budget 
authority. This is $271,706,000 below the budget estimate and 
$3,018,575,000 above the sums made available for the same 
purposes for fiscal year 1998. In addition, the President 
requested $1,858,600,000 in emergency fiscal year 1999 
appropriations. The Committee recommends a total of 
$1,620,000,000 in emergency fiscal year 1999 appropriations.
    In terms of overall national defense spending for fiscal 
year 1999, when the amounts in this bill are combined with 
proposed defense funding in other annual appropriations bills 
the Committee's recommendations are approximately equal to the 
$271.5 billion in discretionary appropriations for the National 
Defense Function (050) agreed to by the Congress and the 
President in April 1997, and subsequently approved by Congress 
in the Concurrent Resolution on the Budget for Fiscal Years 
1998-2002. They are also in accord with the House-passed budget 
resolution for fiscal years 1999-2003. Despite the proposed 
increase over the fiscal year 1998 appropriation, the Committee 
notes that with this recommendation funding in the Department 
of Defense Appropriations Act for fiscal year 1999 will still 
fail to keep pace with inflation. Total funding in the bill is 
one percent, or $2.5 billion, less than what would be required 
to freeze funding at the fiscal year 1998 level, adjusted for 
inflation. As a consequence, if enacted into law, the 
Committee's recommendations would result in the fourteenth 
straight year of real, inflation-adjusted reductions in defense 
spending.
    The new budget authority enacted for the fiscal year 1998, 
the President's budget estimates, and amounts recommended by 
the Committee for fiscal year 1999 appear in summary form in 
the following table:





                    Committee Budget Review Process

    During its review of the fiscal year 1999 budget, the 
Subcommittee on National Security held a total of 17 hearings 
during the time period of January 29, 1998 to March 19, 1998. 
Testimony received by the Subcommittee totaled 1,487 pages of 
transcript. Approximately half of the hearings were held in 
open session. Executive or closed sessions were held only when 
the security classification of the material to be discussed 
presented no alternative.

                              introduction

    The fiscal year 1999 budget for the Department of Defense 
submitted by the President is the first to fully reflect the 
framework established by last year's Balanced Budget Agreement 
and the Quadrennial Defense Review (QDR). Accordingly, the 
fiscal year 1999 budget request before the Committee provides 
for:
          (1) Overall funding levels which increase somewhat 
        over current levels in nominal terms, but which still 
        fail to provide for sufficient resources to offset the 
        effects of inflation (the budget request represents 
        slightly more than a one percent reduction from fiscal 
        year 1998 levels in real, inflation-adjusted terms);
          (2) Continued reductions in both active duty and 
        Reserve component military force structure (the tenth 
        consecutive year of proposed cuts in military 
        manpower);
          (3) A slight increase in overall funding for 
        operation and maintenance--but inexplicably, within 
        that total there are significant reductions from 
        current levels in funding for many key quality of life 
        and readiness-related programs, such as depot 
        maintenance, base operations, and real property 
        maintenance (as well as military construction and 
        family housing programs, which are addressed by the 
        Committee in separate legislation); and
          (4) A slight increase in procurement funding over 
        previously enacted levels (the first such proposed 
        increase in thirteen years), while continuing plans to 
        move into production or advanced development of the 
        next generation of major combat systems.
    The Committee therefore notes that the budget submitted by 
the President, when considered in its entirety, is consistent 
with previously announced plans and contains no radical 
departures from what was forecast a year ago.
    Last year, while both the long-term fiscal plan (the 
Balanced Budget Agreement) and the planning framework (the QDR) 
for national defense were emerging, the Committee observed that 
in many aspects both the near and long-term outlook for a 
sensible defense program had improved when compared to previous 
Administration planning. Nevertheless, the Committee noted with 
concern that both the budget agreement and the QDR had in all 
likelihood failed to give sufficient weight to the significant 
burden, both operational and financial, posed by the continued 
pace of overseas military deployments and operations. As stated 
last year, ``The Committee is highly skeptical, for example, as 
to whether the Military Services can in fact draw down planned 
force structure by an additional 60,000 active duty and 55,000 
Reserve service members, while maintaining forward presence 
deployments and sustaining high OPTEMPO rates, without 
sacrificing the quality of the force and adversely affecting 
the combat capability of frontline units.'' Regrettably, the 
Committee concludes that its skepticism is being borne out by 
events.
    The armed forces today are at the lowest manpower levels 
since the end of World War II. However, they remain forward 
deployed in key regions and are continuing to sustain the high 
rates of operational tempo which have become the norm in recent 
years (for both the Army and Air Force, deployments from home 
station are three to four times higher than the rates sustained 
during the 1980's). This condition has been exacerbated by the 
deployment of U.S. forces on non-traditional peacekeeping 
missions, such as the Bosnia mission, as well as unexpected 
operations such as the movement of air, land and naval forces 
to the Persian Gulf last winter. These deployments have led to 
a host of problems, including hardships for service members and 
their families, disruptions in standard rotation and training 
schedules, and the need to finance the substantial costs of 
such operations.
    These strains, coupled with the effects of high OPTEMPO on 
aging equipment inventories, are creating severe challenges to 
the combat capability and quality of American forces. For 
example:
          (1) Each of the military Service Chiefs have 
        testified before the Committee that it is becoming more 
        difficult to attract, and importantly retain, quality 
        enlisted and officer personnel for the all-volunteer 
        force. And increasingly, the pace of deployments and 
        the lack of essential items needed ``to do the job'' 
        (adequate equipment, realistic training) are being 
        cited as reasons for departures from the service.
          (2) Aging equipment is not only leading to a decline 
        in capability, but to growing problems in weapons 
        maintenance. The mission-capable rate of selected 
        weapons systems in each of the services has dropped 
        steadily since Operation Desert Storm in 1991. This 
        problem is particularly acute for aircraft. Last year, 
        after submission of the budget the Navy and Air Force 
        discovered an aviation spare parts shortfall for fiscal 
        year 1998 in excess of $620 million, due to unexpected 
        problems with older aircraft engines which are being 
        operated at high levels for sustained periods. Even 
        after the Committee added these funds to the fiscal 
        year 1998 appropriations bill, and both the Navy and 
        Air Force increased programmed funding for this problem 
        in their fiscal year 1999 budget submissions, the Navy 
        and Air Force have documented even more funding 
        shortages, over $265 million, for fiscal year 1999 in 
        aviation spare parts.
          (3) In addition to this shortfall, the Committee 
        notes that after transmittal of the President's budget, 
        the Service Chiefs provided the Committee with other 
        high priority, unfunded shortfalls for fiscal year 1999 
        alone totaling nearly $10 billion. Of particular 
        concern, the largest portion of these unfunded needs 
        are in what the Committee considers core readiness 
        categories--funds for training, spare parts, 
        recruitment and retention of personnel, and other 
        basics. The Committee has also been advised that the 
        Department of Defense will soon submit a fiscal year 
        1998 reprogramming request in order to move 
        approximately $1 billion into readiness-related 
        accounts.
    These and other indicators suggest that despite having 
proposed increases for selected programs in its fiscal year 
1999 budget submission (particularly in procurement, to pursue 
long-overdue modernization in many categories of equipment), 
the Department of Defense is still confronting a major near-
term readiness problem. In this regard, as well as in weapons 
modernization (where the proposed fiscal year 1999 budget falls 
short of the funding levels called for in the QDR just one year 
ago), the fiscal year 1999 defense budget submission 
demonstrably falls far short of meeting both the immediate and 
long-term requirements of the U.S. armed forces.

                    rationale for the Committee bill

    When considering its fiscal year 1999 recommendations, the 
Committee was therefore confronted with three overriding 
concerns. First, the fiscal year 1999 budget request, while 
reflecting a nominal increase over fiscal year 1998 levels, 
still fails to adequately address many critical categories, 
particularly those directly related to near-term readiness and 
the preservation of a quality fighting force. These problems 
must be dealt with in this bill, given the missions assigned to 
U.S. forces and the resulting operational and fiscal demands on 
the services. This must also be given high priority because of 
the increasingly obvious danger signs emanating from forces and 
commanders in the field.
    Second, this year's budget framework significantly 
constrains the Committee in dealing with these demands. Rather 
than being able to increase the overall amounts provided for 
national defense above the budget request, as was done in each 
of the past three years, the Committee must work within funding 
levels that approximate those proposed by the President. This 
has forced the Committee to consider many difficult trade-offs 
in making its recommendations.
    Third, the Committee has determined that even while the 
President's budget falls short in meeting many readiness and 
modernization needs of the services, it does propose 
significant amounts, and in many instances substantial budget 
growth, for many well-intentioned activities which, while 
worthy in some instances, are simply not mission-essential. 
These include a variety of administrative and support 
activities; consultants and advisory services; new program 
starts; and several weapons development and acquisition 
programs which are either duplicative of existing programs, 
programs started during the Cold War period to counter threats 
which have since receded in priority, or efforts which are 
little more than demonstration projects reflecting the 
predilection of the Department of Defense to indulge its 
military acquisition bureaucracies. While in and of themselves 
these may be good or ``nice-to-have'' programs, the Committee 
believes they should not be given priority over unfunded 
programs directly supporting combat readiness or the quality of 
life of servicemembers and their families. Such a potential 
misallocation of resources must be dealt with in this bill.
    Therefore, in fashioning this bill, the Committee took 
these considerations into account while remaining committed to 
several key objectives:
          (1) Ensuring an adequate level of readiness, training 
        and quality of life for all service members, both in 
        the Active and Reserve components;
          (2) Providing for a modernization program which both 
        meets today's requirements as well as the security 
        needs of the future;
          (3) Giving special priority to redressing shortfalls 
        in less visible, yet mission-essential programs and 
        equipment; and finally
          (4) Cutting, reforming, or eliminating programs or 
        activities with little military utility, which have 
        shown little demonstrable success, which have 
        encountered delays in development or production, or 
        which are duplicative, excessive or unnecessary.
    The following section of the report details major Committee 
recommendations in support of these objectives.

                    Major Committee Recommendations

              addressing high priority unfunded Shortfalls

    The Committee bill recommends additions to the budget 
request of over $2 billion to address unbudgeted shortfalls 
identified by the military Service Chiefs in personnel and 
readiness-related programs. Overall, the Committee proposes 
additions over the budget request sufficient to redress nearly 
40 percent (by dollar amount) of the noncontingency operation-
related unbudgeted shortfalls identified by the military 
Service Chiefs. Specific details are cited throughout this 
report.

                    ensuring a quality, ready force

    Personnel Issues: The Committee recommends fully funding 
the 3.1 percent military pay raise as requested by the 
Department and has added over $150,000,000 above the budget 
request for shortfalls in pay, recruiting, and retention 
programs identified by the services. The Committee has fully 
funded, and in some instances added funds over the budgeted 
amount, for all military child care and family support 
programs.
    Military Medical Programs: The Committee recommends fully 
funding the budget request for the Defense Health Program, and 
has added more than $350,000,000 over the request for a variety 
of health care efforts, including $160,000,000 for continuing 
the Department's efforts in breast cancer research, treatment, 
and access to care for service personnel and dependents.
    Training/OPTEMPO: For active duty forces, the Committee has 
fully funded the requested amounts for the Services' training 
and OPTEMPO accounts and has added $60,000,000 over the request 
for Army training rotations at the National Training Center.
    Flying hour/spare parts shortfalls: The Committee 
recommends increasing funding for aviation depot-level 
reparables for the Navy and the Air Force by $214,500,000 over 
the amounts requested in the budget.
    Equipment repair/maintenance: The Committee is distressed 
over the continuing existence of substantial unfunded backlogs 
in the Services' depot maintenance accounts and has added 
$300,000,000 over the budget request to meet the most urgent 
unfunded equipment maintenance requirements.
    Real property maintenance: For years the Committee has 
expressed its concern over the growing backlog in real property 
maintenance accounts used to support the Department's base 
infrastructure, including barracks and mission-essential 
facilities. This bill continues the Committee's efforts in 
addressing this backlog by providing an increase of 
$850,000,000 over the budget request for real property 
maintenance, including funding for barracks and living 
facilities, continuing the Committee's commitment to 
revitalizing the Department's base infrastructure.
    Defense Drug Interdiction: The Committee recommends 
$767,595,000, an increase over the budget request of 
$37,013,000, for Department of Defense counter-drug and drug 
interdiction programs. This represents nearly a 7.5 percent 
increase over fiscal year 1998 levels.
    ``Contingency'' operations: The Committee recommends fully 
funding the request of $746,900,000 for operation and 
maintenance requirements associated with U.S. operations in 
Southwest Asia. With regard to funding for Bosnia, the 
President's budget did not originally contain fiscal year 1999 
funding for the U.S. deployment, owing to uncertainty over the 
mission's duration. Subsequently, the President announced U.S. 
forces will remain in Bosnia for the foreseeable future, and he 
has submitted a fiscal year 1999 budget amendment totaling 
$1,858,600,000 in emergency appropriations for Bosnia 
operations. The Committee defers action on this request at this 
time, owing to continued uncertainty over the duration and 
conditions of U.S. activities in the Balkans region, 
particularly in light of the situation in Kosovo.

                         modernization programs

    In previous years, Department of Defense officials conceded 
the most serious shortcomings in planned budgets was in those 
accounts providing for procurement and research and development 
of new equipment and technologies. The fiscal year 1999 budget 
request proposes increases of nearly $3 billion from fiscal 
year 1998 levels for modernization programs. As discussed 
earlier in this report, the Committee bill emphasizes funding 
for unfunded personnel and readiness requirements. Nonetheless, 
modernization shortfalls still persist, and based on extensive 
testimony as well as a concerted effort to identify critical 
shortfalls in existing requirements, the Committee recommends 
increases to the request specifically targeted at meeting 
existing equipment/capability shortfalls as well as providing 
for the projected military requirements of the future. In all, 
the bill recommends increases to the budget request of over 
$800 million for procurement programs (after accounting for 
zero-sum transfers between accounts).
    The most significant recommendations include:
    Missile defense: The Committee recommends total funding of 
$3,354,320,000 for the Ballistic Missile Defense Organization. 
This total includes $950,473,000 for national missile defense 
and $2,403,847,000 for theater systems. The Committee has 
provided $415,694,000 for the Theater High Altitude Air Defense 
(THAAD) program, a reduction of $406,000,000 from the budget 
request due to the continued series of flight test failures. A 
total of $340,446,000, an increase of $150,000,000 over the 
budget request, is proposed for the Navy Theater-Wide (Upper 
Tier) program. The Committee has fully funded the budget 
request for MEADS, the joint U.S.-Israel ARROW missile defense 
program, and the Air Force's Airborne Laser program.
    Ship Self-Defense/Cooperative Engagement: Mindful of the 
growing threat to U.S. forces posed by both theater ballistic 
and cruise missiles, the Committee has continued its long-
standing emphasis on ship self-defense through ``cooperative 
engagement'' (the sharing of tracking and targeting information 
among many different platforms), and has provided $268,400,000 
for these programs, an increase of $89,500,000 over the budget 
request.
    Major weapons programs: The Committee recommends fully 
funding the budget request for: the Army's Crusader next-
generation artillery system, the Navy's E-2C aircraft program, 
one New Attack Submarine, initial funding for the CVN-77 
aircraft carrier, and procurement of one LMSR sealift ship. The 
Committee has also funded the requested number of Army M1A2 
tank upgrades, Navy T-45 aircraft, Marine Corps AV-8B Harrier 
fighters, and Air Force F-22 fighter and C-17 transport 
aircraft; provided an additional seven C-130J variants over the 
budget request for the Marine Corps, Air Force, and Air 
National Guard pursuant to House authorization action; and has 
fully funded the budget request for the Joint Strike Fighter.
    The Committee has added funds to procure additional 
aircraft over the budget request, such as Army and Navy H-60 
helicopters, the Marine Corps V-22 tactical transport, and Air 
Force F-16 fighters. The Committee has also added funds over 
the request for Army multiple rocket launch system (MLRS) 
launchers and Comanche helicopter development, upgrades to 
existing B-2 bombers, long-lead production of JSTARS 
surveillance aircraft, and safety and engine reliability 
upgrades for Air Force aircraft programs.
    Mission-essential shortfalls: The Committee has always 
emphasized less-glamorous, yet mission-essential items which 
are critical to the troops in the field. The Committee bill 
recommends increases over the budget request for such items as: 
additional tactical radios ($41,000,000), night vision devices 
($9,000,000), and Bradley fighting vehicle upgrades 
($86,000,000) for the Army; new HMMWV vehicles for the Army and 
Marine Corps ($79,800,000); Army, Navy and Marine Corps 
ammunition (an increase of $134,500,000); modifications and 
upgrades for EA-6B ($39,000,000) and P-3 aircraft ($72,400,000) 
for the Navy; initial issue equipment ($60,000,000) for the 
Army and Marine Corps; and base telecommunications upgrades for 
the Marine Corps and Air Force ($54,000,000).
    Guard and Reserve Components: The Committee bill continues 
its support of the Guard and Reserve, with recommended 
increases of $280,200,000 over the budget request for selected 
personnel and operation and maintenance programs. With respect 
to modernization programs, the Committee provides 
$1,334,100,000 for equipment requested in the budget for the 
Guard and Reserve components, and has provided an additional 
$832,500,000 above the budget request throughout the bill for 
aircraft, tactical vehicles, miscellaneous equipment, and 
upgrades to existing equipment for the Guard and Reserve 
components.

                       reforms/program reductions

    As mentioned earlier in this report, the Committee has 
always sought to reduce excess or unnecessary funding when 
possible. The Department of Defense is no more sacrosanct than 
any other portion of the Federal government in terms of its 
need to be constantly reviewed, assessed, and improved.
    This year the Committee's efforts to reduce spending 
wherever possible in the Department of Defense are even more 
important. This is due to the need to address critical unfunded 
shortfalls in the fiscal year 1999 budget submission, many 
directly affecting readiness and quality of life programs.
    Accordingly, a major priority throughout the Committee's 
budget oversight process has been the identification of lower 
priority programs which, although they in some instances 
contribute to the military mission, can be cut or eliminated in 
order to fund higher priority programs and activities. The 
Committee has also recommended many budget reductions intended 
to reform and streamline existing Department of Defense 
structure or operations, and in so doing the Committee has 
looked to accelerate already-planned initiatives under the QDR. 
Finally, the Committee has identified budget savings stemming 
from audits by the General Accounting Office, the Department's 
audit and inspector general functions, and the Committee's 
Surveys and Investigations staff, as well as changes in program 
status identified by the military departments.
    Budget execution/lower-priority programs: The following 
table shows selected programs in the budget request which the 
Committee has eliminated or reduced funding based on program 
delays; the program having a relatively low priority; program 
duplication; or where the requested funding is excessive due to 
fact-of-life changes or when compared to previously enacted 
levels.
        Program                                                Reduction
Military/civilian personnel underexecution..............   -$433,800,000
THAAD...................................................   -$406,000,000
Consultants and advisory services.......................   -$342,100,000
Military advance pay....................................   -$301,000,000
Fuel price re-estimates.................................   -$295,000,000
Overbudgeting for legacy computer systems...............   -$298,100,000
Foreign currency re-estimates...........................   -$214,600,000
Revised inflation estimates.............................   -$204,100,000
Joint Aerostat Program..................................   -$103,500,000
Growth in basic research................................    -$69,338,000
JSOW Unitary............................................    -$65,000,000
Growth in FFRDC's.......................................    -$62,000,000
Army anti-tank weapons development......................    -$61,099,000
NATO RDT&E..............................................;    -$44,044,000
Defense dual use and commercialization programs.........    -$47,700,000
Inappropriate budgeting/working capital funds...........    -$34,566,000
Environmental fund recoupment...........................    -$35,000,000

    Reform/restructuring: The Committee notes that DoD, with 
more than a decade of reduced budgets and downsizing behind it, 
has already implemented or is well into implementing a series 
of management and organizational reforms. Among other things, 
these initiatives have already resulted in the defense civilian 
workforce being reduced by nearly 30 percent with significant 
additional reductions projected in the near future. While DoD 
is to be commended for such moves, and although the Department 
intends to make additional reductions associated with 
implementation of the QDR, the Committee believes more must and 
can be done. Accordingly, it has recommended a number of budget 
reductions intended to further streamline and rationalize 
operations.
        Program                                                Reduction
Headquarters activities.................................   -$223,200,000
Travel/TDY expenses.....................................   -$132,400,000
Personnel management programs...........................    -$59,600,000
Overseas disaster aid...................................     -$7,200,000

    Program/budget execution: In addition to the reductions 
cited above, the Committee proposes more than 200 other 
reductions to budgeted items based on delays in program 
execution, contract savings, or other events resulting in the 
requested amount being clearly excessive to program needs. 
These reductions have resulted in over $3 billion in savings in 
this legislation.

               year 2000 and information security issues

    The Committee bill recommends a new title and provides an 
emergency appropriation of $1,600,000,000 to ensure that the 
information technology and national security systems of the 
Department of Defense and the Intelligence Community are 
prepared for the year 2000 (or Y2K) date change and are secure 
against unwanted intrusion. In addition, the Committee 
recommends two general provisions that relate to ensuring year 
2000 compliance and to evaluating year 2000 compliance in major 
military exercises. From the time of Committee action on this 
bill, there are only eighteen months remaining during which the 
year 2000 problem will be transformed from hypothesis to 
reality. The Committee believes it would be irresponsible not 
to make available, as soon as possible, additional funding 
which could be used during fiscal year 1999 to implement and 
test essential fixes to national security-related information 
systems, as well as to develop contingency plans to ensure 
continuity of essential operations in the event needed fixes 
are not in place. Additional information on this initiative can 
be found in the portion of this report dealing with title IX.

            domestic response to weapons of mass destruction

    The Committee has strongly supported efforts to strengthen 
domestic capabilities to defend against and respond to a 
terrorist or rogue state attack on U.S. cities using chemical, 
biological, or even radiological weapons. While not employing 
such weapons (referred to as weapons of mass destruction, or 
WMD), the 1993 terrorist bombing of the World Trade Center in 
New York and the 1995 bombing of the Murrah Federal Building in 
Oklahoma City portend the tremendous response necessary if a 
weapon of mass destruction is used in the United States. Few 
communities, including military installations and facilities, 
have the full array of response assets and expertise required 
to adequately deal with the effects of these weapons or the 
necessary depth to sustain their response operations. Any WMD 
incident would require extraordinary and massive efforts from 
local, state, federal, and private organizations to meet the 
technological, medical, and engineering demands posed by such 
attacks.
    The Committee has been encouraged by the leadership 
exercised by the Secretary of Defense and by the Administration 
to initiate the first steps towards building a credible WMD 
domestic preparedness system. The Department has prepared a 
conceptual plan outlining the expertise and resources the DoD 
is willing and able to provide to assist state and local 
authorities in this respect, and is beginning to organize, 
train, and equip special units in the Reserve Components and 
elsewhere to provide this assistance. The fiscal year 1999 
budget request includes $49,200,000 to initiate this effort.
    The Committee is becoming concerned, however, that lower 
levels within the Administration may be losing the sense of 
urgency and priority to implement this major initiative. Signs 
of bureaucratic resistance, parochialism, and inattention are 
starting to appear as the more than 40 federal departments, 
agencies, and bureaus involved in combating terrorism and the 
hundreds of state and local first responder organizations begin 
to work out the details of designing new and better WMD 
emergency response plans. Most troubling is the fact that the 
Federal Emergency Management Agency, originally designated to 
lead the coordinated federal effort to enhance WMD 
preparedness, has decided to withdraw from that role and a 
successor lead agency has yet to be named. Within the 
Department of Defense, the Committee notes the internal 
bureaucratic delays that were evident in initiating basic WMD 
preparedness planning studies funded by this Committee. The 
Committee urges the Secretary to renew his directives to all 
Defense Department officials charged with implementing this 
program that this is a top priority initiative and that 
bureaucratic intransigence and delay will not be tolerated.
    Fiscal Year 1999 WMD Domestic Preparedness Budget Request: 
The budget requests a total of $49,200,000 to support the 
Reserve Components' participation in WMD domestic preparedness 
and response. This is contained in 14 separate appropriations 
accounts as follows:

Military Personnel:     [In thousands of dollars]
    Military Personnel, Army..................................       100
    Reserve Personnel, Army...................................       820
    National Guard Personnel, Army............................    13,450
    Military Personnel, Navy..................................       100
    Military Personnel, Air Force.............................       100
    National Guard Personnel, Air Force.......................        50
                    --------------------------------------------------------------
                    ____________________________________________________

      Total, MILPERS..........................................    14,620
                    ==============================================================
                    ____________________________________________________
Operation and Maintenance:
    O&M;, Army.................................................    10,200
    O&M;, Army Reserve.........................................     5,080
    O&M;, Army National Guard..................................    10,400
    O&M;, Navy.................................................       400
    O&M;, Air Force............................................       400
    O&M;, Air Force Reserve....................................       300
    O&M;, Air National Guard...................................       900
                    --------------------------------------------------------------
                    ____________________________________________________

    Total, O&M................................................;    27,680
                    ==============================================================
                    ____________________________________________________
Procurement, Defense-Wide (for contamination avoidance).......     6,900
                    ==============================================================
                    ____________________________________________________
      Total funding request...................................    49,200

    These funds are expected to fund the following activities:
    (a) Rapid Assessment and Initial Detection teams 
($19,900,000): This funding establishes ten Army National Guard 
RAID teams in selected states to support civil authorities and 
FEMA in managing the effects of a WMD event. Additional RAID 
teams will be established in subsequent years.
    (b) Patient Decontamination and Reconnaissance 
($15,900,000): This funding establishes and trains Army 
National Guard, Air National Guard, Army Reserve, and Air Force 
Reserve patient decontamination teams and Army National Guard 
and Army Reserve reconnaissance teams for WMD search and 
detection. These teams will be made up of personnel from 
existing chemical companies and medical decontamination teams 
and will support the RAID teams and augment other civil 
authorities when necessary.
    (c) WMD Program Office ($6,900,000): This funding 
establishes a 14-person Reserve Component Program Integration 
Office to oversee and coordinate the WMD response program.
    (d) Medical, Training and Simulation ($6,500,000): This 
funding supports the conduct of two additional Army WMD agent 
casualty training programs and the initial purchase of response 
kits for medical specialists; upgrades Army Reserve simulation 
systems to incorporate WMD effects; and supports additional 
training for Service Emergency Preparedness Liaison Officers.
    Committee Recommendation: Since the President's budget 
request was formulated, the Committee is aware that additional 
planning work and detailed discussions with state and local 
officials have taken place which have identified additional 
procurement, research and development, and training 
requirements. The Committee therefore recommends an additional 
$35,000,000 above the budget request as follows:

                                                                        
                                                                        
                                                                        
O&M;, Army National Guard: Consequence management......       +$3,000,000
O&M;, Army: Consequence management.....................        +2,000,000
Procurement, Defense-Wide: Consequence management.....       +15,000,000
Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, Army:                       
 Consequence management...............................       +15,000,000
                                                                        

    Operation and Maintenance: The Committee believes it is 
particularly important that the National Guard develops close 
cooperative relationships in this new area with state and local 
first responders--fire service, emergency medical service, 
police, and medical personnel--who have the main responsibility 
for responding to these events. The Committee has added 
$5,000,000 to assist in this effort by supporting training of 
first responders on the use of National Guard--provided assets 
and development of WMD sustainment training for first 
responders.
    Procurement: The Committee has added $15,000,000 in 
procurement funding to enable the Department to undertake a 
more vigorous effort to procure (1) chemical-biological 
protection gear to better protect local first responders, (2) 
chemical/biological agent detection kits for first responders, 
and (3) antidote stockpiles.
    Research and Development: The Committee has also added 
$15,000,000 to the budget request for important research and 
development work to enhance the future WMD response program. In 
particular, funds are to be used to conduct interoperability 
simulations and exercises for domestic response with the 
National Guard supporting state and local response 
organizations. Funds are also to be used to plan and design a 
secure, wireless communications infrastructure that is 
interoperable between all designated first responders, the 
National Guard, and other state and federal organizations. In 
addition, funds shall be used to develop better command, 
control, and communications links between first responders and 
the National Guard using the National Guard RCAS and DLN 
networks. The Committee believes the proposal to establish an 
Early Responders Distance Learning Training Center in 
Philadelphia using the National Guard's distance learning 
network to train local firefighters and other first responders 
on how to contain and control WMD damage could be an excellent 
demonstration of this concept. The Committee also believes the 
Army should use these funds to evaluate the utility of 
outfitting the Memorial Tunnel near Charleston, West Virginia 
as a cost effective counterterrorism testing and training 
facility. The Federal Highway Administration has used this 
closed highway tunnel to study the dynamics of fire and smoke 
mitigation in confined spaces, and it could be a valuable asset 
for similar WMD training and research activities.

                         new start notification

    For a third consecutive year, the Committee finds that it 
must again address failures of the Department of Navy 
specifically, and the Department of Defense generally, to 
follow the proper procedures for initiation of new start 
programs. Last year, after the Committee expressed its concern 
over the Navy's initiation of two new start programs without 
prior notification to Congress, the Secretary of the Navy wrote 
to the Committee that, ``while we have longstanding policy 
guidance regarding budget execution, it will be reinvigorated 
so that all of our involved organizations follow established 
DoD policies and procedures regarding changes to 
Congressionally approved programs, as well as new start 
programs.'' During the course of its review of the Department 
of Navy's budget this year, the Committee has learned of three 
additional cases in which the Department has initiated new 
programs, representing billions of dollars of potential 
expenditure, without prior notification to Congress. Further, 
the Committee has also learned of similar unapproved new start 
programs within the Air Force and DARPA. Particularly 
disturbing to the Committee are unapproved new starts in 
classified, ``special access'' programs.
    To fulfill its constitutional responsibilities, Congress 
must know prior to the obligation of any funds when the 
Department plans to start programs, projects, subprojects or 
modifications that were not specifically explained in the 
budget justification material supporting a Presidential budget 
request for which a subsequent appropriation was made. New 
starts pertain to specific appropriation line-items and include 
any new programs, projects, subprojects, or modifications that 
were not disclosed to Congress in the justification material. A 
new start occurs even when such activities may be funded in 
another appropriation belonging to the same or different 
military department or defense agency. Since the existing DoD 
financial management policies governing the new start 
notification process have failed, the Committee bill includes a 
new general provision (Section 8103) which prohibits 
compensation of any DoD employee who initiates a new start 
program without following the proper procedures required by the 
DoD financial management regulations. The Committee believes 
that DoD's acquisition and comptroller organizations, 
especially at the levels most directly responsible for approval 
of the obligation of funds, must institute improved management 
controls to ensure the existing regulations are carefully 
followed. The Committee is prepared to work with DoD to develop 
effective enforcement mechanisms for the new start approval 
process.

                         special interest items

    Items for which funds have specifically been provided in 
any appropriation in this report using the phrases ``only for'' 
or ``only to'' are Congressional interest items for the purpose 
of the Base for Reprogramming (DD Form 1414). Each of these 
items must be carried on the DD form 1414 at the stated amount, 
or a revised amount if changed during conference of if 
otherwise specifically addressed in the conference report.

              Committee Recommendations by Major Category

                       active military personnel

    The Committee recommends a total of $60,911,876,000 for 
active duty military personnel, a net reduction of $287,000,000 
below the budget request. The Committee has funded the 
authorized end strength as requested in the President's budget, 
and has fully funded the proposed pay raise of 3.1 percent. The 
Committee also recommends $82,200,000 over the budget request 
for recruiting and retention incentives for military personnel.

                           guard and reserve

    The Committee recommends a total of $9,639,935,000, a net 
increase of $61,725,000 above the budget request for Guard and 
Reserve personnel. The Committee has funded the authorized end 
strength as requested in the President's budget for Selected 
Reserve, and has included funding to provide for additional 
personnel for the Army Reserve, Navy Reserve, and Army National 
Guard. The Committee has also fully funded the proposed pay 
raise of 3.1 percent.

                       operation and maintenance

    The Operation and maintenance appropriation provides for 
the readiness of U.S. forces as well as the maintenance of 
facilities and equipment, the infrastructure that supports the 
combat forces and the quality of life of servicemembers and 
their families.
    The Committee recommends $83,942,459,000, a net increase of 
$400,222,000 above the fiscal year 1999 budget request. As 
described elsewhere in this report, this increase is driven 
primarily by the need to address shortfalls in Navy and Air 
Force flying hours, readiness training, depot-level 
maintenance, and infrastructure maintenance and repairs. The 
Committee also recommends reductions from the budget request as 
a result of fact of life changes such as declining world-wide 
petroleum prices, civilian personnel under strength and for 
headquarters and administrative activities, and for lower 
priority operation and maintenance-funded activities.

                              procurement

    The Committee recommends $48,471,235,000 in obligational 
authority for programs funded in Title III of the bill, 
Procurement, a net increase of $621,689,000 over the fiscal 
year 1999 budget request. Major programs funded in the bill 
include the following:

  $297,320,000 for 30 UH-60 Blackhawk helicopters
  $570,096,000 for Apache Longbow modifications
  $313,325,000 for 2,000 Hellfire missiles
  $319,988,000 for 3,316 Javelin missiles
  $110,387,000 for 24 MLRS launchers
  $371,844,000 for Bradley fighting vehicle upgrades
  $666,603,000 for M1A2 tank upgrades
  $58,476,000 for 1,000 HMMWV vehicles
  $51,212,000 for SINCGARS tactical radios
  $279,513,000 for 12 AV-8B strike aircraft
  $2,568,083,000 for 27 F-18E/F fighters
  $144,027,000 for 6 CH-60 helicopters
  $267,167,000 for 15 T-45 trainers
  $341,033,000 for P-3 modifications
  $260,652,000 for 5 Trident II strategic missiles
  $39,506,000 for 54 SLAM-ER missiles
  $205,702,000 for 120 Standard missiles
  $1,498,165,000 for 1 New Attack Submarine
  $2,662,078,000 for 3 DDG-51 class destroyers
  $812,618,000 for Marine Corps equipment
  $525,094,000 for 2 F-22 fighters
  $2,596,992,000 for 13 C-17 airlift aircraft
  $463,051,000 for 2 JSTARS aircraft
  $114,492,000 for 15 Predator UAVs
  $60,000,000 for 2 F-16 aircraft
  $341,070,000 for C-135 Modifications
  $275,869,000 for B-2 modifications
  $461,382,000 for 8 C-130J airlift aircraft
  $93,727,000 for 180 AMRAAM missiles
  $1,961,883,000 for ammunition
  $303,235,000 for 40 PAC-3 missiles

               research, development, test and evaluation

    The Committee recommends $35,918,042,000 for Research, 
Development, Test and Evaluation. Major programs funded in the 
bill include the following:

  $313,166,000 for the Crusader artillery system
  $391,823,000 for the Comanche helicopter
  $919,539,000 for the Joint Strike Fighter
  $321,600,000 for the New Attack Submarine
  $186,123,000 for cooperative engagement capability
  $148,165,000 for ship self-defense
  $292,219,000 for the Airborne Laser program
  $1,582,217,000 for the F-22 fighter
  $550,940,000 for the Milstar satellite system
  $340,466,000 for the Navy Upper Tier missile defense program
  $950,473,000 for National Missile Defense
  $415,694,000 for Theater High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD)
  $177,265,000 for PAC-3
  $245,796,000 for Navy Area-Wide missile defense

                         Forces To Be Supported

                         department of the army

    The fiscal year 1999 budget is designed to support active 
Army forces of 10 divisions, 3 armored cavalry regiments, and 
reserve forces of 8 divisions, 3 separate brigades, and 15 
enhanced National Guard brigades (6 enhanced brigades will be 
aligned under 2 AC/ARNG integrated division headquarters). 
These forces provide the minimum force necessary to meet 
enduring defense needs and execute the National Military 
Strategy.
    A summary of the major active forces follows:

                                                                        
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                     Fiscal year        
                                           -----------------------------
                                              1997      1998      1999  
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Divisions:                                                              
    Airborne..............................         1         1         1
    Air Assault...........................         1         1         1
    Light.................................         2         2    1/1(-)
    Infantry..............................         0         0         0
    Mechanized............................         4         4         4
    Armored...............................         2         2         2
                                           -----------------------------
      Total...............................        10        10        10
                                           =============================
Non-division Combat units:                                              
    Armored cavalry regiments.............         3         3         3
    Separate brigades.....................         0         0         1
                                           -----------------------------
      Total...............................         3         3         4
                                           =============================
Active duty military personnel, end                                     
 strength (thousands).....................       495       488       480
------------------------------------------------------------------------

                         department of the navy

    The fiscal year 1999 budget supports battle forces totaling 
315 ships at the end of fiscal year 1999, a decrease of 18 
ships from fiscal year 1998. Forces in fiscal year 1999 include 
18 strategic submarines, 11 aircraft carriers, 245 other battle 
force ships, 324 reserve force ships, 1,871 Navy/Marine Corps 
tactical/ASW aircraft, 648 Undergraduate Training aircraft, 469 
Fleet Air Training aircraft, 242 Fleet Air Support aircraft, 
442 Reserve aircraft, and 456 aircraft in the pipeline.
    A summary of the major forces follows:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                     Fiscal year        
                                           -----------------------------
                                              1997      1998      1999  
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Strategic Forces..........................        18        18        18
                                           -----------------------------
    Submarines............................        18        18        18
    Other.................................         0         0         0
                                           =============================
SLBM Launchers............................       432       432       432
                                           =============================
General Purpose...........................       292       271       256
                                           -----------------------------
    Aircraft Carriers.....................        11        11        11
    Surface Combatants....................       118       107       106
    Submarines (Attack)...................        73        65        57
    Amphibious Warfare Ships..............        39        38        37
    Combat Logistics Ships................        40        39        34
    Other.................................        11        11        11
                                           =============================
Support Forces............................        26        26        23
                                           -----------------------------
    Mobile Logistics Ships................         6         6         4
    Support Ships.........................        20        20        19
                                           =============================
Mobilization Category A...................        18        18        18
                                           -----------------------------
    Aircraft Carriers.....................         1         1         1
    Surface Combatants....................        10        10        10
    Amphibious Warfare Ships..............         2         2         2
    Mine Warfare..........................         5         5         5
                                           =============================
      Total Ships, Battle force...........       354       333       315
                                           =============================
      Total Local Defense/Misc Forces.....       165       167       163
                                           -----------------------------
Auxiliaries/Sealift Forces................       143       144       138
Surface Combatant Ships...................         3         2         2
Coastal Defense...........................        13        13        13
Mobilization Category B...................         6         8        10
                                           -----------------------------
    Surface Combatants....................         0         0         0
    Mine Warfare Ships....................         6         8        10
    Support Ships.........................         0         0         0
                                           =============================
Naval Aircraft:                                                         
    Primary Authorized (Plus-Pipe)........     4,072     4,204     4,128
                                           -----------------------------
        Authorized Pipeline...............       465       476       456
        Tactical/ASW Aircraft.............     1,730     1,873     1,871
        Fleet Air Training................       475       489       469
        Fleet Air Support.................       303       247       242
        Training (Undergraduate)..........       654       675       648
        Reserve...........................       445       444       442
                                           =============================
Naval Personnel:                                                        
    Active................................   569,470   559,881   544,896
                                           -----------------------------
        Navy..............................   395,564   386,894   372,696
        Marine Corps......................   173,906   172,987   172,200
                                           =============================
Reserve:                                                                
    Navy..................................    95,317    94,294    90,843
                                           -----------------------------
        SELRES............................    78,660    78,158    75,253
        TARS..............................    16,657    16,136     5,590
------------------------------------------------------------------------

                      department of the air force

    The fiscal year 1999 Air Force budget is designed to 
support a total active inventory force structure of 50 fighter 
and attack squadrons, 6 Air National Guard air defense 
interceptor squadrons and 9 bomber squadrons, including B-2s, 
B-52s, and B-1s. The Minuteman and Peacekeeper ICBM forces will 
consist of 700 active launchers. A summary of the major forces 
follows:

                      FISCAL YEAR 1999 MAJOR FORCES                     
                 [Includes only Combat Coded Squadrons]                 
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                 1997     1998     1999 
------------------------------------------------------------------------
USAF fighter and attack (Active).............       52       51       50
USAF fighter and attack (ANG and AFRC).......       36       36       35
Air defense interceptor (ANG)................       10       10        6
Strategic bomber (Active)....................        9        9        9
Strategic bomber (ANG and AFRC)..............        3        3        3
ICBM launchers/silos.........................      700      700      700
ICBM missile boosters........................      580      580      580
USAF airlift squadrons (Active):                                        
    Strategic airlift........................       13       13       13
    Tactical airlift.........................       11        9        9
                                              --------------------------
      Total airlift..........................       24       22       22
                                              --------------------------
      Total Active Inventory \1\.............    6,337    6,242   6,207 
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Includes Primary, Backup, and Attrition Reserve Aircraft for all    
  Purpose Identifies for Active, Air National Guard, and Air Force      
  Reserve.                                                              


------------------------------------------------------------------------
                    End strength                        1998      1999  
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Active Duty.........................................   371,577   370,882
Reserve Component...................................   180,786   181,233
Air National Guard..................................   107,355   106,991
Air Force Reserve...................................    73,431    74,242
------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                TITLE I

                           MILITARY PERSONNEL

  Programs and Activities Funded by Military Personnel Appropriations

    The President's budget request reflects a continuation in 
the drawdown of military personnel and force structure as 
Quadrennial Defense Review reductions are implemented. The 
budget proposes to reduce approximately 23,500 active duty 
personnel, and 9,000 Guard and Reserve personnel, a decline of 
one percent from fiscal year 1998 end strength levels. The 
Committee recommends fully funding the proposed 3.1 percent pay 
increase. In addition, the Committee provides $272,600,000 over 
the budget request for specific shortfalls in the active and 
reserve military personnel accounts that were identified by the 
Services as being readiness priorities.

   SUMMARY OF MILITARY PERSONNEL RECOMMENDATIONS FOR FISCAL YEAR 1999

                                                                        
                                                                        
                                                                        
Fiscal year 1998......................................   $69,470,505,000
Fiscal year 1999 budget request.......................    70,777,086,000
Fiscal year 1999 recommendation.......................    70,551,811,000
Change from budget request............................      -225,275,000
                                                                        

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of 
$70,551,811,000 for the Military Personnel accounts. The 
recommendation is an increase of $1,081,306,000 above the 
$69,470,505,000 appropriated in fiscal year 1998. These 
military personnel budget total comparisons include 
appropriations for the active, reserve, and National Guard 
accounts. The following tables include a summary of the 
recommendations by appropriation account. Explanations of 
changes from the budget request appear later in this section.

           SUMMARY OF APPROPRIATION ACCOUNT OF THE FISCAL YEAR 1999 MILITARY PERSONNEL RECOMMENDATION           
                                            [In thousands of dollars]                                           
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                   Change from  
                           Account                                  Budget       Recommendation       budget    
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Military Personnel:                                                                                             
    Army.....................................................      $21,002,051      $20,908,851         -$93,200
    Navy.....................................................       16,613,053       16,560,253          -52,800
    Marine Corps.............................................        6,272,089        6,241,189          -30,900
    Air Force................................................       17,311,683       17,201,583         -110,100
                                                              --------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, Active.......................................       61,198,876       60,911,876         -287,000
                                                              ==================================================
Reserve Personnel:                                                                                              
    Army.....................................................        2,152,075        2,171,675          +19,600
    Navy.....................................................        1,387,379        1,427,979          +40,600
    Marine Corps.............................................          401,888          403,513           +1,625
    Air Force................................................          856,176          850,576           -5,600
National Guard Personnel:                                                                                       
    Army.....................................................        3,404,595        3,413,195           +8,600
    Air Force................................................        1,376,097        1,372,997           -3,100
                                                              --------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, Guard and Reserve............................        9,578,210        9,639,935          +61,725
                                                              ==================================================
      Total, Title I.........................................       70,777,086       70,551,811         -225,275
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The fiscal year 1999 budget request included a decrease of 
23,512 end strength for the active forces and a decrease of 
9,020 end strength for the selected reserve from fiscal year 
1998 authorized levels.
    The Committee recommends the following levels highlighted 
in the tables below.

                      overall active end strength

                                                                        
                                                                        
                                                                        
Fiscal year 1998 estimate.............................         1,419,290
Fiscal year 1999 budget request.......................         1,395,778
Fiscal year 1999 House authorization..................         1,406,722
Fiscal year 1999 recommendation.......................         1,395,778
    Compared with Fiscal year 1998....................           -23,512
    Compared with Fiscal year 1999 budget request.....  ................
                                                                        

                 overall selected reserve end strength

                                                                        
                                                                        
                                                                        
Fiscal year 1998 estimate.............................           886,114
Fiscal year 1999 budget request.......................           877,094
Fiscal year 1999 House authorization..................           878,094
Fiscal year 1999 recommendation.......................           878,290
    Compared with Fiscal year 1998....................            -9,020
    Compared with Fiscal year 1999 budget request.....            +1,196
                                                                        


----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                             Fiscal year 1999                   
                                            Fiscal year --------------------------------------------------------
                                                1998        Budget        House                      Change from
                                              estimate     request    authorization  Recommendation    request  
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Active Forces (end strength):                                                                                   
    Army..................................      488,000      480,000       484,800         480,000   ...........
    Navy..................................      386,894      372,696       376,423         372,696   ...........
    Marine Corps..........................      172,987      172,200       173,922         172,200   ...........
    Air Force.............................      371,409      370,882       371,577         370,882   ...........
                                           ---------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Active Force.................    1,419,290    1,395,778     1,406,722       1,395,778   ...........
                                           =====================================================================
Guard and Reserve (end strength):                                                                               
    Army Reserve..........................      208,000      208,000       209,000         209,000        +1,000
    Navy Reserve..........................       94,294       90,843        90,843          91,039          +196
    Marine Corps Reserve..................       40,855       40,018        40,018          40,018   ...........
    Air Force Reserve.....................       73,447       74,242        74,242          74,242   ...........
    Army National Guard...................      361,516      357,000       357,000         357,000   ...........
    Air National Guard....................      108,002      106,991       106,991         106,991   ...........
                                           ---------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Guard and Reserve............      886,114      877,094       878,094         878,290        +1,196
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

               Adjustments to Military Personnel Account

                                overview

                        end strength adjustments

    The Committee recommends an understrength reduction of 
$174,800,000 to the budget request, as a result of a General 
Accounting Office review of the fiscal year 1999 military 
personnel end strength levels. The General Accounting Office 
has been examining the costs for military pay and allowances to 
determine if the fiscal year 1999 requirements are correct. It 
has concluded, based on March 1998 end strength projections, 
that the active and Reserve components will begin fiscal year 
1999 with approximately 14,700 fewer military personnel on-
board than budgeted. In addition, actual data shows active 
military personnel on-board, by grade mix, is different than 
was requested in last year's budget request. This means the 
fiscal year 1999 pay and allowances requirements for personnel 
are incorrect and the budgets are overstated. The Committee 
will continue to monitor the Services' end strength levels as 
more current data becomes available.

                          military advance pay

    The budget requested a total of $301,000,000 for the active 
component's personnel accounts in order to implement a change 
in the accounting procedure when the Services provide military 
members an advance on their pay associated with permanent 
change of station moves. The Department of Defense General 
Counsel's Office, however, has revisited this issue and now 
concludes that a change in the accounting procedure is not 
necessary. Therefore, the Committee recommends a reduction of 
$301,000,000 to the active military personnel accounts for 
advance pay.

                            foreign currency

    The Committee recommends a reduction of $20,900,000 in the 
active duty military personnel accounts due to savings from 
more favorable exchange rates overseas through fiscal year 
1999.

                         unfunded requirements

    The Committee recommends an increase of $272,600,000 over 
the budget request for additional active duty and reserve 
component military personnel costs described by the Services as 
readiness priorities, as follows:

                        [In thousands of dollars]

Military Pay shortfalls.......................................   $74,000
Annual Training...............................................    33,000
Enlistment Bonuses............................................    22,400
College Fund..................................................    19,800
Full-Time Support personnel...................................    25,000
Increased Use of Guard and Reserve............................    13,400
Active Duty for Special Work..................................    10,000
Schools/Special Training......................................    75,000
                    --------------------------------------------------------------
                    ____________________________________________________

      Total...................................................   272,600

                      full-time support strengths

    There are four categories of full-time support in the Guard 
and Reserve components: civilian technicians, active Guard and 
Reserve (AGR), non-technician civilians, and active component 
personnel.
    Full-time support personnel organize, recruit, train, 
maintain and administer the Reserve components. Civilian 
(Military) technicians directly support units, and are very 
important to help units maintain readiness and meet the wartime 
mission of the Army and Air Force.
    Full-time support end strength in all categories totaled 
150,584 in fiscal year 1998. The fiscal year 1999 budget 
request is 147,871. The following table summarizes Guard and 
Reserve full-time support end strengths.

                                    GUARD AND RESERVE FULL-TIME END STRENGTHS                                   
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                          FY 1998     Budget        House                          Change from  
                                          estimate   request    authorization    Recommendation      request    
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Army Reserve:                                                                                                   
    AGR................................     11,500     11,804           12,804           12,804           +1,000
    Technicians........................      6,501      6,474            6,664            6,474  ...............
Navy Reserve TAR.......................     16,136     15,590           15,590           15,618              +28
Marine Corps Reserve...................      2,494      2,362            2,362            2,362  ...............
Air Force Reserve:                                                                                              
    AGR................................        867        991              991              991  ...............
    Technicians........................      9,622      9,761            9,761            9,761  ...............
Army National Guard:                                                                                            
    AGR................................     22,310     21,763           21,763           21,763  ...............
    Technicians........................     25,250     23,815           24,761           24,761             +946
Air National Guard:                                                                                             
    AGR................................     10,671     10,930           10,930           10,930  ...............
    Technicians........................     22,968     22,750           22,750           22,750  ...............
                                        ------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total:                                                                                                    
          AGR/TAR......................     63,978     63,440           64,440           64,468           +1,028
          Technicians..................     64,341     62,800           63,936           63,746             +946
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                        MILITARY PERSONNEL, ARMY

                                                                        
                                                                        
                                                                        
Fiscal year 1998 appropriation........................   $20,452,057,000
Fiscal year 1999 budget request.......................    21,002,051,000
Committee recommendation..............................    20,908,851,000
Change from budget request............................       -93,200,000
                                                                        

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of 
$20,908,851,000 for Military Personnel, Army. The 
recommendation is an increase of $456,794,000 above the 
$20,452,057,000 appropriated for fiscal year 1998.

                          Program Recommended

    The total amount recommended in the bill will provide the 
following program in fiscal year 1999:





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

                        (In thousands of dollars)

Budget Activity 2: Pay and Allowances of Enlisted 
    Personnel:
    1100  Special Pays/Enlistment Bonuses...............          10,000
Budget Activity 6: Other Military Personnel Costs:
    2620  Advance Military Pay..........................        -161,000
Other Adjustments:
    2760  Foreign Currency Fluctuation Savings..........          -5,500
    2770  Personnel Underexecution......................         -10,700
    2780  Military Pay Shortfall........................          74,000

                        MILITARY PERSONNEL, NAVY

                                                                        
                                                                        
                                                                        
Fiscal year 1998 appropriation........................   $16,493,518,000
Fiscal year 1999 budget request.......................    16,613,053,000
Committee recommendation..............................    16,560,253,000
Change from budget request............................       -52,800,000
                                                                        


    The Committee recommends an appropriation of 
$16,560,253,000 for Military Personnel, Navy. The 
recommendation is an increase of $66,735,000 above the 
$16,493,518,000 appropriated for fiscal year 1998.

                          Program Recommended

    The total amount recommended in the bill will provide the 
following program in fiscal year 1999:





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

Budget Activity 2: Pay and Allowances of Enlisted Personnel:
    3900  Special Pays/Enlistment Bonuses.....................     9,400
Budget Activity 6: Other Military Personnel Costs:
    5350  Education Benefits/College Fund.....................    13,900
    5450  Advance Military Pay................................   -69,000
Other Adjustments:
    5570  Foreign Currency Fluctuation Savings................    -9,100
    5580  Personnel Underexecution............................    -8,000
    5590  Active Duty Special Work............................    10,000

                    MILITARY PERSONNEL, MARINE CORPS

                                                                        
                                                                        
                                                                        
Fiscal year 1998 appropriation........................    $6,137,899,000
Fiscal year 1999 budget request.......................     6,272,089,000
Committee recommendation..............................     6,241,189,000
Change from budget request............................       -30,900,000
                                                                        

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $6,241,189,000 
for Military Personnel, Marine Corps. The recommendation is an 
increase of $103,290,000 above the $6,137,899,000 appropriated 
for fiscal year 1998.

                          Program Recommended

    The total amount recommended in the bill will provide the 
following program in fiscal year 1999:





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

Budget Activity 2: Pay and Allowances of Enlisted Personnel:
    6700  Special Pays/Enlistment Bonuses.....................     3,000
Budget Activity 6: Other Military Personnel Costs:
    8000  Education Benefits/College Fund.....................     5,900
    8100  Advance Military Pay................................   -18,000
Other Adjustments:
    8220  Foreign Currency Fluctuation Savings................    -3,200
    8230  Personnel Underexecution............................   -18,600

                     MILITARY PERSONNEL, AIR FORCE

                                                                        
                                                                        
                                                                        
Fiscal year 1998 appropriation........................   $17,102,120,000
Fiscal year 1999 budget request.......................    17,311,683,000
Committee recommendation..............................    17,201,583,000
Change from budget request............................      -110,100,000
                                                                        


    The Committee recommends an appropriation of 
$17,201,583,000 for Military Personnel, Air Force. The 
recommendation is an increase of $99,463,000 above the 
$17,102,120,000 appropriated for fiscal year 1998.

                          Program Recommended

    The total amount recommended in the bill will provide the 
following program in fiscal year 1999:





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

Budget Activity 6: Other Military Personnel Costs:
    10700  Unemployment Compensation Costs....................    -4,000
    10900  Advance Military Pay...............................   -53,000
Other Adjustments:
    11010  Foreign Currency Fluctuation Savings...............    -3,100
    11020  Personnel Underexecution...........................   -50,000

                        RESERVE PERSONNEL, ARMY

                                                                        
                                                                        
                                                                        
Fiscal year 1998 appropriation........................    $2,032,046,000
Fiscal year 1999 budget request.......................     2,152,075,000
Committee recommendation..............................     2,171,675,000
Change from budget request............................       +19,600,000
                                                                        


    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $2,171,675,000 
for Reserve Personnel, Army. The recommendation is an increase 
of $139,629,000 above the $2,032,046,000 appropriated for 
fiscal year 1998.

                          Program Recommended

    The total amount recommended in the bill will provide the 
following program in fiscal year 1999:





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

                        (In thousands of dollars)

Other Adjustments:
    12010  Personnel Underexecution.....................          -5,400
    12020  Full-Time Support/AGR's......................          25,000

                        RESERVE PERSONNEL, NAVY

                                                                        
                                                                        
                                                                        
Fiscal year 1998 appropriation........................    $1,376,601,000
Fiscal year 1999 budget request.......................     1,387,379,000
Committee recommendation..............................     1,427,979,000
Change from budget request............................       +40,600,000
                                                                        


    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $1,427,979,000 
for Reserve Personnel, Navy. The recommendation is an increase 
of $51,378,000 above the $1,376,601,000 appropriated for fiscal 
year 1998.

                          Program Recommended

    The total amount recommended in the bill will provide the 
following program in fiscal year 1999:





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

                        (In thousands of dollars)

Other Adjustments:
    12870  Personnel Underexecution.....................          -5,000
    12880  Contributory Support to CINCs................          10,000
    12890  Annual Training..............................          33,000
    12891  P-3 Squadrons................................           2,600

                             p-3 squadrons

    The Committee recommends an increase over the request of 
$2,600,000 in ``Reserve Personnel, Navy'', and $7,600,000 in 
``Operation and Maintenance, Navy Reserve'' to provide 
additional personnel and operational support funds associated 
with the restoration of primary authorized aircraft for the 
Navy Reserve's seven P-3 squadrons.

                    RESERVE PERSONNEL, MARINE CORPS

                                                                        
                                                                        
                                                                        
Fiscal year 1998 appropriation........................      $391,770,000
Fiscal year 1999 budget request.......................       401,888,000
Committee recommendation..............................       403,513,000
Change from budget request............................        +1,625,000
                                                                        


    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $403,513,000 
for Reserve Personnel, Marine Corps. The recommendation is an 
increase of $11,743,000 above the $391,770,000 appropriated for 
fiscal year 1998.

                          Program Recommended

    The total amount recommended in the bill will provide the 
following program in fiscal year 1999:





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

                        [In thousands of dollars]                       
                                                                        
                                                                        
                                                                        
Other Adjustments:                                                      
    13760 Personnel Underexecution....................            -2,000
    13770 Increased Use of Guard and Reserve..........             3,400
    13780 JROTC Program...............................               225
                                                                        

                      RESERVE PERSONNEL, AIR FORCE

                                                                        
                                                                        
                                                                        
Fiscal year 1998 appropriation........................      $815,915,000
Fiscal year 1999 budget request.......................       856,176,000
Committee recommendation..............................       850,576,000
Change from budget request............................        -5,600,000
                                                                        

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $850,576,000 
for Reserve Personnel, Air Force. The recommendation is an 
increase of $34,661,000 above the $815,915,000 appropriated for 
fiscal year 1998.

                          Program Recommended

    The total amount recommended in the bill will provide the 
following program in fiscal year 1999:





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

                        [In thousands of dollars]                       
                                                                        
                                                                        
                                                                        
Other Adjustments:                                                      
    14610 Personnel Underexecution....................            -5,600
                                                                        

                     NATIONAL GUARD PERSONNEL, ARMY

                                                                        
                                                                        
                                                                        
Fiscal year 1998 appropriation........................    $3,333,867,000
Fiscal year 1999 budget request.......................     3,404,595,000
Committee recommendation..............................     3,413,195,000
Change from budget request............................        +8,600,000
                                                                        

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $3,413,195,000 
for National Guard Personnel, Army. The recommendation is an 
increase of $79,328,000 above the $3,333,867,000 appropriated 
for fiscal year 1998.

                          Program Recommended

    The total amount recommended in the bill will provide the 
following program in fiscal year 1999:





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

                        [In thousands of dollars]                       
                                                                        
                                                                        
                                                                        
Budget Activity 2: Other Training and Support:                          
    15100  School Training............................            45,000
    15150  Special Training...........................            30,000
Other Adjustments:                                                      
    15360  Personnel Underexecution...................           -66,400
                                                                        

                  NATIONAL GUARD PERSONNEL, AIR FORCE

                                                                        
                                                                        
                                                                        
Fiscal year 1998 appropriation........................    $1,334,712,000
Fiscal year 1999 budget request.......................     1,376,097,000
Committee recommendation..............................     1,372,997,000
Change from budget request............................        -3,100,000
                                                                        

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $1,372,997,000 
for National Guard Personnel, Air Force. The recommendation is 
an increase of $38,285,000 above the $1,334,712,000 
appropriated for fiscal year 1998.

                          Program Recommended

    The total amount recommended in the bill will provide the 
following program in fiscal year 1999:





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

                        [In thousands of dollars]                       
                                                                        
                                                                        
                                                                        
Other Adjustments:                                                      
    16120 Personnel Underexecution....................            -3,100
                                                                        

                                TITLE II

                       OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE

    The fiscal year 1999 budget request for Operation and 
maintenance is $83,542,237,000 in new budget authority, an 
increase of $646,776,000 above the amount appropriated in 
fiscal year 1998. The request also includes a $150,000,000 cash 
transfer from the National Defense Stockpile Transaction fund.
    The accompanying bill recommends $83,942,459,000 for fiscal 
year 1999, an increase of $400,222,000 from the budget request. 
In addition, the Committee recommends that $150,000,000 be 
transferred from the National Defense Stockpile Transaction 
fund.
    These appropriations finance the costs of operating and 
maintaining the Armed Forces, including the reserve components 
and related support activities of the Department of Defense 
(DoD), except military personnel costs. Included are pay for 
civilians, services for maintenance of equipment and 
facilities, fuel, supplies, and spare parts for weapons and 
equipment. Financial requirements are influenced by many 
factors, including force levels such as the number of aircraft 
squadrons, Army and Marine Corps divisions, installations, 
military personnel strength and deployments, rates of 
operational activity, and the quantity and complexity of 
equipment such as aircraft, ships, missiles and tanks in 
operation.
    The table summarizes the Committee's recommendations:
    


    
                   OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE OVERVIEW

    While the Department has proposed a slight increase in 
funding for Operation and maintenance accounts to maintain the 
combat readiness of U.S. forces, the Committee notes that there 
are critical funding shortfalls in the fiscal year 1999 budget 
request. As in past years, the Committee has requested that the 
Military Services provide a list of their top unfunded 
priorities. Unlike previous years, the Committee notes with 
concern that the shortfall lists provided by the Military 
Services focus primarily on Operation and maintenance issues. 
In the Committee's view, these shortfalls pose a serious near-
term risk to the capabilities of U.S. forces. These shortfalls 
are evident in a number of functions financed by the Operation 
and maintenance accounts including readiness related training, 
the mission capable rates of Air Force and Naval aircraft, and 
depot level maintenance of major weapon systems. These 
shortfalls are also apparent in the condition of U.S. military 
bases, for which both base operations and real property 
maintenance are chronically underfunded. To correct these 
deficiencies, the Committee recommends increased funding above 
the budget request in a number of areas including Navy and Air 
Force flying hours and spare parts, depot maintenance, Army 
training rotations, inclement weather gear and other troop 
support equipment, real property maintenance and base 
operations support.
    The Committee also notes that there are areas in the 
Operation and maintenance accounts where substantial savings 
are achievable. Given the need to enhance funding for near-term 
readiness, and the long-recognized need to, if possible, 
increase funding in the procurement and research and 
development accounts, the Committee believes it is imperative 
that the Department use available Operation and maintenance 
funding as efficiently as possible. Therefore, the Committee 
recommends certain reductions based on fact-of-life 
considerations, as well as management actions that DoD should 
undertake to streamline activities funded in the Operation and 
maintenance accounts.

                         flying hour shortfall

    The Committee has serious concerns about aviation mission 
capable rates for Air Force and deployed naval aircraft, 
currently reported at approximately 75 percent. The Committee 
notes that the overall mission capable rates for these two 
services have become steadily worse over the past several 
years. To address these concerns, the Committee directs that 
the Secretary of Defense provide a report to the congressional 
defense committees not later than February 15, 1999, detailing 
trends in aviation mission capable rates from fiscal year 1991 
through the present. This report shall assess the causes of the 
decline in aviation mission capable rates, and describe the 
actions needed to improve the readiness of aviation assets.
    In addition, the Committee recommends an increase of 
$214,500,000 for aviation spares above the budget request as 
follows:

                                                                        
                                                                        
                                                                        
Navy..................................................       $45,000,000
Air Force.............................................       169,500,000
                                                                        

                           depot maintenance

    The Committee recommends an increase of $300,000,000 above 
the budget request for depot maintenance. The Committee notes 
that the fiscal year 1999 budget for depot maintenance for the 
active components, which totals $5,500,000,000, is $200,000,000 
less than the amount funded in fiscal year 1998, and is also 
$200,000,000 less than the 1999 estimate contained in the 
fiscal year 1998 budget request. The Committee notes that the 
Department of Defense continues to request depot maintenance 
funding at levels well below 100 percent of requirements. For 
example, the fiscal year 1999 budget request substantially 
reduces the amount of funding requested for the maintenance of 
wheeled and tracked vehicles. The reduction in the Army is 
nearly 50 percent, a decline of $72,000,000, and the Marine 
Corps budget request for this type of work has been similarly 
reduced. To address this shortfall and prevent an increase in 
the backlog of depot maintenance workload, the Committee 
recommends the following additions to the budget request:

Army....................................................     $50,000,000
Navy Aviation...........................................      75,000,000
Navy Ships..............................................      90,000,000
Marine Corps............................................      20,700,000
Air Force...............................................      64,300,000

                       real property maintenance

    The Committee recommends an increase of $850,000,000 above 
the budget request for real property maintenance. The Committee 
observes that the fiscal year 1999 budget request for real 
property maintenance (RPM) is nearly $650,000,000 less than the 
fiscal year 1998 appropriation, including a reduction of over 
$250,000,000 in the Military Services' Operation and 
maintenance accounts. The budget also proposes the elimination 
of the Quality of Life Enhancement, Defense account. Despite 
past increases provided by the Congress, DoD estimates that the 
backlog of RPM will increase by $2,000,000,000 to a total of 
$16,600,000,000 in fiscal year 1999. The Committee also 
recommends providing this additional funding in the Quality of 
Life Enhancements, Defense account as noted elsewhere in this 
report.

                        base operations support

    The Committee recommends an increase of $500,000,000 above 
the budget request for base operations support costs. The 
Committee notes that, despite a budget request totaling over 
$12,000,000,000, the Department of Defense has suffered 
perennial funding difficulties in the area of base operations 
support. The Military Services have identified funding 
shortfalls totaling nearly $760,000,000 in fiscal year 1999. To 
address this issue, the Committee recommends the following 
increases for each Service:

                                                                        
                                                                        
                                                                        
Army..................................................      $300,000,000
Marine Corps..........................................        10,400,000
Air Force.............................................       189,600,000
                                                                        

                        troop support equipment

    The Committee recommends an increase of $60,000,000 to 
purchase increased quantities of initial issue equipment and 
troop support equipment for the Army and Marine Corps. The 
Committee is aware that the Army and the Marine Corps appear to 
suffer from chronic funding shortfalls for this type of 
equipment. The equipment in question is critical to the 
Services' ability to deploy and sustain soldiers and Marines in 
the field. Therefore, the Committee directs the Secretary of 
the Army and the Secretary of the Navy to submit a report to 
the congressional defense committees no later than March 15, 
1999, that details remaining unfunded requirements for this 
type of equipment, and indicates the funding profile for such 
equipment over the Future Years Defense Program.
    The funds provided by the Committee over the budget request 
are allocated as follows:

                                                                        
                                                                        
                                                                        
Army..................................................       $35,000,000
Marine Corps..........................................        25,000,000
                                                                        

                guard and reserve unfunded requirements

    The Committee recommends an increase of $289,478,000 over 
the budget request for additional Guard and Reserve Operation 
and maintenance requirements described by the Services as 
readiness priorities, as follows:

                                                                        
                                                                        
                                                                        
Real Property Maintenance.............................      $141,978,000
Optempo/Steaming Days.................................       110,000,000
Recruiting and Recruiter Support......................         7,200,000
Military (civilian) technicians.......................        27,000,000
Active Duty for Special Work/Inc. Use of Guard and                      
 Reserve..............................................         3,300,000
                                                       -----------------
      Total...........................................       289,478,000
                                                                        

                       recruiting and advertising

    The Committee recognizes that the Military Services' 
efforts to enlist high quality recruits is continuing to be 
difficult, and recommends an increase of $40,000,000 over the 
budget request to support requirements in achieving recruiting 
objectives.

                        fact-of-life adjustments

    The Committee notes that there have been fundamental 
changes in the economic conditions that underlie certain 
pricing assumptions and program levels built into the fiscal 
year 1999 budget request. As a result, the Committee recommends 
reductions of $295,000,000 due to recent declines in the price 
of both crude oil and refined petroleum products, and 
$259,000,000 for civilian personnel understrength.
    The Committee also recommends a reduction totaling 
$193,700,000 from the budget request because of favorable 
foreign currency fluctuation. Of this amount $93,700,000 is due 
to improvements in the exchange rate of the dollar versus the 
Korean wan and the Japanese yen, and $100,000,000 is due to the 
high balance currently available in the Foreign Currency 
Fluctuation account. The Committee understands that, as a 
result of these recommendations, the Department of Defense will 
still retain a balance of approximately $350,000,000 in the 
Foreign Currency Fluctuation account available in the event 
that unfavorable foreign currency fluctuations develop.

                                                                        
                                                                        
                                                                        
Fuel Repricing:                                                         
    Army..............................................      -$22,300,000
    Navy..............................................      -108,700,000
    Air Force.........................................      -116,000,000
    Reserve Components................................       -48,000,000
Civilian Understrength:                                                 
    Army..............................................     -$164,000,000
    Navy..............................................       -95,000,000
Foreign Currency Fluctuation:                                           
    Army..............................................     -$139,700,000
    Navy..............................................       -15,900,000
    Marine Corps......................................        -2,700,000
    Air Force.........................................       -29,400,000
    Defense-Wide......................................        -6,000,000
                                                                        

                 headquarters and administrative costs

    The Committee recommends a reduction of $223,200,000 from 
the budget request for headquarters and administrative 
activities. Although the fiscal year 1999 budget request shows 
a slight decline in funding for such activities, the budgeted 
decline is considerably less than that required by Section 911 
of the National Defense Authorization Act for fiscal year 1998. 
In addition, the Committee observes that the Department of 
Defense fiscal year 1999 budget request includes over $3.2 
billion in funding for headquarters and administrative 
activities with over 40,000 military and civilian personnel 
assigned to such activities. A recent GAO report finds that DoD 
reporting in the budget request significantly understates the 
amount of funding and number of personnel assigned to such 
activities. In order to provide additional funding for higher 
priority activities both within the Operation and maintenance 
accounts and elsewhere in this bill, the Committee believes 
that funding should be reduced in this area.
    Recommended reductions to the budget request are as 
follows:

                                                                        
                                                                        
                                                                        
Army..................................................      -$38,500,000
Navy..................................................       -32,900,000
Air Force.............................................      -105,200,000
Defense-Wide..........................................       -46,600,000
                                                                        

                     civilian personnel management

    The Committee recommends reducing the budget request by 
$59,600,000 for civilian personnel management. Several accounts 
within this title reflect programmatic increases for civilian 
personnel management initiatives. In the view of the Committee, 
such growth represents an investment which, in itself, is not 
objectionable. However, the budget materials indicate that 
there has been significant growth for such initiatives over at 
least the past four fiscal years with little indication of the 
savings or other benefits to be realized. Given the urgency of 
other requirements in the Operation and maintenance, 
Procurement, and Research and Development accounts, the 
Committee recommends that these initiatives be deferred until 
they can be adequately justified.
    Recommended reductions to the budget request are as 
follows:

                                                                        
                                                                        
                                                                        
Navy..................................................      -$36,400,000
Air Force.............................................       -23,200,000
                                                                        

                        industrial preparedness

    The Committee recommends a reduction of $45,200,000 below 
the budget request for industrial preparedness. The Committee 
notes that there is program growth evident in the fiscal year 
1999 budget request for this function in several of the 
Operation and maintenance accounts. Recent DoD initiatives such 
as those proposed in the Quadrennial Defense Review and the 
subsequent Defense Reform Initiative focus on the need to 
reduce the DoD facilities footprint in order to free resources 
for improved readiness and modernization. It appears, 
therefore, that a high level of funding for laid away plant 
capacity in the fiscal year 1999 budget request is inconsistent 
with the larger effort to reduce DoD facilities.
    Recommended reductions to the budget request are as 
follows:

                                                                        
                                                                        
                                                                        
Army..................................................      -$19,800,000
 Navy.................................................        -1,700,000
Air Force.............................................       -23,700,000
                                                                        

                         temporary duty travel

    The Committee recommends a reduction of $132,400,000 below 
the budget request for temporary duty travel. The Committee 
notes that there have been numerous investments made by the 
Department in technologies such as teleconferencing and 
distance learning which have been justified in large measure 
because of their potential to reduce Department of Defense 
travel expenses. Outlined below are the reductions recommended 
by the Committee to take advantage of these investments.

                                                                        
                                                                        
                                                                        
Army..................................................      -$31,600,000
Navy..................................................       -22,900,000
Marine Corps..........................................          -400,000
Air Force.............................................       -77,500,000
                                                                        

                        miscellaneous equipment

    The Committee recommends a reduction of $55,000,000 below 
the budget request for miscellaneous equipment. The Committee 
recommends reducing the purchase of low priority items such as 
office equipment and furnishings in order to make increased 
funding available for more urgent needs in the Operation and 
maintenance accounts as described elsewhere in this report.
    Recommended reductions to the budget request are as 
follows:

                                                                        
                                                                        
                                                                        
Army..................................................      -$20,000,000
Navy..................................................       -15,000,000
Marine Corps..........................................        -5,000,000
Air Force.............................................       -15,000,000
                                                                        

                          CLASSIFIED PROGRAMS

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

               reprogramming in operation and maintenance

    The Committee directs that proposed transfers of funds 
between O-1 budget activity groups in excess of $15,000,000 are 
subject to normal prior approval reprogramming procedures.
    The Committee designates the following O-1 subactivity 
groups as special interest items. As such, the Department 
should also follow prior approval reprogramming procedures for 
the cumulative value of transfers in excess of $15,000,000 into 
or out of the following O-1 subactivity groups:

Operation and maintenance, Army

    Depot maintenance.

Operation and maintenance, Navy

    Aircraft depot maintenance, Ship depot maintenance, and 
Intermediate maintenance.

Operation and maintenance, Marine Corps

    Depot maintenance.

Operation and maintenance, Air Force

    Operating Forces: Depot maintenance; Mobility Operations: 
Depot maintenance; Training and Recruiting: Depot maintenance; 
Administration and Servicewide Activities: Depot maintenance.
    Given the continuing problem of funds migrating from 
activities directly related to the readiness of U.S. forces to 
other activities, the Committee directs the Department of 
Defense to continue the practice of providing written 
notification to the congressional defense committees for the 
cumulative value of any and all transfers in excess of 
$15,000,000 from or into the following budget activities and 
subactivities:

Operation and maintenance, Army

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

Operation and maintenance, Navy

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

Operation and maintenance, Marine Corps

    Expeditionary Forces: Operational forces, Depot 
maintenance.

Operation and maintenance, Air Force

    Air Operations: Primary combat forces, Depot maintenance; 
Mobility Operations: Airlift operations, Depot maintenance, 
Payments to transportation business area; Training and 
Recruiting: Depot maintenance; and Administration and 
Servicewide Activities: Depot maintenance.

          baseline for operation and maintenance reprogramming

    The Committee has concerns about the reprogramming 
procedures for the Operation and maintenance accounts. Despite 
the establishment of reporting requirements for readiness 
related subactivity groups, and prior approval reprogramming 
procedures for selected subactivities, the Committee is 
concerned that funds added by Congress for readiness related 
activities such as depot maintenance and additional training 
have subsequently been shifted to other activities. The 
Committee is aware that, prior to submitting any prior approval 
reprogrammings for the Operation and maintenance accounts, the 
Department of Defense executes a procedure to establish a 
baseline for each O-1 budget activity, activity group, and 
subactivity group. The committee recognizes that such re-
baselining is necessary to distribute unallocated congressional 
adjustments to the O-1 subactivities. However, the Committee 
strongly disagrees with the DoD practice of combining other 
fact-of-life changes and emergent Service priorities, along 
with unallocated congressional adjustments, in establishing the 
Operation and maintenance reprogramming baseline. Therefore, 
the Committee directs that the Department of Defense and the 
Military Services may only distribute unallocated congressional 
adjustments when establishing the Operation and maintenance 
reprogramming baseline. All other reprogrammings must comply 
with the procedures described elsewhere in this report.

                         budget execution data

    The Committee continues to require detailed data in support 
of the Department's budget such as the O-1 presentation of the 
Operation and maintenance budget request, including revisions 
to the presentation of depot maintenance as reflected in the 
Air Force budget request for fiscal year 1999. In addition, the 
committee directs the Department of Defense to continue the 
submission of O-1 budget execution data for each O-1 
subactivity group on a quarterly basis. The Department shall 
provide such data to the House and Senate Committees on 
Appropriations within 60 days of the end of each quarter of the 
fiscal year.

                    TEST RANGES AND TRAINING ASSETS

    The Committee is aware that the Department is considering 
means of more efficient operations through consolidation of 
research, development, test and evaluation ranges. The 
Committee supports the Department considering enhanced 
efficiencies that may result from integrating training assets 
and test ranges in such a consolidation operation.

                  CHEMICAL-BIOLOGICAL DEFENSE FUNDING

    The Committee recommends that the Department of Defense use 
existing facilities with explosives ranges capable of handling 
large blasts and existing instructional and research programs 
in response to blast, radiological, biological and chemical 
threats.

                     COMPETITIVE BANKING PROCEDURES

    The Committee strongly supports the language included in 
Section 366 of the House-passed Defense Authorization bill for 
fiscal year 1999, which requires the public availability of 
operating and other agreements for financial services, 
including electronic banking, on military installations in the 
United States. In order to expedite the introduction of best 
business practices into this area, the Committee directs the 
Department of Defense to develop a proposal to implement full 
and open competition for the provision of electronic banking 
services on military installations and facilities in the United 
States. In addition, the Committee directs the Secretary of 
Defense to submit a report on this proposal to the Committee 
prior to the House and Senate conference on the Fiscal Year 
1999 Department of Defense Appropriations bill. If implemented 
properly, the Committee believes that significant revenues can 
be generated for the military installations and facilities, 
while DoD personnel are afforded high quality banking services 
at competitive prices.

                    OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, ARMY

                                                                        
                                                                        
                                                                        
Fiscal year 1998 appropriation........................   $16,754,306,000
Fiscal year 1999 budget request.......................    17,223,063,000
Committee recommendation..............................    16,936,503,000
Change from budget request............................      -286,560,000
                                                                        

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of 
$16,936,503,000 for Operation and maintenance, Army, The 
recommendation is an increase of $182,197,000 above the amount 
appropriated for fiscal year 1998.

                           readiness training

    The Army budget request for fiscal year 1999 once again 
proposes absorbing the cost of rotations to the National 
Training Center from units' home station training funds. The 
Committee is concerned that this practice is in effect a 
reduction to readiness related training. To fully fund such 
training, the Committee recommends an increase of $60,200,000 
above the budget request.

                         ARMY DEPOT MAINTENANCE

    The Committee is deeply concerned by the Army's failure to 
follow the direction and intent of Congress expressed in the 
fiscal year 1998 House and Conference reports regarding depot 
maintenance backlogs in communications and electronics 
workloads. While Congress provided an additional $43,500,000 in 
fiscal year 1998 for specific communications and electronics 
workload, the Committee has learned that most of those funds 
were used for other purposes. The Committee directs the 
Secretary of the Army to provide by July 20, 1998 a report on 
the utilization of the $43,500,000 million in fiscal 1998 
funding, and an explanation for the failure to follow 
congressional intent. Furthermore, of the $50,000,000 in 
additional fiscal year 1999 funding recommended for Army depot 
maintenance, the Committee directs that $20,000,000 be 
allocated only for backlogs in communications and electronics 
workload.

         Joint Multi-Dimensional Education and Analysis System

    The bill includes $4,200,000 only to insert, integrate, and 
operate the Joint Multi-Dimensional Education and Analysis 
System (J-MEANS) at the National Defense University.

               medium purpose and temper tent acquisition

    Of the funds made available in ``Operation and Maintenance, 
Army,'' for additional soldier life support equipment, the 
Committee directs that $10,000,000 be made available for the 
purpose of meeting prospective requirements for general 
purpose, temper and other tents associated with major wartime 
and other emergency mobilizations. The Committee observes that 
the procuring agency for such equipment, the Defense Logistics 
Agency, has employed so-called best value procurement methods. 
In this case, these methods have resulted in: (1) major 
attrition of a historically robust small business industrial 
base that has successfully met tent requirements of the 
Military Services, and (2) significantly higher unit costs. 
Accordingly, the Committee expects the Department to revise its 
acquisition strategy to employ methods that maintain the small 
business tent supply base at a prominent level. The Committee 
strongly discourages the use of prime vendor or similar 
procurement methods for acquiring this type of equipment, since 
these methods have had the effect of reducing competition, 
increasing unit costs, and severely eroding the small business 
industrial base for tents and tent items.

                            lease reduction

    The Committee directs the Secretary of the Army to provide 
a report not later than March 1, 1999 to the Committee on the 
costs and benefits of implementing lease reduction programs 
including the vacating of lease space, the utilization of 
existing administrative space on military installations and the 
effect of administrative lease reduction on operation and 
maintenance costs.

                        fort atkinson grave site

    The Committee recognizes the historic importance of Fort 
Atkinson, and believes that the Army should study options for 
the preservation of Fort Atkinson and the adjacent cemetery. 
Accordingly, the Committee directs the Secretary of the Army to 
submit a report, no later than March 31, 1999, assessing the 
Army's responsibilities for preservation of this site, and 
providing a plan of action detailing the measures that the Army 
will take to meet its obligations.

                         camp butner grave site

    The Committee recognizes the commitment of the Army to the 
Town of Butner, North Carolina, and believes that the Army 
should study options for the preservation and maintenance of 
the grave sites on the former Camp Butner. Accordingly, the 
Committee directs the Secretary of the Army to submit a report, 
no later than March 31, 1999, assessing the Army's 
responsibilities for preservation of this site, and providing a 
plan of action detailing the measures that the Army will take 
to meet its obligations.

              ACQUISITION POLLUTION PREVENTION INITIATIVE

    Of the funds appropriated in Operation and maintenance, 
Army, the Committee directs that $5,000,000 be utilized to 
support joint projects initiated as part of the Acquisition 
Pollution Prevention Initiative. The Acquisition Pollution 
Prevention Initiative is a valuable partnership between 
Industry and the Department of Defense to reduce the amount of 
hazardous materials used in weapon systems. Reduced use of 
hazardous materials will reduce costs for DoD's suppliers and 
lower costs at DoD's maintenance depots.

                          Supercomputing Work

    Information on this project can be found in the Information 
Resources Management section of this report.

     Joint Computer-Aided Acquisition and Logistics Support [JCALS]

    Information on this project can be found in the Information 
Resources Management section of this report.

                    ADP Legacy Systems Efficiencies

    Information on this project can be found in the Information 
Resources Management section of this report.

                          Program Recommended

    The total amount recommended in the bill will provide the 
following program in fiscal year 1999:





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

Budget Activity 1: Operation Forces:s of dollars]
    250 Parachute Maintenance and Repair......................     1,000
    250 Readiness Training-National Training Center (NTC).....    60,200
    650 Depot Maintenance.....................................    50,000
    750 Base Support-Land Forces Readiness Support............   179,948
    750 Ft. Irwin, George AFB.................................     2,000
    750 Soldier Life Support..................................    35,000
Budget Activity 2: Mobilization:
    1300 Industrial Preparedness..............................   -19,800
Budget Activity 3: Training and Recruiting:
    1700 Base Support-Academy.................................     5,632
    1950 Defense Acquisition University.......................  -108,000
    1950 Joint Multi-Dimensional Education and Analysis System     4,200
    2050 Base Support-Other Training..........................    60,357
    2300 Army Institute for Professional Development..........     1,000
Budget Activity 4: Administration and Servicewide Activities:
    2850 Supercomputing Work..................................     6,000
    3000 Lewis & Clark Exhibit Support........................     1,000
    3050 JCALS................................................   -40,000
    3350 Base Support-Servicewide Activities..................    54,063
    3650 Misc Support to Other Nations........................    -3,700
Undistributed:
    3710 Classified Programs Undistributed....................     4,500
    3715 Civilian Personnel Underexecution....................  -164,000
    3730 Foreign Currency Fluctuation.........................  -139,700
    3790 Temporary Duty Travel................................   -31,600
    3835 Memorial Events......................................       400
    3845 Headquarters and Administrative Activities...........   -38,500
    3855 Rents................................................    -7,000
    3865 Communications Purchases.............................    -4,400
    3875 Fuel Repricing.......................................   -22,300
    3885 Contract and Advisory Services.......................   -40,200
    3995 Miscellaneous Equipment..............................   -20,000
    3905 Criminal Investigators Computers & Training..........   -18,000
    3925 ADP Legacy Systems Efficiencies......................   -96,660
    4050 Consequence Management...............................     2,000

                    OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, NAVY

                                                                        
                                                                        
                                                                        
Fiscal year 1998 appropriation........................   $21,617,766,000
Fiscal year 1999 budget request.......................    21,877,202,000
Committee recommendation..............................    21,638,999,000
Change from budget request............................      -238,203,000
                                                                        

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of 
$21,638,999,000 for Operation and maintenance, Navy. The 
recommendation is an increase of $21,233,000 above the amount 
appropriated for fiscal year 1998.

            navy electricity and electronics training series

    The Committee recommends $4,000,000 only for the Naval 
Education and Training Professional Development and Technology 
Center, for conversion of Navy training manuals in the 
Electricity and Electronics training series into an enhanced 
interactive electronic format suitable for distance learning.

                national oceanographic laboratory system

    The Committee directs that $7,500,000 of the funds provided 
in Operation and maintenance, Navy be used only for support of 
the National Oceanographic Laboratory System in order to reduce 
the backlog of hydrographic research.

                    ADP Legacy Systems Efficiencies

    Information on this project can be found in the Information 
Resources Management section of this report.

                          Program Recommended

    The total amount recommended in the bill will provide the 
following program in fiscal year 1999:





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

Budget Activity 1: Operation Forces:s of dollars]
    4400 Spares-Navy Flying Hours.............................    45,000
    4600 Depot Maintenance-Aviation...........................    75,000
    5000 Depot Maintenance-Ships..............................    90,000
    5550 Reverse Osmosis Desalinators.........................     1,000
    5800 Tactical Tomahawk....................................    -4,900
    5950 Phalanx Gun Mounts...................................     5,000
Budget Activity 2: Mobilization:
    6650 Industrial Preparedness..............................    -1,700
Budget Activity 3: Training and Recruiting:
    7350 CNET.................................................     3,000
    7350 Navy Electricity & Electronics Training Series.......     4,000
    7550 Recruiting and Advertising...........................    20,800
Budget Activity 4: Administration and Servicewide Activities:
    8100 Personnel Management Program Growth..................   -36,400
    8600 ATIS.................................................     2,500
    8850 Removal of Docks at Sound Lab........................       350
Undistributed:
    9360 Classified Programs Undistributed....................    17,367
    9380 Foreign Currency Fluctuation.........................   -15,900
    9390 Civilian Personnel Underexecution....................   -95,000
    9430 Temporary Duty Travel................................   -22,900
    9460 Headquarters and Administrative Activities...........   -32,900
    9470 Excess Carryover (NCCOSC)............................   -52,000
    9480 Fuel Repricing.......................................  -108,700
    9490 Federal Excise/State Sales Tax for Fuels.............    -3,000
    9500 Contract and Advisory Services.......................   -31,000
    9510 Miscellaneous Equipment..............................   -15,000
    9520 ADP Legacy Systems Efficiencies......................   -87,820
    9540 Navy Environmental Leadership Program................     4,000
    9590 Executive Education Demonstration Project............     1,000

                OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, MARINE CORPS

                                                                        
                                                                        
                                                                        
Fiscal year 1998 appropriation........................    $2,372,635,000
Fiscal year 1999 budget request.......................     2,523,703,000
Committee recommendation..............................     2,585,118,000
Change from budget request............................       +61,415,000
                                                                        

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $2,585,118,000 
for Operation and maintenance, Marine Corps. The recommendation 
is an increase of $212,483,000 above the amount appropriated 
for fiscal year 1998.

                          Program Recommended

    The total amount recommended in the bill will provide the 
following program in fiscal year 1999:





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

Budget Activity 1: Operation Forces:s of dollars]
    10050 Initial Issue Gear..................................    25,000
    10150 Depot Maintenance...................................    20,700
    10200 Base Support-Expeditionary Forces...................     8,823
Budget Activity 3: Training and Recruiting:
    10700 Base Support-Accession Training.....................       682
    11050 Base Support-Base Skills and Advanced Training......       710
    11200 Recruiting and Advertising..........................    12,000
    11300 Marine Corps Junior ROTC............................     1,415
Budget Activity 4: Administration and Servicewide Activities:
    11800 Base Support--Servicewide Activities................       185
Undistributed:
    11915 Foreign Currency Fluctuation........................    -2,700
    11965 Temporary Duty Travel...............................      -400
    11975 Miscellaneous Equipment.............................    -5,000

                  OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, AIR FORCE

                                                                        
                                                                        
                                                                        
Fiscal year 1998 appropriation........................   $18,492,883,000
Fiscal year 1999 budget request.......................    19,127,004,000
Committee recommendation..............................    19,024,233,000
Change from budget request............................      -102,771,000
                                                                        

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of 
$19,024,233,000 for Operation and maintenance, Air Force. The 
recommendation is an increase of $531,350,000 above the amount 
appropriated for fiscal year 1998.

                       realistic bomber training

    The Committee is aware that serious concerns have been 
raised over the environmental impact of the proposed Realistic 
Bomber Training Initiative (RBTI). The Committee directs that 
the Air Force complete an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) 
on RBTI before proceeding further with implementing this 
proposal.

                       specialized skill training

    The Air Force requested $215,477,000 for specialized skill 
training. The Committee recommends $218,477,000, an increase of 
$3,000,000 only to develop the Educational Satellite and 
Airspace Training System for the Air Force Air Education 
Training Center.

                     battle lab management support

    The Committee recommends an increase of $4,000,000 above 
the budget request only for increasing engineering and 
technical support for the Air Force Battle Labs program.

                   air force institute of technology

    The Committee approves of the Air Force decision to keep 
the Air Force Institute of Technology (AFIT) School of 
Engineering at Wright-Patterson Air Force Base. The Committee 
further directs the Air Force to keep the School of Acquisition 
and Logistics, and all other AFIT components, at Wright-
Patterson as well. Furthermore, the Committee directs the Air 
Force to review its use of civilian educational programs to 
utilize more fully existing programs available in AFIT resident 
schools.

                       MINORITY AVIATION TRAINING

    The Committee recommends an increase of $450,000 above the 
budget request to fund increased minority aviation training. 
The Committee directs that this increase be used only for the 
purpose of funding cooperative activities at the William Lehman 
Aviation Center.

                    ADP Legacy Systems Efficiencies

    Information on this project can be found in the Information 
Resources Management section of this report.

                             FIRST PROGRAM

    Information on this project can be found in the Information 
Resources Management section of this report.

                          Program Recommended

    The total amount recommended in the bill will provide the 
following program in fiscal year 1999:





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

Budget Activity 1: Operating Forces:s of dollars]
    12600 Battlelabs..........................................     4,000
    12600 Spares-Air Operations...............................   112,500
    12775 Depot Maintenance-Air Operations....................    46,279
    12850 Base Support-Operating Forces.......................    82,026
    13100 SIMVAL..............................................     1,228
    13600 Base Support-Space Operations.......................    16,500
Budget Activity 2: Mobilization:
    13850 Spares-Mobility Operations..........................    57,000
    13950 Industrial Preparedness.............................   -23,700
    13975 Depot Maintenance-Mobility Operations...............    14,330
    14050 Base Support-Mobilization...........................    20,845
Budget Activity 3: Training and Recruiting:
    14450 Base Support-Academy................................     3,137
    14600 Educational Satellite and Airspace Training System..     3,000
    14775 Depot Maintenance-Base Skills Training..............       552
    14800 Base Support-Other Training.........................    19,783
Budget Activity 4: Administration and Servicewide Activities:
    15475 Depot Maintenance-Service-Wide Activities...........     3,140
    15500 Base Support-Logistics Operations...................    37,698
    15750 Personnel Management program growth.................   -23,200
    16050 Civil Air Patrol....................................     5,770
    16100 Base Support-Service Wide Activities................     9,611
Undistributed:
    16410 Classified Programs Undistributed...................    -1,500
    16430 Foreign Currency Fluctuation........................   -29,400
    16510 Temporary Duty Travel...............................   -77,500
    16525 Headquaters and Administrative Activities...........  -105,200
    16535 Rents...............................................    -2,000
    16545 Communications Purchases............................   -13,600
    16555 Fuel Repricing......................................  -116,000
    16565 Contract and Advisory Services......................   -30,900
    16575 Miscellaneous Equipment.............................   -15,000
    16585 ADP Legacy Systems Efficiencies.....................   -95,620
    16605 FIRST Program.......................................    -7,000
    16660 Minority Aviation Training..........................       450

                OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, DEFENSE-WIDE

                                                                        
                                                                        
                                                                        
Fiscal year 1998 appropriation........................   $10,369,740,000
Fiscal year 1999 budget request.......................    10,750,601,000
Committee recommendation..............................    10,804,542,000
Change from budget request............................       +53,941,000
                                                                        

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of 
$10,804,542,000 for Operation and Maintenance, Defense-Wide. 
The recommendation is an increase of $434,802,000 from the 
amount appropriated in fiscal year 1998.

                       special operations command

    The Special Operations Command requested $1,238,853,000. 
The Committee recommends $1,244,503,000, an increase of 
$5,650,000. Of the amount provided, $2,000,000 is only for the 
Joint Threat Warning System (JTWS), and $7,650,000 is only for 
a program discussed in the classified annex accompanying this 
report. The Committee recommends a reduction of $4,000,000 for 
operation and maintenance of six Patrol Coastal Craft which are 
being deployed to the Southern Command theater of operations 
for counter-drug activities as further described in Title VI, 
Drug Interdiction and Counter-Drug Activities, Defense.

          growth in administrative and servicewide activities

    The President's request for the Administrative and 
Servicewide Activities (BA-4) within Operation and Maintenance, 
Defense-Wide (excluding intelligence programs, transfers and 
one year additions) is an increase of 5 percent above the 
fiscal year 1998 appropriation, even after it is adjusted for 
inflation. Yet at the same time, the total budget for the 
Department of Defense is declining in real terms. The Committee 
does not believe that it is appropriate to increase this 
activity at the expense of combat forces and has therefore 
recommended specific reductions to this account totaling over 
$210,000,000, which is equal to the proposed net growth in this 
budget activity. The specific reductions are outlined 
throughout this section of the report.

                        civil/military programs

    The Committee recommends an increase over the request of 
$10,000,000 for the National Guard Youth Challenge Program. In 
addition, the Committee urges the Department to give priority 
consideration for the Chicago Military Academy and the New York 
State Corps of Cadets youth program for funding under the 
Department's Youth Challenge Program.

                  defense contract audit agency (dcaa)

    The Department requested an increase in the DCAA civilian 
pay account for within grade increases and for the annual pay 
increase. As this Committee has noted in the past, DCAA's 
request for within grade increases is not consistent with DoD 
policy and the size of the Agency's general pay increase 
significantly exceeds the increase authorized by law. The 
Committee denies the unwarranted increases and reduces the DCAA 
budget request by $4,375,000 accordingly.

             defense finance and accounting service (dfas)

    The Defense Finance and Accounting Service is financed 
through the Defense Working Capital Fund (DWCF). The fund is 
designed to capture all the relevant costs to run DFAS and to 
reflect those costs in the prices that DFAS charges its 
customers. The budget request proposes to move the cost of the 
Executive and Professional Training program from the DWCF into 
Operation and Maintenance, Defense-Wide. This program, however, 
primarily pays for the training of employees who are paid from 
the DWCF. The Committee believes that training is an inherent 
part any workforce's operating costs and thus should be paid 
for from within the DWCF. The Committee notes that House Report 
105-265, accompanying the Department of Defense Appropriations 
Act, 1998 specifically directed the Department to program for 
these costs in the DWCF. The Committee recommends a reduction 
of $34,566,000.

                DEFENSE HUMAN RESOURCES ACTIVITY (DHRA)

    The budget request for DHRA includes an increase in 
civilian pay over the last two years that greatly exceeds its 
growth in manpower. Even allowing for the increase in billets 
for the Defense Leadership and Management Program and the 
previous years reimbursables, the request still exceeds the 
activities requirements by $3,900,000. The Committee, 
accordingly, has reduced requested funding by a like amount.

              DHRA--DEFENSE CIVILIAN PERSONNEL DATA SYSTEM

    Information on this project can be found in the Information 
Resources Management section of this report.

               DEFENSE INFORMATION SYSTEMS AGENCY (DISA)

    The Committee agrees with the House National Security 
Committee that a portion of DISA's appropriated budget more 
properly belongs in the Defense Working Capital Fund. The 
Committee therefore directs the Department to carefully review 
DISA's budget and to provide a report to the congressional 
defense committees no later than February 15, 1999 on what 
parts of the DISA budget should be moved into the Defense 
Working Capital Fund.

               DISA--GLOBAL COMBAT SUPPORT SYSTEM (GCSS)

    Information on this project can be found in the Information 
Resources Management section of this report.

                        DLA--EQUIPMENT PURCHASES

    The Defense Logistics Agency requested an increase of 
$29,800,000 in Equipment Purchases to accelerate their life-
cycle replacement of computer systems. The Committee believes 
this increase is excessive and recommends a reduction of 
$14,900,000.

              dla--improved cargo methods and technologies

    The bill includes $2,000,000 only to evaluate cost saving 
opportunities that exist from integrating the latest private 
sector logistics research, transport technology, and security 
development into the practices and procedures for moving 
military cargo around the United States and throughout the 
world. The Committee intends that this work be undertaken by a 
not-for-profit foundation having detailed knowledge of national 
and international commercial practices in all elements of the 
supply chain (i.e., manufacturing, retail, transportation, and 
distribution systems) without bias to any geographic region or 
industry sector. This analysis shall evaluate the ability of 
third-party logistics providers to meet military requirements 
and ways to improve commercial cargo security procedures across 
different distribution networks.

                          dla--dpsc agreement

    The Defense Personnel Support Center (DPSC) of the Defense 
Logistics Agency (DLA) is being relocated from the Philadelphia 
Naval Shipyard to a new site in Philadelphia. The new site 
lacks sufficient space and equipment for its important 
education, training and distance learning activities. In order 
to address these problems, the Committee directs the Secretary 
of Defense to enter into a thirty year lease agreement with the 
Philadelphia College of Textiles and Science for space to be 
utilized by DPSC. The location of these DPSC activities at the 
College, in close proximity to the College's textile science 
education, research and training programs, will foster 
cooperation that will benefit the DPSC's mission in support of 
the Armed Forces. The Committee expects that the lease shall be 
at prevailing rates for such space and shall also support the 
costs of outfitting the space with state-of-the-art distance 
learning technology and standard utilities and overhead 
expenses. The Committee also expects the College to build and 
manage the space and, upon mutual agreement with the DPSC, 
utilize the space when not in use by the DPSC.

                   dla--automated document conversion

    Information on this project can be found in the Information 
Resources Management section of this report.

               defense security assistance agency (dsaa)

    The Department has requested $4,610,000 to pay for the 
salaries of 27 civilians transferred to DSAA. Prior to this 
transfer, all DSAA personnel were funded exclusively through 
the foreign military sales trust fund and the military grant-
aid funds. The Committee sees no reason to change how DSAA 
employees are paid and therefore recommends a reduction of 
$4,610,000.

                     dtrtca--partnership for peace

    The Committee recommends an increase of $1,000,000 for the 
Partnership for Peace program to expand the National Guard's 
involvement in military-to-military contacts and to establish 
Minuteman Fellow Exchanges.

            department of defense education activity (dodea)

    The Department requested $1,347,718,000 for DoDEA. The 
Committee recommends $1,354,968,000, an increase of $7,250,000. 
Of this amount, $2,500,000 is only for a demonstration of 
desiccant based dehumidification, a process that can remove a 
wide range of airborne microorganisms and improve the quality 
of air in the schools. The budget also included a request for 
$3,850,000 to cover the increased cost of facility maintenance 
that results from privatization. The Committee believes that 
the Department should include cost savings as an integral part 
of its decision on when to privatize and therefore does not 
include funding for this purpose.

                       new parent support program

    The Committee recommends an increase over the request of 
$5,600,000 for the New Parent Support Program. This family 
advocacy program is designed to prevent child abuse of young 
children by providing education and personal support to high-
risk families.

                         joint chiefs of staff

    The Committee recommends a reduction of $4,800,000 from the 
budget request for headquarters and administrative expenses. 
None of this, or any other reduction, is to be taken against 
the Joint Staff's efforts in support of Joint Vision 2010.

                   OEA--Agile Port Capabilities Study

    The Committee bill includes $500,000 only to initiate a 
study and demonstration of the advanced ``agile port'' concept 
as a means to reduce transit and delivery times for seagoing 
shipments of military cargo. The Committee directs the 
Department to structure this effort to leverage the work of 
other agencies such as the U.S. Maritime Administration and 
advanced commercial practices to the fullest possible extent. 
The Committee believes the Port of Philadelphia represents an 
ideal demonstration site for this study because of its 
proximity to the sole Defense Logistics Agency distribution 
region headquarters in the eastern United States and its 
participation in related commercial initiatives.

                             oea--planning

    The Committee recommends adding $1,000,000 to the Office of 
Economic Adjustment only for the planning and design of the 
replacement infrastructure necessary for Norton Air Force Base.

                youth development and leadership program

    The Committee recommends $400,000 only for operational 
costs of the youth development and leadership program initiated 
under P.L. 105-174.

                    OSD--National Performance Review

    The Committee has learned that the Department of Defense is 
providing the entire $1,300,000 needed to cover the 
administrative cost of the National Performance Review (NPR). 
Given that the NPR is a government-wide endeavor the Committee 
believes that it is inappropriate for the Department to bear 
the full cost of this effort. The Committee considers this an 
item of Congressional interest and directs that no more than 
$650,000 be used for this effort.

                    ADP Legacy Systems Efficiencies

    Information on this project can be found in the Information 
Resources Management section of this report.

                 Administrative and Contractor Support

    The Committee is concerned about the Department's inability 
to significantly reduce its headquarters staff given the 
sizable drawdown in combat forces. For example, in the Joint 
Staff, programmed manpower reductions were later rescinded so 
that between 1995 and 1998, the size of the Joint Staff 
actually increased. In the Office of the Secretary of Defense 
(OSD), manpower reductions have not lived up to expectations. 
Those limited personnel reductions that can be identified are 
often offset by increases in contractor support. The Committee 
recommends a reduction of $40,000,000 for administrative and 
contractor support, and remains hopeful that the Department's 
implementation of the Defense Reform Initiative will represent 
a break from past practice.

                 Military Personnel Information System

    Information on this project can be found in the Information 
Resources Management section of this report.

                        industry security locks

    Federal Specification FF-L-2740A was established by the 
Inter-Agency Committee on Security Equipment as the standard 
for providing secure protection of sensitive classified 
material. The Committee has supported the Department of 
Defense's efforts to retrofit existing containers with security 
locks that conform to this specification and the Department's 
procurement of new conforming containers. However, the 
Committee is concerned that sensitive classified materials in 
the possession of defense contractors are not subject to the 
same protection. While new containers purchased by defense 
contractors must have locks which meet or exceed this 
specification, there remain a number of older containers which 
fall below the prescribed standard.
    The Committee therefore directs the Under Secretary of 
Defense for Acquisition and Technology to develop and implement 
a plan to ensure that defense contractors in possession of 
classified material retrofit all security containers which do 
not have security locks which meet federal specification FF-L-
2740A. The Committee further directs the Department to report 
to the defense committees no later than February 1, 1999 on the 
aspects and progress of this lock retrofit implementation.

                  National imagery and mapping agency

    The Committee has included a general provision (section 
8095) to clarify that the National Imagery and Mapping Agency 
(NIMA) utilize the qualification based selection (QBS) process 
(the Brooks Act) for private sector firms providing mapping, 
charting and geodesy services as provided in current law and 
followed by other Federal agencies. Identical language was 
included in the House-passed version of the fiscal year 1998 
Department of Defense Appropriations bill. Subsequently, NIMA 
issued a policy affirming its use of the QBS process for all 
its geospatial production service contracts, including but not 
limited to mapping, charting and geodesy services under the 
requirements of previously enacted law and Congressional 
direction (Sec. 403 P.L. 101-574, Sec. 202(d), P.L. 102-366 and 
House Reports 104-617 and 104-863). NIMA also agreed to seek a 
revision to the Federal Acquisition Regulations (FAR) to this 
effect. NIMA is to be commended for its efforts to address 
these issues and seek revisions to the FAR. However, the 
Defense Federal Acquisition Regulatory (DFAR) Council did not 
implement these revisions. The Committee has repeated last 
year's House-passed general provision to ameliorate further 
regulatory and statutory conflicts.

                          Program Recommended

    The total amount recommended in the bill will provide the 
following program in fiscal year 1999:





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

Budget Activity 1: Operating Forces:s of dollars]
    17050 JCS--Mobility Enhancements..........................    15,000
    17050 JCS--Exercises......................................   -13,000
    17100 Special Operations Command..........................     5,650
Budget Activity 3: Training and Recruiting:
    17400 DAU--Transfer.......................................    95,000
Budget Activity 4: Administration and Servicewide Activities:
    17775 National Guard Youth Challenge Program..............    10,000
    17775 Innovative Readiness Training.......................   -10,000
    17800 Classified and Intelligence.........................    41,457
    17900 DCAA--Within Grade Increases........................    -2,375
    17900 DCAA--Price Growth Error............................    -2,000
    17950 DFAS--Executive and Professional Training...........   -34,566
    18000 DHRA--Pay Rate Error................................    -3,900
    18000 DHRA--DCPDS.........................................    -7,000
    18050 DISA--GCSS..........................................   -10,900
    18050 DISA--Lower Priority Program Increases..............    -6,700
    18050 DISA--Management Headquarters Reduction.............    -1,800
    18200 DLA--Blankets.......................................    -3,115
    18200 DLA--Equipment Purchases............................   -14,900
    18200 DLA--Warstopper Increase............................    -3,000
    18200 DLA--Improved Cargo Methods and Technologies........     2,000
    18200 DLA--DPSC Agreement.................................     1,000
    18200 DLA--Automated Document Conversion..................    25,000
    18310 Defense Security Assistance Agency..................    -4,610
    18320 Defense Security Service............................    -2,200
    18475 DTRTCA--Partnership for Peace.......................     1,000
    18475 DTRTCA--OSIA Treaty Requirements....................   -15,400
    18500 DoDEA--Facility Maintenance Contract................    -3,850
    18500 DoDEA--New Parent Support Program...................     5,600
    18500 DoDEA--Family Counseling and Crisis Services........     3,000
    18500 DoDEA--Desiccant Demo...............................     2,500
    18600 JCS--Management Headquarters Reduction..............    -4,800
    18650 OEA--Agile Port Capabilities Study..................       500
    18650 OEA--Planning.......................................     1,000
    18700 OSD--Youth Development and Leadership Youth Program.       400
    18700 OSD--Lower Priority Program Increases...............   -13,500
    18700 OSD--National Performance Review....................      -650
    18900 WHS--Lower Priority Program Increases...............   -10,000
    18900 WHS--White House Defense Fellows....................    -1,000
Other Adjustments:
    18975 Foreign Currency....................................    -6,000
    19110 Impact Aid..........................................    35,000
    19120 ADP Legacy Systems Efficiencies.....................   -18,000
    19130 Administration and Contractor Support...............   -40,000
    19230 Military Personnel Information System...............    38,000
    19240 NIPC Technical Support..............................     5,000

                OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, ARMY RESERVE

                                                                        
                                                                        
                                                                        
Fiscal year 1998 appropriation........................    $1,207,891,000
Fiscal year 1999 budget request.......................     1,202,622,000
Committee recommendation..............................     1,201,222,000
Change from budget request............................        -1,400,000
                                                                        

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $1,201,222,000 
for Operation and maintenance, Army Reserve. The recommendation 
is a decrease of $6,669,000 below the $1,207,891,000 
appropriated for fiscal year 1998.

                          Program Recommended

    The total amount recommended in the bill will provide the 
following program in fiscal year 1999:





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

                        [In thousands of dollars]                       
                                                                        
                                                                        
                                                                        
Budget Activity 4: Administration and Servicewide                       
 Activities:                                                            
    20110 Fuel Repricing Savings......................            -1,400
                                                                        

                       army/navy reserve centers

    The Committee understands that there are two Army Reserve 
Centers in Florida and one Youngstown, Ohio which are in 
extensive need of repair and renovation. In addition, the Navy 
Reserve has a facility located in Youngstown, Ohio, which is 
vacant and needs remediation. The Committee has provided 
additional funds for Real Property Maintenance for the Army 
Reserve and Navy Reserve, and directs that $2,000,000 be 
designated to each component to meet these requirements.

        commercial construction and material handling equipment

    The Committee understands that a large amount of the 
commercial construction and material handling equipment 
inventory, such as motor graders, scrapers, and D-7 bulldozers 
for the Army Reserve and Army National Guard are approaching 
their service life threshold. The Committee directs the 
Department to examine the cost effectiveness of the 
remanufacture or rebuild of older items of equipment in the 
inventory in order to extend their service life and improve the 
effectiveness of this equipment.

                OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, NAVY RESERVE

                                                                        
                                                                        
                                                                        
Fiscal year 1998 appropriation........................      $921,711,000
Fiscal year 1999 budget request.......................       928,639,000
Committee recommendation..............................       949,039,000
Change from budget request............................       +20,400,000
                                                                        

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $949,039,000 
for Operation and maintenance, Navy Reserve. The recommendation 
is an increase of $27,328,000 above the $921,711,000 
appropriated for fiscal year 1998.

                          Program Recommended

    The total amount recommended in the bill will provide the 
following program in fiscal year 1999:





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

Budget Activity 1: Operating Forces:s of dollars]
    21200 Aircraft Depot Maintenance/C-20 Repair..............    11,000
    21450 Mission and Other Ship Operations/MCM steaming days.    10,000
Other Adjustments:
    22780 Fuel Repricing Savings..............................    -8,200
    22790 P-3 Squadrons.......................................     7,600

                          navy reserve forces

    Last year's House and conference reports expressed strong 
support for Naval Reserve components and a concern for the 
elimination or reduction of the hardware and combat/warfare 
missions of the Naval Reserve. The Committee reiterates its 
concern that such eliminations or reductions are unacceptable. 
Elimination of or serious reductions in the remaining Navy 
Reserve Air Wing, or the reliance on ``augment'' crews with no 
hardware for Navy Reserve P-3 squadrons would result in 
detrimental problems for active and reserve Navy forces, 
seriously increase active PERSTEMPO, and result in the loss of 
an experienced cadre of Reserve personnel. Reductions in the 
Navy Reserve surface fleet, or denying new surface fleet 
missions to the Navy Reserve, would adversely impact active 
fleet manning and surface warfare capabilities.
    It is for these reasons that the Committee has provided 
additional funding above the request to maintain the crews and 
operations support for at least seven P-3 aircraft in each of 
the Naval Reserve squadrons. The Committee is also disappointed 
in the extreme lack of budgetary support for Naval Reserve 
annual training and drill funding as well as peacetime 
contributory support. The Committee has also provided funds 
above the request for these purposes and expects the Secretary 
of the Navy and DoD in future budgets to fully fund, as 
required by law, Navy Selected Reserve endstrength for at least 
48 scheduled drills and not less than 14 days active duty for 
training.
    The Committee is aware that the Navy Reserve continues to 
right-size its forces in lean budget years, and urges the 
Secretary of the Navy or the Secretary of Defense not to 
further reduce Navy Reserve forces. The Navy Reserve has 
already downsized more and faster than any active or Reserve 
component, having reduced force structure well over 30 percent 
since 1990. The Committee strongly supports the current Navy 
Reserve missions as funded in this bill and fully expects the 
Secretary of the Navy and DoD to consult with Congress prior to 
any final recommendations that may further reduce Navy Reserve 
forces.

            OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, MARINE CORPS RESERVE

                                                                        
                                                                        
                                                                        
Fiscal year 1998 appropriation........................      $116,366,000
Fiscal year 1999 budget request.......................       114,593,000
Committee recommendation..............................       119,093,000
Change from budget request............................        +4,500,000
                                                                        

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $119,093,000 
for Operation and maintenance, Marine Corps Reserve. The 
recommendation is an increase of $2,727,000 above the 
$116,366,000 appropriated for fiscal year 1998.

                          Program Recommended

    The total amount recommended in the bill will provide the 
following program in fiscal year 1999:





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

Budget Activity 4: Administration and Servicewide Activities:
    23850 Recruiting and Advertising..........................     1,200
    24110 Increased Use of Guard and Reserve..................     1,200
    24120 Active Duty for Special Work........................     2,100

              OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, AIR FORCE RESERVE

                                                                        
                                                                        
                                                                        
Fiscal year 1998 appropriation........................    $1,632,030,000
Fiscal year 1999 budget request.......................     1,744,696,000
Committee recommendation..............................     1,735,996,000
Change from budget request............................        -8,700,000
                                                                        

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $1,735,996,000 
for Operation and maintenance, Air Force Reserve. The 
recommendation is an increase of $103,966,000 above the 
$1,632,030,000 appropriated for fiscal year 1998.

                          Program Recommended

    The total amount recommended in the bill will provide the 
following program in fiscal year 1999:





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

Budget Activity 4: Administration and Servicewide Activities:
    25400 Recruiting and Advertising..........................     3,000
    25520 Fuel Repricing Savings..............................   -11,700

                 wc-130 Weather Reconnaissance Mission

    The Committee continues to strongly support the operations 
of the 53rd Weather Reconnaissance Squadron (Hurricane Hunters) 
and has provided the funding requested to operate this squadron 
only as outlined in the fiscal year 1998 Defense Appropriations 
bill, House Report 105-206, page 72. The Committee has again 
included a general provision, Section 8029 which prohibits the 
reduction or disestablishment of any operations concerning the 
53rd Weather Reconnaissance Squadron.

             OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, ARMY NATIONAL GUARD

                                                                        
                                                                        
                                                                        
Fiscal year 1998 appropriation........................    $2,419,632,000
Fiscal year 1999 budget request.......................     2,436,815,000
Committee recommendation..............................     2,570,315,000
Change from budget request............................      +133,500,000
                                                                        

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $2,570,315,000 
for Operation and maintenance, Army National Guard. The 
recommendation is an increase of $150,683,000 above the 
$2,419,632,000 appropriated for fiscal year 1998.

                          Program Recommended

    The total amount recommended in the bill will provide the 
following program in fiscal year 1999:





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

Budget Activity 1: Operating Forces:s of dollars]
    26210 Land Forces/Ground OPTEMPO..........................   100,000
    26230 Land Forces Readiness Support/Angel Gate Academy....     4,200
Budget Activity 4: Administration and Servicewide Activities:
    26860 Information Management/Distance Learning............     2,800
Other Adjustments:
    26940 Fuel Repricing Savings..............................    -3,500
    26950 Military (Civilian) Technicians.....................    27,000
    26980  Consequence Management.............................     3,000

                distance learning demonstration project

    Information on this project can be found in the Information 
Resources Management section of this report.

             OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, AIR NATIONAL GUARD

                                                                        
                                                                        
                                                                        
Fiscal year 1998 appropriation........................    $3,013,282,000
Fiscal year 1999 budget request.......................     3,093,933,000
Committee recommendation..............................     3,075,233,000
Change from budget request............................       -18,700,000
                                                                        

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $3,075,233,000 
for Operation and maintenance, Air National Guard. The 
recommendation is an increase of $61,951,000 above the 
$3,013,282,000 appropriated for fiscal year 1998.

                          Program Recommended

    The total amount recommended in the bill will provide the 
following program in fiscal year 1999:





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

Budget Activity 1: Operating Forces:s of dollars]
    27650 Aircraft Operations/159th Fighter Group.............     1,500
Budget Activity 4: Administration and Servicewide Activities:
    28100 Recruiting and Advertising..........................     3,000
    28110 Fuel Repricing Savings..............................   -23,200

                 159th Air National Guard Fighter Group

    The Committee recommends an increase of $1,500,000 over the 
budget request in Operation and maintenance, Air National Guard 
and directs that these funds be used for the operation of C-
130H operational support aircraft of the 159th ANG Fighter 
Group.

             OVERSEAS CONTINGENCY OPERATIONS TRANSFER FUND

                                                                        
                                                                        
                                                                        
Fiscal year 1998 appropriation........................    $1,884,000,000
Fiscal year 1999 budget request.......................       746,900,000
Committee recommendation..............................       746.900,000
Change from budget request............................  ................
                                                                        

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $746,900,000 
for the Overseas Contingency Operations Transfer Fund. The 
recommendation is a decrease of $1,137,100,000 below the amount 
appropriated for fiscal year 1998. The Committee recommendation 
provides funding as requested for ongoing DoD operations in 
Southwest Asia.

          UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES

                                                                        
                                                                        
                                                                        
Fiscal year 1998 appropriation........................        $6,952,000
Fiscal year 1999 budget request.......................         7,324,000
Committee recommendation..............................         7,324,000
Change from budget request............................  ................
                                                                        

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $7,324,000 for 
the United States Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces. The 
recommendation is an increase of $372,000 from the amount 
appropriated in fiscal year 1998.

                    ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION, ARMY

                                                                        
                                                                        
                                                                        
Fiscal year 1998 appropriation........................      $375,337,000
Fiscal year 1999 budget request.......................       377,640,000
Committee recommendation..............................       342,640,000
Change from budget request............................       -35,000,000
                                                                        


    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $342,640,000 
for Environmental Restoration, Army. The recommendation is a 
decrease of $32,697,000 from the amount appropriated in fiscal 
year 1998.

        Government-Owned, Contractor-Operated (GOCO) Facilities

    The Committee is aware that the Army may be able to recover 
significant costs associated with the environmental restoration 
of GOCO facilities. The Committee is disappointed with the 
Army's limited efforts to address this opportunity. Since 
current law permits the Army to keep any funds recovered from 
these efforts so they can be used to pay for future 
environmental clean up costs, the Committee recommends a 
reduction of $35,000,000 from the budget request.
    The Committee directs the Army to build on its experience 
with the Twin Cities Army Ammunition Plant (TCAAP) recovery 
project in order to maximize the Army's ability to recover the 
cost for environmental restoration activities at other GOCO 
sites. Because of the time-sensitivity of such claims, the Army 
is directed to report to the Committee by November 1, 1998, on 
its comprehensive claim recovery evaluation and progress in 
this matter.

                         rocky mountain arsenal

    The Committee believes that priority should continue to be 
given to the implementation of the ten-year cleanup plan for 
the Rocky Mountain Arsenal property that has been agreed to by 
the Army, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, the Environmental 
Protection Agency, the State of Colorado, and the Shell Oil 
Company.

                    ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION, NAVY

                                                                        
                                                                        
                                                                        
Fiscal year 1998 appropriation........................      $275,500,000
Fiscal year 1999 budget request.......................       281,600,000
Committee recommendation..............................       281,600,000
Change from budget request............................  ................
                                                                        


    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $281,600,000 
for Environmental Restoration, Navy. The recommendation is an 
increase of $6,100,000 from the amount appropriated in fiscal 
year 1998.

                  ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION, AIR FORCE

                                                                        
                                                                        
                                                                        
Fiscal year 1998 appropriation........................      $376,900,000
Fiscal year 1999 budget request.......................       379,100,000
Committee recommendation..............................       379,100,000
Change from budget request............................  ................
                                                                        


    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $379,100,000 
for Environmental Restoration, Air Force. The recommendation is 
an increase of $2,200,000 from the amount appropriated in 
fiscal year 1998.

                ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION, DEFENSE-WIDE

                                                                        
                                                                        
                                                                        
Fiscal year 1998 appropriation........................       $26,900,000
Fiscal year 1999 budget request.......................        26,091,000
Committee recommendation..............................        26,091,000
Change from budget request............................  ................
                                                                        


    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $26,091,000 
for Environmental Restoration, Defense-Wide. The recommendation 
is a decrease of $809,000 from the amount appropriated in 
fiscal year 1998.

         ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION, FORMERLY USED DEFENSE SITES

                                                                        
                                                                        
                                                                        
Fiscal year 1998 appropriation........................      $242,300,000
Fiscal year 1999 budget request.......................       195,000,000
Committee recommendation..............................       195,000,000
Change from budget request............................  ................
                                                                        

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $195,000,000 
for Environmental Restoration, Formerly Used Defense Sites. The 
recommendation is a decrease of $47,300,000 from the amount 
appropriated in fiscal year 1998.

                   walla walla headquarters facility

    The Committee encourages the Department of the Army to 
support environmental remediation of the former district 
headquarters facility of the Corps of Engineers, located in 
Walla Walla, Washington.

             OVERSEAS HUMANITARIAN, DISASTER, AND CIVIC AID

                                                                        
                                                                        
                                                                        
Fiscal year 1998 appropriation........................       $47,130,000
Fiscal year 1999 budget request.......................        63,311,000
Committee recommendation..............................        56,111,000
Change from budget request............................        -7,200,000
                                                                        

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $56,111,000 
for Overseas Humanitarian, Disaster, and Civic Aid. The 
recommendation is an increase of $8,981,000 from the amount 
appropriated in fiscal year 1998.

                  FORMER SOVIET UNION THREAT REDUCTION

                                                                        
                                                                        
                                                                        
Fiscal year 1998 appropriation........................      $382,200,000
Fiscal year 1999 budget request.......................       442,400,000
Committee recommendation..............................       417,400,000
Change from budget request............................       -25,000,000
                                                                        

    The appropriation provides funds for the Former Soviet 
Union Threat Reduction programs.

                       Committee Recommendations

                         authorization changes

    The Committee recommends the following changes in 
accordance with House authorization action:

                                            [In thousands of dollars]                                           
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                     Committee      Change from 
                                                                  Budget request  recommendation      request   
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Strategic Offensive Arms Elimination--Russia....................         142,400         142,400  ..............
Strategic Nuclear Arms Elimination--Ukraine.....................          47,500          47,500  ..............
Fissile Material Storage Facility--Russia.......................          60,900          60,900  ..............
Warhead Dismantlement Processing--Russia........................           9,400           9,400  ..............
Weapons Transportation Security--Russia.........................          10,300          10,300  ..............
Weapons Storage Security--Russia................................          41,700          41,700  ..............
Reactor Core Conversion--Russia.................................          29,800          29,800  ..............
Chemical Weapons Destruction--Russia............................          88,400          35,000         -53,400
BW Proliferation Prevention.....................................           2,000           2,000  ..............
Defense and Military Contacts...................................           2,000  ..............          -2,000
Administrative Support..........................................           8,000  ..............          -1,000
Strategic Arms Elimination Activities--Russia/Ukraine...........  ..............          31,400         +31,400
                                                                 -----------------------------------------------
      Total.....................................................         442,400         417,400         -25,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                 QUALITY OF LIFE ENHANCEMENTS, DEFENSE

                                                                        
                                                                        
                                                                        
Fiscal year 1998 appropriation........................      $360,000,000
Fiscal year 1999 budget request.......................                 0
Committee recommendation..............................       850,000,000
Change from budget request............................      +850,000,000
                                                                        

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $850,000,000 
for Quality of Life Enhancements, Defense. The recommendation 
is an increase of $490,000,000 above the amount appropriated 
for fiscal year 1998.
    The Committee recommends an increase of $850,000,000 for 
real property maintenance in this account. As described 
elsewhere in this report, the Committee continues to vigorously 
support improvement to the quality of life for service 
personnel. Accordingly, the Committee designates this increased 
funding as a special interest item, subject to normal prior 
approval reprogramming procedures.
                               TITLE III

                              PROCUREMENT

                  Estimates and Appropriation Summary

    The fiscal year 1999 Department of Defense procurement 
budget request totals $47,849,546,000. The accompanying bill 
recommends $48,471,235,000. The total amount recommended is an 
increase of $621,689,000 above the fiscal year 1999 budget 
estimate and is $2,824,020,000 above the total provided in 
fiscal year 1998. The table below summarizes the budget 
estimates and the Committee's recommendations.





                          classified programs

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

                           rangeless training

    The Navy and Air Force requested a total of $17,300,000 to 
continue the Joint Tactical Combat Training System (JTCTS). The 
fiscal year 1999 budget proposes a major restructure of the 
program, which would deliver less capability at later times 
than originally planned. The program has been de-scoped to the 
point where it is no longer worth pursuing. The Committee 
recommends it be terminated, and denies the budget request. Low 
cost upgrades to existing deployed training range equipment are 
a prudent alternative. The Committee therefore recommends a 
total of $15,000,000 for rangeless training in concert with the 
recommendations in the procurement section of the House-passed 
authorization bill. While the preliminary focus of JTCTS is for 
air-to-air combat training, the Committee notes that 
alternative upgrades to existing systems can eventually include 
existing underwater ranges leading to a total air-land-sea 
system for joint force training. The additional funds are only 
for the Large Area Tracking Range (LATR), the Kadena Interim 
Training System (KITS), and their integration. The Committee 
recommendations to eliminate funds for the Joint Tactical 
Combat Training System and to provide funds for low cost 
rangeless training upgrades to existing systems are as follows:

                        [In millions of dollars]

APAF (JTCTS) Miscellaneous Production Charges.................    -3,500
OPAF (JTCTS) Combat Training Ranges...........................    -5,500
RDT&E;, Navy (JTCTS) Consolidated Training Systems Development.    -6,900
RDT&E;, AF (JTCTS) Combat Training Ranges......................    -1,400
                    --------------------------------------------------------------
                    ____________________________________________________

      Subtotal................................................   -17,300
                    --------------------------------------------------------------
                    ____________________________________________________

OPN (LATR) Weapons Range Support..............................    +5,000
OPAF (KITS) Combat Training Ranges............................    +5,000
RDT&E;, Navy (LATR) Consolidated Training Systems Development..    +5,000
                    --------------------------------------------------------------
                    ____________________________________________________

      Subtotal................................................   +15,000
                    --------------------------------------------------------------
                    ____________________________________________________

      Grand total.............................................    -2,300

                       AIRCRAFT PROCUREMENT, ARMY

                                                                        
                                                                        
                                                                        
Fiscal year 1998 appropriation........................    $1,346,317,000
Fiscal year 1999 budget request.......................     1,325,943,000
Committee recommendation..............................     1,400,338,000
Change from budget request............................       +74,395,000
                                                                        

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

                       Committee Recommendations

                         authorization changes

    The Committee recommends the following changes in 
accordance with House authorization action:

                                            [In thousands of dollars]                                           
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                         Budget request         Committee          Change from  
                         Item                                                 recommended           request     
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CH-47 Modifications.................................           101,176              88,476              -12,700 
C-12 Cargo Mods.....................................             2,658               9,658               +7,000 
Kiowa Warrior.......................................            40,446              56,446              +16,000 
Aircraft Survivability Equipment....................             5,144              12,544               +7,400 
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                              Rotary Wing

                            uh-60 blackhawk

    The Army requested $218,820,000 for UH-60 Blackhawk 
helicopters. The Committee recommends $297,320,000, an increase 
of $78,500,000. The additional funds are only to procure 8 
additional Blackhawks for the National Guard. The Committee 
notes that that Army identified Blackhawks as a high priority 
unfunded requirement.

                        Modification of Aircraft

                          ah-64 modifications

    The Army requested $52,902,000 for AH-64 modifications. The 
Committee recommends $55,902,000, an increase of $3,000,000 
only for the Vibration Management Enhancement Program for the 
National Guard.

                             Other Support

                      airborne command and control

    The Army requested $24,421,000 for the Airborne Command and 
Control System. The Committee recommends no funds due to 
schedule delays. The Committee notes that a significant portion 
of the fiscal year 1998 funds remain unobligated.

                        common ground equipment

    The Army requested $30,107,000 for common ground equipment. 
The Committee recommends $31,307,000, an increase of $1,200,000 
only to equip the 258th Air Traffic Control Squadron Air 
Traffic Control Tower with a communications package and 
associated electronic equipment necessary to satisfy FAA 
requirements and compatibility.

                          Program Recommended

    The total amount recommended in the bill will provide the 
following programs in fiscal year 1999:





                       MISSILE PROCUREMENT, ARMY

                                                                        
                                                                        
                                                                        
Fiscal year 1998 appropriation........................      $762,409,000
Fiscal year 1999 budget request.......................     1,205,768,000
Committee recommendation..............................     1,140,623,000
Change from budget request............................       -65,145,000
                                                                        

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

                       Committee Recommendations

                             Other Missiles

              enhanced fiber optic guided missile (efogm)

    The Army requested $13,716,000 to procure the Enhanced 
Fiber Optic Guided Missile (EFOGM). The Committee recommends no 
funds for this program, a decrease of $13,716,000. The 
Committee notes that EFOGM production was not authorized in the 
House-passed Defense Authorization bill.

                                hellfire

    The Army requested $360,625,000 for procurement of Hellfire 
Missiles and support equipment. The Committee recommends 
$313,325,000, a decrease of $47,300,000. This amount includes a 
decrease of $44,300,000 for Longbow Hellfire economic order 
quantities (EOQ) for a proposed four year multiyear program and 
a decrease of $3,000,000 as recommended in the House-passed 
Defense Authorization bill. The Committee specifically denies 
approval for the Longbow Hellfire multiyear program.
    In recent years, the Army's track record with multiyear 
programs has been extremely poor. In fiscal year 1997, the Army 
failed to budget for the last year of the Avenger multiyear 
contract leading the Committee to add $60,000,000 for the last 
93 units in the 3 year contract. Also in that year, the Army 
requested multiyear contracts for Laser Hellfire, ATACMS Block 
IA, and Javelin. One year later, the Army terminated the Laser 
Hellfire program and cancelled plans for the congressionally 
approved ATACMS Block IA multiyear program. Just one year after 
Congress approved a four year Javelin MYP, the Army decreased 
its missile buy to procure additional command launch units 
(CLUs). The multiyear contract was not broken because Congress 
provided additional funds for Marine Corps missiles.
    The Committee is further concerned about the instability of 
the Longbow Hellfire's inventory requirement given that this 
requirement has been challenged by the General Accounting 
Office, DoD's Deep Attack Weapons Mix Study (DAWMS), and the 
Secretary of Defense's Offices for Policy (OSD(P)), Comptroller 
(OSD(C)), and Program Analysis and Evaluation (OSD(PA&E;)). This 
latter office has taken the position that the Army's Longbow 
Hellfire inventory requirement exceeds the requirement for two 
Major Regional Contingencies (MRC) by the equivalent of four to 
six major wars' expenditure. Given the Army's poor track record 
with weapon multiyear programs and the uncertain Longbow 
inventory requirement, the Committee believes an annual 
procurement strategy is a more prudent approach for acquiring 
this system.

              multiple launch rocket system (mlrs) rocket

    The Army requested $16,513,000 to procure MLRS-ER rockets. 
The Committee recommends $3,413,000, a decrease of $13,100,000. 
The Army no longer plans to procure these rockets in fiscal 
year 1999.

         multiple launch rocket system (mlrs) launcher systems

    The Army requested $85,387,000 to procure MLRS launchers. 
The Committee recommends $110,387,000, an increase of 
$25,000,000 only to procure launchers for the National Guard. 
The Committee encourages the Army to use the additional funds 
to procure the new M270A1 launcher.

                        Modification of Missiles

                                avenger

    The Army requested $8,425,000 for Avenger slew-to-cue. The 
Committee recommends no funds for this program, a reduction of 
$8,425,000. The General Accounting Office indicates that the 
slew-to-cue design will not be complete until September 1998, 
and production will not begin until fiscal year 1999. Since the 
Army has prior year funds to initiate production, no additional 
funds are required in fiscal year 1999.

                         itas/tow modifications

    The Army requested $62,478,000 for modifications to the 
Improved Target Acquisition System (ITAS) and the Tow missile. 
The Committee recommendation approves this amount. However, the 
Committee notes that the Army's budget requests approval for a 
four year multiyear program for ITAS. Given the Army's poor 
track record for multiyear programs as discussed previously 
under the heading ``Hellfire,'' the Committee specifically 
denies approval of the ITAS multiyear program. The Committee is 
further concerned with the instability in the program's costs. 
In the last three budget submissions, the Army's estimate for 
the average unit cost for ITAS (total buy) was $433,000 (1997 
estimate), $549,000 (1998 estimate), and $519,000 (1999 
estimate). These estimates represent yearly fluctuations of 37 
percent and 18 percent over the three year period. Since cost 
stability is a key criteria for approval of multiyear programs, 
the Committee believes that ITAS is a poor candidate for such 
an acquisition strategy.

                          Program Recommended

    The total recommended in the bill will provide the 
following program in fiscal year 1999:





        PROCUREMENT OF WEAPONS AND TRACKED COMBAT VEHICLES, ARMY

                                                                        
                                                                        
                                                                        
Fiscal year 1998 appropriation........................    $1,298,707,000
Fiscal year 1999 budget request.......................     1,433,608,000
Committee recommendation..............................     1,513,540,000
Change from budget request............................       +79,932,000
                                                                        


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

                       Committee Recommendations

                        Tracked Combat Vehicles

                        bradley base sustainment

    The Army requested $285,844,000 for Bradley base 
sustainment. The Committee recommends $371,844,000, an increase 
of $86,000,000. Within this amount, $80,000,000 is only to 
modify Bradley A0 variants to the ODS variant for the National 
Guard and $6,000,000 is only for cordless Vehicular 
Intercommunications Systems (AN/VIC-3).

                Modification of Tracked Combat Vehicles

                          m1 abrams tank (mod)

    The Army requested $53,301,000 for the M1 Abrams tank 
modification program. The Committee recommends $58,301,000, an 
increase of $5,000,000 only for cordless Vehicular 
Intercommunications Systems (AN/VIC-3).

                         abrams upgrade program

    The Army requested $412,661,000 for the Abrams upgrade 
program. The Committee recommends $403,661,000, a decrease of 
$9,000,000. Within that amount is a decrease of $20,000,000 for 
the M1A1D program and an increase of $11,000,000 to accelerate 
the System Enhancement Program (SEP).

                     army tank modernization issues

    The Committee is concerned about the Army's plan to 
terminate its Abrams M1A2 tank modernization program after 
2003. At that time, the Army will have modernized only 1,150 
M1A1 tanks to the M1A2 configuration. This would equip only one 
of every three brigades in each of the Army's six heavy 
divisions with modern and up to date equipment. The remaining 
equipment would be made up of older and less capable M1A1 
models that have significantly different crew training and 
maintenance requirements. With the advent of a next generation 
replacement tank at least 15 years away, the Committee has 
major reservations about the Army's plan to institutionalize a 
tank force that is multi-tiered in terms of capability, 
training requirements, and maintenance requirements.
    Based on the justification presented to date, it appears to 
the Committee that the Army's plan for introducing the new 
M1A1D Abrams variant to the fleet is not based on any 
comprehensive assessment of armored systems modernization 
requirements, but is merely budget driven. Therefore, the 
Committee directs the Secretary of the Army to submit to 
Congress an armored systems modernization plan through 2020 
with the fiscal year 2000 budget request. The plan is to 
include requirements, alternatives, cost, and schedule. The 
Army is to include M1A2 SEP ``Step-1'' program in its analysis. 
If the Army's armored systems modernization plan determines 
that M1A2 production should continue after fiscal year 1999, 
the Committee encourages the Army to enter into a second 
multiyear contract.
    The Committee believes that until the armored systems 
modernization plan is submitted to the Congress, it is 
premature to begin the development of the next combat vehicle. 
Therefore, the Committee denies the Army's request for funds in 
research, development, test and evaluation for the future 
combat system. The Committee encourages the Army to include 
eyesafe laser rangefinders as part of the Abrams upgrade 
program because of safety considerations and benefits.

                        army tank prepositioning

    With the dramatic reductions in force following the end of 
the Cold War, the Army has changed its war-fighting strategy to 
rely on a CONUS-based force depending on prepositioned overseas 
armor stocks. The Committee is concerned that these strategic 
equipment stocks will not be in the same configuration as 
needed by Army forces arriving from the U.S. This situation 
occurred in the early days of Desert Shield when the United 
States Marine Corps fell onto 1960's vintage M60A1 tanks that 
were inferior to the models provided to some of our allies. 
This tank should never have been used in this operation and has 
since been dropped from the force.
    The Committee understands that the Army's current plan is 
to equip its prepositioned stocks with M1A1D tanks. This 
configuration will mean that a significant number of tank crews 
arriving from the U.S. will not be given equipment with which 
they are familiar. The Committee fails to see the logic in 
spending large sums to maintain prepositioned equipment stocks 
if that equipment is inferior to that used by many of our 
forces in CONUS and cannot be immediately used upon arrival in 
theater.
    The Committee directs the Secretary of Defense to report to 
the congressional defense committees assessing the adequacy of 
plans and budget resources to rotate prepositioned equipment 
stocks to ensure commonality between the available equipment in 
these prepositioned stocks and the equipment U.S. forces are 
trained to fight with. This report shall explain the 
differences in crew training that will be required to operate 
and maintain the M1A1D tank versus the M1A2 SEP tank; the 
length of time it takes to requalify an M1A2 tank crew on the 
M1A1D; the projected performance of an M1A2 tank crew that had 
to fight with an M1A1D tank within a week of receiving it 
compared to how it would perform with an M1A2 tank; a 
description of the experiences of Army tank crews of becoming 
proficient with the prepositioned tanks in the most recent 
Persian Gulf deployment; a comparison of the planned mix of 
tanks to be prepositioned in the next five years versus the 
planned numbers of crews to be deployed who are fully qualified 
to operate those tanks; and a description of any changes to the 
prepositioned equipment stocks that emanate from this review. 
The Secretary shall report the results of this review to 
Congress no later than March 1, 1999.
    The Committee expects the Secretary of the Army to use the 
results of this report to assist in the review of the Army's 
armored systems modernization plan.

                          Program Recommended

    The total amount recommended in the bill will provide the 
following programs in fiscal year 1999:





                    PROCUREMENT OF AMMUNITION, ARMY

                                                                        
                                                                        
                                                                        
Fiscal year 1998 appropriation........................    $1,037,202,000
Fiscal year 1999 budget request.......................     1,008,855,000
Committee recommendation..............................     1,099,155,000
Change from budget request............................       +90,300,000
                                                                        


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

                       Committee Recommendations

                         authorization changes

    The Committee recommends the following changes to the 
budget request in accordance with House authorization action:

                                            [In thousands of dollars]                                           
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                  Committee        Change from  
                           Item                              Budget request      recommended         request    
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CTG, 5.56MM...............................................            91,620            97,220            +5,600
CTG, 7.62MM...............................................            10,463            14,463            +4,000
120MM M830A1..............................................                 0            10,000           +10,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                    Small/Medium Caliber Ammunition

                            25mm, all types

    The Army requested $59,618,000 for CTG, 25MM, All Types 
ammunition. The Committee recommends $80,418,000, an increase 
of $20,800,000 only for M919 ammunition.

                           Mortar Ammunition

                         60mm mortar, practice

    The Army requested no funds for CTG, Mortar, 60MM Practice 
ammunition. The Committee recommends $5,000,000 only for M766 
ammunition.

                          120mm mortar, he 934

    The Army requested $29,087,000 for CTG, Mortar 120MM, HE 
M934 ammunition. The Committee recommends $38,087,000, an 
increase of $9,000,000 only for M934 ammunition.

                       120MM mortar, illum xm930

    The Army requested no funds for CTG, Mortar, 120MM 
Illumination XM930 ammunition. The Committee recommends 
$8,500,000 only for XM930 ammunition.

                            Tank Ammunition

                              120mm/m829a2

    The Army requested $9,732,000 for 120MM M829A2 ammunition. 
The Committee recommends $19,732,000, an increase of 
$10,000,000 only for M829A2 ammunition to correct a critical 
shortfall identified by the Army. The Committee understands 
that a total of $42,000,000 is required annually to produce the 
M829A2 at a minimum production rate. The Army has agreed to 
fund the remaining shortfall in fiscal year 1999. The Committee 
directs the Secretary of the Army to provide to the Committee 
no later than August 1, 1998 a plan for sustaining a minimum 
rate of production in fiscal year 1999. If the plan includes an 
internal reprogramming, the Committee directs that the report 
include the sources.

                          Artillery Ammunition

                              105mm dpicm

    The Army requested no funds for 105MM DPICM ammunition. The 
Committee recommends $7,500,000 only for 105MM DPICM 
ammunition.

                               105mm m927

    The Army requested no funds for 105MM M927 ammunition. The 
Committee recommends $5,000,000 only to procure M927 ammunition 
for the National Guard.

                                 SADARM

    The Army requested $56,542,000 for SADARM. The Committee 
recommends $36,542,000, a decrease of $20,000,000. Recently, 
the Committee has learned that the SADARM program has 
experienced cost overruns and the Army will reduce the fiscal 
year 1998 procurement quantities to pay for those overruns. 
Additionally, the SADARM program has experienced reliability 
problems during testing that may not be resolved until as late 
as May 1999. Therefore, the Committee recommends that 
production in fiscal year 1999 be maintained at the revised 
fiscal year 1998 level.

                             155mm he m107

    The Army requested $25,650,000 for 155MM HE M107 
ammunition. The Committee recommends $35,650,000, an increase 
of $10,000,000 only for M107 ammunition.

                            155mm he m795e1

    The Committee directs that the Army may spend no more than 
$7,000,000 of the fiscal year 1998 procurement funds to perform 
in-process improvements to the M795 to add an extended range 
capability.

                                Rockets

                       bunker defeating munition

    The Army requested no funds for the bunker defeating 
munition program. The Committee recommends $10,000,000 only to 
procure additional Bunker Defeat Munitions for contingency 
operations and training to assure a sufficient quantity of 
munitions are available while the Army continues development of 
the MPIM/SRAW.

                        Production Base Support

                   provision of industrial facilities

    The Army requested $47,660,000 for the provision of 
industrial facilities. The Committee recommends $52,560,000, an 
increase of $4,900,000 only to execute the prove-out of the 
large caliber deep drawn cartridge case facility project.

                          Program Recommended

    The total amount recommended in the bill will provide the 
following programs in fiscal year 1999:





                        OTHER PROCUREMENT, ARMY

                                                                        
                                                                        
                                                                        
Fiscal year 1998 appropriation........................    $2,679,130,000
Fiscal year 1999 budget request.......................     3,198,811,000
Committee recommendation..............................     3,101,130,000
Change from budget request............................       -97,681,000
                                                                        


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

                        Committee Recommendation

                         authorization changes

    The Committee recommends the following changes in the 
budget estimate, in accordance with House authorization action:

                                            [In thousands of dollars]                                           
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                  Committee       Change  from  
                           Item                              Budget request      recommended         request    
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Common Imagery Grd/surface sys............................                 0             2,508            +2,508
Pusher Tugs, Small........................................             4,269             8,569            +4,300
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                     Tactical and Support Vehicles

              high mobility multi-purpose wheeled vehicles

    The Army requested $12,144,000 for High Mobility Multi-
purpose Wheeled Vehicles (HMMWV). The Committee recommends 
$58,476,000, an increase of $46,332,000 only for HMMWV's which 
the Army identified as a critical shortfall.

                   family of medium tactical vehicles

    The Army requested $332,044,000 for the Family of Medium 
Tactical Vehicles (FMTV). The Committee recommends 
$312,424,000, a decrease of $19,620,000 for 2.5 ton tactical 
vehicles. Recently, there have been accidents involving new 2.5 
ton cargo trucks which the Army believes may be due to failure 
of the rear driveshaft. The Army is currently working to 
correct this problem. In the interim, the Army has issued a 
safety message to all Army and Air Force units with FMTV 2.5 
ton cargo trucks, affecting approximately 4,200 trucks. After a 
complete inspection of each new truck's driveshaft, it is 
returned to the fleet and can only be operated at speeds not 
exceeding 30 miles per hour until the Army has isolated the 
root cause of the problem and taken corrective action. The 
Committee has learned that over 100 of the inspected trucks 
were parked for safety reasons until they could be repaired. 
The Committee finds this situation unacceptable and believes 
that no funds should be appropriated to procure additional 2.5 
ton cargo trucks until the Army provides a detailed report to 
the Congress outlining: (1) the problem; (2) the solution; (3) 
the cost of the solution; (4) who is responsible for the cost 
of modifying the fielded trucks with the solution; (5) the 
schedule for the installing the fix in the fielded vehicles.
    The Committee also directs that the Army may not enter into 
a new multiyear contract for FMTV's until the report has been 
submitted to the Congress.

                             line haul, esp

    The Army requested $4,883,000 for the line haul extended 
service program. The Committee recommends $4,983,000, an 
increase of $100,000 only for the collision warning system.

 high mobility multi-purpose wheeled vehicle, extended service program

    The Army requested $24,832,000 for the High Mobility Multi-
purpose Wheeled Vehicle Extended Service Program (HMMWV-ESP). 
The Committee recommends no funds.
    The Army's fiscal year 1998 budget requested funds for a 
follow-on HMMWV program and terminated HMMWV production. Since 
the Army had conducted no analysis to support its budget, the 
Congress denied the request for the follow-on program and added 
funds to continue HMMWV production. Additionally, the Congress 
directed that the Army provide a light tactical wheeled vehicle 
strategy by September 15, 1997. The plan was to outline light 
tactical wheeled vehicle alternatives and detailed cost 
analysis. The Army never submitted a plan to the Congress.
    The Army's fiscal year 1999 budget proposes terminating 
HMMWV production in fiscal year 1999. The budget also proposes 
a new initiative, a HMMWV-ESP and continues funding research 
and development for the next-generation light tactical wheeled 
vehicle. For the second year in a row, the Army has developed a 
program strategy with no analysis to support its decision. 
Therefore, the Committee denies the funds for a HMMWV-ESP.
    The Committee is frustrated with the Army's blatant 
disregard for the Congress' request for a light tactical 
wheeled vehicle strategy. Once again, the Committee directs 
that the Secretary of the Army submit a light tactical wheeled 
strategy with the fiscal year 2000 budget. The plan is to 
include the requirements, estimated development and acquisition 
costs, and estimated operation and support costs for each 
alternative.

                        Satellite Communications

                             smart-t space

    The Army requested $57,743,000 for Secure Mobile Anti-jam 
Reliable Tactical Terminal (SMART-T). The Committee recommends 
$33,143,000, a decrease of $24,600,000 based on contract 
delays. The Committee notes that over the last three years, the 
Army has reprogrammed over $15,000,000 from this line item for 
higher priority programs.

                         Combat Communications

                     army data distribution system

    The Army requested $24,048,000 for the Army data 
distribution system. The Committee recommends $27,048,000, an 
increase of $3,000,000 only for Enhanced Position Location 
Reporting Systems (EPLRS).

                            sincgars family

    The Army requested $13,212,000 for the SINCGARS family of 
radios. The Committee recommends $51,212,000, an increase of 
$38,000,000 only for ``Tactical Internet'' SINCGARS for the 
National Guard.

                             tactical radio

    The Committee has learned that the 82nd Airborne Division 
has an urgent requirement to replace its aging non-secure 
radios, especially the analog AN/PRC-104 radio. If the Army 
validates the requirement for a replacement radio, the 
Committee encourages the Army to procure off-the-shelf radios, 
such as the AN/PRC-138 and the AKLR/MBITR. The Army is directed 
to report back to the Committee not later than August 1, 1998 
on the status of plans to meet the 82nd Airborne Division's 
requirements.

                          Information Security

                  information system security program

    The Army requested $29,714,000 for the information system 
security program. The Committee recommends $31,714,000, an 
increase of $2,000,000 only for portable ``uninterruptible'' 
universal power supply systems.

                      Electronic Equipment--TIARA

                                jtt/cibs

    The Army requested $5,340,000 for JTT/CIBS-M. The Committee 
recommends $10,340,000, an increase of $5,000,000 only to 
procure additional JTT/CIBS-M.

                        iew ground based sensor

    The Army requested $25,388,000 for Ground Based Common 
Sensor. The Committee recommends $14,188,000, a decrease of 
$11,200,000 because full-rate production will be delayed. The 
remaining funds will be used only to implement hardware and 
software changes to the Limited Procurement Urgent (LPU) 
systems that will be fielded in fiscal year 1999; upgrade the 
communications architecture between GBCS and All Source 
Analysis System; support total package fielding for the LPUs; 
and provide interim contractor support for the fielded systems.

                              joint stars

    The Army requested $87,229,000 for Joint Stars. The 
Committee recommends $90,229,000, an increase of $3,000,000 
only to procure additional workstations to augment the mobile 
Common Ground Station deployed to tactical commanders.

                Electronic Equipment--Electronic Warfare

                               shortstop

    The Army requested no funding for Shortstop (SEPS). The 
Committee recommends $15,000,000 only to procure 14 SEPS for 
U.S. Forces, Korea, and 89 SEPS for the BDE Contingency Set.

                          night vision devices

    The Army requested $29,636,000 for night vision devices. 
The Committee recommends $38,636,000, an increase of 
$9,000,000. The additional funds are only for night vision 
devices and priority should be for third generation 25mm tube 
upgrades for AN/PVS-4 and AN/TVS-5 night sights, AN/PEQ 
infrared target pointers, borelights, and pattern generators.

              Electronic Equipment--Tactical Surveillance

                  modification of in-service equipment

    The Army requested $5,477,000 for the modification of in-
service equipment. The Committee recommends $23,227,000, an 
increase of $17,750,000. Of that amount, $16,000,000 is only 
for AN/TPQ-36 (V)8 fire finder systems and $1,750,000 is only 
for the automated integrated surveying instrument.

               Electronic Equipment--Tactical C2 Systems

                   gun laying and positioning system

    The Army requested $11,781,000 for the gun laying and 
positioning system. The Committee recommends $6,331,000, a 
decrease of $5,450,000 as recommended by the General Accounting 
Office.

                            iyscon equipment

    The Army requested $34,175,000 for integrated system 
control (IYSCON) equipment. The Committee recommends 
$10,175,000, a decrease of $24,000,000. Since the system did 
not have a successful initial operational test and evaluation 
(IOT&E;) in March, the Army has decided to continue with a 
``phase II'' IOT&E; in October 1998 and delay the Milestone III 
decision until January 1999. Furthermore, the fiscal year 1999 
budget request represents a 232 percent increase over last 
year's appropriated amount. Given the delays in the program and 
the unresolved software issues, the Committee believes it is 
prudent to reduce the request to last year's appropriated 
level.

                    Electronic Equipment--Automation

                  army training xxi and modernization

    The Army requested $32,635,000 for Army Training XXI and 
modernization. The Committee recommends no funds. The Committee 
believes that the funding for this Army program, which is 
projected to cost over $100 million, should come from existing 
training budgets in the Army.

                       automated data processing

    Information on this project can be found in the Information 
Resources Management section of this report.

                    Combat Service Support Equipment

                              landwarrior

    The Army requested $51,380,000 for Landwarrior. The 
Committee recommends no production funds due to delays in the 
development program. The Committee recommends additional 
funding in research, development, test and evaluation, Army to 
continue the development of the Landwarrior system.

                         Construction Equipment

                          hydraulic excavator

    The Army requested $6,402,000 for hydraulic excavators. The 
Committee recommends $8,902,000, an increase of $2,500,000. Of 
that amount, $1,000,000 is only for hydraulic excavator systems 
for the active Army and $1,500,000 is only for hydraulic 
excavator systems for the Army Reserve.

                Rail, Float, Containerization Equipment

                      floating crane, 100-250 ton

    The Army requested no funds for 100-250 ton floating 
cranes. The Committee recommends $15,000,000 only for one 115-
ton floating crane.

                               Generators

                  generators and associated equipment

    The Army requested $82,749,000 for generators and 
associated equipment. The Committee recommends $69,049,000, a 
decrease of $13,700,000 for 3 kilowatt generators as 
recommended by the Committee's Survey and Investigations Staff. 
Originally, the Army had estimated a unit cost of approximately 
$5,000 for the 3 kilowatt generator. The 3 kilowatt generator, 
currently in development, now has an estimated unit cost of 
$9,000. This estimate is a much higher unit cost in comparison 
to other models. Until testing is complete, the Committee 
believes that it is premature to begin production of the 3 
kilowatt generator.

                      Material Handling Equipment

                         rough terrain handler

    The Army requested $13,615,000 for rough terrain handlers. 
The Committee recommends $3,615,000, a decrease of $10,000,000 
due to contracting delays.

                           Training Equipment

                      training devices, nonsystem

    The Army requested $56,755,000 for non-system training 
devices. The Committee recommends $67,755,000, an increase of 
$11,000,000. Of the additional funds $3,000,000 is only for 
computer controlled, propane (natural gas) firefighter 
trainers, $3,000,000 is only for the aerial weapons scoring 
system, and $5,000,000 is only to procure engagement skills 
trainers for the National Guard. The Committee directs the Army 
to provide funding in fiscal year 2000 to purchase the 
remainder of the required firefighter systems.

                  simnet/close combat tactical trainer

    The Army requested $113,927,000 for the SIMNET/close combat 
tactical trainer. The Committee recommends $76,527,000, a 
decrease of $37,400,000. The fiscal year 1999 budget request 
represents a $60,600,000, or over 113 percent, increase over 
last year's appropriated amount. Since software problems have 
delayed the program by one year, the Committee does not believe 
such considerable program growth is warranted before the 
completion of a successful initial operational test and 
evaluation.

              fire support combined arms tactical trainer

    The Army requested $28,124,000 for the fire support 
combined arms tactical trainer. The Committee recommends no 
funds due to software problems that have resulted in schedule 
delays.

                 Test Measure and Diagnostic Equipment

                  integrated family of test equipment

    The Army requested $54,051,000 for the integrated family of 
test equipment. The Committee recommends $69,051,000, an 
increase of $15,000,000 only for base shops sets and electro-
optics test facility sets.

                        Other Support Equipment

                  modification of in-service equipment

    The Army requested $17,667,000 for modification of in-
service equipment. The Committee recommends $22,467,000, an 
increase of $4,800,000 only for laser leveling systems.

                       R-2000 engine flush system

    The Army requested no funds for the R-2000 engine flush 
system. The Committee recommends $5,000,000 only for R-2000 
engine flush system for the Army National Guard.

                          Program Recommended

    The total amount recommended in the bill will provide the 
following in fiscal year 1999:





                       AIRCRAFT PROCUREMENT, NAVY

                                                                        
                                                                        
                                                                        
Fiscal year 1998 appropriation........................    $6,535,444,000
Fiscal year 1999 budget request.......................     7,466,734,000
Committee recommendation..............................     7,599,968,000
Change from budget request............................      +133,234,000
                                                                        

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

                       Committee Recommendations

                         authorization changes

    The Committee recommends the following changes in 
accordance with the House authorization action:

                                            [In thousands of dollars]                                           
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                      Budget         Committee      Change from 
                                                                      request     recommendation      request   
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
AV-8B (V/STOL) Harrier..........................................         282,713         279,513          -3,200
T-45 (Trainer) Goshawk..........................................         282,667         267,167         -15,500
KC-130J.........................................................               0         112,400        +112,400
EA-6 Modifications..............................................          75,735         114,735         +39,000
ES-3 Modifications..............................................           5,172               0          -5,172
E-6 Modifications...............................................          64,660          60,060          -4,600
Spares and Repair Parts.........................................         727,838         719,438          -8,400
Common Ground Equipment.........................................         330,952         315,552         -15,400
Aircraft Industrial Facilities..................................          13,753          11,953          -1,800
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                         Multiyear Procurement

    The Navy requested authority to enter into multiyear 
contracts for T-45 and E-2C aircraft, which the Committee 
approves in section 8008 of the bill. The Committee encourages 
the Navy to pursue engine multiyear contracts within this 
authority for the E-2C program, if cost-effective. The 
Committee also encourages the Navy to structure the E-2C 
contract to allow the movement of at least one aircraft between 
fiscal years, if cost-effective.

                            Combat Aircraft

                            F/A-18E/F Hornet

    The Navy requested $2,787,783,000 to procure 30 F/A-18E/F 
Hornet aircraft. The Committee recommends $2,568,083,000 to 
procure 27 aircraft, a decrease of $219,700,000 and 3 aircraft. 
This includes a decrease of $204,700,000 for 3 aircraft as 
recommended in the House-passed authorization bill, and a 
decrease of $15,000,000 since the Navy has used the F/A-18 
program as a reprogramming source in a number of previous 
fiscal years.

                           v-22 (medium lift)

    The Navy requested $610,766,000 to procure 7 V-22 aircraft. 
The Committee recommends $696,266,000, an increase of 
$85,500,000 and 1 aircraft. This includes $78,000,000 for 1 
additional aircraft as recommended in the House-passed 
authorization bill, and an increase of $7,500,000 to address 
support equipment shortfalls. Without additional funds for 
support equipment in this fiscal year, the first two scheduled 
V-22 deployments will not have any intermediate level 
maintenance capability, jeopardizing the mission-capable rates 
of the aircraft for an extended period of time.

                            ch-60 helicopter

    The Navy requested $106,027,000 for CH-60 helicopters. The 
Committee recommends $144,027,000, an increase of $38,000,000 
only to procure two CH-60 helicopters for the Navy Reserve.

                        kc-130j tanker aircraft

    The Navy requested no funds for procurement of KC-130J 
aircraft. The Committee recommends $112,400,000 for 2 aircraft. 
The KC-130F is the Marine Corps' tactical aerial refueling 
aircraft. It comprises about half of the Marine Corps total 
force inventory and over 70 percent of the active force 
inventory. By 2000, the KC-130F fleet will be 40 years old. 
Procurement of KC-130J aircraft allows retirement of older 
model aircraft, increases safety in an aging tanker fleet, 
increases aircraft performance, and reduces life cycle costs.

                        Modification of Aircraft

                           depot maintenance

    The Navy requested $70,000,000 in Research, Development, 
Test and Evaluation, Navy in a new line item entitled Depot 
Maintenance for projects which historically have been spent in 
the modification programs in Aircraft Procurement, Navy. The 
Committee denies this request, and has instead provided the 
following increases in this account:

                        [In thousands of dollars]                       
                                                                        
                                                                        
                                                                        
AV-8B series..........................................           +11,000
S-3 series............................................           +23,800
P-3 series............................................           +28,700
Common avionics changes...............................            +6,500
                                                                        

                              av-8 series

    The Navy requested $99,109,000 for AV-8 aircraft 
modifications. The Committee recommends $112,409,000, an 
increase of $13,300,000 of which $11,000,000 is a transfer from 
Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, Navy as described 
above and $2,300,000 is for AV-8B antennas. The Commandant of 
the Marine Corps identified the lack of current-generation AV-
8B antennas as a serious deficiency. AV-8B aircraft currently 
use Vietnam-era antennas on radar warning receiver equipment. 
The additional $2,300,000 will procure 145 ALR-67 antenna sets, 
which increase accuracy of threat detection by a factor of two 
and are five times more reliable than current equipment.

                              f-14 series

    The Navy requested $223,661,000 for F-14 aircraft 
modifications. The Committee recommends $224,361,000, an 
increase of $700,000. This includes an increase of $8,000,000 
for LANTIRN and a decrease of $7,300,000 as recommended in the 
House-passed authorization bill. The Chief of Naval Operations 
identified the lack of LANTIRN equipment as a serious 
deficiency. The additional funds will procure the last LANTIRN 
system needed to meet fleet inventory objectives and support 
equipment needed to effectively operate deployed LANTIRN 
systems.

                              f-18 series

    The Navy requested $198,049,000 for F-18 aircraft 
modifications. The Committee recommends $211,149,000, an 
increase of $13,100,000. This includes an increase of 
$17,000,000 only for modification of Naval Reserve aircraft, 
and a decrease of $3,900,000 as recommended in the House-passed 
authorization bill.

                              ah-1w series

    The Navy requested $22,394,000 for AH-1 helicopter 
modifications. The Committee recommends $27,894,000, an 
increase of $5,500,000 only for night targeting systems. The 
Committee notes that the Commandant of the Marine Corps include 
the AH-1 night targeting systems on his list of unfunded 
reuqirements.

                               H-1 SERIES

    The Navy requested $18,220,000 for H-1 helicopter 
modifications. The Committee recommends $30,220,000, an 
increase of $12,000,000 only for AN/AAQ-22 thermal imaging 
systems upgrades.

                              ep-3 series

    The Navy requested $5,437,000 for EP-3 aircraft 
modifications. The Committee recommends $6,937,000, an increase 
of $1,500,000 only to procure EP-3 flat panel displays.

                               P-3 series

    The Navy requested $268,633,000 for P-3 aircraft 
modifications. The Committee recommends $341,033,000, an 
increase of $72,400,000. Within the increase $28,700,000 is 
transferred from Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, 
Navy as discussed above; $10,000,000 is only for the 
Lightweight Environmentally Sealed Parachute Assembly as 
recommended in the House-passed authorization bill; $12,200,000 
is only for 1 additional Anti-Submarine Warfare Improvement 
Program (AIP) kit; $15,000,000 is only for specific emitter 
identification; and $6,500,000 is only for procurement of 28 
advanced digital recorders for 3 P-3 squadrons. Additional 
funds for specific emitter identification complete the 
initiative begun last year to provide 40 forward deployed P-3s 
with the ability to ``fingerprint'' ships for wartime, 
intelligence, or counter-drug operations. Additional funds for 
advanced digital recorders allow replacement of 25 year old, 
obsolescent acoustic data recorders to provide increased 
mission capability and operating cost savings.

                               E-2 series

    The Navy requested $91,502,000 for E-2 aircraft 
modifications. The Committee recommends $96,502,000, an 
increase of $5,000,000 only for the Lightweight Environmentally 
Sealed Parachute Assembly as recommended in the House-passed 
authorization bill.

                          common ecm equipment

    The Navy requested $37,375,000 for common electronic 
warfare equipment. The Committee recommends $33,075,000, a 
decrease of $4,300,000. This includes an increase of $5,000,000 
only for AN/ALR-67(V)2 radar warning receiver upgrades and a 
decrease of $9,300,000 to transfer funds for the integrated 
defensive electronic countermeasures system to Research, 
Development, Test and Evaluation, Navy due to recent 
restructuring of the program. The AN/ALR-67(V)2 is the standard 
radar warning receiver installed on all Navy and Marine Corps 
front-line tactical strike and fighter aircraft. The system 
performs well against the threats for which it was designed, 
but has become deficient against modern surface and airborne 
threats. Additional funds will allow low-cost performance 
upgrades to existing systems which provide significantly 
greater survivability for combat aircrews while also lowering 
life cycle cost.

                        common avionics changes

    The Navy requested $104,697,000 for common avionics 
changes. The Committee recommends $109,197,000, an increase of 
$4,500,000. This includes an increase of $6,500,000 which is a 
transfer from Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, Navy 
as discussed previously and a decrease of $2,000,000 as 
recommended in the House-passed authorization bill.

                              Rescissions

    The Committee recommends rescissions of $28,500,000 from 
several fiscal year 1998 Other Procurement, Navy programs due 
to recent budget execution data identified by the General 
Accounting Office or the Committee's Surveys and Investigations 
Staff. This includes: $15,000,000 due to delays in the Nulka 
decoy program, $3,600,000 for pollution control equipment on 
ships which now are to be decommissioned, $3,000,000 due to 
cancelled requirements for Type 8B Mod 3 periscopes, $2,300,000 
for contract savings on the AN/SQQ-62 sonobouy, $1,700,000 due 
to contract savings in other navigation equipment, $1,500,000 
due to cancelled WLQ-4 requirements, and $1,400,000 due to 
battle force tactical trainer contract savings.

                          Program Recommended

    The total recommended in the bill will provide the 
following program in fiscal year 1999:





                       WEAPONS PROCUREMENT, NAVY

                                                                        
                                                                        
                                                                        
Fiscal year 1998 appropriation........................    $1,102,193,000
Fiscal year 1999 budget request.......................     1,327,545,000
Committee recommendation..............................     1,191,219,000
Change from budget request............................      -136,326,000
                                                                        

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

                       Committee Recommendations

                         authorization changes

    The Committee recommends the following changes to the 
budget request in accordance with House authorization action.

                                            [In thousands of dollars]                                           
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                      Budget         Committee      Change from 
                              Item                                    request     recommendation      request   
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tomahawk........................................................         129,758          33,258         -96,500
Standard Missile................................................         225,702         205,702         -20,000
Aerial Targets..................................................          75,474          72,774          -2,700
Weapons Industrial Facilities...................................          27,113          24,333          -2,800
MK-48 Torpedo...................................................          52,813          50,613          -2,200
CIWS............................................................           2,778           6,778          +4,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                           Tactical Missiles

                                 amraam

    The Navy requested $62,641,000 to procure 115 AMRAAMs. The 
Committee recommends $55,641,000, a decrease of $7,000,000. 
These funds are available based on savings from the recent 
merger between the two competing prime contractors.

                                  jsow

    The Navy requested $125,207,000 to procure JSOW munitions. 
The Committee recommends $110,207,000, a decrease of 
$15,000,000 for JSOW tooling. The Navy request includes 
$24,600,000 for additional JSOW tooling. The Navy has not 
adequately justified such a large expenditure on tooling in 
fiscal year 1999.

                                SLAM-ER

    The Navy requested $39,506,000 to procure SLAM-ER in the 
Harpoon Modification line-item. The Committee approves this 
request, but has created a separate SLAM-ER line-item to 
provide better visibility for this program. The Committee 
directs the Navy to use this new line-item for future budget 
requests for SLAM-ER.

                                PENGUIN

    The Navy requested no funds for procurement of Penguin 
missiles. The Committee recommends $10,000,000 only for 
additional procurement of Penguin missiles.

                             aerial targets

    The Committee is aware of the need to replace the current 
Vandal target missile with a follow-on supersonic seaskimming 
target (SSST) missile. The Committee believes that the Navy 
should conduct a full and open competition for the new target 
missile taking into account the full range of performance 
parameters that meet the requirements of the new target 
missile.

                         harpoon modifications

    The Navy requested $39,506,000 for Harpoon Modifications. 
As noted previously, the Committee has transferred these funds 
to a new SLAM-ER line-item.

                          Program Recommended

    The total recommended in the bill will provide the 
following program in fiscal year 1999:





            PROCUREMENT OF AMMUNITION, NAVY AND MARINE CORPS

                                                                        
                                                                        
                                                                        
Fiscal year 1998 appropriation........................      $397,547,000
Fiscal year 1999 budget request.......................       429,539,000
Committee recommendation..............................       473,803,000
Change from budget request............................       +44,264,000
                                                                        

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

                        Committee Recommendation

                         authorization changes

    The Committee recommends the following changes to the 
budget request in accordance with House authorization action:

                                            [In thousands of dollars]                                           
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                      Budget         Committee      Change from 
                              Item                                    request     recommendation      request   
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
5.56MM, All types...............................................          25,750          26,350            +600
7.62MM, All types...............................................             196             896            +700
120MM M865.5....................................................               0             500            +500
120MM M831.7....................................................               0             700            +700
25MM, All types.................................................           3,860           4,760            +900
9MM, All types..................................................           2,332           3,132            +800
Grenades, All types.............................................           4,893           8,093          +3,200
Rockets, All types..............................................          21,346          38,346         +17,000
Demolition munitions, all types.................................           7,737           8,337            +600
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                      Procurement Ammunition, Navy

                             practice bombs

    The Navy requested $40,134,000 for practice bombs. The 
Committee recommends $60,134,000, an increase of $20,000,000. 
Of the additional amount, $10,000,000 is only for laser guided 
training rounds and $10,000,000 is only for laser guided 
training rounds in the minimum collateral damage weapon 
variant.

                          Program Recommended

    The total amount recommended in the bill will provide the 
following in fiscal year 1999:





                   SHIPBUILDING AND CONVERSION, NAVY

                                                                        
                                                                        
                                                                        
Fiscal year 1998 appropriation........................    $8,235,591,000
Fiscal year 1999 budget request.......................     6,252,672,000
Committee recommendation..............................     5,973,452,000
Change from budget request............................      -279,220,000
                                                                        

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

                       Committee Recommendations

                         authorization changes

    The Committee recommends the following changes in 
accordance with House authorization action:

                                            [In thousands of dollars]                                           
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                     Committee      Change from 
                                                                  Budget request  recommendation      request   
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Strategic Sealift (LMSR)........................................         251,400               0        -251,400
LCAC Landing Craft..............................................               0          16,000          16,000
Post Delivery...................................................         123,277         114,977          -8,300
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                  Recognition of Vice Admiral Connolly

    The Committee recognizes Vice Admiral Thomas F. Connolly's 
significant contributions to the United States Navy and urges 
the Secretary of the Navy to acknowledge his service by 
appropriate means, including the naming of a ship or facility 
in his honor.

                       Aircraft Carrier Reporting

    The Department of Defense submits annual Selected 
Acquisition Reports (SAR) to Congress providing detailed cost 
and schedule status of major weapon system programs. Reports 
are not submitted once a program is late in the production 
cycle. The most recent SAR report for Nimitz class carriers 
indicates that it is the last one to be submitted. The 
Committee believes that aircraft carriers are different from 
other programs, like tanks and aircraft, that are produced in 
high annual quantities. The Committee would like to continue to 
receive information on Nimitz class carriers until CVN-77, the 
last ship of the class, is well into construction. In addition, 
the Navy's change in approach to CVX may extend the Nimitz 
class indefinitely. For these reasons, the Committee directs 
that the Secretary of Defense continue to annually submit SAR 
reports on Nimitz class aircraft carriers until further notice.

                             Other Warships

                                 ddg-51

    The Navy requested $2,672,078,000 to procure 3 DDG-51 
destroyers. The Committee recommends $2,662,078,000, a decrease 
of $10,000,000 since the Navy has used the DDG-51 program as a 
reprogramming source in a number of prior fiscal years.

                            Amphibious Ships

                                 lpd-17

    The Committee concurs with the direction provided by the 
House National Security Committee in House Report 105-532 
regarding the evaluation of combat system and ship self-defense 
alternatives for the LPD-17 class amphibious assault ships, 
except that the Committee directs the Navy to report the 
results of the evaluation on these systems to the congressional 
defense committees by October 30, 1998, before proceeding with 
procurement.

              Auxiliaries, Craft, and Prior Year Programs

                           lcac landing craft

    The Navy requested no funds for LCAC landing craft. The 
Committee recommends $16,000,000, as provided in the House-
passed authorization bill. Of this amount, $1,000,000 shall be 
used for TF-40B integrated logistics support concurrent with 
sea trials and a subsequent determination of engine 
requirements for enhanced performance benefits for the service 
life extension program.

                               outfitting

    The Navy requested $95,680,000 for outfitting ships. The 
Committee recommends $80,680,000, a decrease of $15,000,000. 
Subsequent to submission of the President's budget for fiscal 
year 1999, the Navy requested approval to reprogram $31,782,000 
in fiscal year 1997 funding and $20,000,000 in fiscal year 1998 
funding for outfitting costs. These actions were not forecast 
in the President's budget for fiscal year 1999. The Committee 
assumes that some savings will accrue in fiscal year 1999 that 
were not anticipated when the budget was formulated or that the 
Navy could again reprogram funds should actual ship delivery 
schedules dictate the need for outfitting funds beyond what the 
Committee recommends.

                          Program Recommended

    The total recommended in the bill will provide the 
following program in fiscal year 1999:





                        OTHER PROCUREMENT, NAVY

                                                                        
                                                                        
                                                                        
Fiscal year 1998 appropriation........................    $3,144,205,000
Fiscal year 1999 budget request.......................     3,937,737,000
Committee recommendation..............................     3,990,553,000
Change from budget request............................       +52,816,000
                                                                        

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

                       Committee Recommendations

                         authorization changes

    The Committee recommends the following changes in 
accordance with House authorization action:

                                            [In thousands of dollars]                                           
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                     Committee      Change from 
                                                                  Budget request  recommendation      request   
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pollution Control Equipment.....................................         149,669         130,269         -19,400
HM&E; Items Under $2 million.....................................          58,121          55,021          -3,100
Reactor Power Units.............................................         227,338         200,038         -27,300
Reactor Components..............................................         211,382         200,882         -10,500
Nuclear Alterations.............................................          96,752          90,752          -6,000
AN/SSQ-89 Surface ASW Combat System.............................          27,432          18,732          -8,700
SSN Acoustics...................................................         133,535         132,335          -1,200
Sonar Switches and Transducers..................................          12,785          11,785          -1,000
Cooperative Engagement Capability...............................          47,332          82,332         +35,000
Common Imagery Ground/Surface System............................               0          65,827         +65,827
Strategic Platform Support Equipment............................          12,687          11,687          -1,000
Ship Communications Items Under $2 million......................          24,220          22,320          -1,900
Satellite Communications Ship Terminals (Space).................         145,193         155,193         +10,000
Integrated Broadcast System.....................................               0          10,271         +10,271
Naval Shore Communications......................................         113,546         110,546          -3,000
Engagement Systems Support......................................             307               0            -307
Strategic Missile Systems Equipment.............................         283,612         278,612          -5,000
Pollution Control Equipment.....................................          28,039          22,539          -5,500
Special Purpose Supply Systems..................................          95,711          68,631         -27,080
Training Support Equipment......................................           2,174           7,174          +5,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                          Navigation Equipment

                       other navigation equipment

    The Navy requested $45,259,000 for other navigation 
equipment. The Committee recommends $63,259,000, an increase of 
$18,000,000 of which $12,000,000 is only for the WSN-7 ring 
laser gyro navigation system and $6,000,000 is only for the 
WQN-2 doppler sonar velocity log as recommended in the House-
passed authorization bill.

                Communications and Electronic Equipment

                             radar support

    The Navy requested $1,260,000 for radar support. The 
Committee recommends $23,260,000, an increase of $22,000,000 of 
which $9,000,000 is only for the AN/BPS-15(H) submarine radar 
navigation system as recommended in the House-passed 
authorization bill and $13,000,000 is only for the AN/SPS-73 
surface search radar.

                      Electronic Warfare Equipment

                           c3 countermeasures

    The Navy requested $6,080,000 for C3 countermeasures. The 
Committee recommends $12,580,000, an increase of $6,500,000 
only for OUTLAW BANDIT surface ship radar signature reduction 
kits. These funds are for installation of previously purchased 
equipment on 3 CG-47 cruisers. The total amount is of special 
interest for the purpose of the Base for Reprogramming (DD Form 
1414).

                    Other Ship Electronic Equipment

                       navy tactical data system

    The Navy requested $34,000 for the Navy tactical data 
system. The Committee recommends $10,034,000, an increase of 
$10,000,000 only to continue the acquisition and installation 
of low cost emulator systems at land based sites for which 
validated requirements exist.

                    minesweeping system replacement

    The Navy requested $32,934,000 for minesweeping systems 
replacement. The Committee recommends $17,034,000, a decrease 
of $15,900,000 due to a program restructure and schedule slip 
in the remote minehunting system for surface ships. The 
Committee has provided an additional $7,500,000 in Research, 
Development, Test and Evaluation, Navy for increased 
development costs of the remote minehunting system.

                     Aviation Electronic Equipment

                        national airspace system

    The Navy requested $28,201,000 for the National Airspace 
System. The Committee recommends no funds due a restructure and 
schedule slip in the program.

                         identification systems

    The Navy requested $15,330,000 for identification systems. 
The Committee recommends $13,430,000, a decrease of $1,900,000 
due to canceled requirements for MK-12 field changes.

                    Other Shore Electronic Equipment

                         jmcis tactical/mobile

    The Navy requested $3,982,000 for JMCIS Tactical/Mobile. 
The Committee recommends $25,982,000, an increase of 
$22,000,000 of which $12,000,000 is only for the procurement of 
a littoral surveillance system and $10,000,000 is only for 
Mobile Inshore Undersea Warfare van upgrades. Funds for the 
littoral surveillance system are to design specific 
improvements into an existing AN/SQR-17A(V)3 signal processing 
system and procure an engineering development model for 
operational use. These littoral warfare improvements increase 
the capability to detect small submerged devices and swimmers; 
provide a semi-automatic alert capability to cue system 
operators to potential airborne, surface, and subsurface 
threats; and allow rapid deployment of passive barriers and 
active acoustic arrays tailored for a particular harbor's 
characteristics and mission operational requirements.

                shore electronic items under $2 million

    The Navy requested $2,559,000 for shore electronic items 
under $2 million. The Committee recommends $10,559,000, an 
increase of $8,000,000 only for AN/UYQ-70 shipboard display 
equipment support.

                          Shore Communications

                                jedmics

    Information on this project can be found in the Information 
Resources Management section of this report.

                       Aircraft Support Equipment

                    weapons range support equipment

    The Navy requested $8,064,000 for weapons range support 
equipment. The Committee recommends $13,064,000, an increase of 
$5,000,000 only for a deployable rangeless air combat training 
as recommended in the House-passed authorization bill.

                 aircraft launch and recovery equipment

    The Navy requested $39,749,000 for aircraft launch and 
recovery equipment. The Committee recommends $35,649,000, a 
decrease of $4,100,000 related to revised pricing or reduction 
in quantity of equipment after the budget was submitted. The 
equipment includes service change kits for launching systems, 
visual aids, recovery systems, an information data management 
and control system, and carrier and shore based improved 
optical landing systems.

                        meteorological equipment

    The Navy requested $32,892,000 for meteorological 
equipment. The Committee recommends $28,492,000, a decrease of 
$4,400,000 due to unjustified cost growth in a satellite 
receiver/recorder and the tactical environmental support 
system.

                           Ordnance Equipment

                       Ship Gun System Equipment

                       gun fire control equipment

    The Navy requested $20,203,000 for gun fire control 
equipment. The Committee recommends $35,203,000, an increase of 
$15,000,000 only for procurement of 4 additional AN/SPQ-9B 
radars. The additional funds, when combined with the funds 
already in the budget for procurement of these radars, will 
result in lower unit costs. They also accelerate fielding of 
capability to Aegis cruisers and aircraft carriers to detect 
and defend themselves from modern low-flying anti-ship cruise 
missiles.

                     Ship Missile Systems Equipment

                        ship self defense system

    The Navy requested $22,944,000 for the ship self defense 
system. The Committee recommends $43,944,000, an increase of 
$21,000,000 only for procurement of 3 ship self-defense MK1 
systems for LSD-class amphibious assault ships and one shore 
based system. This equipment is critical for providing these 
front-line combat ships with the ability to detect and defeat 
anti-ship cruise missiles. The Chief of Naval Operations 
identified the lack of ship self-defense equipment for LSD 
ships as a serious deficiency.

                        aegis support equipment

    The Navy requested $83,169,000 for Aegis support equipment. 
The Committee recommends $85,169,000, an increase of $2,000,000 
only to install and test a shipboard network of wireless 
sensors as part of the automated maintenance environment 
project.

                   surface tomahawk support equipment

    The Navy requested $90,209,000 for Tomahawk support 
equipment. The Committee recommends $103,009,000, an increase 
of $12,800,000. This amount includes an increase of $10,000,000 
only for upgrades to the Afloat Planning System and $2,800,000 
for equipment associated with the Navy's new plan to procure 
Tactical Tomahawk.

               Fleet Ballistic Missile Support Equipment

                     anti-ship missile decoy system

    The Navy requested $21,504,000 for anti-ship missile decoy 
systems for surface ships. The Committee recommends $8,004,000, 
a decrease of $13,500,000 for the NULKA decoy, which has not 
successfully passed operational testing.

                       Other Expendable Ordnance

                 surface training device modifications

    The Navy requested $5,891,000 for surface training device 
modifications. The Committee recommends $6,891,000, an increase 
of $1,000,000 only for the electronic warfare trainer component 
of the Battle Force Tactical Trainer.

                Personnel and Command Support Equipment

                       Command Support Equipment

    The Navy requested $17,916,000 for command support 
equipment. The Committee recommends $19,916,000, an increase of 
$2,000,000 only for the Advanced Technical Information System.

                   operating forces support equipment

    The Navy requested $4,684,000 for operating forces support 
equipment. The Committee recommends $6,184,000, an increase of 
$1,500,000 only for procurement of 33LL manual reverse osmosis 
desalinator equipment used in life raft survival gear.

                                 Other

                        spares and repair parts

    The Navy requested $279,028,000 for spares and repair 
parts. The Committee recommends $247,528,000, a decrease of 
$31,500,000 due to fiscal constraints. The budget requests 
growth of about 30 percent compared to the current fiscal year 
1998 funding level. The Committee recommendation provides 15 
percent growth.

                          Program Recommended

    The total recommended in the bill will provide the 
following program in fiscal year 1999:





                       PROCUREMENT, MARINE CORPS

                                                                        
                                                                        
                                                                        
Fiscal year 1998 appropriation........................      $482,398,000
Fiscal year 1999 budget request.......................       745,858,000
Committee recommendation..............................       812,618,000
Change from budget request............................       +66,760,000
                                                                        

    This appropriation provides the Marine Corps with funds for 
procurement, delivery and modification of missiles, armament, 
communication equipment, tracked and wheeled vehicles, and 
various support equipment.

                 Intelligence/Communications Equipment

                  items less than $2.0 million (intel)

    The Marine Corps requested no funding for intelligence 
items less than $2,000,000. The Committee recommends 
$2,000,000, of which $1,000,000 is only to purchase imagery 
tools and high quality large format printers and $1,000,000 is 
only to procure additional tactical remote sensor systems 
(TRSS).

                             Other Support

                          command post systems

    The Marine Corps requested $7,134,000 for command post 
systems. The Committee recommends $12,134,000, an increase of 
$5,000,000 only to build the first article Joint Task Force 
Enhanced Core Communications system for environmental and 
fielding testing support to USMC Joint Task Force 
communications requirements.

          communications and electronic infrastructure support

    The Marine Corps requested $57,862,000 for communications 
and electronic infrastructure support. The Committee recommends 
$89,862,000, an increase of $32,000,000 only for base 
telecommunications upgrades at MCB Quantico, MCB Twentynine 
Palms, and MCB Barstow. The Committee notes that the Marine 
Corps identified base telecommunications infrastructure as a 
high priority unfunded requirement.

                           Tactical Vehicles

                  medium tactical vehicle replacement

    The Marine Corps requested $83,717,000 for the medium 
tactical vehicle replacement program. The Committee recommends 
$69,717,000, a decrease of $14,000,000 for trainers. In Section 
8008 of the bill, the Committee approves the Marine Corps' 
request to enter into a multiyear contract for the medium 
tactical vehicle replacement program.

                  light tactical vehicle remanufacture

    The Marine Corps requested $39,263,000 for the light 
tactical vehicle remanufacture program. The Committee 
recommends $72,763,000, an increase of $33,500,000 only for new 
High Mobility Multi-purpose Wheeled Vehicles (HMMWV). The 
Committee notes that the Marine Corps identified HMMWV's as a 
high priority unfunded requirement.

                      Materials Handling Equipment

                       command support equipment

    The Marine Corps requested $514,000 for command support 
equipment. The Committee recommends $4,914,000, an increase of 
$4,400,000. Of the additional funds, $1,000,000 is only for 
laser leveling systems and $3,400,000 is only to procure 19 
MIC-120 UBM systems.

                      material handling equipment

    The Marine Corps requested $6,453,000 for material handling 
equipment. The Committee recommends $11,453,000, an increase of 
$5,000,000 only for the rough terrain container handlers 
product improvement program.

                          Program Recommended

    The total amount recommended in the bill will provide the 
following in fiscal year 1999:





                    AIRCRAFT PROCUREMENT, AIR FORCE

                                                                        
                                                                        
                                                                        
Fiscal year 1998 appropriation........................    $6,480,983,000
Fiscal year 1999 budget request.......................     7,756,475,000
Committee recommendation..............................     8,384,735,000
Change from budget request............................      +628,260,000
                                                                        

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

                       Committee Recommendations

                         authorization changes

    The Committee recommends the following changes to the 
budget request in accordance with House authorization action.

                                            [In thousands of dollars]                                           
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                     Committee      Change from 
                              Item                                Budget request  recommendation      request   
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
F-16............................................................               0          60,000         +60,000
EC-130J.........................................................               0          51,500         +51,500
C-130J..........................................................          63,782         237,782        +174,000
WC-130J.........................................................               0          59,700         +59,700
JSTARS ADV PROCUREMENT..........................................               0          72,000         +72,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                            Tactical Forces

                                  F-22

    The Air Force requested $595,094,000 to procure the first 
two F-22 production aircraft. The Committee recommends 
$525,094,000, a decrease of $70,000,000. After submission of 
the President's budget, the Defense Acquisition Executive 
decided to delay Low Rate Production (LRIP) of the F-22 until 
fiscal year 2000 and to convert the two fiscal year 1999 
aircraft to so-called Production Representative Test Vehicles 
(PRTVs). These two aircraft will still be used for Independent 
Operational Test and Evaluation (IOT&E;). However, the Air 
Force's fiscal year 1999 request also includes funding to 
initiate the stand-up of the F-22's support infrastructure. 
Though the Committee supports the F-22 program, the Committee 
nevertheless believes it is premature to procure the support 
infrastructure for a weapon system that has not been approved 
for production. Instead, the Air Force should use support 
equipment already procured using F-22 research, development, 
test and evaluation funding to allow the Production 
Representative Test Vehicles to participate in IOT&E.; When and 
if the F-22 program is approved for production and these PRTV 
aircraft are later delivered to Air Combat Command for 
operational use, additional support equipment will be available 
from the fiscal year 2000 Low Rate Initial Production buy.

                          Operational Trainers

                                 JPATS

    The Air Force requested $107,086,000 for 19 JPATS aircraft 
and associated support equipment. The Committee recommends 
$102,186,000, a net decrease of $4,900,000. This amount 
includes a $9,100,000 increase for three additional JPATS 
aircraft and a decrease of $14,000,000 for the Training 
Integration Management System (TIMS). The Committee believes 
that the Air Force plan to procure the entire inventory of TIMS 
in the first year of production (fiscal year 1999) adds too 
much risk to the program. The Committee recommends that 
procurement of 4 of the 6 TIMS be deferred to future years.

                        Mission Support Aircraft

                            civil air patrol

    The Air Force requested $2,619,000 to procure Civil Air 
Patrol aircraft. The Committee recommends $3,000,000, an 
increase of $381,000. The Committee designates this program as 
a special interest item.

                 predator unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV)

    The Predator continues to be the only operational endurance 
UAV available to support DoD tactical intelligence 
requirements. With increased emphasis on worldwide contingency 
operations, the Committee is concerned that an adequate number 
of Predator UAV systems are not available to meet this global 
requirement.
    The Air Force should be mindful that the Predator UAV will 
increasingly operate over populated areas and interact with 
commercial and military air traffic. The Committee urges the 
Air Force to initiate a product improvement program to develop 
a redundant flight control system on the Predator UAV program.
    Additionally, the Committee believes there is a need for 
quick global response to small-scale contingencies with real 
time tactical intelligence support. Therefore, the Air Force 
should consider establishing a Rapid Response Predator System. 
The Committee also believes that the other services should have 
complete use of the real time imagery produced by the Predator 
UAV.

                   Modification of Inservice Aircraft

                           f-15 modifications

    The Air Force requested $196,579,000 to procure F-15 
modifications. The Committee recommends $241,579,000, an 
increase of $45,000,000. This amount includes an increase of 
$20,000,000 for ``E'' kit engine modifications and an increase 
of $25,000,000 for procurement of the ALQ-135 low band jammer.

                           f-16 modifications

    The Air Force requested $229,319,000 for F-16 
modifications. The Committee recommends $235,319,000, an 
increase of $6,000,000 only for 600 gallon fuel tanks.

                           c-5 modifications

    The Air Force requested $63,635,000 to procure C-5 
modifications. The Committee recommends $98,635,000, an 
increase of $35,000,000 only for C-5 High Pressure Turbine 
(HPT) engine modifications. The Committee notes this 
modification has been identified by the Air Force as a high 
priority unfunded requirement.

                           t-38 modifications

    The Air Force requested $53,570,000 to procure T-38 
modifications. The Committee recommends $46,570,000, a decrease 
of $7,000,000. The Committee notes that the pricing of fiscal 
year 1999 avionics upgrade installations is out of line with 
other fiscal years.

                          c-130 modifications

    The Air Force requested $119,592,000 for C-130 aircraft 
modifications. The Committee recommends $148,292,000, an 
increase of $28,700,000. This amount includes an increase of 
$24,700,000 only for EC-130 modifications and an increase of 
$4,000,000 only for an aluminum mesh system in C-130 aircraft 
that can prevent fuel tank explosions.

                          c-135 modifications

    The Air Force requested $291,070,000 for C-135 
modifications. The Committee recommends $341,070,000, an 
increase of $50,000,000 only to reengine two KC-135 aircraft.

                           e-3 modifications

    The Air Force requested $114,181,000 to procure E-3 AWACS 
modifications. The Committee recommends $107,181,000, a 
decrease of $7,000,000 for the Radar System Improvement Program 
(RTIP). The Committee notes that the fiscal year 1999 unit cost 
of RTIP equipment is out of line with the unit cost expected in 
fiscal year 1998.

                     passenger safety modifications

    The Air Force did not request funds in the Passenger Safety 
Modifications line-item. The Committee recommends an additional 
$50,000,000 only to procure additional aircraft safety 
modifications.

                    Aircraft Spares and Repair Parts

                        spares and repair parts

    The Air Force requested $524,829,000 to procure aircraft 
spares and repair parts. The Committee recommends $522,398,000, 
a decrease of $2,431,000 for the Pacer Coin program.

               Aircraft Support Equipment and Facilities

                        common support equipment

    The Air Force requested $152,109,000 to procure common 
support equipment. The Committee recommends $158,109,000, an 
increase of $6,000,000 only for procurement of the Modular 
Airborne Firefighting System for the Air National Guard.

                      b-2 post production support

    The Air Force requested $189,869,000 for B-2 post 
production support. The Committee recommends $275,869,000, an 
increase of $86,000,000 only for the following upgrades 
identified by the Air Force: low observable repair verification 
tools; low observable enhanced tiles; center instrument 
displays; defensive management system software fixes; aircraft 
autothrottles; and Wind Corrected Munitions Dispenser 
integration.
    The Panel to Review Long-Range Air Power was established by 
congressional direction in Section 8131 of the Defense 
Appropriations Act for fiscal year 1998. The legislation 
directed the Panel to recommend whether additional funds for 
the B-2 should be used for continued low-rate production of the 
B-2 or for upgrades to improve the deployability, survivability 
and maintainability of the existing fleet.
    The Panel recommended using additional funds for the B-2 
for upgrades to improve the B-2's deployability, survivability 
and maintainability. The Panel further determined that the 
current force of bombers, if supported with a sustained series 
of investments, will provide warfighters with high leverage 
combat capabilities in a wide range of contingencies through 
the remainder of the force's useful life. Accordingly, the 
Panel recommended a carefully phased and funded investment plan 
to upgrade and sustain the B-2 as well as the rest of the 
bomber force structure. The Committee agrees with these 
recommendations and has provided the additional funds for these 
upgrades. In addition, the Panel found current DoD planning 
regarding future bomber production inadequate and recommended 
that the Department develop a plan for replacing the current 
force over time.
    Accordingly, the Committee directs the DoD to present to 
the Congress no later than March 1, 1999, a comprehensive plan 
for the future long-range bomber force. This plan should be 
based on the findings and recommendations of the Long-Range Air 
Power Panel and should be comprised of two parts. The first 
should describe the integrated and phased investment plan 
recommended by the Panel needed to upgrade and sustain the 
existing Long Range Air Power force structure, with particular 
emphasis on those upgrades needed to fully leverage the 
potential of the B-2. The second part should describe DoD's 
plan to replace the existing bomber force structure over time 
including planned investment for such a system and timeliness 
associated with production of additional aircraft.

                      f-16 post production support

    The Air Force requested $27,289,000 to procure F-16 post 
production support. The Committee recommends $42,289,000, an 
increase of $15,000,000 only for the F-16 Intermediate Avionics 
Improvement Shop (IAIS) for the Air National Guard.

                    miscellaneous production charges

    The Air Force requested $221,464,000 for miscellaneous 
production charges. The Committee recommends $207,864,000, a 
decrease of $13,600,000. This amount includes a decrease of 
$10,100,000 for HARM Targeting System (HTS) as proposed in the 
House-passed defense authorization bill and a decrease of 
$3,500,000 for Joint Tactical Combat Training System (JTCTS) as 
discussed elsewhere in this report.

                          common ecm equipment

    The Air Force requested $4,963,000 to procure common ECM 
equipment. The Committee recommends $20,663,000, an increase of 
$15,700,000. This amount includes an increase of $10,000,000 
only for ALQ-184 sustainment and an increase of $5,700,000 only 
for ALE-50 decoys.

                          Program Recommended

    The total recommended in the bill will provide the 
following program in fiscal year 1999:





                     MISSILE PROCUREMENT, AIR FORCE

                                                                        
                                                                        
                                                                        
Fiscal year 1998 appropriation........................    $2,394,202,000
Fiscal year 1999 budget request.......................     2,359,803,000
Committee recommendation..............................     2,191,527,000
Change from budget request............................      -168,276,000
                                                                        

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

                       Committee Recommendations

                         authorization changes

    The Committee recommends the following changes to the 
budget request in accordance with House authorization action.

                                            [In thousands of dollars]                                           
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                     Committee      Change from 
                              Item                                Budget request  recommendation      request   
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Maverick........................................................               0           3,000          +3,000
Inertial Upper Stages...........................................          48,012          46,012          -2,000
Titan Space Boosters............................................         578,540         550,540         -28,000
Medium Launch Vehicle...........................................         188,406         177,406         -11,000
Special Programs................................................         616,271         576,271         -40,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                Tactical

                                 amraam

    The Air Force requested $114,627,000 to procure 180 
AMRAAMs. The Committee recommends $93,727,000, a decrease of 
$20,900,000 for savings associated with the merger of the 
system's prime contractors.

                   Modification of Inservice Missiles

                      minuteman iii modifications

    The Air Force requested $90,618,000 to procure Minuteman 
III modifications. The Committee recommends $136,618,000, an 
increase of $46,000,000 only for additional Minuteman III 
Guidance Replacement Program (GRP) upgrades.

                             Space Programs

             global positioning system--advance procurement

    The Air Force requested $77,400,000 for advance procurement 
for the next multiyear block of GPS Satellites. The Committee 
recommends no funding, a decrease of $77,400,000. The Committee 
at this time also denies the Air Force's proposal to award a 
multiyear contract for Block IIF GPS satellites.
    In making this recommendation the Committee notes that an 
excessive buildup of on-ground GPS satellite inventory will 
enable the Air Force to defer the multiyear contract until the 
fiscal year 2000 timeframe. Additionally, the uncertainties 
surrounding the final design of the NAVWAR upgrades for GPS 
suggest that one of the principal criteria for a multiyear 
program, ``stability and maturity of design'' has yet to be 
achieved.
    When the GPS program is ready to proceed to a multiyear 
contract, the Committee urges the Air Force to examine 
multiyear production profiles of lesser length and quantity 
then has been the case to date. Rapidly cycling technologies in 
the space and electronics industry should preclude any 
acquisition organization from making investment commitments for 
excessive lengths of time.

                        defense support program

    The Air Force requested $89,904,000 for the Defense Support 
Program. The Committee recommends $82,904,000, a decrease of 
$7,000,000. It is the Committee's understanding that funds 
excess to program requirements are available as a result of the 
consolidation of Defense Support Program post-production 
service contracts. Accordingly, this recommendation is made 
without prejudice.

                            special programs

    Details of the Committee's recommendation are discussed in 
the classified annex to this report.

                          Program Recommended

    The total recommended in the bill will provide the 
following program in fiscal year 1999:





                  PROCUREMENT OF AMMUNITION, AIR FORCE

                                                                        
                                                                        
                                                                        
Fiscal year 1998 appropriation........................      $398,534,000
Fiscal year 1999 budget request.......................       384,161,000
Committee recommendation..............................       388,925,000
Change from budget request............................        +4,764,000
                                                                        

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

                       Committee Recommendations

                             practice bombs

    The Air Force requested no funds for practice bombs. The 
Committee recommends $5,000,000 only for laser guided training 
rounds.

                          Program Recommended

    The total amount recommended in the bill will provide the 
following in fiscal year 1999:





                      OTHER PROCUREMENT, AIR FORCE

                                                                        
                                                                        
                                                                        
Fiscal year 1998 appropriation........................    $6,592,909,000
Fiscal year 1999 budget request.......................     6,974,387,000
Committee recommendation..............................     7,034,217,000
Change from budget request............................       +59,830,000
                                                                        

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

                       Committee Recommendations

                         authorization changes

    The Committee recommends the following changes to the 
budget request in accordance with House authorization action.

                                            [In thousands of dollars]                                           
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                     Committee      Change from 
                              Item                                Budget request  recommendation      request   
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Intelligence Comm Equipment.....................................           5,697           8,697          +3,000
TAC SIGINT Support..............................................           1,883               0          -1,883
Intelligence Production Activity................................          72,605          71,605          -1,000
Common Imagery GRD/Surface Sys..................................               0           5,681          +5,681
DARP RC-135.....................................................          12,656          16,456          +3,800
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                       Cargo and Utility Vehicles

                              cap vehicles

    The Air Force requested $744,000 for Civil Air Patrol (CAP) 
vehicles. The Committee recommends $1,400,000, an increase of 
$656,000. The Committee designates this program as a special 
interest item.

                         Intelligence Programs

                   intelligence data handling system

    The Air Force requested $17,574,000 for the Intelligence 
Data Handling System. The Committee recommends $21,174,000, an 
increase of $3,600,000 only to provide JSAS to Air Force battle 
labs.

                          Electronics Programs

                theater air control systems improvement

    The Air Force requested $30,002,000 to procure Theater Air 
Control Systems Improvement. The Committee recommends 
$32,502,000, a net increase of $2,500,000. This amount includes 
an increase of $8,000,000 only for the Mobile Radar Approach 
Control (RAPCON) for the Air National Guard and a decrease of 
$5,500,000 based on recently realized contract savings for 
components of the Air Force Mission Planning System.

              Special Communications Electronics Projects

                  automatic data processing equipment

    The Air Force requested $33,190,000 to procure Automatic 
Data Processing Equipment. The Committee recommendation 
provides for this amount. However, the amount provided includes 
an increase of $3,000,000 only to establish a collaborative 
network between Air Force Battle Labs. Funds are to be used for 
procurement of hardware/software databases and necessary 
training and support plans for a collaborative high speed 
networking capability. This amount also includes a decrease of 
$3,000,000 to reflect economies available in purchasing 
commercially available equipment.

                     af global command and control

    The Air Force requested $5,819,000 to procure Air Force 
Global Command and Control systems upgrades. The Committee 
recommends $4,519,000, a decrease of $1,300,000 based on lower 
than expected costs to modernize the command and control 
systems at Air Force installations.

                         combat training ranges

    The Air Force requested $13,194,000 to procure equipment 
for Combat Training Ranges. The Committee recommends 
$12,694,000, a net decrease of $500,000. This amount includes 
an increase of $5,000,000 only for procurement of the Kadena 
Interim Training System (KITS) and a decrease of $5,500,000 for 
the Joint Tactical Combat Training System (JTCTS) as discussed 
elsewhere in this report.

                       joint surveillance system

    The Air Force requested $11,137,000 to initiate procurement 
of upgrades to Regional/Sector Air Operations Centers (R/
SAOCs). The Committee recommends no procurement funds for this 
program. The Committee notes that development of the R/SAOC has 
experienced delays resulting in the inability to initiate 
procurement in fiscal year 1999. The Committee has transferred 
a portion of these funds to the Air Force Research, 
Development, Test and Evaluation account to fund further 
development of this system prior to procurement.

                        Air Force Communications

                    base information infrastructure

    The Air Force requested $159,383,000 for procurement of 
Base Information Infrastructure systems. The Committee 
recommends $180,383,000, an increase of $21,000,000. This 
amount includes an increase of $20,000,000 only to further 
improve Air Force base information protection systems and an 
increase of $1,000,000 only for the Air Force Office of 
Security and Investigation (OSI) for equipment to support 
computer crime investigations.

                             DISA Programs

                  air force satellite control network

    The Air Force requested $26,007,000 for the Air Force 
Satellite Control Network. The Committee recommends 
$23,007,000, a decrease of $3,000,000. The availability of 
prior year program balances makes this reduction possible 
without prejudice to the program.

                         Organization and Base

                         tactical c-e equipment

    The Air Force requested $31,064,000 to procure tactical 
communications-electronics equipment. The Committee recommends 
$27,364,000, a decrease of $3,700,000. The Committee notes that 
the Air Force no longer intends to use the funds to buy V5 
Pacer Speak radios as budgeted. Prior year funds are available 
to procure the V3+ radios as now planned.

                  combat survivor/evader locator radio

    The Air Force requested $13,757,000 for the first year of 
production of the newly developed combat survivor/evader radio. 
The Committee recommends no funds for this program. The 
Committee notes that testing of the new radio will extend 
through much of fiscal year 1999 and that initial production 
should be delayed until early in the next fiscal year to 
provide adequate time to correct any system deficiencies before 
a commitment is made for the first major purchase.

                   CAP Communications and Electronics

    The Air Force requested $378,000 for Civil Air Patrol 
Communications and Electronics equipment. The Committee 
recommends $450,000, an increase of $72,000. The Committee 
designates this program as a special interest item.

                  Personal Safety and Rescue Equipment

                          Night Vision Goggles

    The Air Force requested $8,118,000 to procure night vision 
goggles. The Committee recommends $6,118,000, a decrease of 
$2,000,000 based on problems experienced in development of the 
new AN/AVS-8(V)2 night vision goggles.

                         Base Support Equipment

                        Base Procured Equipment

    The Air Force requested $5,644,000 for base procured 
equipment. The Committee recommends $10,224,000, an increase of 
$4,600,000. This amount includes an increase of $1,800,000 only 
to procure Ultimate Building Machines for the Air National 
Guard, an increase of $800,000 only to procure the ultimate 
building machine for the active Air Force, and an increase of 
$2,000,000 only for fielding the Automated Integrated Surveying 
Instrument.

                        Productivity Investments

    The Air Force requested $12,304,000 for productivity 
investments. The Committee recommends $17,304,000, an increase 
of $5,000,000 for the Supply Asset Tracking System (SATS). 
Information on this project can be found in the Information 
Resources Management section of this report.

                          Program Recommended

    The total recommended in the bill will provide the 
following program in fiscal year 1999:





                       PROCUREMENT, DEFENSE-WIDE

                                                                        
                                                                        
                                                                        
Fiscal year 1998 appropriation........................    $2,106,444,000
Fiscal year 1999 budget request.......................     2,041,650,000
Committee recommendation..............................     2,055,432,000
Change from budget request............................       +13,782,000
                                                                        

    This appropriation provides funds for the procurement 
activities of centrally managed programs and the Defense 
Agencies.

                       Committee Recommendations

                         Authorization Changes

    The Committee recommends the following changes in 
accordance with House authorization action:

                                            [In thousands of dollars]                                           
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                     Committee      Change from 
                                                                  Budget request  recommendation      request   
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Major equipment, DSPO...........................................          16,214               0         -16,214
Patriot PAC-3...................................................         343,235         303,235         -40,000
Maritime equipment MODS.........................................          26,012          22,012          -4,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                          Major Equipment, OSD

    The Department requested $100,245,000 for Major Equipment, 
OSD. The Committee recommends $137,245,000, an increase of 
$37,000,000. Of that amount, the Committee recommends an 
increase of $10,000,000 only for the Mentor-Protege program and 
an increase of $27,000,000 only for High Performance Computing.
    The Committee is concerned that budget plans of the High 
Performance Computing Modernization Program (HPCMP) continue to 
place greater emphasis on sustainment of operations and related 
services than on the purchase of new supercomputers for DoD. As 
a result, major shortfalls are developing in the program's 
ability to meet projected user requirements, as the March 1998 
DoD HPC Modernization Plan attests. Therefore, the Committee 
believes that a more equal balance between procurement and 
research and development, test and evaluation funds is 
appropriate and that sustainment of operations and related 
services should not dominate the program budgets.
    The Committee directs therefore that no less than 
$109,455,000 or forty-eight percent of the total funds 
appropriated for the High Performance Computing Modernization 
Program be used for the procurement of high performance 
computing hardware. The Committee directs that future budgets 
include a budget share of no less than fifty percent for 
procurement for high performance computing hardware.

                  Automatic Document Conversion System

    Information on this project can be found in the Information 
Resources Management section of this report.

                             Patriot PAC-3

    The Department requested $343,235,000 for Patriot PAC-3. 
The Committee recommends $303,235,000, a decrease of 
$40,000,000. The Committee has transferred this amount to the 
Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, Defense-Wide 
account as recommended in the House-passed Defense 
Authorization bill.

                       Special Operations Command

    The Special Operations Command requested $73,991,000 for 
Classified Programs. The Committee recommends $79,084,000, an 
increase of $5,093,000 only for a program discussed in the 
classified annex accompanying this report.

                Chemical and Biological Defense Program

                         Consequence Management

    The Department requested no funding for consequence 
management. The Committee recommends $15,000,000 only for 
consequence management.

                 Military Personnel Information System

    Information on this project can be found in the Information 
Resources Management section of this report.

                          Program Recommended

    The total amount recommended in the bill will provide the 
following in fiscal year 1999:





                  NATIONAL GUARD AND RESERVE EQUIPMENT

                                                                        
                                                                        
                                                                        
Fiscal year 1998 appropriation........................      $653,000,000
Fiscal year 1999 budget request.......................  ................
Committee recommendation..............................       120,000,000
Change from budget request............................      +120,000,000
                                                                        

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

                       Committee Recommendations

    In all accounts throughout the bill, the Committee 
recommends a total of $2,166,600,000 for procurement of 
National Guard and Reserve equipment, a net increase of 
$803,000,000 above the budget request.
    The Committee commends the Department of Defense for this 
year having substantially increased the request for equipment 
to be provided to the National Guard and Reserve components. 
Elsewhere in this report, the Committee has recommended funding 
in the procurement accounts of each of the military services, 
totaling $1,334,100,000 as identified in the table below.
        Appropriation                                    Cost (millions)
Aircraft, Army..............................................$110,200,000
Missiles, Army................................................35,300,000
Weapons and Tracked Combat Vehicles, Army.....................12,300,000
Ammunition, Army.............................................182,300,000
Other Procurement, Army......................................476,300,000
Aircraft, Navy................................................41,800,000
Ammunition, Navy/USMC.........................................17,300,000
Other Procurement, Navy....................................... 3,600,000
Procurement, USMC.............................................39,900,000
Aircraft, USAF...............................................290,900,000
Ammunition, USAF..............................................30,400,000
Other Procurement, USAF.......................................84,500,000
NG&RE;, Other Procurement...................................... 9,300,000
                    --------------------------------------------------------------
                    ____________________________________________________

      Total...............................................$1,334,100,000

    The budget request is still inadequate to provide the 
National Guard and Reserve components the equipment needed to 
respond to increasing deployments. Therefore, the Committee 
further recommends an increase of $712,500,000 in the 
procurement accounts of the services for National Guard and 
Reserve equipment and has specifically identified the following 
aircraft and aircraft modifications as shown in the table 
below:

UH-60 Blackhawk (8).....................................     $78,000,000
CH-60 (2)...............................................      38,000,000
F-18 modifications......................................      17,000,000
WC-130J (1).............................................      59,700,000
EC-130J (1).............................................      76,200,000
C-130J (3)..............................................     174,000,000
KC-135 Reengining.......................................      50,000,000

                          Program Recommended

    The Committee further recommends an increase of 
$120,000,000 to the budget request for the National Guard and 
Reserve Equipment appropriation, which will provide the 
following program in fiscal year 1999:





    The Committee believes that the Chiefs of the Reserve and 
National Guard components should exercise control of 
modernization funds provided in this account and directs that 
they provide a separate submission of a detailed assessment of 
their modernization requirements and priorities to the 
congressional defense committees. The Committee expects the 
component commanders to give priority consideration for funding 
in this appropriation of the following items: Reconfigurable 
Mission Simulator, Mobile Backscatter Radar, F-16 ALR-56M RWR, 
P-3C Reserve Modernization, AN/PVS-7 and AN/PVS-14 Night Vision 
Devices, C-17 Simulator, Early Production and Fielding Program, 
F-15 Night Vision Imaging Systems, Frequency Hopping 
Multiplexer, Full Mission Trainer Upgrades, MIDS System 
Integration, D7 Tractor Bulldozer PIP, D7 Tractor Bulldozer, 
IREMBASS, Sandbagger, and CH-47 Internal Crashworthy Fuel 
Cells.

                    INFORMATION RESOURCES MANAGEMENT

    The Department requested $11,315,159,000 for Information 
Resources Management. The Committee recommends $11,065,959,000, 
a decrease of $249,200,000 as explained below:

Operation and Maintenance, Army:sands of dollars]
    Supercomputing Work.......................................     6,000
    JCALS.....................................................   -40,000
    ADP Legacy Systems Efficiencies...........................   -96,660
Operation and Maintenance, Navy:
    ADP Legacy Systems Efficiencies...........................   -87,820
Operation and Maintenance, Air Force:
    ADP Legacy Systems Efficiencies...........................   -95,620
    FIRST.....................................................    -7,000
Operation and Maintenance, Defense-Wide:
    DCPDS.....................................................    -7,000
    GCSS......................................................   -10,900
    Automated Document Conversion.............................    25,000
    ADP Legacy Systems Efficiencies...........................   -18,000
    Military Personnel Information System.....................    38,000
Operation and Maintenance, Army National Guard:
    Distance Learning Demonstration Project...................     2,800
Other Procurement, Army:
    Ammunition AIT............................................    10,000
    JCALS.....................................................   -20,000
Other Procurement, Navy:
    JEDMICS...................................................     5,000
Other Procurement, Air Force:
    Supply Asset Tracking System..............................     5,000
Procurement, Defense-Wide:
    Automated Document Conversion.............................    25,000
    Military Personnel Information System.....................    12,000
Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, Navy:
    Advanced Distributed Learning.............................     5,000
Total
                                                                -249,200

                          supercomputing work

    The Army requested $5,400,000 in Operation and Maintenance, 
Army for the Army's High Performance Computing Research 
efforts. The Committee recommends $11,400,000, an increase of 
$6,000,000 only to enable the Army to continue its 
supercomputing efforts at a level consistent with last year.

         joint computer-aided acquisition and logistics support

    The Army requested $160,501,000 for Joint Computer-Aided 
Acquisition and Logistics Support (JCALS). The Committee 
recommends $100,501,000, which includes decreases of 
$40,000,000 in Operation and Maintenance, Army and $20,000,000 
in Other Procurement, Army. The JCALS program was started back 
in 1991 to provide an infrastructure capable of integrating 
digitized technical data that supports a weapons system's 
acquisition and logistics life cycle. Milestone III for the 
Joint Technical Manual (JTM) was originally scheduled for 
November, 1995. It was then moved to June, 1996 then to 4th 
quarter, 1997, then again to April, 1998. The JTM failed to get 
full Milestone III approval in April and is scheduled for 
another review later this summer. During this time JCALS has 
invested significant resources into creating a common 
infrastructure for use by the Acquisition and Logistics 
Community. Although this equipment was supposed to be fielded 
to support the applications under development, this 
infrastructure now supports 16,000 users while the JTM (which 
was to be the first of many software applications) remains 
under development. In addition, the Committee has determined 
that approximately $19,600,000 of the funds appropriated for 
JCALS is being used for pilot projects not related to the JCALS 
effort and directed by officials outside the program.
    As a consequence of these and other issues, the Committee 
believes that JCALS has lost its focus. The Committee 
specifically denies the $19,600,000 being used for pilot 
projects and directs that no funds be used for that effort. 
Those projects need to be identified and defended on their own 
merits and not under the auspices of the JCALS program. In 
addition, the Committee believes that accelerating the fielding 
of the infrastructure, as proposed in the budget, is 
inappropriate given the delays that have occurred in the 
development of the software applications it was designed to 
support. The Committee therefore recommends the Department 
apply these reductions to limit the rate at which additional 
infrastructure is fielded. Should the Department believe that 
fielding the infrastructure is vital regardless of the fate of 
the software program that was used to justify it, then the 
Committee recommends that these initiatives be divided in the 
next President's budget and the two justified separately.

                    adp legacy systems efficiencies

    The Committee supports the reductions recommended in the 
House-passed defense authorization bill. The continued use of 
legacy systems after their scheduled termination date diverts 
limited resources to low priority information technology 
systems. In addition, to the extent that these legacy systems 
share data with other systems their continued use creates a 
significant risk of generating Year 2000 date calculation 
errors that could spread to and disrupt the functioning of 
other systems.

             financial information resources system (first)

    The Committee agrees with the actions taken in the House-
passed defense authorization bill to eliminate the funding for 
the development of the Financial Information Resources System 
(FIRST), an Air Force-unique system which duplicates the 
existing Program, Budget and Accounting System (PBAS). The 
Committee believes this problem could have been avoided if the 
Air Force Materiel Command had taken a more active role in 
reviewing the information technology development efforts of its 
field activities and ensuring their programs were in compliance 
with the Information Technology Management Reform Act of 1996 
(ITMRA). The Committee recommends no funds for the FIRST 
program and requests a report by February 15, 1999, indicating 
how the Air Force will implement ITMRA and ensure better 
control over its Information Technology systems.

                 defense civilian personnel data system

    The fielding schedule for the Defense Civilian Personnel 
Data System has slipped by six months which will reduce the 
funding required for sustainment in fiscal year 1999. 
Accordingly, the Committee recommends a reduction of $7,000,000 
in Operation and Maintenance, Defense-Wide.

                  Global Combat Support System (GCSS)

    The budget requested an increase of $10,900,000 for the 
Global Combat Support System in Operation and Maintenance, 
Defense-Wide. However, this request has not been substantiated 
by either DISA's budget briefings or its IT-43 submission which 
show that the funding requirement for GCSS is level or 
declining. Given the absence of any requirement for these 
funds, the Committee recommends a reduction of $10,900,000.

                     Automated Document Conversion

    The Committee recognizes that the Automated Document 
Conversion program continues to perform a critical role in the 
attainment of the Department's goal for achieving a paperless, 
integrated, digital environment by the year 2002. The Committee 
applauds the Department's efforts, as articulated in the 
Defense Reform Initiative, and urges the Department to use this 
valuable program to achieve these goals. Given the significant 
conversion requirement remaining in each service and the need 
to continue the service efforts, the Committee believes 
additional funding is required to digitize legacy engineering 
documents.
    The Committee agrees to provide a total of $50,000,000 only 
for software, hardware, conversion services and drawing system 
solutions, of which $25,000,000 is in Operation and 
Maintenance, Defense-Wide and $25,000,000 is in Procurement, 
Defense-Wide. These funds are to be directly managed by the 
Office of the Assistant Deputy Undersecretary of Defense for 
Logistics, Reinvention and Modernization.
    The Committee further directs the Department of Defense to 
begin incorporating the automated document conversion 
requirements into the service budgets, beginning with its 
fiscal year 2000 budget submission.

                 military personnel information systems

    The Committee continues to strongly support the fiscal year 
1998 conference and House report direction regarding DoD-wide 
military personnel information systems and the Navy Standard 
Integrated Personnel System (NSIPS). The Committee understands 
that the central design activity (CDA) transfers directed by 
the Committee last year have not been completed and that some 
transfers will not occur for some time. The Committee directs 
the Navy and DoD to immediately finalize and implement all the 
CDA manpower management, resources and support function 
transfers to the Naval Reserve.
    The Committee recommends $25,289,000, for the NSIPS program 
and $44,600,000 for the Defense Integrated Military Human 
Resources System (DIMHRS) as requested in the President's 
budget. The Committee understands that DoD and OMB have 
recommended making DIMHRS the initial program for implementing 
provisions of the Clinger-Cohen Act (the Information Technology 
Management Reform Act of 1996), the Paperwork Reduction Act, 
and other initiatives based on the Government Performance 
Results Act and the National Performance Review. The Committee 
endorses such efforts and strongly believes that additional 
recommendations from the Defense Reform Initiative directives 
regarding information management should be followed. The 
Committee strongly recommends that the Office of the Deputy 
Secretary of Defense, using a revised DIMHRS program as the 
model prototype, immediately implement a program to streamline 
and cut future costs for military manpower and personnel 
information systems, through business process improvement, 
innovative acquisition techniques, performance-based and 
results-based management, modular contracting, COTS technology, 
and the consolidation and integration of existing manpower and 
personnel information systems. These information system 
programs should be implemented in an enterprise level strategic 
approach instead of single information system applications, 
with DIHMRS to provide the enterprise level strategy for 
managing the development of all DoD-wide manpower and personnel 
information systems. Within this approach, application 
development should be done in small and modular (usable) 
segments in keeping with Clinger-Cohen and OMB direction. This 
enterprise strategy should provide for the entire life cycle 
and legacy system maintenance of military manpower and 
personnel information systems including, but not limited to, 
personnel, manpower, training, compensation, dependents, and 
health affairs. The Committee directs that funding provided for 
DIHMRS be redirected to implement this military manpower and 
personnel information program and enterprise strategy and that 
full funding be provided in future budget requests and in the 
future year defense plan for these efforts.
    In using DIMHRS as the model for this priority program for 
military manpower and personnel information, the Deputy 
Secretary of Defense is directed to maintain the current 
project and program management and executive agent 
responsibility as established for DIMHRS by the Department in 
1997 and as directed in the fiscal year 1998 Defense 
Appropriations House and conference reports.
    The Committee directs the Deputy Secretary of Defense to 
report back to the Committee, before conference committee 
action on this bill, on a plan to implement this military 
manpower and personnel information program, for consolidating 
the budgets of associated legacy systems, and for centralizing 
control of configuration management for the life cycle of 
military manpower and personnel systems including, but not 
limited to, personnel, manpower, training, compensation, 
dependents, and health affairs.
    The Committee has provided an additional $38,000,000 in 
Operation and Maintenance, Defense-Wide and $12,000,000 in 
Procurement, Defense-Wide for the Military Personnel 
Information System and directs DoD to provide these funds only 
for and under the management and control of the Commander, 
Naval Reserve and the Naval Reserve's Systems Executive Office. 
The Committee directs the DoD Comptroller and DoD to allocate 
these funds within 35 days of enactment of this bill to the 
Commander, Naval Reserve Forces and the Naval Reserve's Systems 
Executive Office. The Committee directs that these funds shall 
be used only for: (1) implementing the enterprise level 
strategy and military manpower and personnel information 
program; (2) developing a proof of concept and prototype using 
DIMHRS as the model and strategy for the manpower and personnel 
enterprise management program; (3) addressing modernization and 
migration systems support; (4) completing the establishment of 
an application control center; (5) providing initial 
outfitting, equipment, communications, local area network (LAN) 
equipment, software, hardware and related infrastructure 
support requirements for information system facilities; (6) 
completing Naval Support Activity and Joint Reserve base cable 
plant upgrades; and (7) accelerating the development of the 
state model for a national system of electronic health records 
under the Government Computerized Patient Record program. The 
Committee expects DoD and the services to discontinue 
developing single or stove-pipe military personnel and manpower 
information system applications and to coordinate any new 
system developments in these areas with the Naval Reserve 
Systems Executive Office and the revised DIMHRS and military 
personnel and manpower information program. In order to support 
this initiative, the Committee expects the DoD and the Navy to 
create, within the office of the Commander, Naval Reserve 
Forces, a Deputy Systems Executive Officer (SEO) position, at 
the civilian SES level. This deputy may be designated by the 
Commander, Naval Reserve Forces, as the Systems Executive 
Officer for Manpower and Personnel.

                distance learning demonstration project

    The Committee recommends $2,800,000 to be made available 
only to continue efforts to demonstrate cost effective ways to 
use the National Guard Distance Learning Network to meet DoD 
training requirements. Funds are provided: (1) to conduct a 
technical evaluation of the National Guard Bureau (NGB) 
Distributive Technical Training Program (DTTP) network to 
establish performance measures to quantify the earned value of 
the network; (2) to develop distance education technology 
methods to improve the state of the practice for the conversion 
of courseware to distance learning format; and (3) to conduct 
other high priority activities to better integrate distance 
learning networks into National Guard training requirements.

             ammunition automated identification technology

    The Committee recommends providing $10,000,000 in Other 
Procurement, Army to be used only for the completion of the 
ongoing Radio-Frequency Tagging/In-transit Visibility program 
at the remaining Army Ammunition Depots and related Ammunition 
Supply Points and Ports.

    Joint Engineering Data Management Information and Control System

    The Navy requested $8,765,000 for the Joint Engineering 
Data Management Information and Control System (JEDMICS). The 
Committee recommends $13,765,000, an increase of $5,000,000 in 
Other Procurement, Navy to be used only to acquire and 
integrate an information security solution to protect sensitive 
but unclassified data being transmitted to remote users via the 
internet.

                  Supply Asset Tracking System (SATS)

    The Committee recommends $5,000,000 in Other Procurement, 
Air Force only for the procurement and installation of the Air 
Force Supply Asset Tracking System at Air Mobility Command and 
Air Combat Command installations.

                     Advanced Distributed Learning

    The Committee is concerned that the significant cost saving 
advantages of Advanced Distributed Learning (ADL) systems have 
not been fully realized because each military component has 
developed proprietary architectures, courseware, and software 
that are incompatible and become obsolete as soon as changes 
are made to the underlying platform and operating system 
software. The Committee believes that significant cost savings 
can be achieved through the development of a common DoD open 
architecture standard in ADL courseware and software. To 
accomplish this, the Committee directs the Secretary to 
designate the Department of the Navy as the executive agent for 
a joint service working group to be chaired by the Under 
Secretary of Defense (Personnel and Readiness) to (1) review 
the consistency of functional requirements and specifications 
of the DoD distributed training community, (2) test and 
validate newly developed tools and learning content, and (3) 
recommend methods to improve commonality and interoperability. 
The Committee has provided $5,000,000 under Research, 
Development, Test and Evaluation, Navy (PE 0603707N) to support 
this effort. Section 8097 of the General Provisions requires 
the Secretary to report to Congress on the results of this 
review by no later than June 30, 1999.

                    On-Line Computer-Based Learning

    The Committee believes that the Department of Defense 
should take advantage of the significant cost savings 
associated with the rapid advances in online, computer-based, 
learning and teaching. Accordingly, the Committee recommends 
the Department accelerate the acquisition of advanced learning 
management systems for centrally controlling online learning 
activities, including course delivery, learner access, 
collaboration and performance tracking using the World Wide 
Web. The Committee also recommends the Department accelerate 
acquisition of learning authoring systems that can be used by 
both expert and novice users and that support the creation of 
content based on Internet standards.

               information technology--43 report formats

    The Committee supports the new IT-43 report formats used in 
preparation of the Information Technology Budget submission. As 
the Department continues its revision of the IT budget formats 
in preparation for its fiscal year 2000 budget submission, the 
Committee directs the Department to include the following: (1) 
tables that show for each IT system how its funding is broken 
out by R-1, P-1 or subactivity so that it can be cross 
referenced with the President's budget; (2) the Acquisition 
Program Baseline associated with the establishment of the 
program along with any rebaselining; (3) the Y2K status of each 
system, its level of certification (as defined in the DoD Year 
2000 Management Plan), and the status of its contingency plan; 
(4) in all dollar tables, a column for at least one year beyond 
the budget; and (5) if a systems name has been changed, the 
earlier name of the system.

                   software program managers network

    The Committee continues to support service programs and 
related activities provided by the Software Program Managers 
Network (SPMN). The Committee directs the Department to provide 
funds within the budget, including carryover funding, to 
maintain this important effort. The Committee directs that 
operational control of the SPMN be maintained under the 
Assistant Secretary of the Navy for Research, Development and 
Acquisition.

                  Software engineering best practices

    For many years, the Software Engineering Institute (SEI) at 
Carnegie Mellon University has worked effectively with the 
Department to identify ``best practices'' to reduce the cost, 
schedule, technical and performance risks associated with 
acquiring and building quality software. The Committee 
recognizes that although many Department organizations have 
adopted the SEI best practices, there remains a large gap 
between these best practices and the Department's actual 
practices. Accordingly, the Committee directs the Office of the 
Secretary of Defense to require the military services and 
defense agencies to plan proactively for the use of software 
engineering best practices.

                   Information Technology Management

    The Committee is concerned about the adequacy of the 
Department's oversight of its information technology systems. 
In reviewing the budgets of individual systems it is clear that 
agencies and departments are using Operation and maintenance 
funds for purposes inconsistent with that appropriation. For 
example, the Department is spending about $780,000,000 in 
Operation and maintenance on the development and modernization 
of information technology systems. According to the Financial 
Management Regulation (FMR) ``Development and Modernization'' 
including ``Program costs for new AIS's'' and ``any change or 
modification to an existing AIS which is intended to result in 
improved capability or performance''. However, the same FMR 
defines the cost of new equipment or systems, the replacement 
of equipment or systems, and even software changes designed 
``to improve system performance'' as ``Investments'' if, in 
total value, they exceed the current $100,000 expense/
investment threshold. Thus, they should be paid for with either 
Procurement or Research, Development, Test and Evaluation 
funds. The Committee directs the DoD to correct this problem in 
its fiscal year 2000 budget submission. The Committee is fully 
prepared to require prior approval reprogramming procedures for 
such transfers absent the needed corrections.
    The Committee believes that ensuring the use of the correct 
appropriation is but the first step in the proper oversight of 
information technology systems. The Committee strongly endorses 
the provisions of the Information Technology Management Reform 
Act (ITMRA) as essential to improving this process. The 
Department is apparently considering abolishing the Major 
Automated Information System Review Council (MAISRC), an 
organization with potential, but one that fails to meet and 
instead delegates its review role to working groups. However, 
given the Department's enormous investment in new information 
technology systems, it is important that the replacement 
structure strengthen the process and ensure a level of review 
and oversight compatible with the ITMRA and closer to that used 
for weapon systems. The Committee therefore directs the 
Department to report back on its plans for the MAISRC, or its 
replacement, before this bill is considered in conference.
                                TITLE IV

               RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST AND EVALUATION

                  Estimates and Appropriation Summary

    The fiscal year 1999 Department of Defense research, 
development, test and evaluation budget request totals 
$36,078,577,000. The accompanying bill recommends 
$35,918,042,000. The total amount recommended is a decrease of 
$160,535,000 below the fiscal year 1999 budget estimate and is 
$1,973,282,000 below the total provided in fiscal year 1998. 
The table below summarizes the budget estimates and the 
Committee's recommendations.





                             basic research

    The Department of Defense requested $1,111,227,000 for 
basic research in fiscal year 1999, an increase of $69,338,000 
or seven percent compared to the current fiscal year 1998 
level. While the Committee supports the need for the Defense 
Department to conduct a robust basic university research 
program, in the context of the overall fiscal year 1999 defense 
budget such funding growth is unwarranted. As in past years, 
this year's budget submission included large unfunded 
shortfalls in training and readiness accounts. Each of the 
service chiefs identified major funding shortfalls in funding 
for operations, readiness, and modernization accounts, many of 
which are addressed by the Committee elsewhere in this report. 
In this context, the Committee continues to question whether 
budget growth in basic research is warranted. The Committee 
recommends reductions to the requested amounts for basic 
research funding to maintain this program at the 1998 level.

                defense airborne reconnaissance program

    The Committee recommends the transfer of funding for 
certain programs under the Defense Airborne Reconnaissance 
Program from the Defense-Wide account to Army, Navy and Air 
Force accounts. Details are found in a classified annex 
accompanying this report.

                            tactical radios

    The Committee directs that no more than 25 percent of the 
funds appropriated for the research and development of tactical 
radios may be obligated until the Assistant Secretary of 
Defense for Command, Control, Communications, and Intelligence 
certifies to the congressional defense committees that the 
development program meets interoperability requirements, is not 
duplicative of other developmental efforts, and is fully funded 
in the budget.

       federally funded research and development centers (FFRDCS)

    The Committee notes that the Department of Defense's fiscal 
year 1999 spending plan for FFRDCs is well over the limitation 
set by Congress in 1996. The Department estimates that it will 
spend $1,212,800,000 for Federally Funded Research and 
Development Centers (FFRDCs) in 1999. This is an increase in 
spending of five percent over the baseline for FFRDC 
expenditures of $1,162,650,000 established in the Defense 
Appropriations Act for 1996.
    Congress has demonstrated through previous years' 
appropriations action that it does not support increasing FFRDC 
expenditures. Yet, the Department continues to attempt to 
increase its use of FFRDCs and proposes higher expenditures. 
For example, the Department's recent estimates for 1998 are 
that it will spend an additional $30,000,000 above the amounts 
forecast last year, bringing the total 1998 expenditures to 
$1,215,400,000. The Committee believes that this trend is not 
in the right direction and is contrary to prior congressional 
action.
    In addition to increased expenditures, the Committee 
reiterates its concerns regarding the poor management of 
FFRDCs. The Committee underscores the importance of the 1997 
recommendations of the Defense Science Board (DSB). The DSB 
report concluded that FFRDCs are overused and do not provide 
the ``best available service at the most reasonable cost.'' The 
DSB report also recommended that work being done by FFRDCs 
should be more ``carefully defined and limited,'' that 
competition be introduced and that management practices be 
changed beginning in 1998 to accommodate report 
recommendations. The Committee notes that the DSB report 
recommendations have largely been ignored and that management 
practices continue to be lax.
    In addition, with regard to management the Committee also 
cites a March 6, 1998 DoD Inspector General audit that reported 
that one of the largest FFRDCs is not complying with 
requirements to file timely audits. The report stated:

          Consequently, there is no assurance that . . . 
        expenditures of Federal awards are in compliance with 
        the specific requirements of types of services allowed 
        or unallowed, claims for advances or reimbursements, 
        amounts claimed for matching, level of effort and/or 
        earmarking, special reporting, and special tests and 
        provisions.

    In light of these considerations, the Committee recommends 
a reduction of $62,000,000 for FFRDCs. The Committee fully 
expects the Department to comply with the recommendations of 
the DSB and to control FFRDC costs in the future.

                    advisory and assistance services

    The Committee recommends a reduction of $240,000,000 for 
Advisory and Assistance Services in accordance with the House-
passed Defense Authorization bill. Of that amount, the 
Committee recommends a reduction of $80,000,000 for procurement 
and $160,000,000 for research and development accounts.
    The Committee is concerned about the conclusions of a May 
1998 General Accounting Office (GAO) report that confirmed the 
continued underreporting of Advisory and Assistance Services by 
the Department of Defense. The report stated:

          DoD officials also indicated that there is a tendency 
        to report costs for these services (Advisory and 
        Assistance Services) in the miscellaneous category to 
        avoid the closer scrutiny and spending limitations on 
        contract services identified as advisory and assistance 
        services. DoD-wide problems with the management of 
        advisory and assistance services, including accurate 
        identification and reporting of costs, have been 
        documented since 1985. Despite Congressional action 
        requiring detailed reporting of advisory and assistance 
        service costs, problems continue.

    According to GAO, DoD continues to report expenditures of 
approximately $3,000,000,000 for Advisory and Assistance 
Services. However, GAO has identified approximately 
$12,000,000,000 in Advisory and Assistance Services 
expenditures and confirmed the inaccurate reporting of these 
services in the miscellaneous services category. The Committee 
believes that the Department should review its Advisory and 
Assistance Services reporting procedures and submit a more 
accurate accounting of these costs in its fiscal year 2000 
budget submission.

                           DUAL USE PROGRAMS

    The Department requested $169,000,000 for dual use 
programs, an increase of $47,700,000 over the 1998 enacted 
level. Within this amount, the Department requested $65,600,000 
for dual use programs and $103,400,000 for Commercial Savings 
and Support Initiative (COSSI) programs. The Committee 
recommends $121,300,000, a reduction of $47,700,000. Within 
this amount, $59,600,000 is for dual use programs and 
$61,700,000 is for Commercial Savings and Support Initiative 
(COSSI) programs.
    To date, the Congress has appropriated $2,068,251,000 for 
dual use programs. The Committee is concerned that hundreds of 
projects have been initiated with little apparent benefit to 
the warfighter. Furthermore, the Committee believes that a 
forty percent increase in funding over the prior year is in 
excess of requirements and therefore recommends funding 
sufficient to retain the current level of effort.

                     NATO RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT

    The Department requested a total of $44,044,000 for NATO 
Research and Development. The Department requested: $11,161,000 
for the Army; $11,004,000 for the Navy; $11,117,000 for the Air 
Force; and $10,762,000 for the Defense-Wide program.
    The Committee believes that the NATO Research and 
Development program is an example of a well-intentioned federal 
program that once established, never ends. The program has 
produced few results since it was started in fiscal year 1986 
at the height of the Cold War. Few if any projects financed by 
this appropriation have resulted in fielded systems for the 
U.S. military. In addition, projects started with these funds 
require the military services to finance the out year costs.
    Given the current fiscal environment, the Committee 
believes that this program is of low priority and is no longer 
affordable, particularly as the Services are trying to find 
ways to finance higher priority programs in areas such as 
readiness and modernization. Therefore, the Committee 
recommends no appropriation.

                          CLASSIFIED PROGRAMS

    Adjustments to classified RDT&E; programs are addressed in 
the classified annex accompanying this report.

            RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST AND EVALUATION, ARMY

                                                                        
                                                                        
                                                                        
Fiscal year 1998 appropriation........................    $5,156,507,000
Fiscal year 1999 budget request.......................     4,780,545,000
Committee recommendation..............................     4,967,466,000
Change from budget request............................      +186,901,000
                                                                        

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

                       Committee Recommendations

                         authorization changes

    The Committee recommends the following changes in 
accordance with House authorization action:

                                            [In thousands of dollars]                                           
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                      Budget         Committee      Change from 
                              Item                                    request       recommended       request   
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tactical exploitation of national capabilities..................          44,674          40,074          -4,600
Aircraft engine component improvement program...................           2,948          11,948          +9,000
Special Army Program............................................           6,537           7,537          +1,000
Information systems security program............................           7,433          12,433          +5,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                     anti-tank weapons master plan

    In the face of extreme funding shortfalls in the Army's 
operation and maintenance and procurement accounts, the 
Committee is dismayed with the Cold War-mind set of this 
service to develop an ever-growing mix of weapons to kill 
tanks. The Committee is aware of at least 40 DoD weapons 
systems, currently in various phases of acquisition, which can 
be used to kill tanks. The Committee questions the need to 
procure so many tank-killing systems in a period in which our 
potential adversaries possess significantly smaller tank forces 
as compared to the threat faced during the Cold War. For 
example, rather than addressing critical shortfalls in 
training, vehicle maintenance, base operations, and real 
property maintenance, the Army instead continues to develop 
expensive tank-killing projects like MSTAR, LOSAT, and EFOGM. 
The Committee believes that the Office of Secretary of Defense 
and the Joint Staff must do a better job in reviewing these 
programs to preserve resources for other priorities, especially 
those affecting the near-term readiness of U.S. forces. 
Accordingly, the Committee directs the Secretary of Defense, 
with cooperation from the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of 
Staff, to develop an Anti-Tank Weapons Master Plan to be 
submitted with the fiscal year 2000 budget. This plan should 
identify the projected armor threat and the projected 
quantities of all DoD weapon systems with an anti-tank 
capability, whether fielded or in development, with the purpose 
of identifying and eliminating excess capabilities. The 
Committee recommends termination of MSTAR, LOSAT, and EFOGM 
because of this proliferation of anti-tank development 
programs, and in order to fund critical Army readiness 
shortfalls.

                   alternative propulsion technology.

    The Committee directs that of the available funds for Army 
research, development, test and evaluation, $10,000,000 is only 
to continue the development of alternative vehicle propulsion 
technologies.

                             Basic Research

                       defense research sciences

    The Army requested $137,399,000 for defense research 
sciences. The Committee recommends $121,827,000, a decrease of 
$15,572,000 as explained in the beginning of this section. 
Additionally, the Committee directs that within the available 
funds, $3,700,000 is available only for nutrition research.

                            Applied Research

                  sensors and electronic survivability

    The Army requested $18,738,000 for sensors and electronic 
survivability. The Committee recommends the requested amount. 
The Committee continues to support the development of the 
Projectile Detection and Cueing program (PDCUE). The Committee 
encourages the Army to transition the PDCUE program from an 
Army Research Lab effort to an Army, Research, Development and 
Engineering Center effort in fiscal year 2000 and the outyears.

                           missile technology

    The Army requested $25,180,000 for missile technology. The 
Committee recommends $24,880,000, a reduction of $300,000 based 
on termination of MLRS Smart Tactical Rocket (MSTAR) program. 
MSTAR is a new Army program to integrate an anti-tank weapon 
like BAT or SADARM on an MLRS rocket. The Committee notes that 
MLRS launchers will already have an anti-tank capability with 
ATACMS Block II.

                   modeling and simulation technology

    The Army requested $27,981,000 for modeling and simulation 
technology. The Committee recommends $22,531,000, a decrease of 
$5,450,000 for the Army After Next Applied Research project.

                combat vehicle and automotive technology

    The Army requested $40,107,000 for combat vehicle and 
automotive technology. The Committee recommends $30,107,000, a 
decrease of $10,000,000. The Committee recommendation includes 
a decrease of $5,000,000 for the next generation light truck 
and a decrease of $5,000,000 for the future combat system. 
Further details are provided in the Other Procurement, Army and 
the Weapons and Tracked Combat Vehicles, Army sections of this 
report.

                    weapons and munitions technology

    The Army requested $29,489,000 for weapons and munitions 
technology. The Committee recommends $25,689,000, a decrease of 
$3,800,000 for Sense and Destroy Armament Missile (SADARM) 
sensor improvements, due to unresolved reliability issues with 
the basic SADARM program.

                   electronics and electronic devices

    The Army requested $22,329,000 for electronics and 
electronic devices. The Committee recommends $29,829,000, an 
increase of $7,500,000 only to advance the development of Micro 
Electro Mechanical Systems (MEMS) for deep silicon etching 
process technology.

                  human factors engineering technology

    The Army requested $13,369,000 for human factors 
engineering. The Committee recommends $21,169,000, an increase 
of $7,800,000. Of that amount, $4,800,000 is only for Medical 
Teams and $3,000,000 is only for Life Support Trauma and 
Transport (LSTAT).

                    environmental quality technology

    The Army requested $13,842,000 for environmental quality 
technology. The Committee recommends $42,342,000, an increase 
of $28,500,000. Of this amount $3,000,000 is only for the 
Plasma Energy Pyrolysis System, a transportable system capable 
of destroying hazardous, chemical and medical waste streams. In 
addition, $5,000,000 is only to support the Sustainable Green 
Manufacturing Initiative, which supports research and 
development for cost-effective and environmentally sustainable 
manufacturing, maintenance and logistics. The Committee 
recommends $3,000,000 only to continue efforts to develop a 
computer-based land management model for the Army to reduce 
time and costs attributable to military training area recovery 
and restoration. Further, $2,000,000 is only for the Army 
Research Office to research ways to conduct on-site chemical 
and hazardous material disposal in an environmentally 
acceptable manner.
    The Committee also provides $7,500,000 only for the 
continuation of the Commercialization of Technologies to Lower 
Defense Costs Initiative. This initiative integrates technology 
commercialization infrastructure components to: (a) find 
solutions to U.S. government and industry problems by 
transitioning key federal laboratory technologies; (b) increase 
the number of federal laboratory technologies taken to market; 
and (c) increase the supply of military critical technologies. 
Finally, $8,000,000 is only for Electronic Equipment 
Demanufacturing through the National Defense Center for 
Environmental Excellence. The Committee encourages the Army to 
continue conducting environmental compliance research projects 
using the personnel and technologies at the Western 
Environmental Technology Office facility. The Committee directs 
that $500,000 from within available funds shall be used only 
for the evaluation of an EPA approved field test kit that 
provides quantitative and qualitative analysis of soil and 
water samples in the field using a lightweight 
spectrophotometer system, and a soil and water contamination 
analysis technique based on an aromatic alkylation reaction.

              command, control, communications technology

    The Army requested $19,746,000 for command, control, and 
communications technology. The Committee recommends 
$22,546,000, an increase of $2,800,000 only for the multi-media 
communications device.

                    military engineering technology

    The Army requested $37,488,000 for military engineering 
technology. The Committee recommends $42,488,000, an increase 
of $5,000,000 only for further technology development to 
enhance the military capabilities and economic efficiency of 
fuel cells at the U.S. Army Construction Engineering Research 
Laboratories.

                           medical technology

    The Army requested $67,255,000 for medical technology. The 
Committee recommends $155,740,000, an increase of $88,485,000. 
Of that amount, $15,000,000 is only for continued 
neurofibromatosis research, $25,000,000 is only for neurotoxin 
exposure treatment, $3,000,000 is only for diagnostic and 
surgical breast imaging, $3,000,000 is only for the portable 
cardiopulmonary bypass pump and oxygenator, $3,000,000 is only 
for musculoskeletal injuries, $9,985,000 is only for Disaster 
Relief and Emergency Medical Services (DREAMS), $15,000,000 is 
only for minimally invasive surgery, $5,000,000 is only for 
osteoporosis, $1,000,000 is only for pain management, 
$2,000,000 is only for technology roadmaps for telemedicine, 
$3,500,000 is only for continuation of advanced cancer 
detection and $3,000,000 is only for continuation of 
cooperative teleradiology.
    The Committee has previously funded technology roadmap 
activities that have identified a methodology for determining 
those medical applications for which technology can drive down 
DoD medical infrastructure costs. The Committee has provided 
$2,000,000 only for the existing team to demonstrate the cost 
reduction potential and information security aspects of 
telemedicine applications and efforts by DoD.

                     Advance Technology Development

                     warfighter advanced technology

    The Army requested $32,969,000 for warfighter advanced 
technology. The Committee recommends $27,369,000, a decrease of 
$5,600,000 for Landwarrior future technology development.

                      medical advanced technology

    The Army requested $11,012,000 for Medical Advanced 
Technology. The Committee recommends $179,012,000, an increase 
of $168,000,000. Of that amount, $135,000,000 is only for the 
Army peer-reviewed Breast Cancer Research Program, $11,000,000 
is only for the National Medical Testbed, $9,000,000 is only 
for continuation of the diabetes research program, $5,000,000 
is only for portable digital x-ray technology, and $8,000,000 
is only for assistive technology to support innovative applied 
technology programs for veterans, service members and their 
families at the Assistive Technology and Research Center at the 
National Rehabilitation Hospital.

                           diabetes research

    The Committee directs that priority consideration be given 
to proposals of the Diabetes Institute of Pittsburgh to support 
expanded research efforts in the field of immunogenetics, 
diabetes mellitus for children, HLA-related research, and 
clinical histocompatibility and transplantation.

                      aviation advanced technology

    The Army requested $30,048,000 for Aviation Advanced 
Technology. The Committee recommends $40,048,000, an increase 
of $10,000,000 only for a side-by-side test between Starstreak 
and Stinger on the Apache helicopter.

               weapons and munitions advanced technology

    The Army requested $24,555,000 for weapons and munitions 
advanced technology. The Committee recommends $27,055,000, an 
increase of $2,500,000. The Committee recommendation includes a 
decrease of $2,500,000 based on termination of MSTAR and an 
increase of $5,000,000 for an electro-rheological fluid recoil 
concept demonstration.

          command, control, communications advanced technology

    The Army requested $20,109,000 for command, control and 
communications technology. The Committee recommends 
$28,109,000, an increase of $8,000,000 for Army Global 
Broadcast System (GBS) certification and for the integration of 
the GBS/Information Management (IM) system into the Army 
Warfighter Information Network architecture. The Committee 
encourages the Army to adequately fund GBS/IM in future budget 
submissions to ensure that this capability is fully integrated 
into the digitized force structure.

                 missile and rocket advanced technology

    The Army requested $86,096,000 for missile and rocket 
advanced technology. The Committee recommends $47,896,000, a 
decrease of $38,200,000. This amount includes a decrease of 
$35,700,000 based on termination of Enhanced Fiber Optic Guided 
Missile (EFOGM) and a decrease of $2,500,000 based on 
termination of MSTAR. The Committee notes that EFOGM was 
terminated in the House-passed defense authorization bill.

            landmine warfare and barrier advanced technology

    The Army requested $21,944,000 for landmine warfare and 
barrier advanced technology. The Committee recommends 
$24,944,000, an increase of $3,000,000 only to continue the 
development, demonstration, and testing of the stand-off 
forward looking ground penetrating radar technology to detect, 
classify and identify land mines.

                    joint service small arms program

    The Army requested $5,173,000 for the joint service small 
arms program. The Committee recommends $10,673,000, an increase 
of $5,500,000. Of the increase, $2,000,000 is only for the 
Objective Individual Combat Weapon and $3,500,000 is only for 
the Objective Crew Served Weapon.

                 line-of-sight technology demonstration

    The Army requested $20,099,000 for the Line-of-Sight 
Technology (LOSAT) program. The Committee recommends no funds 
for this anti-tank concept demonstration program as discussed 
previously. The Committee notes that the Army is already 
developing the follow-on to LOSAT, called the Compact Kinetic 
Energy Missile (CKEM). While the Army considers LOSAT to be a 
``niche'' anti-tank weapon, CKEM is more likely to be 
proliferated within the Army. CKEM is a much smaller weapon 
which can be fired on the move with greater lethality, greater 
field of regard, and a smaller signature. The Committee, 
despite reservations about funding another new anti-tank 
weapon, has fully funded CKEM and believes such a program is a 
more viable approach than LOSAT for a kinetic energy missile.

        strategic environmental research and development program

    The Army budget submission included $54,419,000 for the 
Strategic Environmental Research and Development Program. As 
this program is designed to support the entire Department of 
Defense, the Committee recommends transferring this entire 
program back to the Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, 
Defense-Wide account where it has been funded since its 
inception.

                          joint tactical radio

    The Army requested $15,600,000 for the Joint Tactical Radio 
System (JTRS). The Committee approves the request. JTRS, based 
on a common communications system architecture, will meet 
airborne, ground, mobile, fixed station, maritime and personnel 
communications requirements. Although it will be interoperable 
with legacy communications, the JTRS will be capable of future 
technology insertions. The basic radio, which will be fielded 
in fiscal year 2000, will meet DoD's narrow band requirements. 
However, based on the current schedule, the Army's digitized 
battlefield requirement for a wide band capability will not be 
met until fiscal year 2002. In the interim, the Army must use 
less capable radios. The Committee encourages the Army to 
accelerate the development of the JTRS to meet its wide band 
requirements.

                      Demonstration and Validation

                army missile defense systems integration

    The Army requested $12,240,000 for Army missile defense 
system integration. The Committee recommends $21,240,000, an 
increase of $9,000,000 only for the Space and Strategic Defense 
Command's battle lab.

                    armament enhancement initiative

    The Army requested $26,526,000 for the armament enhancement 
initiative. The Committee recommends $46,526,000, an increase 
of $20,000,000 only for the Tank Extended Range Munition--
Kinetic Energy.

                     army data distribution system

    The Army requested $17,281,000 for the Army data 
distribution system. The Committee recommends $6,281,000, a 
decrease of $11,000,000 for the Near Term Digital Radio (NTDR). 
The NTDR is intended to be a ``gap filler'' radio until the 
Joint Tactical Radio System (JTRS) is fielded. Touted by the 
Army as a low cost, interim, non-developmental radio, the 
original $10,000,000 NTDR development contract has experienced 
cost growth of over 300 percent. The Army has stated it is not 
sure that the NTDR is even capable of providing the mobile 
networked data radio backbone required for the digitized 
force's tactical internet.
    The NTDR acquisition strategy has been described as 
``flawed'' by the Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense 
for Command, Control, and Communications (ASDC3I). 
Additionally, the ASDC3I and the Army believe the JTRS will 
satisfy Army requirements for the digitized battlefield. The 
basic JTRS will be fielded in fiscal year 2000 and DOD believes 
that it will meet the Army's requirements for the digital 
battlefield in 2002. In the interim, the Army's requirements 
can be satisfied with existing radios, such as EPLRS.
    Therefore, the Committee has recommended no funding for the 
NTDR. The Committee also recommends rescinding unobligated 
fiscal year 1998 NTDR funds. Additionally, the Committee 
believes that any outyear funds budgeted for the NTDR should be 
used to accelerate the JTRS. The Committee has also provided 
additional funds in Other Procurement, Army for additional 
EPLRS.

                     nato research and development

    The Army requested $11,161,000 for NATO research and 
development. The Committee recommends no funds. Details are 
provided in the beginning of the research and development 
section of this report.

                     aviation advanced development

    The Army requested $7,487,000 for aviation advanced 
development. The Committee recommends $12,487,000, an increase 
of $5,000,000 only for the virtual cockpit optimization 
program.

                     artillery systems development

    The Army requested $313,166,000 for artillery systems 
development. The Committee recommends the budget request. The 
Committee continues to support the Crusader program and 
believes that it has the potential to increase future artillery 
and maneuver force effectiveness.

               Engineering and Manufacturing Development

                                comanche

    The Army requested $367,823,000 for Comanche. The Committee 
recommends $391,823,000, an increase of $24,000,000 only for 
mission equipment package risk reduction and to accelerate the 
development of the second prototype aircraft. The Committee 
notes that the Army identified Comanche as a high priority 
unfunded requirement.

                             ew development

    The Army requested $85,989,000 for electronic warfare 
development. The Committee recommends $90,989,000, an increase 
of $5,000,000 only to complete the integration of the Advanced 
Threat Infrared Countermeasures/Common Missile Warning System 
on the Longbow Apache helicopter.

                       all source analysis system

    The Army requested $28,081,000 for the all source analysis 
system. The Committee recommends $36,081,000, an increase of 
$8,000,000 for Multi-Adaptive Single Source software 
development.

                   family of heavy tactical vehicles

    The Army requested no funds for the family of heavy 
tactical vehicles. The Committee recommends $3,000,000 only to 
modernize the existing fleet of trailers in the Army inventory.

                engineer mobility equipment development

    The Army requested $63,069,000 for engineer mobility 
equipment development. The Committee recommends $76,069,000, an 
increase of $13,000,000 to procure one additional GRIZZLY 
counter-mine, counter-obstacle prototype system to collect RAM 
data necessary to support a production decision.

                combat feeding, clothing, and equipment

    The Army requested $62,218,000 for combat feeding, 
clothing, and equipment. The Committee recommends $82,218,000, 
an increase of $20,000,000 only to continue development and 
testing of the Landwarrior program. Although the Army views 
Landwarrior as a successful program, the Committee is concerned 
with a number of technical issues which the Army must resolve 
before the system is fielded. Weight and power management are 
two major areas of concern that continue to put risk in the 
program. As a result of the outstanding technical issues, the 
Initial Operational Test and Evaluation (IOT&E;) that was 
scheduled for fiscal year 1998 has been delayed to fiscal year 
1999.
    The Committee has also learned that the Landwarrior 
research and development program is not fully funded. According 
to the Army, the program has experienced 9 percent cost growth 
due to cost overruns and additional requirements levied by the 
Army. For example, the Army has not fully funded Landwarrior 
digitization efforts, one of the Army's top modernization 
priorities.
    The Army budget request includes funds to begin the first 
year of low rate production for Landwarrior. Since the program 
has slipped, the Committee believes that it is premature to 
begin production in fiscal year 1999. Instead, the Committee 
has provided additional funds to conduct testing and resolve 
these outstanding technical issues.

                  automatic test equipment development

    The Army requested $7,030,000 for automatic test equipment 
development. The Committee recommends $12,030,000, an increase 
of $5,000,000 only to continue the development of the 
Integrated Family of Test Equipment pre-planned product 
improvements and the electro-optics test facility technology.

                 brilliant anti-armor submunition (bat)

    The Army requested $134,858,000 for Brilliant Anti-Armor 
Submunition (BAT). The Committee recommends $128,858,000, a 
decrease of $6,000,000 associated with delays in the ATACMS 
Block IIA Program.

                   aviation--engineering development

    The Army requested $6,599,000 for aviation engineering 
development. The Committee recommends $12,599,000, an increase 
of $6,000,000 only for the Comanche helicopter ``Pilot Vehicle 
Interface'' helmet display systems.

             weapons and munitions--engineering development

    The Army requested $37,725,000 for weapons and munitions--
engineering development. The Committee recommends $40,725,000, 
an increase of $3,000,000 only for the trajectory correctable 
munition.

                            landmine warfare

    The Army requested $46,905,000 for landmine warfare. The 
Committee recommends $41,405,000, a decrease of $5,500,000 for 
the remote anti-armor mine system program. The Committee notes 
that the Army submitted a reprogramming action in September 
1997 which was recently approved. Since the program has 
slipped, the Committee recommends no funds for the Remote Anti-
Armor Mine System Program in fiscal year 1999.

                   sense and destroy armament missile

    The Army requested $20,813,000 for the Sense and Destroy 
Armament Missile (SADARM). The Committee recommends no funds 
for the development of the product improvement program for 
SADARM due to reliability issues with the basic SADARM program.

             duap commercial operations and support savings

    The Army requested $33,600,000 for DUAP commercial 
operations and support savings. The Committee recommends 
$19,700,000, a decrease of $13,900,000. Details are provided in 
the beginning of the research and development section of this 
report.

                         artillery systems--emd

    The Army requested $100,000 for artillery systems--
engineering and manufacturing development. The Committee 
recommends $2,600,000, an increase of $2,500,000 only for the 
lightweight 155mm howitzer.

                        RDT&E; Management Support

            army technical test instrumentation and targets

    The Army requested $33,439,000 for Army technical test 
instrumentation and targets. The Committee recommends 
$43,439,000, an increase of $10,000,000 only for national test 
range and evaluation-related instrumentation and infrastructure 
upgrades at the White Sands Missile Range.

                    survivability lethality analysis

    The Army requested $30,498,000 for survivability and 
lethality analysis. The Committee recommends $36,498,000, an 
increase of $6,000,000 only to expand the current information 
warfare vulnerability assessments program to determine the 
exploitable weaknesses in the first digitized division.

                  dod high energy laser test facility

    The Army requested $15,022,000 for the high energy laser 
test facility. The Committee recommends $28,022,000, an 
increase of $13,000,000. Of the increase, $8,000,000 is only 
for the solid state laser program and $5,000,000 is only for 
the hybrid-high mobility multi-purpose vehicle.

          munitions standardization, effectiveness, and safety

    The Army requested $8,497,000 for Munitions 
Standardization, Effectiveness, and Safety. The Committee 
recommends $11,497,000, an increase of $3,000,000 only for the 
continued development and commercialization of environmentally 
sound technologies for the demilitarization of ammunition.

                        environmental compliance

    The Army requested $44,116,000 for environmental 
compliance. The Committee recommends $47,116,000, an increase 
of $3,000,000 only for the U.S. Army Construction Engineering 
Research Laboratories to conduct a demonstration of low 
emission natural gas boiler technology.

                    Operational Systems Development

                    mlrs product improvement program

    The Army requested $20,244,000 for the MLRS Product 
Improvement Program. The Committee recommends $32,744,000, a 
net increase of $12,500,000. This amount includes an increase 
of $8,300,000 only for commercial component usage and joint 
service communications, an increase of $6,000,000 only for 
HIMARS, an increase of $3,200,000 only for the Improved 
Launcher Mechanical System (ILMS), and a decrease of $5,000,000 
for savings associated with the recently signed Guided MLRS 
Memorandum of Understanding with foreign participants.

                                aerostat

    The Army requested $103,937,000 for Aerostat. The Committee 
recommends no funds. Further details are provided in the 
classified annex accompanying this report.

                  combat vehicle improvement programs

    The Army requested $94,756,000 for combat vehicle 
improvement programs. The Committee recommends $101,856,000, an 
increase of $7,100,000 only to complete the field emission 
display program.

            force xxi, warfighting rapid acquisition program

    The Army requested $99,528,000 for Force XXI, Warfighting 
Rapid Acquisition Program (WRAP). The Committee recommends 
$64,528,000, a decrease of $35,000,000. The Committee notes 
that fiscal year 1998 appropriated funds remain unobligated. 
Additionally, programs initiated with WRAP funds, such as the 
airborne command and control, gun laying, and avenger slew to 
cue systems, have experienced schedule delays. The Committee 
believes that given the critical shortfalls in the Army's 
operation and maintenance and procurement accounts, this 
initiative is not as high a priority to the Army's current or 
future readiness and, accordingly, recommends this reduction to 
the Force XXI, WRAP initiative.
    As in the previous two fiscal years, the Committee directs 
that no funds may be obligated from the Force XXI, WRAP 
initiative without prior notification to the congressional 
defense subcommittees. Notification is to include the 
supporting criteria outlining technical merit and maturity; 
criticality and priority to warfighter requirements; 
affordability; effectiveness; and sustainability in future 
budget submissions. The Committee directs that none of the WRAP 
funds may be used for technologies included in the budget 
request, such as applique, night vision equipment, and radios. 
Instead, WRAP funds are to be reprogrammed, with prior 
notification, to the account for obligation.

            missile/air defense product improvement program

    The Army requested $11,252,000 for Missile/Air Defense 
Product Improvement Program. The Committee recommends 
$19,252,000, an increase of $8,000,000 only for the Stinger 
Block II Program.

              end item industrial preparedness activities

    The Army requested $30,511,000 for end item industrial 
preparedness activities. The Committee recommends $59,711,000, 
an increase of $29,200,000. Of the increase, $13,200,000 is 
only for munitions manufacturing technology, $9,000,000 is only 
for the Totally Integrated Munitions Enterprise program, 
$4,000,000 is only for the Instrumented Factory for Gears, 
$1,000,000 is only for Composite Armored Vehicle manufacturing 
technology, and $2,000,000 is only for the Center of Optics 
Manufacturing.

                         Consequence Management

    Further details are provided under the heading Domestic 
Response to Weapons of Mass Destruction.

                           Tactical Vehicles

    The Committee understands that the Army has a requirement 
for an airdrop-capable, multi-utility, commercially available 
vehicle for the movement of supplies and injured personnel in 
rugged terrain. The Committee encourages the Army to give 
favorable consideration to the military GATOR in meeting this 
mission requirement.

                          Program Recommended

    The total amount recommended in the bill will provide the 
following in fiscal year 1999:





            RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST AND EVALUATION, NAVY

                                                                        
                                                                        
                                                                        
Fiscal year 1998 appropriation........................    $8,115,686,000
Fiscal year 1999 budget request.......................     8,108,923,000
Committee recommendation..............................     8,297,986,000
Change from budget request............................      +189,063,000
                                                                        


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

                       Committee Recommendations

                         Authorization Changes

    The Committee recommends the following changes in 
accordance with the House authorization action:

                                            [In thousands of dollars]                                           
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                  Committee        Change from  
                                                             Budget request    recommendation        request    
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Undersea Warfare Weaponry Technology......................            34,856            36,856            +2,000
Air Systems and Weapons Advanced Technology...............            48,143            46,143            -2,000
Surface Ship and Submarine HM&E; Advanced Technology.......            39,264            47,264            +8,000
Surface and Shallow Water Mine Countermeasures............            73,491            80,491            +7,000
Shipboard System Component Development....................            27,725            28,725            +1,000
Marine Corps Assault Vehicles.............................           104,822           108,822            +4,000
Marine Corps Ground Combat/Support System.................            37,133            39,633            +2,500
S-3 Weapon System Improvement.............................            31,469             4,376           -27,093
RDT&E; Ship and Aircraft Support...........................            57,421            55,421            -2,000
HARM Improvement..........................................            18,921            33,921           +15,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                   electromagnetic propulsion systems

    The Committee is aware of the Navy's need to refine 
technologies for the purpose of increasing ship speed and 
efficiencies. Recognizing that such goals could be met through 
electromagnetic propulsion systems, the Committee encourages 
the Navy to consider utilizing the National Science 
Foundation's Magnetic Laboratory and related resources located 
in Tallahassee, Florida.

                            Applied Research

              Air and surface launched weapons technology

    The Navy requested $37,140,000 for air and surface launched 
weapons technology. The Committee recommends $41,140,000, an 
increase of $4,000,000 of which $3,000,000 is only for rotary 
valved multiple combustor pulse detonation engines and 
$1,000,000 is only for the development of environmentally safe 
energetic materials and advanced explosive compositions and 
related technologies as recommended in the House-passed 
authorization bill.

               Ship, submarine, and logistics technology

    The Navy requested $43,177,000 for ship, submarine, and 
logistics technology. The Committee recommends $45,177,000, an 
increase of $2,000,000 only for the development of ship 
machinery component level intelligent distributed control 
systems for autonomous underwater vehicles.

                          Aircraft technology

    The Navy requested $23,229,000 for aircraft technology. The 
Committee recommends $27,029,000, an increase of $3,800,000 of 
which $2,000,000 is only for the Vectored Thrust Ducted 
Propeller program in preparation for a flight demonstration in 
2002 and $1,800,000 is only to develop the advanced 1000-plus 
line resolution charged coupled device II night vision camera 
to be applied to the Crusader helmet mounted display. The 
Committee continues to support the flight demonstration of the 
VDTP compound helicopter technology and recognizes that a 
timely flight demonstration will maximize the opportunity to 
transition this technology to a number of DoD aircraft.

                 Marine corps landing force technology

    The Marine Corps requested $12,132,000 for landing force 
technology. The Committee recommends $13,632,000, an increase 
of $1,500,000 only for the coastal battlefield reconnaissance 
and analysis advanced technology demonstration.

              Historically black colleges and universities

    The Navy requested $4,699,000 for historically black 
colleges and universities. The Committee recommends $6,699,000, 
an increase of $2,000,000 only for the teaching and study of 
urban education in science, engineering, and mathematics.

      Communications, command and control, intelligence technology

    The Navy requested $65,033,000 for communications, command 
and control, and intelligence technology. The Committee 
recommends $60,033,000, a decrease of $5,000,000. This includes 
an increase of $1,000,000 only for the hybrid wireless fiber 
optic communications system recommended in the House-passed 
authorization bill; a $1,000,000 decrease with prejudice for 
development of infrared search and track technology; and a 
decrease of $5,000,000 due to fiscal constraints. The Committee 
has provided sufficient funds for infrared search and track 
technology in aircraft carrier development as discussed below.

                        Human systems technology

    The Navy requested $29,722,000 for human systems 
technology. The Committee recommends $31,722,000, an increase 
of $2,000,000 only for the smart aircrew integrated life 
support system to integrate physiological monitoring with 
biofeedback support for aircrew performance.

            materials, electronics, and computer technology

    The Navy requested $77,617,000 for materials, electronics, 
and computer technology. The Committee recommends $80,617,000, 
an increase of $3,000,000. This includes a decrease of 
$7,000,000 due to excessive budget growth and the following 
increases recommended in the House-passed authorization bill: 
$3,000,000 only for development of superconducting waveform 
generator and analog-to-digital converter technology; 
$1,000,000 only for carbon-carbon materials for reentry bodies; 
$3,500,000 only for silicon-carbide semiconductor substrates; 
and $2,500,000 only for ultra-high thermal conductivity fibers. 
Within the total amount provided, $1,800,000 is only for 
further development of Terfenol-D, a specially formulated iron-
alloy which changes shape in the presence of a magnetic field 
for actuators, transducers, vibration control systems, 
micropositioning systems, sonar systems, and other military 
applications.

                     electronic warfare technology

    The Navy requested $23,849,000 for electronic warfare 
technology. The Committee recommends $22,849,000, a decrease of 
$1,000,000 due to fiscal constraints.

                undersea warfare surveillance technology

    The Navy requested $50,619,000 for undersea warfare 
surveillance technology. The Committee recommends $51,119,000, 
an increase of $500,000 only for development of lithium carbon 
monoflouride batteries for mine applications.

                oceanographic and atmospheric technology

    The Navy requested $56,722,000 for oceanographic and 
atmospheric technology. The Committee recommends $70,222,000, 
an increase of $13,500,000. Within that amount, $10,000,000 is 
only to continue autonomous underwater vehicle and sensor 
development as recommended in the House-passed authorization 
bill; $2,750,000 is only for the Naval Surface Warfare Center 
South Florida Test Facility to continue collaborative marine 
vehicle research efforts; and $750,000 is only for the PM-10 
clean air study. In addition, the Committee encourages the Navy 
to accelerate transfer of the research ship USNS Hayes from 
Cape Canaveral to the South Florida Test Facility as soon as 
possible.

                         dual use applications

    The Navy requested $20,000,000 for dual use applications. 
The Committee approves the request, and directs that 
$15,000,000 of the amount provided be available only for 
projects with the National Technology Alliance Program to 
provide cross-agency, cross-program sharing of advanced 
commercial and consumer information technology solutions for 
end-users in the Intelligence Community and the Department of 
Defense. Funds for projects funded through the Program may only 
be obligated if approved in advance by the Navy's Director of 
Space Information Warfare Command and Control.

                               project m

    The Committee supports the language on Project M contained 
in the report accompanying the House-passed authorization bill.

                    Advanced Technology Development

              precision strike and air defense technology

    The Navy requested $58,306,000 for precision strike and air 
defense technology. The Committee recommends $62,306,000, an 
increase of $4,000,000. This includes an increase of $5,000,000 
only for mobile off-shore basing and a decrease of $1,000,000 
due to fiscal constraints. Within the amount provided for the 
mobile off-shore base, the Committee directs the Navy to 
provide $1,000,000 to the Joint Warfighting Capabilities 
Assessment initiative (PE 0902298J) and $1,000,000 to the OSD 
Office of Acquisition and Technology (PE 0603728D) for joint 
community MOB assessments and studies.

             marine corps advanced technology demonstration

    The Marine Corps requested $41,931,000 for advanced 
technology demonstration. The Committee recommends $51,931,000, 
an increase of $10,000,000. Of the increase, $5,000,000 is only 
for BURRO project and $5,000,000 is only to continue the SMAW 
product improvement program.

                          medical development

    The Navy requested $18,728,000 for medical development. The 
Committee recommends $69,028,000, an increase of $50,300,000. 
Of that amount, $34,000,000 is only for the Bone Marrow Donor 
Program, $3,000,000 is only for the Naval Blood Research 
Laboratory, $4,000,000 is only for dental research, $1,800,000 
is only for the National Biodynamics Lab, $4,500,000 is only 
for the Medical Readiness Telemedicine Initiative to continue 
development of a centralized organization capable of delivering 
integrated and interoperable advanced medical care services to 
remote locations on a timely basis and $3,000,000 is only for 
rural health.

                          bone marrow registry

    The Committee provides $34,000,000 to be administered by 
the C.W. Bill Young Marrow Donor Recruitment and Research 
Program, also known, and referred to, within the Naval Medical 
Research Institute, as the Bone Marrow Registry. This DoD donor 
center has recruited more than 150,000 DoD volunteers, and 
provides more marrow donors per week than any other donor 
center in the Nation. The Committee is aware of the continuing 
success of this life saving program for military contingencies 
and civilian patients, which now includes more than 3,000,000 
potential volunteer donors, and encourages agencies involved in 
contingency planning to include the C.W. Bill Young Marrow 
Donor Recruitment and Research Program in the development and 
testing of their contingency plans. DD Form 1414 shall show 
this as a special congressional interest item, and the 
Committee directs that all of the funds appropriated for this 
purpose be released to the C.W. Bill Young Marrow Donor 
Recruitment and Research Program within 60 days of enactment of 
this bill.

    manpower, personnel and training advanced technology development

    Information of this project can be found in the Information 
Resources Management section of this report.

                     advanced technology transition

    The Navy requested $74,392,000 for advanced technology 
transition. The Committee recommends $59,392,000, a reduction 
of $15,000,000 due to fiscal constraints. The reduction 
eliminates about half of the funds budgeted to initiate new 
projects in fiscal year 1999. The Committee directs that none 
of the reduction be applied to the anti-torpedo project.

                         c3 advanced technology

    The Navy requested $22,294,000 for C3 advanced technology. 
The Committee recommends $28,294,000, an increase of $6,000,000 
only for the dominant battlespace command initiative.

                      Demonstration and Validation

                    air/ocean tactical applications

    The Navy requested $28,824,000 for air/ocean tactical 
applications. The Committee recommends $25,824,000, a decrease 
of $3,000,000 due to excessive budget growth.

                         aviation survivability

    The Navy requested $8,164,000 for aviation survivability. 
The Committee recommends $13,164,000, an increase of $5,000,000 
of which $3,000,000 is only for the escape system dynamic flow 
test facility as recommended in the House-passed authorization 
bill and $2,000,000 is only for the helicopter aircrew 
integrated life support system.

                        asw systems development

    The Navy requested $20,184,000 for ASW systems development. 
The Committee recommends $35,184,000, an increase of 
$15,000,000. Within that amount, $9,000,000 is only for 
RAINBOW/BEARTRAP acoustic processors for SH-60B LAMPS 
helicopters; $3,000,000 is only to continue the development and 
testing of advanced anti-submarine warfare technologies on the 
BEARTRAP platform; and $3,000,000 is only for reassessment of 
SSQ-62 sonobouy at-sea performance by evaluating prototypes in 
tactically significant operating areas, investigating neckdown 
of passive sonobouys into a unibouy configuration, and sonobouy 
GPS integration analysis and prototype development.

                   Advanced Combat Systems Technology

    The Navy requested $8,653,000 for advanced combat systems 
technology. The Committee recommends $6,653,000, a decrease of 
$2,000,000 due to fiscal constraints.

             advanced submarine combat systems development

    The Navy requested $68,402,000 for advanced submarine 
combat systems development. The Committee recommends 
$75,802,000, an increase of $7,400,000 only for the lightweight 
wide aperture array to support the conformal array velocity 
sensor project.

                      SURFACE SHIP TORPEDO DEFENSE

    The Navy requested no funds for surface ship torpedo 
defense. The Committee recommends $6,000,000. The Committee 
notes that the OSD-chartered independent IDA study of the 
surface ship torpedo defense program finds that a torpedo 
defense capability is required for all surface ships and 
recommends that the Navy continue the program in collaboration 
with the Royal Navy of the United Kingdom. These additional 
funds are only to continue a joint collaborative program with 
the United Kingdom to develop promising technologies identified 
during the recent demonstration/validation phase of the 
program, such as the mobile expendable acoustic decoy, concept 
one countermeasures, and improved processing and sensors. This 
funding is also intended to conduct system simulation modeling, 
in consort with the current United Kingdom effort, that will 
identify the most cost effective torpedo defense capability for 
surface ships. The Navy is directed to initiate upgrading the 
current torpedo countermeasure winch and tow capability for 
littoral operations.

                      carrier systems development

    The Navy requested $154,307,000 for carrier systems 
development. The Committee recommends $64,307,000, a decrease 
of $90,000,000. In the fiscal year 1999 budget, $190,150,000 is 
requested for aircraft carrier development funds in this and 
another budget line. The budget envisioned development of a new 
(CVX) class of ships to replace the existing Nimitz-class. In 
recent internal budget deliberations, the Navy is considering 
changing its acquisition strategy to an evolutionary approach 
where the Nimitz hull-form would be retained and improvements 
would be incrementally fielded as new ships are built. The 
Committee supports a robust aircraft technology development 
program, but given the uncertainty of the Navy's direction, 
recommends $100,000,000 to continue technology development. The 
Committee notes that many of the areas for technology 
development contained in the carrier systems development budget 
might no longer be pursued under the Navy's new approach, which 
is evolving and has not yet been approved by the Secretary of 
Defense. The Committee questions the wisdom of narrowly 
focusing all future carrier component technology development 
beyond CVN-77 on a limited number of propulsion and power 
technologies at the expense of all others. The Committee 
expects that the CVX budget and plan submitted to the Congress 
for fiscal year 2000 will contain a fully-funded and well 
balanced program that best meets the most urgent warfighting, 
operational effectiveness, and cost-reduction requirements for 
a future class of aircraft carriers.
    Since the early 1990s, congressional committees have 
expressed concern about the Navy's inability to field an 
infrared search and track system for protection of surface 
ships from anti-ship cruise missile attack. As radar signatures 
of enemy missiles decrease over time, heat signatures will play 
a growing importance in defeating such threats. Last year, the 
Chief of Naval Operations testified to the Committee that 
theater commanders-in-chief want infrared search and track 
(IRST) devices on their ships. The fiscal year 1999 budget 
requests no funds for continued IRST development, even though 
over $51 million has been invested to date in the technology 
and it has demonstrated impressive performance capability. 
After the fiscal year 1999 budget was submitted, the Navy 
announced a major reorganization of its Program Executive 
Offices under which many ship self-defense programs have been 
assigned to the office responsible for aircraft carriers and 
logistics ships. This offers an opportunity to reinvigorate the 
infrared search and track program under new management. The 
Committee directs that of the amount provided in this bill for 
aircraft carrier technology development, $10,000,000 is only 
for engineering manufacturing development of infrared search 
and track. The Committee recommends bill language that 
precludes obligation of more than $50,000,000 of the funds 
provided in the bill for aircraft carrier technology 
development until the Secretary of the Navy certifies in 
writing to the congressional defense committees that the Navy 
has a fully-funded program for development and installation of 
an infrared search and track device on CVN-77 prior to its 
acceptance by the Navy from the shipbuilder.

                      ship concept advanced design

    The Navy requested $14,900,000 for ship concept advanced 
design. The Committee recommends $19,900,000, an increase of 
$5,000,000 only for an integrated bioenvironmental hazards 
research program that focuses primarily on the development of 
biosensors and biomarkers of exposure for human and ecological 
bioenvironmental problems relevant to the Navy.

                   advanced surface machinery systems

    The Navy requested $58,419,000 for advanced surface 
machinery systems. The Committee recommends $34,919,000, a 
reduction of $23,500,000 to terminate the intercooled 
recuperated (ICR) gas turbine engine development program.
    Non-nuclear ships today use jet engines for propulsion. The 
ICR program, underway for nearly a decade, seeks to develp a 
system which attaches a recuperator device to a turbine engine 
to recover energy from the exhaust and reinject it back into 
the engine-intake to increase fuel inefficiency. The Navy 
always managed this as a stand-alone program, isolated from any 
ship acquisition program. For example, in April, 1998 the Navy 
reorganized its program executive offices to stand-up a new 
office to manage DD-21. Ship component development programs 
were placed under this office, but not ICR, which remains a 
bureaucratic orphan.
    In 1995, the Committee recommended that this program be 
terminated due to severe technical problems, cost growth, and 
the fact that it would take 76 years (twice the service life) 
to pay back the investment if the Navy installed it on DDG-51 
destroyers. Navy documents showed the ICR engine development 
cost $500,000,000 and the installation on DDG-51 ships cost 
$249,000,000. During initial testing, the recuperator suffered 
a catastrophic failure after only 17 hours of a planned 500 
hour test, causing the need for a redesign of the device. The 
Congress allowed the program to continue, and the Navy 
successfully completed the 500 hour test in September, 1997. 
However, recent Navy analysis of the test results and decisions 
related to the new DD-21 class of destroyers clearly show that 
the program is in worse condition than in 1995 in terms of 
cost, schedule, technical performance, and platform 
integration:
    U.S. Navy Requirement. In the early 1990s a number of 
Congressional Committees questioned the Navy on which ship the 
ICR engine would be installed. The Navy formally budgeted to 
put ICR on a number of DDG-51s in 1994. However, the DDG-51 
Selected Acquition Report dated December 1997 shows that the 
``P3I'' (ICR) engine is now deleted from the program because 
``it is not cost-effective''. Regarding the use of the ICR 
engine on future ships, the Committee notes that the request-
for-proposals to industry for DD-21 does not require ICR to be 
used. The Navy has no intention of dictating that ICR be used 
for DD-21 or any other ship acquisition program. After nearly a 
decade, the Navy cannot answer the fundamental question that if 
the nation invests $500,000,000 in the ICR engine, on which 
United States ship will it be used?
    The Committee believes that theater commanders, who would 
be most affected by introduction of the ICR engines into their 
fleets, have not had a sufficient opportunity to express their 
views on the merit of continued investment in the troubled ICR 
development program. The Committee directs the Commander in 
Chief of the U.S. Atlantic Command and the Commander in Chief 
of the U.S. Pacific Command to certify in writing to the 
congressional defense committees by July 20, 1998 whether they 
have an operational requirement for the ICR engine on surface 
ships.
    Cost. The Navy has invested $326,000,000 in ICR through 
fiscal year 1998, and there is another $60,000,000 in the 
fiscal year 1999 budget and accompanying outyear plan to 
conduct a 3,000 hour test. But, another $128,000,000 more than 
is budgeted in the current outyear plan is needed over the next 
four years to complete development and full qualification 
trials on the engine. The $326,000,000 sunk-cost includes 
$150,000,000 of overruns and cost-growths since the program was 
begun. After the fiscal year 1999 budget was submitted, the 
Navy discovered a $28,000,000 funding shortfall in fiscal years 
1998 and 1999, which will either require reprogramming of funds 
from higher priority Navy weapons programs or will result in at 
least another 18 month schedule delay. Installation costs on 
DDG-51 would have exceeded $19,000,000 per ship. Yet, no cost 
estimates have been developed or budgeted for installation of 
ICR on future Navy ships.
    Poor Technical Performance. Until this point, the Navy has 
struggled with issues related to the ICR recuperator device. 
However, based on recent analysis of the 500 hour tests, the 
Navy indicates that not only are there new failure modes in the 
recuperator, but also there are new problems with corrosion and 
limited life in the engine's combustor cans, compressor vane 
cracking and high-cycle fatigue in the turbine engine, and 
turbine cooling and longevity issues. The discovery of flaws in 
the engine itself is very troubling. It undermines the premise 
that ICR is based on a proven, off-the-shelf commercial 
aircraft engine. The fleet is concerned about ICR engine 
reliability which is jeopardized by the engine's complexity and 
that the life of the combustion section of about 400 hours must 
be improved to at least 5,000 hours. For example, current ship 
propulsion engines do not use combuster cans; the need to 
replace combuster cans at sea due to short life would cause a 
Navy ship to shut down for a number of days to service them.
    Life Cycle Cost. The DD-21 request for proposals does not 
require the use of the ICR engine. While ICR may save fuel, it 
may not have the lowest life cycle cost due to high manpower 
requirements and spares consumption. In June, 1998 the Navy 
informed the Committee that while the ICR engine will save 
fuel, the acquisition cost will be significantly more than the 
current engine and the reliability costs of ICR are unknown.
    Payback of Investment. The Department of Defense 
justification for continuation of the ICR engine development 
program suggests that payback of the investment occurs in 2028, 
under the most favorable assumptions for ICR: the largest 
population of ships with ICR engines (80 DD-21 equivalents) and 
a zero discount rate (out year savings not penalized for time 
value). Payback occurs in 2037 under less favorable 
assumptions. The Committee is compelled to observe that this 
analysis is premised on several dubious assumptions. For 
example, the $328 million in sunk costs for development were 
not considered in the analysis. The Committee notes that in 
order to obtain any reasonable payback for this investment, the 
Navy would have to install ICR on all 32 DD-21 ships and entire 
classes of follow-up on ships as well. It remains clear that 
when all costs are considered, there is no likely scenario 
where ICR savings justify the investment.
    After consideration of the preceding issues, the Committee 
finds it original 1995 judgment about this program has 
regrettably been affirmed. The ICR program faces the prospect 
of continued technical problems, cost overruns, and delays; it 
lacks a firm commitment for production and installation on a 
ship; and it is not supported by credible cost-effective 
analysis. When all costs are considered, the program costs more 
than it saves. The Navy does not need the engine, and the 
Office of the Secretary of Defense remains its only advocate. 
The Navy and the Committee should not be forced to cut other 
needed programs to pay for what is at least a $128,000,000 
future shortfall in the program just to complete development 
testing and full qualification trials, with no assurance that 
the engine will go into service. The Committee therefore 
recommends that this troubled program be terminated.

                         CONVENTIONAL MUNITIONS

    The Navy requested $39,775,000 for conventional munitions. 
The Committee recommends $42,775,000, an increase of $3,000,000 
only for environmentally-safe energetic materials as 
recommended in the House-passed authorization bill.

           marine corps mine/countermeasures systems--adv dev

    The Marine Corps requested $1,958,000 for advanced 
development of mine/countermeasures systems. The Committee 
recommends $2,958,000, an increase of $1,000,000 only for an 
international cooperative research and development program 
initiative applying Norwegian mine clearing vehicle technology.

                   cooperative engagement capability

    The Navy requested $131,623,000 for cooperative engagement 
capability. The Committee recommends $186,123,000, an increase 
of $54,500,000. The cooperative engagement capability (or CEC) 
program should fund only the development of core technologies. 
Programs for individual weapon system platforms should bear 
their own unique costs for integration of cooperative 
engagement capability into their systems. The Committee has 
therefore transferred $12,500,000 of funds requested in the 
cooperative engagement development budget to other programs: 
$9,500,000 for integration on DDG-51 ships has been provided in 
Surface Combatant Combat Systems Engineering and $3,000,000 for 
development of a new LAMPS data link has been provided in Other 
Helo Development. The Committee notes that the LAMPS/CEC 
datalink interference issue was recognized when cooperative 
engagement was fielded, but the redesign of the helicopter's 
datalink is an issue independent from cooperative engagement 
capability. The Committee directs that future budget 
submissions to Congress provide Navy weapons cooperative 
engagement capability integration costs in platform development 
budgets.
    The Committee recommends an additional $67,000,000 for 
cooperative engagement capability and related requirements 
identified by the Navy after the budget was submitted. These 
additional requirements became known after analysis of at-sea 
test results conducted in 1997. This includes an additional 
$20,000,000 only to conduct additional developmental and 
operational testing to resolve battlegroup interoperability 
issues; $15,000,000 only for design agent transition; 
$13,000,000 only to develop large network capability; 
$10,000,000 only to develop a low cost common equipment set; 
and $9,000,000 only to establish a land based network.
    The Committee notes that the Navy has not used additional 
funds provided by Congress in this program during the past two 
years as the Committee intended. The Committee also notes that 
the Navy has realigned fiscal year 1998 inflation funds from 
other programs to the benefit of the F/A-18 development 
program, and believes that the cooperative engagement program 
is of equal priority. The Committee therefore has included bill 
language to require that the total amount appropriated for 
cooperative engagement capability be spent only for that 
purpose.

                        environmental protection

    The Navy requested $59,438,000 for environmental 
protection. The Committee recommends $73,138,000, an increase 
of $13,700,000. Within this amount, $2,700,000 is only for 
aviation depot maintenance technology as recommended in the 
House-passed authorization bill, $7,000,000 is only for the 
Resource Recovery Technology Center, and $4,000,000 is only to 
complete the evaluation of an asbestos thermo-chemical 
conversion technology, to be used in conjunction with the 
ongoing submarine inactivation program at Puget Sound Naval 
Shipyard. The funds for aviation maintenance technology are 
only for Naval Aviation Depot, Jacksonville.

                      navy logistics productivity

    The Navy requested no funds for Navy logistics 
productivity. The Committee recommends $3,000,000 only for 
rapid retargeting of electronic circuits using virtual 
prototyping.

                           ship self-defense

    The Navy requested $12,337,000 for ship self-defense, which 
is approved by the Committee and designated as special interest 
for the purpose of the Base of Reprogramming (DD Form 1414).

                         land attack technology

    The Navy requested $110,104,000 for land attack technology. 
The Committee recommends $103,104,000, a reduction of 
$7,000,000 for the vertical gun system whose funding was 
reduced in both the House and Senate authorization bills. The 
Committee directs the Director, Operational Test and Evaluation 
(DOT&E;) to review the Navy's analysis of Land Attack Standard 
Missile (LASM) lethality and report his assessment of this 
analysis to the congressional defense committees. The Committee 
directs that no fiscal year 1999 funds for LASM may be 
obligated prior to submission of this report. This report 
should draw on DOT&E;'s recent experience with lethality 
analysis on the ATACMS Block IA program.

                     non-lethal weapons technology

    The Marine Corps requested $22,592,000 for non-lethal 
weapons. The Committee recommends $25,092,000, an increase of 
$2,500,000 only to support the expansion of the role and 
missions of the Joint Non-Lethal Directorate's Human Effects 
Panel to review Department-wide weapons development in this 
sensitive area.

               Engineering and Manufacturing Development

                         other helo development

    The Navy requested $231,120,000 for other helicopter 
development. The Committee recommends $231,620,000, an increase 
of $500,000. Within this amount, an additional $15,000,000 is 
for CH-60 mine countermeasures identified by the Chief of Naval 
Operations as a serious deficiency; $3,000,000 is for the LAMPS 
data link as discussed previously; and $1,000,000 is only to 
upgrade the ship ground station at the Naval Air Warfare Center 
Aircraft Division and provide the capability for ship, air, and 
ground systems interoperability for research, development, 
testing, evaluation, and training support. The Committee 
recommends that $18,500,000 for operational evaluation and 
post-testing correction of deficiencies for the advanced low 
frequency sonar be denied based on analysis from the General 
Accounting Office that such testing has been delayed until 
2001. The Committee also encourages the Navy to test the 
capabilities of the SH-60R helicopter with the Joint Synthetic 
Evaluation and Battle space system using the Air 
Interoperability Center Fiber Optic Network.

                             AV-8B aircraft

    The Navy requested $13,787,000 for AV-8B aircraft 
engineering development. The Committee recommends $50,387,000, 
an increase of $36,600,000. Within that amount, an additional 
$31,500,000 is for the open systems core avionics requirement 
and $5,100,000 is for the landing signal officer automated 
shipboard operating bulletin. The Commandant of the Marine 
Corps identified both these items as serious deficiencies. The 
open systems core avionics requirement provides AV-8B mission 
computer enhancement using commercial off-the-shelf processors 
and rewrites legacy assembly language software into a higher 
order language. This will significantly enhance the capability 
of AV-8B software, significantly lower the cost of future 
software upgrades, and facilitate integration of future weapons 
on the aircraft. The landing signal officer automated shipboard 
operating bulletin software upgrades will make the system 
easier to operate by providing more accurate weight, balance, 
and center-of-gravity calculations; ordnance configurations; 
and take-off parameters.

                              H-1 upgrades

    The Navy requested $98,542,000 for H-1 helicopter upgrades. 
The Committee recommends $122,542,000, an increase of 
$24,000,000 only to accelerate the H-1 upgrade program. The 
Committee notes that the Marine Corps identified the H-1 
program as a high priority unfunded requirement for fiscal year 
1999.

                        acoustic search sensors

    The Navy requested $29,637,000 for acoustic search sensors. 
The Committee recommends $31,637,000, an increase of $2,000,000 
only for cost reduction technology insertions to the air 
deployed active receiver/improved extended echo ranging system 
and advanced active processing upgrades to sonobuoys.

                      air crew systems development

    The Navy requested $9,454,000 for air crew systems 
development. The Committee recommends $12,454,000, an increase 
of $3,000,000. The Committee is encouraged with efforts to date 
regarding joint ejection seat testing of front line fighter/
trainer aircraft (FLEET program). These tests have verified 
deficiencies in aircraft escape systems, particularly for the 
smaller aircrew at higher speeds. The bill includes $3,000,000 
only to address stability deficiencies identified in FLEET 1 
testing and to demonstrate improvements through dynamic 
testing.

                     electronic warfare development

    The Navy requested $128,586,000 for electronic warfare 
development. The Committee recommends $137,886,000, an increase 
of $9,300,000 for the integrated defensive electronic 
countermeasures system which is transferred from Aircraft 
Procurement, Navy due to a recent program restructure.

              surface combatant combat systems engineering

    The Navy requested $132,561,000 for surface combatant 
combat systems engineering. The Committee recommends 
$169,061,000, an increase of $36,500,000. Within this amount, 
$9,500,000 is transferred from CEC, and an additional 
$27,000,000 is for Aegis baseline software development, 
integration of cooperative engagement capability into Aegis 
baseline upgrades, and resolution of battlegroup 
interoperability issues. The Committee directs that no funds, 
whether in the budget or the additional funds provided herein, 
for Aegis baseline 6, phase 1 or subsequent phases may be 
obligated unless the Navy certifies in writing to the House and 
Senate Appropriations Committees that such baselines include 
cooperative engagement capability. Finally, $9,000,000 is only 
for development of the high dynamic range, low cost, towed 
array receiver and beamformer sonar system.

                 navy theater ballistic missile defense

    The House-passed authorization bill recommends $50,000,000 
for Aegis ship combat system upgrades to support theater 
ballistic missile defense missions. These funds are for 
evolution of the SPY-1D radar system. The Committee recommends 
no additional funds in the Navy appropriation, but recommends 
additional funds in the Defense-Wide appropriation which could 
be used by the Ballistic Missile Defense Organization to 
develop an advanced combat system for Aegis ships. Noting that 
there are alternative technical approaches, namely evolution of 
SPY-1D or development of high power discriminator systems, the 
Navy and BMDO will have to reconcile the technical and 
competitive requirements for developing an advanced combat 
system for Aegis ships. Given these events, the funds provided 
to the Navy in the fiscal year 1998 bill for high power 
discriminator development are premature. The Committee 
therefore recommends a rescission of $15,000,000.

                     airborne mine countermeasures

    The Navy requested $24,967,000 for airborne mine 
countermeasures. The Committee recommends $30,967,000, an 
increase of $6,000,000, of which $4,000,000 is only to complete 
development, test and evaluation of electrodynamic acoustic 
projector technology in the shallow water influence mine system 
and $2,000,000 is only to support an autonomous solution during 
engineering manufacturing development of the CH-60 helicopter-
borne mine destruction technology.

                   ssn-688 and trident modernization

    The Navy requested $50,300,000 for SSN-688 and Trident 
modernization. The Committee recommends $60,300,000, an 
increase of $10,000,000 only for acoustic rapid COTS insertion/
multi-purpose processor software-build development as 
recommended in the House-passed authorization bill. The 
Committee directs the Secretary of Defense to conduct an 
analysis of converting some of the Trident SSBN submarines to 
SSGN configuration for conventional missions, in the event that 
some of these boats become no longer needed to support 
strategic missions if strategic arms reduction treaties enter 
into force. It should identify the parameters for such a 
conversion, such as feasibility, desirability, cost, schedule, 
technical approach, and a concept of operations. This analysis 
should be submitted to the congressional defense committees no 
later than March 1, 1999.

                          new design submarine

    The Navy requested $218,816,000 for the new design 
submarine. The Committee recommends $240,816,000, an increase 
of $22,000,000. Within that amount, $10,000,000 is only for 
submarine technology insertion; $7,000,000 is only for glass 
reinforced plastic and rubber sandwich sonar domes; and 
$5,000,000 is only for non-propulsion electronics. These 
increases are recommended in the House-passed authorization 
bill.

                          ssn-21 developments

    The Navy requested $27,456,000 for SSN-21 developments. The 
Committee recommends $22,456,000, a decrease of $5,000,000 for 
a system-level shock testing of the SSN-21 Seawolf submarine. 
Live-fire testing legislation (10 U.S.C. 2366) requires 
realistic live-fire testing of major Department of Defense 
weapon systems. The intent of the legislation is to conduct 
tests early in the production cycle of a weapon system in order 
to ensure adequacy of design and to allow incorporation of 
design changes, if any, as a program moves into full rate 
production. Because the waiver authority of this legislation is 
very narrow, the Defense Department has concluded that it must 
conduct live-fire system-level tests of the SSN-21 submarine at 
an estimated cost of $47 million. However, of the 3 boats now 
planned in the program, SSN-21 is already at sea; SSN-22 is 
over 87 percent complete; and SSN-23 is over 34 percent 
complete. The Navy has conducted significant component-level 
shock testing for major items on the SSN-21, and has conducted 
sophisticated, high-fidelity modeling of system-level shock 
tests. Live-fire tests inherently present risk of damage to the 
ship and its components, injury to the crew, and add cost and 
program disruption for conducting post-test repairs. The 
Seawolf live-fire test as currently planned would be conducted 
at only one-half shock factor, due to potential risk to the 
crew and ship. The Committee strongly questions the value of 
spending $47 million for this purpose. Recognizing that system-
level live-fire tests on the Seawolf class might have some 
value for the New Attack Submarine program, the Committee notes 
that the Navy plans to conduct system-level live-fire tests on 
that class of submarines starting in 2002 at an estimated cost 
of $71 million. The Committee concludes that funding for 
Seawolf system-level live-fire shock testing in fiscal year 
1999 is unwarranted, and recommends that $5,000,000 budgeted 
for this purpose be eliminated. The Committee has included bill 
language that allows system-level live-fire testing on the SSN-
21 class only if the Commander in Chief of the Atlantic 
Command, who will operate the three Seawolf class of submarines 
once they are fielded, certifies to the congressional defense 
committees that such tests must be conducted to fulfill 
operational requirements for the boats. If such certification 
is made, then the Navy may submit a prior approval 
reprogramming request to the congressional defense committees 
in order to proceed with any tests.

           ship contract design/live fire test and evaluation

    The Navy requested $133,645,000 for ship contract design 
and live fire test and evaluation. The Committee recommends 
$60,845,000, a decrease of $72,800,000. This includes decreases 
of $68,872,000 due to delays in the DD-21 development program 
and $5,928,000 to eliminate funds for a proposed new-start 
development program for the ADC(X) class of ships due to fiscal 
constraints. Within the amount provided, an additional 
$2,000,000 is only for the smart propulsor product model.
    The Committee is not convinced that the Navy has adequately 
addressed the DD-21 combat system architecture, and the 
opportunity to capitalize on the investment made by its 
submarine community in acoustic rapid COTS insertion with 
multi-purpose processors and middle-ware software. The Navy's 
submarine community is incrementally fielding advanced 
commercial-based computers to its fleet to attain dramatic 
performance increases in processing of acoustic data while 
attaining dramatic life cycle cost reduction compared to 
military specification software and hardware. The approach uses 
computers that are independent of the software applications 
that run on them, and the same hardware and software is fielded 
on different classes of ships. The Committee is concerned that 
the Navy will simply issue a DD-21 request for proposals to 
industry that would allow a new combat system to be built from 
scratch without capitalizing on the investment made by the 
submarine community. The Committee also believes that there is 
a strategic opportunity to field common hardware and software 
to the submarine and surface ship communities, which process 
similar types of acoustic information for underwater warfare. 
The Committee believes the Navy should use acoustic rapid COTS 
on multipurpose processors and middle-ware software for at 
least the acoustic processing component, if not all, of the DD-
21 combat system. The Committee directs the Secretary of the 
Navy to submit a report to the congressional defense committees 
by February 1, 1999 describing how this objective can be 
accomplished.
    The Navy requested $5,928,000 for ADC(X) ship contract 
design. The Navy indicated to the Committee after the budget 
was submitted that these funds can not be spent in this budget 
line due to the immaturity of the ADC(X) program. The Committee 
notes that the fiscal year 1999 President's budget and outyear 
plan conforms with the language in the Committee's fiscal year 
1998 report that was subsequently adopted in conference with 
the Senate requiring that budgets for construction of ADC(X) 
ships be funded in the Shipbuilding and Conversion 
appropriation. The Committee reaffirms this policy.

                    navy tactical computer resources

    The Navy requested $8,249,000 for tactical computer 
resources. The Committee recommends $44,749,000, an increase of 
$36,500,000. Within that amount, an additional $17,000,000 is 
only for development of UYQ-70 display improvements and to 
incorporate a technology refresh capability; $14,500,000 is 
only for virtual prototyping of electronic circuits; and 
$5,000,000 is only for development and three prototype systems 
of the computer aided dead reckoning tracer (CA/DRT).

                      joint standoff weapon system

    The Navy requested $73,022,000 for development of Joint 
Standoff Weapons Systems. The Committee recommends $8,022,000, 
a decrease of $65,000,000 based on the Committee's 
recommendation to terminate the Navy's $4,300,000,000 program 
to procure 7800 unitary warhead variants of the JSOW munition.
    JSOW-Unitary was originally conceived as an inexpensive, 
level-of-effort weapon used in the later phases of an air 
campaign when enemy long range area defenses have been 
destroyed. For the early high threat phase of an air campaign, 
the Department is acquiring more potent weapons like SLAM-ER, 
Tactical Tomahawk, and JASSM. By most measures, the JSOW-
Unitary, as currently designed, is more expensive and 
significantly less capable than these other weapon systems. The 
average unit cost of the initial lot of JSOW-Unitary is at 
least fifty percent higher than the unit cost of the initial 
lot of SLAM-ER, Tactical Tomahawk, or JASSM. Further, JSOW-
Unitary is a 40+ nautical mile weapon with a 520 pound warhead. 
By comparison, SLAM-ER is a 150+ nautical mile weapon with a 
550 pound warhead, Tactical Tomahawk is a 1,000+ nautical mile 
weapon with a 750 pound warhead, and JASSM is a 250+ nautical 
mile weapon with a 1000 pound warhead. Each of these latter 
weapons are significantly more survivable than the glide-only 
JSOW-Unitary.
    The Committee agrees with the Navy that there is a need for 
an inexpensive, level-of-effort stand-off weapon. The Committee 
is also aware of alternative programs that use low-cost wing 
adapter kits to greatly extend the range of existing inventory 
``dumb bombs.'' One approach being explored by the Navy is to 
use a wing-kit adapter and a JDAM tail kit (for guidance) to 
extend the range of the 2000 pound JDAM. Another approach being 
explored by the Air Force is to use the Longshot wing-kit 
adapter with self-contained guidance. The Committee understands 
that such weapons can be easily procured for less than $50,000 
per copy and provide capabilities similar to JSOW-Unitary. 
Accordingly, the Committee recommends termination of the JSOW-
Unitary program and further recommends creation of a new, Low 
Cost Stand-Off Weapon program.

                        low cost standoff weapon

    The Committee recommends $10,000,000 to initiate a new Low 
Cost Stand-Off Weapon program. The Committee directs that this 
program be structured using a competitive acquisition strategy 
similar to that used for the JDAM and the Wind Corrected 
Munition Dispensor (WCMD) programs. The objective of this 
program should be to develop an accurate stand-off weapon that 
can be procured for less than $50,000 per unit. The Committee 
directs that the Navy submit a report on its acquisition plans 
for the Low Cost Stand-Off Weapon program no later than 
December 1, 1998.

                          medical development

    The Navy requested $4,321,000 for Medical Development. The 
Committee recommends $9,721,000, an increase of $5,400,000. Of 
that amount, $2,000,000 is only for development of filtration 
materials with high-flow biocide characteristics and $3,400,000 
is only to modify the Voice Instructional Device for use as a 
tool for shipboard medical personnel or others in the field to 
collect, process, store, and forward critical medical 
information for treatment of combat casualties.

                    distributed surveillance system

    The Navy requested $42,017,000 for the distributed 
surveillance system. The Committee recommends $55,417,000, an 
increase of $13,400,000 of which $6,700,000 is only to continue 
the development and testing of the all-optical deployable 
system into the Advanced Deployable System (ADS), and 
$6,700,000 is only to continue the planned introduction of 
automation and data fusion capability for the ADS demonstration 
system.

                        RDT&E; Management Support

                          major t&e; investment

    The Navy requested $17,281,000 for major T&E; investment. 
The Committee recommends $23,281,000, an increase of $6,000,000 
only for continued development of the East Coast communications 
network at the Naval Aircraft Warfare Center Aircraft Division, 
Patuxent River.

                      studies and analysis support

    The Navy requested $10,132,000 for studies and analysis 
support. The Committee recommends $6,132,000, a reduction of 
$4,000,000 to keep the program at the fiscal year 1998 
appropriated level.

            management, technical, and international support

    The Navy requested $28,690,000 for management, technical, 
and international support. This is an increase of about 49 
percent over the fiscal year 1998 appropriated level. The 
Committee recommends $17,690,000, a decrease of $11,000,000.

                rdt&e; science and technology management

    The Navy requested $64,455,000 for science and technology 
management. The Committee recommends $54,455,000, a decrease of 
$10,000,000 due to fiscal constraints.

                              t&e; support

    The Navy requested $260,601,000 for test and evaluation 
support. The Committee recommends $256,801,000, a decrease of 
$3,800,000. This includes a decrease of $5,800,000 as 
recommended in the House-passed authorization bill and an 
increase of $2,000,000 only for development of a man-overboard 
indicator.

                sew surveillance/reconnaissance support

    The Navy requested $13,185,000 for SEW surveillance/
reconnaissance support. The Committee recommends $15,185,000, 
an increase of $2,000,000 only for the integration and support 
of COTS visualization software and database servers.

                   marine corps program wide support

    The Marine Corps requested $7,132,000 for program wide 
support. The Committee recommends $14,632,000, an increase of 
$7,500,000. Of the additional funds, $4,000,000 is only to 
support phase III of the ongoiong Marine Corps effort to 
develop and field an interim biological agent detection system 
to fill CBIRF requirements and $3,500,000 is only for the 
probable cause detection system to detect chemical effects on 
personnel when there are no obvious signs.

                    Operational Systems Development

                         ssbn security program

    The Navy requested $33,588,000 for the SSBN security 
program. The amount requested is 36 percent higher than the 
fiscal year 1998 appropriated level. The Committee recommends 
$28,588,000, a decrease of $5,000,000 due to fiscal 
constraints.

                            f/a-18 squadrons

    The Navy requested $357,214,000 for F/A-18 development. The 
Committee recommends $288,805,000, a decrease of $68,409,000. 
This includes decreases of $43,409,000 to transfer the Super 
Hornet Advanced Reconnaissance Pod from this budget line to 
Manned Reconnaissance Systems (program element 0305207N) and 
$25,000,000 due to excessive budget growth. The budget request 
for development of the new model F/A-18 is about $88,000,000 or 
68 percent higher than forecast a year ago. The Navy has 
recently informed the Committee that its estimate to complete 
the development contract will be revised downward now that the 
wing-drop issue has been resolved, the contract remains in an 
underrun status, and additional funds have been made available 
to the F/A-18 program in fiscal year 1998 due to allocation of 
inflation savings from other programs after the President's 
budget was submitted.

             tomahawk and tomahawk mission planning center

    The Navy requested $66,727,000 for the Tomahawk and 
Tomahawk Mission Planning Center. The Committee recommends 
$165,300,000, an increase of $98,573,000 only for the Tactical 
Tomahawk Program.

               consolidated training systems development

    The Navy requested $28,390,000 for consolidated training 
systems development. The Committee recommends $32,490,000, an 
increase of $4,100,000. This includes increases of $5,000,000 
only for the large area tracking range and $6,000,000 only to 
convert the battle force team trainer to the Windows operating 
environment; and a decrease of $6,900,000 to terminate the 
Joint Tactical Combat Training System.

                         aviation improvements

    The Navy requested $64,956,000 for aviation improvements. 
The Committee recommends $61,956,000, a decrease of $3,000,000 
to limit growth in engine component improvement. The Committee 
directs that none of this reduction be applied to advanced 
boresight equipment.

                  marine corps communications systems

    The Marine Corps requested $50,594,000 for communications 
systems. The Committee recommends $56,390,000, an increase of 
$5,796,000. Of the increase, $5,000,000 is only for Joint Task 
Force Enhanced Communications for integration and production 
transition testing to meet JTF operational and environmental 
requirements, and $796,000 is only to continue the development 
of the Marine Corps Tactical Control and Analysis Center.

                   tactical unmanned aerial vehicles

    The Navy requested no funding for the Tactical Unmanned 
Aerial Vehicle Program. The Committee recommends $14,008,000 
for the Navy to continue the multiple-participant competitive 
demonstration through the shipboard phase, and $8,000,000 for 
the Marine Corps to continue the development of a close-range 
tactical UAV. The Committee also recommends $4,000,000 for the 
continued development of the UAV multi-function self-aligned 
gate array technology development and demonstration program. 
Funding for the Common Systems Development in the amount of 
$5,048,000 and funding for the Tactical Control System (TCS) in 
the amount of $32,144,000 are transfers from RDT&E;, Defense-
Wide.

                     manned reconnaissance systems

    The Navy requested $342,000 for manned reconnaissance 
systems. The Committee recommends $42,751,000, an increase of 
$42,409,000 transferred from the funding line for F/A-18 
squadrons.

                       shared reconnaissance pod

    The Committee strongly supports the Navy's Shared 
Reconnaissance Pod (SHARP) program and is pleased that the Navy 
has decided to meet its 15-year old, manned tactical 
reconnaissance requirement with a reconnaissance pod employing 
state-of-the-art imagery technologies. However, the Committee 
is concerned with an apparent decision by the Chief of Naval 
Operations to not support this program in future year budgets. 
This is disturbing particularly when considering the successful 
demonstration of the F-14 Tactical Airborne Reconnaisance 
Podded System (TARPS) Completely Digital (CD) on June 2, 1998. 
The display clearly demonstrated modern off-the-shelf electro-
optic (EO) framing technologies employed in a reconnaissance 
pod.
    Moreoever, the Committee agrees with the Navy's stated 
position that SHARP will provide superior imagery more cost 
effectively than the older Advanced Tactical Air Reconnassiance 
System (ATARS) technology. The Committee believes the most 
prudent expenditure of limited funding is on modern imagery 
technologies that provide our troops the greatest opportunity 
for mission success, minimizing crew and aircraft exposure to 
hostile action and allowing for flexible employment on multiple 
aircraft types. SHARP provides these qualities and 
capabilities. Therefore, the Committee strongly recommends that 
the Navy include the SHARP program in future budgets.

                      integrated broadcast service

    The Committee recommends the transfer of $14,580,000 from 
various accounts into this account to be managed by the IBS 
Executive Agent, Director, Space Information Warfare Command 
and Control.

                           depot maintenance

    The Navy requested $69,967,000 for depot maintenance 
activities which historically have been performed in 
procurement. The Committee denies this request and has provided 
funds instead in Aircraft Procurement, Navy.

                        industrial preparedness

    The Navy requested $59,060,000 for industrial preparedness. 
The Committee recommends $69,060,000, an increase of 
$10,000,000 to alleviate program shortfalls.

                              Rescissions

    The Committee recommends rescissions of $2,500,000 from two 
fiscal year 1998 Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, 
Navy programs due to recent budget execution data identified by 
the General Accounting Office. These include $1,500,000 for 
contract savings on the lightweight torpedo and $1,000,000 in 
navigation/identification systems no longer needed by the Navy.

                          Program Recommended

    The total recommended in the bill will provide the 
following program in fiscal year 1999:





         RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST AND EVALUATION, AIR FORCE

                                                                        
                                                                        
                                                                        
Fiscal year 1998 appropriation........................   $14,507,804,000
Fiscal year 1999 budget request.......................    13,598,093,000
Committee Recommendation..............................    13,577,441,000
Change from budget request............................       -20,652,000
                                                                        

    This appropriation funds the research, development, test 
and evaluation activities of the Department of the Air Force.

                       Committee Recommendations

                defense airborne reconnaissance program

    The Committee recommends the transfer of funding for 
certain programs under the Defense Airborne Reconnaissance 
Program from Defense-Wide accounts to Air Force accounts. 
Details are found in a classified annex accompanying this 
report.

                         authorization changes

    The Committee recommends the following changes to the 
budget request in accordance with House authorization action.

                                            [In thousands of dollars]                                           
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                     Committee      Change from 
                              Item                                Budget request  recommendation      request   
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Space-Based Laser...............................................          35,000          25,000         -10,000
Test and Evaluation Support.....................................         370,168         376,168          +6,000
Rocket Systems Launch Program...................................           7,865          18,865         +11,000
Seek Eagle......................................................          17,590          19,590          +2,000
Missile and Space Tech Collection...............................          18,595          26,595          +8,000
Information Systems Security Program............................           8,420          10,420          +2,000
Spacetrack......................................................          39,532          38,532          -1,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                             Basic Research

                       defense research services

    The Air Force requested $209,395,000 for Defense Research 
Sciences. The Committee recommends $202,751,000, a net decrease 
of $6,644,000. This amount includes an increase of $3,500,000 
only for coal derived jet fuel, an increase of $3,000,000 only 
for the Center for Adaptive Optics, and a decrease of 
$13,100,000 as discussed under the heading ``Basic Research'' 
elsewhere in this report. The Committee's recommendation 
includes the requested amount of $650,000 for support to the 
Sacramento Peak Observatory. The Committee directs that the 
full amount be provided to Sacramento Peak and designates this 
project to be of specific congressional interest.

                            Applied Research

                               materials

    The Air Force requested $62,578,000 for materials. The 
Committee recommends $72,578,000, an increase of $10,000,000 
only for additional advanced materials research.

                          aerospace propulsion

    The Air Force requested $69,061,000 for Aerospace 
Propulsion. The Committee recommends $74,061,000, an increase 
of $5,000,000 only for the variable displacement vane pump.

                  command, control, and communications

    The Air Force requested $65,175,000 for Command, Control, 
and Communications. The Committee recommends $67,675,000, an 
increase of $2,500,000 only for continued research in protein 
memory.

                      logistics systems technology

    The Air Force requested $8,677,000 for logistics systems 
technology. The Committee recommends $9,677,000, an increase of 
$1,000,000 only for the Passive Aircraft Status System (PASS).

                    Advanced Technology Development

                 advanced materials for weapon systems

    The Air Force requested $21,006,000 for Advanced Materials 
for Weapons Systems. The Committee recommends $37,006,000, an 
increase of $16,000,000. This includes an increase of 
$9,000,000 only for advanced low observable coatings and an 
increase of $7,000,000 only for dual use technology programs 
through the National Center for Industrial Competitiveness 
including composite affordability and chrome plating 
alternative technologies.

            crew systems and personnel protection technology

    The Air Force requested $16,603,000 for Crew Systems and 
Personnel Protection Technology. The Committee recommends 
$22,603,000, an increase of $6,000,000. This amount includes 
$3,000,000 only for ejection seat technology and an increase of 
$3,000,000 only for laser eye protection.

                      electronic combat technology

    The Air Force requested $25,553,000 for Electronic Combat 
Technology. The Committee recommends $31,553,000, an increase 
of $6,000,000 only for the Precision Location and 
Identification (PLAID) system.

                  space and missile rocket propulsion

    The Air Force requested $21,121,000 for space and missile 
rocket propulsion. The Committee recommends $25,121,000, an 
increase of $4,000,000 only for the high payoff rocket 
propulsion technology initiative.

                      ballistic missile technology

    The Air Force requested no funds for Ballistic Missile 
Technology. The Committee recommends $16,000,000 only to 
continue missile and GPS range safety technology development 
and demonstrations in realistic flight environments.

                     advanced spacecraft technology

    The Air Force requested $42,571,000 for advanced spacecraft 
technology. The Committee recommends $54,571,000, an increase 
of $12,000,000. Within this amount, $5,000,000 is only for the 
continuation of the Scorpius low cost expendable launch vehicle 
technology program and $7,000,000 is only for the miniature 
satellite threat reporting system.

                      advanced weapons technology

    The Air Force requested $40,153,000 for advanced weapons 
technology. The Committee recommends $50,153,000, an increase 
of $10,000,000 only for Geo Space Object Imaging.

                      Demonstration and Validation

                           advanced milsatcom

    The Committee is concerned about the current program 
schedule in place for the advanced milsatcom program. Under 
present planning the first launch of an advanced EHF Milstar 
follow-on satellite will not occur until 2006, four years after 
the launch of the last Milstar satellite. After the investment 
of several billion dollars since the inception of the Milstar 
program there are indications that communications capability 
will begin to degrade until the advanced capability is launched 
in 2006. The Committee is concerned that the Defense Department 
is not giving adequate attention to the operational risk during 
this transition period, including consideration that hundreds 
of Milstar terminals will be fielded by this timeframe.
    The Committee, therefore, directs the Secretary of Defense 
to provide a report by March 31, 1999 to the congressional 
defense committees on (1) the effects of Milstar communications 
degradation during the 2003 to 2006 transition period, and (2) 
suggested alternatives to minimize any adverse operational 
effects, such as adjusting the launch schedules for Milstar II 
and accelerating the launch schedule for an advanced 
capability.

                     nato research and development

    The Air Force requested $11,117,000 for NATO Research and 
Development. The Committee recommends no funds for this program 
as discussed under the heading ``NATO Research and 
Development'' earlier in this report.

               intercontinental ballistic missile dem/val

    The Air Force requested $29,360,000 for Intercontinental 
Ballistic Missile Demonstration/Validation. The Committee 
recommends $42,360,000, an increase of $13,000,000 only for the 
Conventional Ballistic Missile Advanced Concept Technology 
Demonstration.

                        global broadcast service

    The Air Force requested $70,147,000 for the Global 
Broadcast Service. The Committee recommends $67,947,000, a 
decrease of $2,200,000. Budgetary resources excess to program 
requirements in fiscal year 1998 make this reduction possible 
without prejudice.

                       air force/nro partnership

    The Air Force requested $17,645,000 for the Air Force--
National Reconnaissance Office Partnership. The Committee 
recommends no funding, a decrease of $17,645,000. The details 
of this recommendation are discussed in the classified annex to 
this report.

                  space based infrared system (SBIRS)

    The Committee understands that the Defense Department's 
current plan to transition from the Defense Support Program 
(DSP) to the Space Based Infrared System (SBIRS) may result in 
capabilities that are too robust, meaning that there would be 
more satellites in orbit than are required or could be 
accommodated by ground processing facilities.
    The Committee therefore directs the Secretary of Defense to 
identify and assess the alternatives to the current DSP and 
SBIRS transition plan. The assessment should consider (1) 
deployment schedules that optimize existing DSP and planned 
SBIRS capabilities, (2) the cost of each alternative, and (3) 
the effectiveness of each alternative in terms of meeting both 
strategic and theater ballistic missile threats. The report 
should be provided to the Committee no later than April 30, 
1999.

               Engineering and Manufacturing Development

                             ew development

    The Air Force requested $90,126,000 for Electronic Warfare 
Development. The Committee recommends $95,126,000, an increase 
of $5,000,000 only for advanced flares for the B-1 and C-17 
aircraft.

                          life support systems

    The Air Force requested $3,744,000 for Life Support 
Systems. The Committee recommends $6,744,000, an increase of 
$3,000,000 only for engineering and manufacturing development 
efforts to incorporate inflatable restraint concepts for seats 
tested during FLEET 1. The Committee is encouraged with the 
efforts to date regarding joint ejection seat testing of front 
line fighter/trainer aircraft (FLEET program).

                         combat training ranges

    The Air Force requested $14,581,000 for Combat Training 
Ranges. The Committee recommends $13,181,000, a decrease of 
$1,400,000 for Joint Tactical Combat Training System as 
discussed elsewhere in this report.

                computer resource technology transition

    The Air Force requested $200,000 for Computer Resource 
Technology Transition. The Committee recommends $4,200,000, an 
increase of $4,000,000 only for the National Product Line Asset 
Center.

          commercial operations and support savings initiative

    The Air Force requested $27,937,000 for Commercial 
Operations and Support Savings Initiative. The Committee 
recommends $14,037,000, a decrease of $13,900,000 as discussed 
under the heading, ``Dual Use Programs'' earlier in this 
report.

               evolved expendable launch vehicle program

    The Air Force requested $280,297,000 for the evolved 
expendable launch vehicle program (EELV). The Committee 
recommends $230,297,000, a decrease of $50,000,000. Program 
restructuring and the likelihood that the Air Force will award 
development contracts to the EELV offerors below levels 
estimated in the budget request make this reduction possible.
    The Committee remains fully supportive of the EELV program 
and its goal of dramatically reducing recurring launch costs 
for DoD and commercial payloads. The Committee does, however, 
have concerns about several aspects of the EELV program 
acquisition strategy. The primary purpose of the EELV program 
is to reduce the recurring launch costs of all payloads in the 
national mission model through fiscal year 2020 by 25 to 50 
percent. The Committee is concerned that due to considerable 
fluctuations in the national mission model the results of cost 
savings analysis based on the model may be suspect. Further, 
the Committee believes that the Air Force's methodology to 
assess savings from the EELV program may be inadequate because 
it does not include nonrecurring investment costs that the Air 
Force plans to incur to achieve savings. A more appropriate 
measure of the costs savings achieved on the EELV program, 
which includes all sunk costs to the government, may be a net 
present value analysis.
    The Committee also has serious reservations about the Air 
Force's proposed use of ``other transaction authority'' 
instruments instead of contracts to develop the new EELV 
system. Under such agreements traditional safeguards which 
protect the government's interest in large acquisition programs 
are largely absent. These safeguards include such items as 
guaranteed system performance, assurances of cost 
reasonableness, enforceable schedules and other requirements. 
In addition the government would have no outside audit 
authority to monitor program performance.
    Despite these reservations, the Committee believes the EELV 
program should go forward. The Committee directs, however, that 
no more than 50 percent of the funds appropriated for the EELV 
development program in fiscal year 1999 may be obligated until 
(1) the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and 
Technology and the Defense Department Inspector General 
certifies to the congressional defense committees that the use 
of ``other transaction authority'' is appropriate for the EELV 
program and that adequate safeguards exist to protect the 
government's interest and monitor program performance, and (2) 
the Air Force conducts a net present value analysis of the 
costs savings to be achieved on the EELV program. This analysis 
should be performed for the time periods 1997 to 2010 and 1997 
to 2020. The analysis should consider all sunk costs to the 
government for the EELV program.
    The Committee also directs that the Secretary of Defense 
and the prime contractors under the EELV program shall provide 
the Comptroller General with such information on the program as 
the Comptroller General considers necessary to conduct 
continued review of the program in response to congressional 
direction.

     Research, Development, Test and Evaluation Management Support

                      threat simulator development

    The Air Force requested $32,582,000 for Threat Simulator 
Development. The Committee recommends $29,582,000, a decrease 
of $3,000,000 for delays in development of the Joint Modeling 
and Simulation System (JMASS).

                  major test and evaluation investment

    The Air Force requested $34,518,000 for Major Test and 
Evaluation Investment. The Committee recommends $42,018,000, an 
increase of $7,500,000. This amount includes $5,000,000 only 
for improvements to the Santa Rosa Island range complex and 
$2,500,000 only to ensure availability of electronic combat 
operational test and training capabilities on the Eglin Air 
Force Base Range Complex.

                      Test and evaluation support

    This research and development line-item provides for the 
operation and maintenance of Air Force test facilities. Like 
operation and maintenance funding generally, this line-item 
should obligate 100 percent by the end of the first year of 
availability. However, the Air Force's current projections are 
that $14,000,000 of fiscal year 1998 funds will be unobligated 
at year end. The Committee recommends a rescission of 
$10,000,000 of fiscal year 1998 funds for this activity, and 
expects the Air Force to streamline its Test and Evaluation 
Support operations to execute funding more like the operations 
and maintenance accounts.

                    Operational Systems Development

          region/sector operation control center modernization

    The Air Force requested $13,592,000 for Region/Sector 
Operation Control Center Modernization. The Committee 
recommends $21,792,000, an increase of $8,200,000 transferred 
from Air Force procurement at the request of the Air Force to 
fund additional development activities.

                                 amraam

    The Air Force requested $45,078,000 for AMRAAM. The 
Committee recommends $15,078,000, a decrease of $30,000,000 to 
defer initiation of the Phase III Pre-planned Product 
Improvement EMD program for AMRAAM. The Committee strongly 
supports the need for the planned improvements, but is 
concerned about the significant level of remaining risk 
identified by the Air Force. The Committee therefore recommends 
the Air Force conduct further risk reduction efforts prior to 
initiation of the EMD program. The Committee addresses this 
issue further in the classified annex accompanying this report.

          aircraft engine component improvement program (cip)

    The Air Force requested $92,069,000 for Aircraft Engine 
CIP. The Committee recommends $117,069,000, an increase of 
$25,000,000. The Committee is concerned with the growing engine 
problems experienced by the Air Force and believes that 
additional development of safety, reliability, and 
maintainability upgrades for engines is a prudent investment. 
The Committee designates this program as an item of special 
congressional interest.

                          sensor fused weapons

    The Air Force requested $3,551,000 for Sensor Fused 
Weapons. The Committee recommends $7,551,000, an increase of 
$4,000,000 only for additional development on this Sensor Fused 
Weapons Pre-Planned Production Improvement program.

             joint air-to-surface standoff missile (jassm)

    The Air Force requested $132,870,000 for the JASSM program. 
The Committee recommends $129,870,000, a decrease of $3,000,000 
based on expected program cost savings. The Committee notes 
that the Air Force budget requested 52 test missiles to support 
the JASSM test program. Based largely on lower than expected 
cost estimates, the Air Force now plans to procure 69 test 
missiles. Even under a revised test plan, 8 of these missiles 
are excess to the testing needs of the program. Accordingly, 
the Committee recommends a reduction which eliminates these 
excess missiles.

                                 jstars

    The Air Force requested $123,793,000 for JSTARS. The 
Committee recommends $98,193,000, a decrease of $25,600,000. 
This amount includes a decrease of $5,600,000 as recommended by 
the House-passed defense authorization bill and a $20,000,000 
decrease for the Radar Technology Improvement Program (RTIP). 
The Committee supports the RTIP program, but notes that the Air 
Force has identified a funding shortfall of $428,000,000 in 
fiscal year 2000 and out. The shortfall in fiscal year 2000 
alone is $163,000,000. Given the uncertain status of this 
program, the Committee believes it is prudent to reduce the 
level of resources applied to RTIP in fiscal year 1999 pending 
submission of a fully funded budget by the Air Force.

                      tactical information program

    The Air Force requested $10,685,000 for the Tactical 
Information Program. The Committee recommends transferring 
these funds for the Tactical Information Broadcast Service to 
the Navy so that it can be managed by the Integrated Broadcast 
Service Executive Agent, the Director, Naval Space Information 
Warfare Command and Control.

                 defense satellite communication system

    The Air Force requested $15,641,000 for the defense 
satellite communications system (DSCS). The Committee 
recommends $13,141,000, a decrease of $2,500,000 due to 
excessive costs budgeted for DSCS integration on the EELV.
    The Committee also notes its concern with the state of 
development of the operational requirements document (ORD) for 
the DSCS follow-on system. It is the Committee's understanding 
that important technical trade off issues and integration 
problems with the existing network management system have yet 
to be worked out prior to the release of the request for 
proposal (RFP) for the DSCS follow-on program. The Committee 
directs the Air Force to report to the Committee on the 
resolution of these difficulties prior to the release of any 
RFP for the DSCS follow-on. The Committee believes that the 
DSCS follow-on program should be as close to a commercial 
communications satellite design as possible and that commercial 
acquisition practices should be utilized to the fullest extent 
practicable to include the use of firm fixed price procurement 
contracts.

                 security and investigative activities

    The Air Force requested $458,000 for Security and 
Investigative Activities. The Committee recommends $1,458,000, 
an increase of $1,000,000 only for improvements to the Air 
Force Office of Security and Investigations (OSI) computer 
crime investigations capability.

                defense meteorological satellite program

    The Air Force requested $20,432,000 for the defense 
meteorological satellite program. The Committee recommends 
$17,932,000, a decrease of $2,500,000. In making this 
recommendation the Committee notes program growth over prior 
year levels for supplies and equipment.

           navstar global positioning system (user equipment)

    The Air Force requested $67,238,000 for the NAVSTAR global 
positioning system user equipment segment. The Committee 
recommends $62,238,000, a decrease of $5,000,000. The Air Force 
has been unable to support its request for funding for the GPS 
NAVWAR upgrade program with any well-defined pricing 
methodology. The Committee makes its recommendation 
accordingly.
    The Committee also urges the Air Force to consider all 
available technology solutions to the NAVWAR upgrade program 
and not focus exclusively on modifications to the GPS 
satellite.

                        industrial preparedness

    The Air Force requested $50,997,000 for Industrial 
Preparedness. The Committee approves this amount; however, of 
the amount provided, $1,000,000 is made available only for the 
Wright Technology Network.

                              compass call

    The Air Force requested no funds for Compass Call. The 
Committee recommends $20,000,000 only to support the upgrade of 
the 43rd Electronic Combat Squadron's EC-130H aircraft to the 
Block 35 configuration.

                   tactical air reconnaissance system

    The Committee is concerned with the Air Force's purchase of 
the Medium Altitude Electro-Optical (MAEO) for the Tactical Air 
Reconnaissance System (TARS) pods on Air National Guard F-16 
aircraft. The Air Force has decided to procure five MAEO 
sensors; one for each of the four Air National Guard units and 
one spare to share among those widely separated units. The 
committee does not understand the rationale for this deployment 
decision considering the large cost of the MAEO and its support 
equipment.
    Furthermore, the Committee has learned that the Air Force 
has determined that any follow-on TARS sensor must be capable 
of all-weather and day/night operations. This suggests a 
synthetic aperture radar (SAR) or, at a minimum, an infrared 
capability. The MAEO provides neither of these functions. 
Additionally, the Committee notes that the TARS program is 
limited by law to a funding cap of $50,000,000 for procuring 
TARS sensors. For these reasons, the Committee does not support 
the purchase of additional MAEO sensors.

                      High Altitude Endurance UAV

                            global hawk uav

    The Committee is encouraged by recent successful flight 
tests of the Global Hawk High Altitude Endurance (HAE) unmanned 
aerial vehicle. Currently, the Department is funded to procure 
a total of five air vehicles to conduct military utility tests. 
The Committee is aware that under the current plan, a two to 
three year gap exists between delivery of the final test 
vehicle and delivery of the first production vehicle. This 
delivery gap may result in program instability, cost increases 
and poor program performance.
    The Committee directs the Air Force to certify that its 
current testing and acquisition plan will not jeopardize the 
financial well-being of the Global Hawk program and its 
industrial base. The Committee shall consider a proposed 
reprogramming of funds into the Global Hawk program should the 
Air Force determine that its current plan is financially and 
programmatically detrimental to the program.

                          Program Recommended

    The total recommended in the bill will provide the 
following program in fiscal year 1999:





        RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST AND EVALUATION, DEFENSE-WIDE

                                                                        
                                                                        
                                                                        
Fiscal year 1998 appropriation........................    $9,821,760,000
Fiscal year 1999 budget request.......................     9,314,665,000
Committee recommendation..............................     8,776,318,000
Change from budget request............................      -538,347,000
                                                                        

    This appropriation provides funds for the research, 
development, test and evaluation, defense-wide activities of 
centrally managed programs and the Defense Agencies.

                       Committee Recommendations

                         authorization changes

    The Committee recommends the following changes in 
accordance with House authorization action:

                                            [In thousands of dollars]                                           
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                     Committee      Change from 
                                                                  Budget request  recommendation      request   
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Next generation Internet........................................          40,000          53,000         +13,000
Tactical technology.............................................         188,995         151,995         -37,000
Integrated command and control..................................          34,000          40,000          +6,000
Explosives demilitarization technology..........................          11,650          13,650          +2,000
Command, control and communications.............................         200,100         172,600         -27,500
Land warfare technology.........................................         108,490          96,890         -11,600
Partnership for peace...........................................           1,957           5,957          +4,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                             Basic Research

                    university research initiatives

    The Department requested $216,320,000 for University 
Research Initiatives (URI). The Committee recommends 
$218,400,000, an increase of $2,080,000. This amount includes 
an increase of $15,000,000 only for the Department of Defense 
Experimental Program to Stimulate Competitive Research 
(DEPSCoR), an increase $1,800,000 only for research on a 
photoacoustic detection device, an increase of $1,600,000 only 
for research on medical ultrasound technology, and a reduction 
of $16,320,000 due to program growth. The Committee also 
recommends $9,000,000 from within available funds only for the 
Military Family Research Institute.

        government/industry cosponsorship of university research

    The Department requested $9,870,000 for Government and 
Industry Co-sponsorship of University Research (GICUR). The 
Committee notes that this program is aimed at encouraging 
cooperation and collaboration between the government, industry 
and universities regarding semiconductor electronics. The 
Committee agrees that semiconductors are a high priority for 
the Department. However, the Committee believes that the 
Department's prior year investment of $840,000,000 has been 
more than adequate to meet the challenges presented to the 
semiconductor industry over the last decade. In fact, the 
sizable DoD investment has allowed the semiconductor industry 
to flourish; and, SEMATECH has shown its ability to be 
successful in the absence of federal funding. In a letter to 
the Committee, March 16, 1998, SEMATECH's Director stated:

          We can take pride in the fact that SEMATECH has 
        matured to the point where we can now rely solely on 
        member company financial support. SEMATECH received its 
        final matching federal appropriation in FY 96. When we 
        began 10 years ago as an experiment in American 
        industry and government cooperation, the matching funds 
        were critical. Today, we have two important segments of 
        our economy--the U.S. semiconductor manufacturers and 
        the U.S. equipment and materials suppliers again in 
        positions of world market leadership.

    The Committee also notes the Department's considerable 
request of $1,111,227,000 for Basic Research and $3,019,851,000 
for Applied Research. These funds provide for ample research 
into areas such as materials, advanced electronics and 
lithography--all of interest to industry, to academe and the 
military.
    Therefore, given the extent of the Department's investment 
for the advancement of semiconductors, materials, advanced 
electronics and lithography, the Committee believes that this 
particular request is well in excess of requirements and 
recommends no appropriation.

                            Applied Research

                        next generation internet

    The Department requested $40,000,000 for the Next 
Generation Internet. The Committee recommends $53,000,000, an 
increase of $13,000,000 as recommended in the House-passed 
defense authorization bill.

                 support technologies--applied research

    The Department requested $86,866,000 for Support 
Technologies--Applied Research. The Committee recommends 
$81,866,000, a net reduction of $5,000,000. Within this amount, 
the Committee recommends an increase of $5,000,000 only for 
wideband gap technology. In addition, the Committee recommends 
a reduction of $10,000,000 for the Space-Based Laser program as 
recommended in the House-passed defense authorization bill.

                      Medical free electron laser

    The Department requested $9,706,000 for the Medical Free 
Electron Laser. The Committee recommends $17,206,000, an 
increase of $7,500,000.

            computing systems and communications technology

    The Department requested $417,723,000 for Computing Systems 
and Communications Technology, an increase of twenty-eight 
percent over the prior year level. The Committee recommends 
$390,723,000, a net reduction of $27,000,000. Within this 
amount, the Committee recommends an increase of $5,000,000 only 
for Multi-Spectral Imaging and $2,000,000 only for Computer 
Security. In addition, the Committee recommends a reduction of 
$34,000,000 for computer networking within Project ST-19, High 
Performance and Global Scale Systems. The Department requested 
$34,300,000 for Networking, a sixty percent increase over the 
1998 enacted level. The Committee believes this is excessive 
and that some activities within this project duplicate efforts 
in other accounts. The Committee agrees with the Department's 
overall priority regarding advanced computing networks and 
computer security initiatives. However, the Committee believes 
there is duplication of effort in the area of high speed 
networks. The Committee therefore recommends a reduction of 
$34,000,000 for Networking.

                          tactical technology

    The Department requested $188,995,000 for Tactical 
Technology. The Committee recommends $151,995,000, a reduction 
of $37,000,000. Within this amount, the Committee recommends an 
increase of $2,000,000, only for the continuation of simulation 
based design and virtual reality efforts, in a collaborative 
program with the private industry, for the Gulf Coast Region 
Maritime Technology Center. The Committee also recommends a 
reduction of $5,600,000 for High Performance Algorithm 
Development, a reduction of $8,000,000 for Advanced Fire 
Support System and a reduction $25,400,000 due to program 
growth as recommended in the House-passed defense authorization 
bill.
    The Committee notes that the Department is requesting 
$8,000,000 in project TT-04, Advanced Land Systems, to continue 
initial studies and to develop detailed designs for a 
containerized, remotely operated, unmanned missile artillery 
system known as Advanced Fire Support System, or AFSS. The 
concept is to develop an artillery system that requires fewer 
personnel, decreased logistical support, lower life-cycle costs 
and that is more survivable than existing systems. The 
Committee is concerned that this concept may not meet Army 
requirements and may be limited with respect to its range, 
logistics and ability to enhance the Army's capabilities on the 
battlefield. The AFSS is expected to have a range of 20 to 40 
km and as currently configured, may be less capable than 
present systems.
    Furthermore, the Army has not identified a requirement for 
AFSS and has not funded development of this system in the 
current Future Years Defense Plan or in its Program Objective 
Memorandum. The Committee notes DARPA's experience with Arsenal 
Ship--a similar concept for a sea-based capability--and its 
ultimate termination. The Committee believes that the AFSS 
program faces similar problems with regard to Service support 
and therefore recommends a reduction of $8,000,000.

               integrated command and control technology

    The Department requested $34,000,000 for Integrated Command 
and Control Technology. The Committee recommends $40,000,000. 
Of this amount, the Committee recommends an increase of 
$6,000,000 only for the High Definition Display program.

                  materials and electronics technology

    The Department requested $244,408,000 for Materials and 
Electronics Technology. The Committee recommends $253,408,000, 
an increase of $9,000,000.
    Of that amount, $4,000,000 is only for nanophase magnetic 
particle and advanced material research at the advanced 
materials research institute and to further explore the 
potential benefits of macromosaics to military systems and 
$5,000,000 is only for the continued development of polymer 
materials and processing, and for the development of integrated 
sensor devices for acoustic, electrical and chemical 
applications.

                        WMD Related Technologies

    The Department requested $203,598,000 for WMD Related 
Technologies. The Committee recommends $204,598,000, an 
increase of $1,000,000 only for facial recognition technology.

                      nuclear stewardship program

    The Committee is concerned with the Department's commitment 
to the sustainment of its nuclear stewardship program. In 
particular, the Committee is concerned that insufficient 
resources and attention are being paid to ensure the continued 
survivability of weapon platforms and supporting C3I systems 
from the effects of a nuclear explosion--particularly in light 
of India and Pakistan's recent nuclear testing.
    The Committee notes that funding for nuclear programs has 
been reduced substantially and remaining funds have largely 
been redirected to non-nuclear programs. The Committee believes 
it is imperative that the Department, through the Defense 
Threat Reduction Agency, strengthen its capability to test, 
verify and assure system survivability in a nuclear 
environment. Critical to this effort is a robust investment in 
simulators, simulator technology, and support modeling 
capability necessary to compensate for the loss of underground 
nuclear testing. The Committee recommends that the Department 
provide funding in future budgets for improving its testing-
based capability.

                    Advanced Technology Development

                 explosives demilitarization technology

    The Department requested $11,650,000 for Explosives 
Demilitarization Technology. The Committee recommends 
$13,650,000, an increase of $2,000,000 as recommended in the 
House-passed defense authorization bill.

                      counterproliferation support

    The Department requested $70,611,000 for 
Counterproliferation Support. The Committee recommends 
$55,611,000, a net reduction of $15,000,000. Of this amount, 
the Committee recommends an increase of $10,000,000 only for 
the Counterproliferation Analysis and Planning System (CAPS) 
and $25,000,000 is transferred to U.S. SOCOM, under Special 
Operations Advanced Technology Development (PE 1160402BB) to 
initiate the Special Reconnaissance Capabilities Program.

         support technologies--advanced technology development

    The Department requested $166,676,000 for Support 
Technologies--Advanced Technology Development. The Committee 
recommends $193,676,000, an increase of $27,000,000. Within 
this amount, $22,000,000 is only for Advanced Interceptor 
Technology in accordance with the House-passed defense 
authorization bill and $5,000,000 is only for Scorpius.

     chemical and biological defense program--advanced development

    The Department requested $42,762,000 for the Chemical and 
Biological Defense Program. The Committee recommends 
$55,262,000, an increase of $12,500,000. Of this amount, 
$2,500,000 is only for biocide-based protective ensembles and 
$10,000,000 is only to continue the study of the effects of 
long term exposure to low levels of chemical agents and to 
evaluate future medical sensitivity to sub-chronic exposures.

          countermeasures against biological weapons pathogens

    The Committee believes that there is a great need to 
accelerate efforts to develop countermeasures against 
biological weapons pathogens given recent trends and the 
potential threat of biological weapons. Research studies that 
have a high probability of identifying pharmaceutical agents to 
lessen the devastating consequences of biological pathogens are 
a priority. In particular, the Department should intensify 
efforts to develop single antidotes that are effective against 
a broad range of biological pathogens. The Committee has been 
informed of the potential of Alpha-Beta technology in this 
respect, and encourages the Department to investigate its 
efficacy.

                 verification technology demonstration

    The Department requested $63,052,000 for Verification 
Technology Demonstration. The Committee recommends $48,052,000, 
a net reduction of $15,000,000. Of this amount, the Committee 
recommends an increase of $10,000,000 only for nuclear 
detection, analysis and forensics systems and a reduction of 
$25,000,000 as recommended in the House-passed defense 
authorization bill. Within the increase, $5,000,000 is only for 
the continuation of an industry-based program for developing 
and integrating systems using advances in enhanced electronic 
solid state nuclear nonproliferation and counter-terrorism; and 
$5,000,000 is only for the accelerated development of nuclear 
detection systems and analytical techniques, including 
specialized cryocoolers for portable and remote operations, 
portable analytical and forensics systems, and advanced 
monitoring needed to enhance the nuclear nonprolifertion 
capability of the United States. In addition, the Committee 
recommends $12,000,000 from within available funds only for 
peer reviewed basic and applied research to support nuclear 
test monitoring.
    The recent nuclear tests in South Asia raise serious 
concerns about the Department's ability to support a robust 
operational nuclear test monitoring program. The Committee 
directs that from within available funds, $12,000,000 shall be 
available only for peer reviewed basic and applied research to 
support operational nuclear test monitoring. Of this amount, 
$3,200,000 shall be available only for peer-reviewed seismic 
research; and $8,800,000 shall be available only for peer-
reviewed basic research--$7,800,000 of which is only for 
explosion seismology research. The Committee directs that the 
applied seismic research program address the specific 
prioritized research topics recommended to the Department by 
the National Research Council.
    The Committee directs the Nuclear Treaty Programs Office to 
award these funds through a competitive peer panel review 
process; to segregate the basic and applied research funds for 
this program into clearly identifiable projects within the 6.1 
and 6.2 budget categories; and to improve integration of the 
basic and applied components of the program. Further, the 
Committee directs the Department to provide, by December 1, 
1998, a detailed report to the Committee on the plan for 
obligating these funds. Finally, the Committee directs the 
Department to sustain funding for these activities in future 
budgets to ensure the expertise needed in this critical 
operational program.

               generic logistics research and development

    The Department requested $17,788,000 for Generic Logistics 
R&D; Technology Demonstrations. The Committee recommends 
$25,388,000, an increase of $7,600,000 only for the Computer 
Assisted Technology Transfer Program (CATT).

                strategic environmental research program

    The Department requested no funds in this account for the 
Strategic Environmental Research and Development Program 
(SERDP). The Committee recommends $59,419,000. Of this amount 
$54,419,000 is transferred from amounts requested in the budget 
under Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, Army. The 
Committee is concerned that the Department of Defense will 
incur an increase in future costs associated with meeting 
environmental requirements if SERDP is not able to complete 
ongoing military unique technology projects nor continue 
development of emergent technologies of national significance 
to meet evolving regulatory issues. Therefore the Committee 
directs that not less than $59,419,000 shall be available only 
for the SERDP and that future budget submissions include SERDP 
as a Defense-Wide account to ensure the proper visibility as a 
multi-service program. Of this amount, $2,000,000 is only to 
continue the research, development and demonstration program 
devoted to health and safety issues of environmental cleanup 
workers as it relates to the development and introduction of 
environmental remediation technologies. The program shall 
continue to develop and evaluate protection and safety methods 
and techniques necessary for the safe use and application of 
environmental remediation technology and to transfer such 
methods and technologies to field use. In addition, the 
Committee recommends $3,000,000 only for a risk-based approach 
to research the effects of toxic chemicals on human health and 
the environment. This research should address questions needed 
to establish cleanup criteria related to toxic chemicals 
associated with base operations and remediation waste sites. 
This research should improve DoD capabilities for site specific 
remediation of toxic chemical.

                  cooperative dod/va medical research

    The Department requested no funds for the Cooperative DoD/
VA Medical Research program. The Committee recommends 
$11,000,000.

                   advanced electronics technologies

    The Department requested $244,737,000 for Advanced 
Electronics Technologies. The Committee recommends 
$264,537,000, an increase of $19,800,000. Of this amount, the 
Committee recommends an increase of $9,500,000 only for 
cryogenic electronics, an increase of $7,000,000 only to 
continue development of laser plasma x-ray source technology to 
exploit the use of these devices for future aircraft systems 
and other defense applications and an increase of $3,300,000 
only for nanotechnology and crystalline control arrays. In 
addition, the Committee recommends from within available funds, 
$4,000,000 only for the development of microdevice 
manufacturing processes including the immediate evaluation and 
acquisition of extremely small, very light, energy efficient, 
high speed processing state of the art gas chromatography (GC) 
based detectors using high aspect ratio microstructure (HARM) 
machining techniques made possible by X-ray lithography. These 
GC devices shall be used for detection of chemical agents and 
other battlefield and anti-terrorism purposes. The Committee 
directs the Department to implement these processes and 
development and provide this funding only through the 
prototyping and production of strategic defense related 
technologies at the Center for Advanced Microstructures and 
Devices.

                        Nanotechnology Research

    The Committee recommends $3,300,000 only to support 
nanotechnology research for the development of nanoscale and 
mesoscale materials for novel chemical sensing, novel optical 
switching, and optical limiting materials, and materials for 
thin 2-D display devices for Department of Defense applications 
as chemical sensors for environmentally hazardous species such 
as heavy metals and chemical warfare agents. The major approach 
to be used involves crystalline colloidal self assembly for 
preparing periodic materials that can be polymerized and 
further processed for use as diffracting materials.

               advanced concept technology demonstration

    The Department requested $116,330,000 for Advanced Concept 
Technology Demonstrations. The Committee recommends 
$81,076,000, a reduction of $35,254,000 due to program growth. 
The Committee directs that none of these funds can be used for 
LOSAT or EFOGM.

            high performance computing modernization program

    The Department requested $140,927,000 for the High 
Performance Computing Modernization Program. The Committee 
recommends $120,927,000, a reduction of $20,000,000. The 
Committee notes that the Department's request is substantially 
more than the fiscal year 1998 budget request of $126,211,000 
and more than the 1998 House recommended level of $124,880,000. 
The Committee continues to be concerned about the imbalance 
between sustainment and operations and procurement of 
additional supercomputing hardware.
    The Committee therefore has recommended in Procurement, 
Defense-Wide an increase of $27,000,000 only for procurement of 
additional supercomputing hardware. The Committee notes that 
the recommended level will provide for a more properly balanced 
program and help meet the requirements of the DoD user 
community.

              command, control and communications systems

    The Department requested $200,100,000 for Command, Control 
and Communications Systems. The Committee recommends 
$172,600,000, a reduction of $27,500,000 as recommended in the 
House-passed defense authorization bill.

                     sensor and guidance technology

    The Department requested $213,154,000 for Sensor and 
Guidance Technology. The Committee recommends $203,654,000, a 
net reduction of $9,500,000. Within the amounts provided, the 
Committee recommends an increase of $6,500,000 only for the 
continuation of the GPS Guidance Package as a competitive 
program and an increase of $11,000,000 only for enhanced 
testing of the GeoSAR program incorporating complimentary 
technologies.
    In addition, the Committee recommends a reduction of 
$27,000,000 with prejudice for the Tactical Radar program and 
the Discoverer II program. Discoverer II is a technology 
demonstration program to develop two small satellites with 
Synthetic Aperture Radar (SAR) that will operate in a low earth 
orbit (LEO) to meet military requirements. As proposed, the 
program funding responsibilities would be shared among three 
organizations: DARPA, the Air Force and the National 
Reconnaissance Office. Each organization has identified 
approximately $23,900,000 in fiscal year 1998 funds that they 
propose to initiate this new program and $62,700,000 in fiscal 
year 1999 funds to continue this effort. The Committee believes 
this program was not properly notified and identified to 
Congress as a new start, especially in light of the estimated 
cost of $592,400,000 for this technology demonstration. 
Therefore, the Committee recommends a rescission of $6,000,000 
of fiscal year 1998 funds, and no funding for Discoverer II, 
Starlite, and related technology in 1999.

                        land warfare technology

    The Department requested $108,490,000 for Land Warfare 
Technology. The Committee recommends $96,890,000, a reduction 
of $11,600,000 as recommended in the House-passed defense 
authorization bill.

                       classified darpa programs

    The Department requested $55,500,000 for DARPA classifed 
programs. The Commttee recommends $42,000,000, a reduction of 
$13,500,000 for the Unmanned Combat Air Vehicle (UCAV).

                      Demonstration and Validation

                            cals initiative

    The Department requested $1,863,000 for the CALS 
Initiative. The Committee recommends $11,363,000, an increase 
of $9,500,000. Of this amount, the Committee recommends an 
increase of $4,000,000 only for Continuous Acquisition and 
Life-Cycle Support, an increase of $3,000,000 only for 
commodity management system consolidation and an increase of 
$2,500,000 only to support efforts initiated under the 
Secretary's Defense Reform Initiative to implement paper-free 
contract administration and finance operations.

                       Ballistic Missile Defense

    The Department requested $3,178,940,000 for the Ballistic 
Missile Defense Organization's (BMDO) research and development 
programs. The Committee recommends $2,984,940,000, a net 
reduction of $194,000,000. In addition, the Department 
requested $409,380,000 for BMDO procurement programs. The 
Committee recommends $369,380,000, a reduction of $40,000,000, 
as explained in this report under the heading ``Procurement, 
Defense-Wide''.
    The Committee recommends specific changes in ballistic 
missile defense research and development programs from the 
budget request as detailed in the table below.

                                            BALLISTIC MISSILE DEFENSE                                           
                                            [In thousands of dollars]                                           
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                  Committee        Change from  
                                                             Budget request    recommendation        request    
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Support Technology........................................           253,542           275,542           +22,000
Theater High-Altitude Area Defense Dem/Val................           497,752           392,752          -105,000
Theater High-Altitude Area Defense EMD....................           323,942            22,942          -301,000
Navy Upper Tier...........................................           190,446           340,446          +150,000
PAC-3.....................................................           137,265           177,265           +40,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

               theater high-altitude area defense system

    The Department requested a total of $821,694,000 for the 
Theater High-Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) program. Of that 
amount, the Department requested $497,752,000 for Demonstration 
and Validation (DEM/VAL) and $323,942,000 for Engineering, 
Manufacturing and Development (EMD). The Committee recommends a 
total of $415,694,000, a reduction of $406,000,000.
    The THAAD program has undertaken eight flight tests over 
the last three years. The first four flight tests took place in 
1995. The first flight test demonstrated the missile's 
propulsion, kill vehicle separation, the seeker, the radar and 
safety functions. The second flight demonstrated the missile's 
guidance, control and kill vehicle maneuver capabilities. The 
third flight demonstrated the seeker, the communications links 
and fire control functions. The fourth flight objective was to 
intercept a target. This flight and the subsequent four flights 
all failed to achieve an intercept.
    Analysis of each of the tests showed that the problems were 
not design flaws but were failures due to quality control. 
Flight test four failed due to an avionics software problem. 
Flight test five failed due to an electrical power failure 
during the booster/kill vehicle separation. Flight test six 
failed because of contamination in the seeker. Flight test 
seven failed due to contamination of a battery connector. 
Preliminary analysis of the most recent flight test, FT-8, 
suggests that an electrical malfunction in the Thrust Vector 
Control (TVC) system assembly caused the failure.
    All told, these failures have resulted in several 
restructures of the THAAD program, cost increases--approaching 
$2 billion for the total program--and schedule delays of 36 
months. The Committee is extremely concerned about the 
performance of the prime contractor in meeting its obligations 
under the contract and reiterates the concerns expressed in the 
House-passed defense authorization legislation that the 
Ballistic Missile Defense Organization (BMDO) consider an 
alternate contractor.
    Given these failures, and the lack of a viable system at 
present that could serve as a prototype capability, the 
Committee recommends a rescission of $67,000,000 in fiscal year 
1998 funds and a reduction of $105,000,000 in fiscal year 1999 
funds. These amounts were intended to provide for the award of 
a prime contract for 40 User Operational Evaluation System 
(UOES) missiles. The UOES missiles would have provided an 
initial prototype system for use in a contingency. With the 
failure of flight test 8, the Department will be unable to 
execute this contract in this fiscal year due to a requirement 
that THAAD intercept at least one target prior to the contract 
award. In addition to the problems of program execution, the 
GAO and the Welch panel have raised questions about the 
advisability of the UOES plan. The Committee agrees with these 
concerns and believes that prior to the award of a UOES 
contract, this plan be extensively reviewed.
    Furthermore, the Committee recommends $22,942,000, a 
reduction of $301,000,000 for the EMD phase of the program. 
Prior to FT-8, the THAAD schedule for completing the Program 
Design and Risk Reduction flight test program was based on 
achieving three intercepts of five flight tests. The program 
acquisition plan requires three intercepts for the program to 
meet its exit criteria. Because of the failure of FT-8, the 
Committee views it as highly unlikely that THAAD will achieve 
three intercepts before July of 1999 and therefore recommends a 
reduction of $301,000,000 to account for the schedule slip.

                           navy theater wide

    The Department requested $190,446,000 for the Navy Theater 
Wide program. The Committee recommends $340,446,000, an 
increase of $150,000,000. With the continued problems 
associated with the Theater High-Altitude Area Defense System 
(THAAD), the only viable near-term alternative program is the 
sea-based Navy Theater Wide system. The Committee is pleased 
that the Ballistic Missile Defense Organization (BMDO) and the 
Navy have recently arrived at a viable, coherent program 
technology demonstration plan for the Navy Theater Wide program 
(also known as the Navy Upper Tier program) that will result in 
a prototype capability in 2005. The Committee is further 
encouraged by the progress of this program toward a Defense 
Acquisition Board (DAB) review that will formalize the joint 
BMDO/Navy plan.
    The Committee continues to believe in the inherent 
advantages of developing a sea-based theater missile defense 
capability. Furthermore, the Committee believes that the lower 
risks associated with developing a weapon system using extant 
sea-based assets (e.g. Aegis-class ships and the Standard 
missile) should help the program avoid some of the problems now 
being experienced in the THAAD program.
    The Committee understands the risks associated with the 
Navy Theater Wide program and specifically, the Lightweight 
Exoatmospheric Projectile (LEAP) kill vehicle. However, the 
Committee believes that these risks can be mitigated with a 
cautious acquisition program that includes stable resources and 
a rigorous test and evaluation program. The Committee also 
continues to believe in the urgency of the program and the need 
to deploy this capability at the earliest possible date. 
Therefore, in order to provide sufficient funding for the 2005 
option, as proposed by BMDO and the Navy, the Committee 
recommends $340,446,000, an increase of $150,000,000 over the 
budget request.
    The Committee continues to believe that the Navy Theater 
Wide program will provide a substantial defense capability for 
our military and civilian populations as well as our allies. 
Therefore, the Committee recommends, for the third year in a 
row, a funding increase to support the actual deployment of 
this critical program. Bill language has been included to 
ensure deployment at the earliest feasible time following Aegis 
LEAP intercept flight tests. The Committee directs the 
Department to report back to the Committees on Appropriations 
on: (1) actions being taken to deploy a block I Naval Theater 
Wide program in accordance with the Joint Requirements 
Oversight Council (JROC) approved operational requirements 
document; (2) the earliest deployment that can be done 
responsibly given ground testing and flight test preparations 
as specified in the Welch report; and (3) identification of 
funding in the outyears to develop and deploy the Navy Theater 
Wide system.

                         humanitarian demining

    The Department requested $17,234,000 for Humanitarian 
Demining. This is an increase of over two times the prior year 
request of $7,663,000 for this activity. The Committee notes 
that although the military is assisting in the development of 
mine clearing technologies, the primary purpose of this program 
is for non-defense, civilian purposes. The Committee recognizes 
the humanitarian value of these efforts. Nonetheless, the 
Committee is concerned that there is little military value in 
this effort and that increases in these activities further 
deplete resources available for higher priority Department of 
Defense requirements. Therefore, the Committee recommends 
$8,234,000, a reduction of $9,000,000 from the request. The 
Committee notes that this amount still provides an increase of 
seven and one-half percent over the prior year request.

               Engineering and Manufacturing Development

                             patriot pac-3

    The Department requested $137,265,000 for Patriot PAC-3. 
The Committee recommends $177,265,000, an increase of 
$40,000,000. The Committee has transferred these funds from the 
Procurement, Defense-Wide account as recommended in the House-
passed defense authorization bill.

                           Management Support

                  Industrial Capabilities Assessments

    The Department requested $2,937,000 for Industrial 
Capabilities Assessments. According to the justification, these 
funds would be used to assist the Department in: (1) examining 
the effectiveness of the Department's acquisition strategies; 
and (2) identifying policies, practices and investment 
strategies to maintain industrial capabilities.
    The Committee recognizes the need for the Department to 
understand how its policies, practices and investment 
strategies affect the industrial base. However, the Committee 
notes that the Department has requested $30,021,000 in PE 
605104D8Z for Technical Studies, Support and Analysis. The 
Committee believes that this line provides sufficient funds to 
include industrial capabilities studies. In addition, the 
Committee notes the Department's $1.2 billion funding estimate 
for FFRDC's. Between both activities the Committee believes the 
Department has sufficient resources to undertake this type of 
analysis and therefore recommends no funding.

                    Operational Systems Development

                    Partnership For Peace Activities

    The Department requested $1,957,000 for Partnership For 
Peace Activities. The Committee recommends $5,957,000, an 
increase of $4,000,000. Of this amount, $4,000,000 is only for 
the International Medical Programs Global Satellite 
Surveillance System (IMPGSS) as recommended in the House-passed 
defense authorization bill.

           special operations advanced technology development

    The Special Operations Command requested $8,020,000 for 
Advanced Technology Development. The Committee recommends 
$34,020,000, an increase of $26,000,000. Of this amount 
$1,000,000 is only to secure weapon classification and to 
prepare for low rate initial production of the Advanced 
Lightweight Grenade Launcher and $25,000,000 is only for the 
Special Reconnaissance Capabilities Program.

          Special Operations Intelligence Systems Development

    The Special Operations Command requested $1,805,000 for 
Special Operations Intelligence Systems Development. The 
Committee recommends $10,805,000, an increase of $9,000,000. Of 
this amount $5,000,000 is only for the development of the SOF 
Intelligence Vehicle and $4,000,000 is only for the development 
of the Joint Threat Warning System.

           Special Operations Force Operational Enhancements

    The Special Operations Command requested $33,799,000 for 
Operational Enhancements. The Committee recommends $47,604,000, 
an increase of $13,805,000. Of this amount, $6,000,000 is only 
for Advanced Special Warefare Craft/VSV and $7,805,000 is only 
for a program discussed in the classified annex accompanying 
this report.

                Defense Airborne Reconnaissance Program

    The Committee recommends the transfer of funding for the 
Defense Airborne Reconnaissance Program to various accounts of 
the Services. Details are found in the classified annex 
accompanying this report.

                          Program Recommended

    The total amount recommended in the bill will provide the 
following in fiscal year 1999:





               DEVELOPMENTAL TEST AND EVALUATION, DEFENSE

                                                                        
                                                                        
                                                                        
Fiscal year 1998 appropriation........................      $258,183,000
Fiscal year 1999 budget request.......................       251,106,000
Committee recommendation..............................       263,606,000
Change from budget request............................        12,500,000
                                                                        

    This appropriation provides funds for the developmental 
test and evaluation, defense activities of centrally managed 
programs and the defense agencies.

           Central Test and Evaluation Investment Development

    The Department requested $122,169,000 for Central Test And 
Evaluation Investment Development. The Committee recommends 
$134,669,000, an increase of $12,500,000. Of this amount, 
$9,500,000 is only for the Airborne Separation Video System and 
$3,000,000 is only for the Roadway Simulator.
    The Committee notes that a previously funded feasibility 
study has shown that commercial roadway simulator technology 
can be adapted to the scale needed to test large military 
trucks and tractor trailers. This technology could 
significantly reduce development costs, shorten production 
schedules and produce safer military vehicles. The Committee 
provides $3,000,000 only for design work for Phase I of the 
Army Roadway Simulator in PE 060494D. The Committee directs 
that these funds are only available for the simulator design 
phase and that none of these funds shall be used for purposes 
of military construction at the Aberdeen Test Center.

                          Program Recommended

    The total amount recommended in the bill will provide the 
following in fiscal year 1999:

                                            [In thousands of dollars]                                           
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                  Committee        Change from  
                                                             Budget request      recommended         request    
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Developmental Test and Eval, Defense:                                                                           
    Central test and evaluation investment development....           122,169           134,669           +12,500
    Foreign comparative testing...........................            32,684            32,684  ................
    Development test and evaluation.......................            96,253            96,253  ................
                                                           -----------------------------------------------------
      Total, Developmental Test and Eval, Defense.........           251,106           263,606           +12,500
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                OPERATIONAL TEST AND EVALUATION, DEFENSE

                                                                        
                                                                        
                                                                        
Fiscal year 1998 appropriation........................       $31,384,000
Fiscal year 1999 budget request.......................        25,245,000
Committee recommendation..............................        35,245,000
Change from budget request............................        10,000,000
                                                                        

    This appropriation provides funds for the Office of the 
Director, operational test and evaluation.

                           live fire testing

    The Department requested $9,934,000 for Live Fire Testing. 
The Committee recommends $19,934,000, an increase of 
$10,000,000. Of this amount, the Committee recommends an 
increase of $4,000,000 only for vulnerability assessments, as 
recommended in the House-passed defense authorization bill. In 
addition, the Committee recommends an increase of $6,000,000 
only for modeling and simulation.

                          Program Recommended

    The total amount recommended in the bill will provide the 
following in fiscal year 1999:

                                            [In thousands of dollars]                                           
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                  Committee        Change from  
                                                             Budget request      recommended         request    
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Operational Test and Evaluation, Defense:                                                                       
    Operational test and evaluation.......................            15,311            15,311  ................
    Live fire testing.....................................             9,934            19,934           +10,000
                                                           -----------------------------------------------------
      Total, Operations Test and Evaluation...............            25,245            35,245           +10,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                TITLE V

                     REVOLVING AND MANAGEMENT FUNDS

                     DEFENSE WORKING CAPITAL FUNDS

                                                                        
                                                                        
                                                                        
Fiscal year 1998 appropriation........................      $971,952,000
Fiscal year 1999 budget request.......................        94,500,000
Committee recommendation..............................        94,500,000
Change from budget request............................                 0
                                                                        

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $94,500,000 
for the Defense Working Capital Funds. The recommendation is a 
decrease of $877,452,000 below the amount appropriated for 
fiscal year 1998.

                     commissary subsidy divestiture

    The Committee is aware that the fiscal year 1999 budget 
request distributes the subsidy for operation of military 
commissaries to the Operation and maintenance accounts of the 
military services. This change is responsible for the 
substantial decrease in the funding requested in Title V. While 
the Committee recognizes that this change is intended to give 
the military services more control over commissaries, the 
Committee has serious concerns that this change in funding 
effectively reverses the DoD effort to consolidate the 
commissaries under the Defense Commissary Agency. Therefore, 
the Committee recommends including a general provision, Section 
8104, that requires funding for the commissary subsidy to be 
transferred from the military services' operation and 
maintenance accounts to the Defense Working Capital Funds. In 
addition, the Committee directs that the Secretary of Defense 
submit a report, not later than February 15, 1999, which 
details the missions and responsibilities of the Defense 
Commissary Agency (DeCA) and the Military Services concerning 
the operation of DoD commissaries.

                 recovery of operating gains and losses

    The Committee is aware that during fiscal year 1998 the 
Department implemented a significant change to the policy 
governing pricing for depot maintenance products and services. 
This policy change requires periodic reviews of the depot 
maintenance activities' financial performance. If significant 
unbudgeted operating losses become apparent during these 
reviews, the Committee understands that DoD will require the 
depots to increase prices to recover such unbudgeted losses. 
The Committee shares the concerns underlying this change. The 
recent history of the depot maintenance activities has been 
chronic operating losses that, in part, have lead to the need 
for advance billing to maintain solvency of the working capital 
funds.
    However, the Committee is also concerned that this policy 
may negatively impact funding in the Operation and maintenance 
accounts. The Committee has consistently supported increased 
funding in the operation and maintenance accounts to cover 
unbudgeted depot maintenance workload, and reduce backlogs. The 
Committee would strongly object to a policy that would result 
in Operation and maintenance funded customers of DoD depot 
maintenance activities paying higher prices, but not receiving 
increased levels of workload commensurate with congressional 
intent. Further, it is not clear to the Committee whether this 
policy change is intended to be permanent, or how this change 
interacts with related issues such as rate stabilization, the 
calculation of operating gains and losses, and the usual policy 
for recovery of operating gains and losses. Therefore, the 
Committee directs the Secretary of Defense to submit a report 
to the congressional defense committees not later than February 
15, 1999, providing a detailed description of the following 
working capital fund policies and their implementation specific 
to each of the working capital funds: accumulated operating 
results (AOR) normalization for depot maintenance activities; 
recovery of operating gains and losses; rate stabilization 
policy; and a complete description of the methods used to 
calculate accumulated and net operating gains and losses.

               RESERVE MOBILIZATION INCOME INSURANCE FUND

                                                                        
                                                                        
                                                                        
Fiscal year 1998 appropriation........................  ................
Fiscal year 1999 budget request.......................       $37,000,000
Committee recommendation..............................  ................
Change from budget request............................       -37,000,000
                                                                        

    This appropriation pays claims and administration costs for 
participating members of the insurance program.
    The Committee recommends a reduction of $37,000,000 since 
the termination costs for this program were funded in the 
Fiscal Year 1998 Supplemental Appropriations and Recissions 
Act, recently signed into law.

                     NATIONAL DEFENSE SEALIFT FUND

                                                                        
                                                                        
                                                                        
Fiscal year 1998 appropriation........................    $1,074,948,000
Fiscal year 1999 budget request.......................       418,166,000
Committee recommendation..............................       673,366,000
Change from budget request............................      +255,200,000
                                                                        

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

            large medium speed roll-on/roll-off (lmsr) ships

    The Navy requested $100,000,000 in the National Defense 
Sealift Fund for LMSR ship acquisition. The Committee 
recommends $366,400,000, an increase of $266,400,000. This 
includes transfer of $251,400,000 for construction of the last 
LMSR ship from Shipbuilding and Conversion, Navy as recommended 
in the House-passed defense authorization bill, and an increase 
of $15,000,000 only to restore funds for cargo-space 
temperature and humidity control equipment on the last 6 LMSR 
ships. The bill also proposes a transfer of $28,000,000 million 
to ``Alteration of Bridges'' only to alter the obstructive 
League Island liftbridge to provide critically needed access 
for larger naval vessels. The Committee directs this transfer 
to be completed within 30 days of enactment of this act. The 
Committee understands that the Office of the Secretary of 
Defense removed funds from the LMSR ship construction budget 
needed to provide air-conditioning and dehumidification 
equipment on some LMSR ships. This can only have an adverse 
effect on LMSR operations and limit the flexibility of theater 
commanders during wartime. At this late stage of ship 
construction it would cost more than it saves to remove the 
equipment from the ships, based on actual data submitted by the 
shipyards. The Committee recommends $15,000,000 to restore 
these funds, and directs that no contracting action be taken to 
remove HVAC equipment from LMSR ships.

                            defense features

    In fiscal year 1997, Congress made $50,000,000 of the 
National Defense Sealift Fund available for inclusion of 
defense features during construction of commercial ships. The 
Navy conducted a competition for these funds, received only one 
bid, and made an award to a shipbuilder. The Committee 
recommends a reduction of $40,000,000 since the Navy has made a 
good-faith effort to execute the defense features program and 
now intends to reprogram the funds for other purposes.

             lighterage aboard ship (lash) vessel charters

    The Committee considered including a new general provision 
prohibiting the use of funds to replace LASH (Lighterage Aboard 
Ship) vessels currently under charter to the Military Sealift 
Command (MSC) for the Department of the Army's prepositioned 
afloat ammunition program in Diego Garcia, or to prematurely 
terminate such MSC charters for these LASH vessels. The 
Committee did not support newly-emerging Army or MSC proposals 
to cancel, or to not exercise options in, contracts for 
prepositioned ammunition LASH vessels that were competitively 
procured, in order to immediately transition to container 
ships. The Army and MSC have reevaluated the proposal to 
immediately make such a transition to container ships and have 
notified the Committee that plans to exercise contract options 
and not to terminate contracts are proceeding.
                                TITLE VI

                  OTHER DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE PROGRAMS

                         DEFENSE HEALTH PROGRAM

                                                                        
                                                                        
                                                                        
Fiscal year 1998 appropriation........................   $10,369,075,000
Fiscal year 1999 budget request.......................    10,055,822,000
Committee recommendation..............................    10,127,622,000
Change from budget request............................       +71,800,000
                                                                        

                         defense health program

    The Department requested $10,055,822,000 for the Defense 
Health Program, $9,653,435,000 for Operation and maintenance 
and $402,387,000 for Procurement.
    The Committee recommends $10,127,622,000. Of this amount, 
$9,725,235,000 is for Operation and maintenance, an increase of 
$71,800,000 over the budget request; and $402,387,000 is for 
Procurement, the budgeted amount.
    Of the amounts added for Operation and maintenance, 
$10,000,000 is only for prostate cancer research, $10,000,000 
is only for ovarian cancer research, $25,000,000 is only for 
breast cancer treatment for military families, $1,500,000 is 
only for brain injury treatment, $1,000,000 is only for post-
polio syndrome research, $5,000,000 is only to continue nervous 
system studies relating to the treatment of central nervous 
system injury (brain trauma, spinal cord injury, stroke, and 
Alzheimer's Disease) and cognitive dysfunction under 
Cooperative Agreement DAMD 17-93-V-3018, $6,000,000 is only for 
proton beam scanning technology research, $4,000,000 is only 
for molecular genetics research in association with the 
National Medical Testbed, $1,000,000 is only for Prisoner of 
War Studies, $1,000,000 is only for epidermolysis bullosa and 
$7,300,000 is only for the personal identification carrier.

                             breast cancer

    The Department requested no funds for breast cancer 
research. The Committee recommends $160,000,000. Of this 
amount, $135,000,000 is for the Army's peer-reviewed Breast 
Cancer research program, and $25,000,000 is in operation and 
maintenance is only to continue the Defense Health Program's 
breast cancer treatment program to improve quality of care for 
military members and their families.

                            prostate disease

    The bill includes $10,000,000 only to continue the 
Department's nationally-recognized program to conduct basic and 
clinical research studies to combat diseases of the prostate. 
The goal of this program is to develop more effective, more 
specific and less toxic forms of therapy for patients in all 
stages of prostate disease. The Center for Prostate Disease 
Research established under this program uses the large network 
of military hospitals around the country as a resource for 
information on the improved detection and treatment of prostate 
disease. The Department should continue to give the highest 
priority to funding research that is multi-institutional, 
multi-disciplinary and regionally focused. The Committee 
directs that of these funds, not more than $2,500,000 shall be 
available only for a non-invasive prostate and coronary disease 
reversal program.

                             ovarian cancer

    The bill includes $10,000,000 only to continue the 
Department's Ovarian Cancer Research Program in support of a 
comprehensive program that includes prevention, implementation 
and development planning. Recognizing that many worthy ovarian 
cancer research projects cannot be supported within available 
funds, the Committee urges the Department to give priority 
consideration to institutions designated as comprehensive 
cancer centers by the National Cancer Institute of the National 
Institutes of Health. Eligible institutions should demonstrate 
an outreach relationship with regional hospitals or academic 
health centers, and with ovarian cancer advocacy groups.

                        General Medical Officers

    The Committee directs the Department of Defense to phase 
out the use of General Medical Officers (GMO) and to replace 
them with Board Eligible primary care specialists within the 
next six years. In addition, the Committee directs the 
Assistant Secretary of Defense for Health Affairs, in 
coordination with the Surgeons General, to submit a report to 
the congressional defense committees by February 1, 1999 on the 
Department's plan to phase out the use of GMOs.

                            Trauma Training

    The Committee recommends the Army establish an additional 
trauma training center in accordance with the American College 
of Surgeons standards for trauma centers to ensure higher 
levels of medical readiness.

                          Post-Polio Syndrome

    The Committee has included $1,000,000 to support important 
research on the effects of post-polio syndrome and possible 
treatments for polio survivors who are suffering from 
increasing pain and weakness related to overuse of arm muscles. 
Research should focus on improved symptom assessment of post-
polio patients, identification of rehabilitation alternatives 
for post-polio syndrome patients, and application to other 
muscular disorders. The Committee is aware of the research done 
on this subject by Albert Einstein Memorial Hospital in 
Philadelphia and commends it to the Department for close 
review.

                     smoking and tobacco cessation

    The Committee supports the stated goals of the Department 
of Defense to reduce smoking prevalence and to meet Health 2000 
goals. However, the Committee is concerned that current efforts 
lack the coordination required to meet these ambitious goals 
and directs that the Department of Defense implement a 
comprehensive smoking and tobacco cessation program.

            CHEMICAL AGENTS AND MUNITIONS DESTRUCTION, ARMY

                                                                        
                                                                        
                                                                        
Fiscal year 1998 appropriation........................      $600,700,000
Fiscal year 1999 budget request.......................       855,100,000
Committee recommendation..............................       796,100,000
Change from budget request............................       -59,000,000
                                                                        

                       Committee Recommendations

                           program reductions

    The Army requested $855,100,000 for the destruction of 
chemical agents and munitions. The Committee recommends 
$796,100,000, a decrease of $59,000,000 due to slow obligation 
rates.

                          Program Recommended

    The total amount recommended in the bill will provide the 
following in fiscal year 1999:

                                            [In thousands of dollars]                                           
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                     Committee      Change from 
                                                                  Budget request    recommended       request   
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Chem Agents and Munitions Destruction, Army:                                                                    
    Chem demilitarization--O&M..................................;         531,650         508,650         -23,000
    Chem demilitarization--Proc.................................         140,670         124,670         -16,000
    Chem demilitarizatin--RD&E..................................;         182,780         162,780         -20,000
                                                                 -----------------------------------------------
      Total, Chem Agents and Munitions Destruction, Army........         855,100         796,100         -59,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

         DRUG INTERDICTION AND COUNTER-DRUG ACTIVITIES, DEFENSE

                                                                        
                                                                        
                                                                        
Fiscal year 1998 appropriation........................      $712,882,000
Fiscal year 1999 budget request.......................       727,582,000
Committee recommendation..............................       764,595,000
Change from budget request............................       +37,013,000
                                                                        


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

                       Committee Recommendations

    The Department of Defense requested $727,582,000 for Drug 
Interdiction and Counter-Drug Activities. The Committee 
recommends $764,595,000, an increase of $37,013,000, to fund 
three important new initiatives for detection of aerial/
maritime transit of illegal drugs into the United States, and 
to address shortfalls for programs which are not adequately 
funded in the budget.

                         authorization changes

    The Committee recommends the following changes in the 
budget request in accordance with House authorization action:

                                            [In thousands of dollars]                                           
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                  Committee        Change from  
                           Item                              Budget request    recommendation        request    
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
National Guard Cargo/Mail Inspection......................           $29,000                 0          -$29,000
Southern Air Forces Counter-drug Support..................            26,416            $7,416           -19,000
Joint Interagency Task Force South........................            23,063             7,663           -15,400
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


                          Program Recommended

    The total amount recommended in the bill will provide the 
following program in fiscal year 1999:

          DRUG INTERDICTION AND COUNTER-DRUG ACTIVITIES DEFENSE         
                         [Dollars in thousands]                         
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                      Budget     Committee   Change from
                                     request    recommended    request  
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Educate America's Youth..........      $12,830      $13,730         +900
    Young Marines................          500        1,400         +900
                                                                        
Increase Safety of Citizens......       86,669      112,069      +25,400
    Indiana HIDTA................            0          500         +500
    Kentucky HIDTA...............            0        5,200       +5,200
    Gulf States Counter-drug                                            
     Initiative C3I..............        1,147       10,147       +9,000
    Gulf States Counter-drug                                            
     Initiative RCTA.............        2,209        3,209       +1,000
    Multi-Jurisdictional Counter-                                       
     drug Task Force.............        2,007        6,207       +4,200
    C-26 Aircraft Photo                                                 
     Reconnaissance Upgrade......            0        5,500       +5,500
                                                                        
Reduce Health and Social Costs...       72,936       72,936            0
                                                                        
Shield America's frontiers.......      301,334      325,334      +24,000
    National Guard Cargo/Mail                                           
     Inspection..................       29,000            0      -29,000
    National Guard General                                              
     Support.....................      118,620      158,620      +40,000
    Southwest Border Fence.......            0        5,000       +5,000
    Caribbean/Eastern Pacific                                           
     Surface Interdiction........        8,500       12,500       +4,000
    Southwest Border Information                                        
     Systems.....................            0        4,000       +4,000
                                                                        
Break Drug Sources of Supply.....      253,813      240,526      -13,287
    Southern Air Forces Counter-                                        
     drug Support................       26,416        7,416      -19,000
    Joint Interagency Task Force                                        
     South.......................       23,063        7,663      -15,400
    Operation CAPER FOCUS........            0       10,500      +10,500
    Civil Air Patrol.............        1,187        3,800       +2,613
    SOUTHCOM Observation/Spray                                          
     Aircraft....................            0        8,000       +8,000
                                  --------------------------------------
      Total......................      727,582      764,595      +37,013
------------------------------------------------------------------------

                        Educate America's Youth

    The Committee recommends $1,400,000 for the Young Marines 
Program, an increase of $900,000. While primarily a function of 
other federal agencies, educating America's youth about the 
danger of drug abuse is an important component of the overall 
National Drug Control Strategy. The Young Marines Program 
educates and inspires the youth within our communities by 
promoting a healthy and drug-free lifestyle. The Committee 
compliments the Marine Corps and the hundreds of volunteers who 
contribute to the success of this program.

                      Increase Safety of Citizens

              indiana high intensity drug trafficking area

    The Committee recommends $500,000 only for the Indiana 
National Guard to conduct counter-drug activities in the 
Indiana High Intensity Drug Trafficking Area. The Committee 
expects these funds will enable the Indiana National Guard to 
successfully complete the unique missions begun in fiscal year 
1998.

             kentucky high intensity drug trafficking area

    The Committee recommends $5,200,000 only for the Kentucky 
National Guard to conduct counter-drug activities in the 
Appalachian High Intensity Drug Trafficking Area. Eastern 
Kentucky is now considered the second largest source of 
domestic marijuana cultivation in the United States, and 
additional funding for the Kentucky National Guard is needed 
for marijuana eradication and other counter-drug 
responsibilities.

                  gulf states counter-drug initiative

    The Committee recommends $13,356,000 only for the Gulf 
States Initiative (GSCI), an increase of $10,000,000, of which 
$1,000,000 is only for the Regional Counter-drug Training 
Academy (RCTA), and $9,000,000 shall be used only for 
sustainment costs, improvements to existing processing and 
analysis centers, and for broadening the GSCI C3I focus. The 
Committee has funded this program in the Drug Interdiction and 
Counter-drug account, but directs that the GSI C3I program be 
held in the office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense for 
Command, Control, Communications and Intelligence (OASDC3I) 
Joint Military Intelligence Program (JMIP). The Committee 
directs the Senior Civilian Official, OASDC3I to report back to 
the Committee on Appropriations prior to conference on this 
bill on the Department's plans to provide future adequate 
budget support for the GSI.

              multi-jurisdictional counter-drug task force

    The Committee recommends $6,207,000 only for the Multi-
Jurisdictional Counter-Drug Task Force, an increase of 
$4,200,000.

               c-26 aircraft photo reconnaissance upgrade

    The Committee recommends $5,500,000 only for the C-26 
aircraft photo-reconnaissance upgrade, an increase of 
$5,500,000. The Committee expects that this funding, in 
combination with funds provided last year, will enable the Air 
Force National Guard to complete the photo reconnaissance 
upgrade of its C-26 aircraft with electro-optical framing 
capability.

                       Shield America's Frontiers

                       national guard state plans

    The Committee recommends $158,620,000 only for National 
Guard General Support, an increase of $40,000,000 when combined 
with the reduction of $29,000,000 from the Cargo/Mail 
Inspection program. While the National Guard plays an important 
role in the 
Cargo Inspection program, the resource positions it provides 
should more properly be manned by employees of the U.S. Customs 
Service or other law enforcement entities. With the funds 
provided in this project and elsewhere in this account for the 
National Guard, a total of $180,000,000 will be available to 
the National Guard for Counter-drug activities.

                     SOUTHWEST BORDER FENCE PROJECT

    The Committee recommends $5,000,000 only for the Southwest 
Border Fence project, an increase of $5,000,000.

             CARIBBEAN/EASTERN PACIFIC SURFACE INTERDICTION

    The Committee recommends $12,500,000 only for the 
Caribbean/Eastern Pacific Surface Interdiction project, an 
increase of $4,000,000. The Committee has transferred 
$4,000,000 from the Special Operations Operation and 
Maintenance accounts to this project to allow the increased 
deployment of Patrol Coastal Craft to the Caribbean and Eastern 
Pacific. These deployments will provide a substantial Naval 
presence in the Southern Command theater of operations with 
which to increase surface interdiction targeted at suspected 
narco-traffickers. The Committee understands that additional 
funding may be required to enable the Commander-in-Chief of the 
Southern Command to fully utilize these assets and expects the 
Department of Defense to make those funds, as needed, available 
through the normal reprogramming process.

                  SOUTHWEST BORDER INFORMATION SYSTEMS

    The Committee recommends $4,000,000 only for the Southwest 
Border Information Systems project, an increase of $4,000,000.

                      Break Drug Sources of Supply

                SOUTHERN AIR FORCES COUNTER-DRUG SUPPORT

    The Committee recommends $7,416,000 for Southern Air Forces 
counter-drug support, a decrease of $19,000,000 as proposed in 
the House-passed defense authorization bill.

                   JOINT INTERAGENCY TASK FORCE SOUTH

    The Committee recommends $7,663,000 for Joint Interagency 
Task Force South, a decrease of $15,400,000 as proposed in the 
House-passed defense authorization bill.

                         OPERATION CAPER FOCUS

    The Committee recommends $10,500,000 only for Operation 
CAPER FOCUS, an increase of $10,500,000. The Committee is aware 
of a shortage of detection, monitoring and tracking assets in 
the Eastern Pacific where a cocaine transit pipeline feeds 
Mexico and ultimately the United States. The execution phase of 
CAPER FOCUS was designed to provide counter-drug coverage in 
this strategic drug transit area but was cancelled. The 
Committee expects the Department of Defense to use the funds 
provided along with any other assets necessary to help stop the 
flow of narcotics trafficking in this region.

                            civil air patrol

    The Committee recommends $3,800,000 only for the Civil Air 
Patrol, an increase of $2,613,000.

                  SOUTHCOM OBSERVATION/SPRAY AIRCRAFT

    The Committee recommends $8,000,000 only for the U.S. 
Southern Command to lease or procure aircraft that would 
provide reconnaissance in support of Colombian and Peruvian 
counter-drug intelligence needs, as well as directly support 
operations against river/coastal drug shipments and drug 
laboratories. These assets will provide an important element to 
the Riverine program initiated by the Committee in fiscal year 
1998 and other counter-drug activities in South America.

                    OFFICE OF THE INSPECTOR GENERAL

                                                                        
                                                                        
                                                                        
Fiscal year 1998 appropriation........................      $138,380,000
Fiscal year 1999 budget request.......................       132,064,000
Committee recommendation..............................       132,064,000
Change from budget request............................                 0
                                                                        

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $132,064,000 
for the Office of the Inspector General. The recommendation is 
a decrease of $6,316,000 below the amount appropriated for 
fiscal year 1998.

                                            [In thousands of dollars]                                           
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                     Committee      Change from 
                                                                  Budget request    recommended       request   
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Office of the Inspector General:                                                                                
    Operation and maintenance...................................         130,764         130,764  ..............
    Procurement.................................................           1,300           1,300  ..............
                                                                 -----------------------------------------------
      Total, Office of the Inspector General....................         132,064         132,064  ..............
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                               TITLE VII

                            RELATED AGENCIES

                 NATIONAL FOREIGN INTELLIGENCE PROGRAM

                              Introduction

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

                            classified annex

    Because of the highly sensitive nature of intelligence 
programs, the results of the Committee's budget review are 
published in a separate, detailed and comprehensive classified 
annex. The intelligence community, Department of Defense and 
other organizations are expected to comply fully with the 
recommendations and directions in the classified annex 
accompanying the fiscal year 1999 Defense Appropriations Bill.

   CENTRAL INTELLIGENCE AGENCY RETIREMENT AND DISABILITY SYSTEM FUND

                                                                        
                                                                        
                                                                        
Fiscal year 1998 appropriation........................      $196,900,000
Fiscal year 1999 budget request.......................       201,500,000
Committee recommendation..............................       201,500,000
Change from budget request............................  ................
                                                                        

    This appropriation provides payments of benefits to 
qualified beneficiaries in accordance with the Central 
Intelligence Agency Retirement Act of 1964 for Certain 
Employees (P.L. 88-643). This statute authorized the 
establishment of a CIA Retirement and Disability System 
(CIARDS) for a limited number of CIA employees, and authorized 
the establishment and maintenance of a fund from which benefits 
would be paid to those beneficiaries.

               INTELLIGENCE COMMUNITY MANAGEMENT ACCOUNT

                                                                        
                                                                        
                                                                        
Fiscal year 1998 appropriation........................      $121,080,000
Fiscal year 1999 budget request.......................       138,623,000
Committee recommendation..............................       136,123,000
Change from budget request............................        -2,500,000
                                                                        

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

                        Committee Recommendation

    The budget requested $138,623,000 for the Intelligence 
Community Management Account. The Committee recommends 
$136,123,000, a decrease of $2,500,000. Details of adjustments 
to this account are included in the classified annex 
accompanying this report.

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

                                                                        
                                                                        
                                                                        
Fiscal year 1998 appropriation........................       $35,000,000
Fiscal year 1999 budget request.......................        15,000,000
Committee recommendation..............................        15,000,000
Change from budget request............................  ................
                                                                        

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $15,000,000 
for Payment to Kaho'olawe Island Conveyance, Remediation, and 
Environmental Restoration Fund. The recommendation is a 
decrease of $20,000,000 below the amount appropriated for 
fiscal year 1998.

                 NATIONAL SECURITY EDUCATION TRUST FUND

                                                                        
                                                                        
                                                                        
Fiscal year 1998 appropriation........................        $2,000,000
Fiscal year 1999 budget request.......................         5,000,000
Committee recommendation..............................         3,000,000
Change from budget request............................        -2,000,000
                                                                        

    The National Security Education Trust Fund was established 
to provide scholarships and fellowships to U.S. students to 
pursue higher education studies abroad and grants to U.S. 
institutions for programs of study in foreign areas and 
languages. The budget requested $5,000,000. The Committee 
recommends $3,000,000, a decrease of $2,000,000.
                               TITLE VIII

                           GENERAL PROVISIONS

    Title VIII of the accompanying bill includes 106 general 
provisions. Most of these provisions were included in the 
Department of Defense Appropriations Act for fiscal year 1998 
and many have been included in the Defense Appropriations Act 
for a number of years.
    Actions taken by the Committee to amend last year's 
provisions or new provisions recommended by the Committee are 
discussed below or in the applicable section of the report.

              Definition of Program, Project and Activity

    For purposes of the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit 
Control Act of 1985 (Public Law 99-177) as amended by the 
Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Reaffirmation Act 
of 1987 (Public Law 100-119) and by the Budget Enforcement Act 
of 1990 (Public Law 101-508), the following information 
provides the definitions of the term ``program, project, and 
activity'' for appropriations contained in the Department of 
Defense Appropriations Act. The term ``program, project, and 
activity'' shall include the most specific level of budget 
items, identified in the Department of Defense Appropriations 
Act, 1998, the accompanying House and Senate Committee reports, 
the conference report and accompanying joint explanatory 
statement of the managers of the Committee on Conference, the 
related classified reports, and the P-1 and R-1 budget 
justification documents as subsequently modified by 
Congressional action.
    In carrying out any Presidential sequestration, the 
Department of Defense and agencies shall conform to the 
definition for ``program, project, and activity'' set forth 
above with the following exception:
    For Military Personnel and the Operation and Maintenance 
accounts the term ``program, project, and activity'' is defined 
as the appropriations accounts contained in the Department of 
Defense Appropriations Act.
    The Department and agencies should carry forth the 
Presidential sequestration order in a manner that would not 
adversely affect or alter Congressional policies and priorities 
established for the Department of Defense and the related 
agencies and no program, project, and activity should be 
eliminated or be reduced to a level of funding which would 
adversely affect the Department's ability to effectively 
continue any program, project, and activity.

                            Civil Air Patrol

    The Committee recommends a total of $28,347,000 to support 
operations of the Civil Air Patrol (CAP). This includes 
$3,800,000 to support the CAP counterdrug program, and 
$4,850,000 for procurement of equipment. The Civil Air Patrol, 
as an all-volunteer Air Force auxiliary, performs 85 percent of 
the air search and rescue missions each year saving many lives. 
It also performs low level route surveys for the Air Force and 
flies drug surveillance missions supporting several different 
federal agencies. The Committee is disturbed by actions of the 
Air Force attempting to administratively shift funds the 
Congress had intended for operational support of the non-profit 
Civil Air Patrol corporation to support other related internal 
Air Force activities. The bill includes a general provision 
(section 8033), which prohibits the Air Force from diverting 
these funds in the future.

                Reserve Component Maintenance Capability

    The Committee has included a general provision (section 
8099) which prohibits any Reserve Component from establishing 
new activities to perform depot level maintenance or 
remanufacture of any equipment unless the Secretary first 
certifies that certain conditions are met. The Secretary must 
certify (a) that insufficient workload capacity is available at 
existing government or private sector depot maintenance 
facilities currently used by the Reserve Components for similar 
work; and (b) an in-depth analysis has been performed on a 
case-by-case basis comparing the cost of any proposed expansion 
of depot facilities versus the cost of performing the same work 
at existing depot facilities or by the private sector.
    The Committee was surprised to learn that the Army National 
Guard plans to establish two new depot maintenance facilities 
to remanufacture 2.5 ton trucks. This work is currently being 
performed for the Department by a private sector contractor. In 
addition, the Committee understands that the National Guard 
envisions expanding its depots to perform work on other wheeled 
vehicles, tracked vehicles, computers, missile launching 
devices, and calibration.
    The Committee is deeply troubled by this proposal. The 
Secretary of Defense has repeatedly testified that excess 
capacity exists within the current depot system and has 
requested Congress authorize two additional Base Closure and 
Realignment rounds. In addition, it is longstanding Department 
policy to maximize the utility of the private sector for 
maintenance of equipment when it is cost effective to do so. 
The Army National Guard proposal is totally contrary to the 
Secretary of Defense's recommendations and policies.
    The Committee has, therefore, included this provision to 
ensure that no new government depot maintenance capacity is 
established unless the Secretary first determines on a case-by-
case basis that existing capacity is insufficient from a 
workload and cost perspective.

                     TRICARE Managed Care Contracts

    As one of the largest health care providers in the nation, 
the Department of Defense has experienced many of the same 
challenges as the private sector health care industry--
including rising costs, problems with access to care and lack 
of a uniform benefit. The TRICARE managed care program was 
initiated in 1993 to address these challenges and to improve 
health care for our nation's active duty military personnel, 
military retirees and their families.
    Under TRICARE, the military health care system is centrally 
managed and organized by region. Currently, there are 12 
TRICARE regions and each region contains military medical 
treatment facilities and clinics. In addition, civilian support 
contracts (TRICARE managed care contracts) supplement the care 
provided by the military medical system.
    To date, seven multi-billion dollar TRICARE contracts have 
been awarded to private sector health care companies. Each 
support contract is awarded to a single large private sector 
health care company responsible for all contracted health 
services in a given region. The contracts are awarded for a 
five-year period (one year plus four option years), and the 
successful implementation of these, and subsequent TRICARE 
contracts, are vital to an efficient and well-run managed care 
program for the military.
    However, the TRICARE contracting process has proven to be 
complex, costly, and time-consuming. In some cases, TRICARE 
implementation in a specific region has been temporarily 
delayed due to bid protests (the GAO has upheld three protests 
in the seven regions), causing delay, extra cost, and most 
important, confusion and frustration among beneficiaries. In 
other cases, DoD has permitted the contractor to begin services 
with the understanding that further arbitration may cause a 
change in contracts. Today, five years after TRICARE was 
started, the last of the seven contract awards is still not 
finalized.
    Though unintended, the delays and disruptions experienced 
as TRICARE is being implemented have proven frustrating to many 
military beneficiaries. If not managed properly, these problems 
as well as other aspects of TRICARE implementation could have 
an adverse impact on the delivery of care to military 
beneficiaries. The Committee has heard from many beneficiaries 
as each new region is converted to TRICARE and new, often 
confusing, administrative policies and procedures are 
implemented. Many TRICARE beneficiaries are just now becoming 
familiar with their new administrative system and with their 
physicians. Yet the Department is about to embark on awarding a 
new round of managed care contracts as the first contracts 
awarded in 1993 are coming due.
     Given the turbulence which has affected the military 
health system over the last decade, the Committee believes 
there is a need for greater stability in the delivery of health 
care services, at least over the near-term. The Committee 
therefore recommends a new general provision (section 8100) 
granting the Secretary of Defense permissive authority to 
negotiate two year extensions to the existing managed care 
contracts if terms can be agreed to that are in the best 
interest of the government. The Committee expects that the 
health care price for any extension period would not exceed the 
health care price in the fifth option period after adjustment 
for inflationary factors as measured by the BPA. The 
administrative price and the phase out prices for any extension 
period would be expected not to exceed such prices in the fifth 
option period after adjustments for the annual percentage 
change in the CPI-U. Section 8100 also provides that all future 
TRICARE managed care support contracts replacing contracts in 
effect, or in the final stages of acquisition as of September 
30, 1998, may include a base contract period for up to seven 
years (in one year option periods). The Committee believes that 
the provision of this new, discretionary authority will give 
the Department an important tool to help it manage its health 
care contracts and to ensure high quality health care for 
military families.
                                TITLE IX

                EMERGENCY APPROPRIATIONS FOR INFORMATION

                    SYSTEMS TECHNOLOGY AND SECURITY

                       OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE

      Information Systems Technology and Security Transfer Account

                                                                        
                                                                        
                                                                        
Fiscal year 1998 appropriation........................  ................
Fiscal year 1999 budget request.......................  ................
Committee recommendation..............................    $1,600,000,000
Change from budget request............................    +1,600,000,000
                                                                        

                        Committee Recommendation

    The Committee recommends an emergency appropriation of 
$1,600,000,000 to ensure that the information technology and 
national security systems of the Department of Defense and the 
Intelligence Community are prepared for the year 2000 (or Y2K) 
date change and are secure against unwanted intrusion. In 
addition, the Committee recommends two general provisions that 
relate to ensuring year 2000 compliance and to evaluating year 
2000 compliance in major military exercises.
    While it operates over two million separate computers, the 
Department of Defense relies on over 25,000 distinct computer 
systems (defined as unique information technology systems, 
programs, or major system applications) to conduct its mission. 
Of those, the Department has identified 2,800 systems which it 
believes are ``critical to direct fulfillment of military or 
intelligence missions'', which ``if not functional, would 
preclude the CINC from conducting missions across the full 
spectrum of operations''.
    These computer systems are not simply embedded in weapons 
systems, the category which DoD suggests is best prepared to 
meet the year 2000 problem. These systems are also integral 
parts of command and control systems; satellite systems; the 
Global Positioning System; highly specialized inventory 
management and transportation management systems; medical 
equipment; and systems for payment and personnel records. DoD 
also operates a multitude of military bases, which are much 
like small towns where the infrastructure is also vulnerable to 
year 2000 problems. Power grids, heating systems, air 
filtration units, automatic locking devices, chronometers on 
ships and airplanes, and any timed device contain embedded 
chips that may not be Y2K compliant. Simply put, if the 
Department's mission critical systems are not prepared to deal 
with the year 2000 computer problem, then the U.S. military may 
not be mission-capable in the year 2000.
    Unfortunately, the Department's own reports indicate that 
repairs to many of its mission critical systems are running 
behind schedule. In addition, both the DoD Inspector General 
and the GAO have concluded that the Department's official 
reports overstate the actual level of completed Y2K corrective 
actions.
    The same reliance on computers that makes our military and 
intelligence communities potentially vulnerable to the Y2K 
problem also makes these agencies vulnerable to unauthorized 
penetration of their information networks. Recently reported 
instances of ``hackers'' attempting to access, and in some 
instances, manipulate information within DoD computer networks 
bear testament to the problems which have arisen with the 
advent of globally-linked, readily-accessed networks. The 
``Eligible Receiver'' exercise conducted last year confirmed 
that there are indeed serious vulnerabilities and weaknesses in 
the DoD's information systems which can be exploited. The 
Committee notes with concern reports that DoD and other 
agencies, in their efforts to rapidly introduce Y2K fixes into 
computer and other information systems, may in fact be creating 
additional system vulnerabilities, making unwanted intrusions 
easier.
    With such obvious implications for national security, the 
Committee believes it is essential that both the defense and 
intelligence communities secure their systems from both 
computer error and unauthorized intrusion. This effort is 
extensive and costly in terms of both dollars and manpower. 
During fiscal year 1998 alone, DoD has had to divert over 
$1,000,000,000 from other high priority efforts just to address 
Y2K software and hardware fixes. Unfortunately, the fiscal year 
1999 budget request once again includes no dedicated funding 
for software and hardware Y2K fixes, as well as no funds for 
end to end functional testing, joint exercises that include Y2K 
simulations, additional DoD IG audits, a test augmentation 
force, or the development of contingency plans. In the area of 
information assurance, there are significant unmet requirements 
for the purchase and integration of firewalls, guards, FORTEZZA 
products, command and control protection tools, Computer 
Emergency Response Teams, vulnerability assessments, `red team' 
exercises, accelerated training of network administrators and 
the upgrade of base information infrastructure. In addition, 
the recently released Presidential Decision Directive 63 places 
additional responsibilities on the DoD for ensuring the 
protection of its critical systems.
    From the time of Committee action on this bill, there are 
only eighteen months remaining during which the year 2000 
problem will be transformed from hypothesis to reality. The 
Committee believes it would be irresponsible not to make 
available, as soon as possible, additional resources which 
could be used during fiscal year 1999 to implement and test 
essential fixes to national security-related information 
systems, as well as the development of contingency plans to 
ensure continuity of essential operations in the event needed 
fixes are not in place.
    Therefore, the Committee recommends $1,600,000,000 in a new 
appropriations account (``Information Systems Technology and 
Security Transfer Account''), only for efforts associated with 
achieving year 2000 compliant systems as well as improved 
information assurance and protection for those systems operated 
by the Department of Defense and the Intelligence Community. 
The Committee bill designates these funds as an emergency 
appropriation, which shall only be available for obligation to 
the extent the President designates these funds as emergency 
appropriations and submits an official budget request to 
Congress delineating the use of these funds. The Committee 
expects there to be a coordinated effort between the Secretary 
of Defense, the Director of Central Intelligence, and the 
Director of the Office of Management and Budget in identifying 
program and funding requirements. The Committee also fully 
expects these officials to move as rapidly as possible in 
taking the actions needed to secure necessary funding should 
the Committee recommendation be enacted into law.
    Recognizing that the actual funding requirements associated 
with this problem will become more apparent as fiscal year 1999 
progresses, the Committee expresses its intent that any funds 
requested by the President need not be requested all at once, 
or in one lump-sum, but rather as soon as requirements emerge. 
The Committee stands ready to work with the Department of 
Defense, the Intelligence Community, and the Office of 
Management and Budget in developing a common approach to 
meeting these needs as they are identified. Additional 
discussion regarding this initiative is contained in the 
classified annex accompanying this report.

                     General Provisions--This Title

    The Committee also proposes two new general provisions that 
relate to ensuring year 2000 compliance and for the evaluation 
of year 2000 compliance in major military exercises. Section 
9001 requires that no funds in this bill can be spent on 
developing or modernizing any information technology or 
national security system until that system has been 
independently certified as Y2K compliant. This provision also 
requires the Department to develop contingency plans, not just 
for each individual system, but for the overall function that a 
collection of systems perform. For example, the intent is to 
put in place a mechanism to ensure personnel will continue to 
be paid even if there were a failure in any part of the payroll 
process. In addition, this provision requires the DoD to report 
on how it plans to test each system for Y2K compliance 
(individually, as a function group and as part of large scale 
exercises); how DoD plans to ensure that it has adequate tools 
and testing facilities to accommodate the large number of 
systems requiring testing; and the DoD criteria for certifying 
systems as compliant. This provision also directs the DoD IG to 
selectively audit systems certified as compliant to see if they 
do indeed operate correctly under year 2000 conditions.
    Section 9002 requires the DoD to move beyond merely testing 
individual systems and functions to the conduct of full scale 
tests of all of its systems, as part of large scale exercises. 
The Committee believes the only way to know if the DoD and its 
military components are ready to move out of the testing 
laboratories and onto the battlefield is to do so through 
actual exercises, to take place before the end of fiscal year 
1999. It is the Committee's intent that the 25 exercises 
required in the bill be viewed as the minimum number the 
Department should conduct. While the portion of these exercises 
dedicated to simulating the year 2000 may be limited at the 
start, the Committee directs the Department to expand on the 
Y2K exercise component until it has conducted several large 
exercises with all the systems in a simulated year 2000 for the 
full length of the exercise. Only by conducting tough, 
realistic, year 2000 exercises can the Department assure itself 
and the National Command Authority of the readiness of our 
military forces.
    Addressing the Y2K problem also involves significant 
personnel management issues. The Committee strongly encourages 
the Department to make the administrative changes necessary to 
ensure that program managers and other key personnel are not 
rotated to new jobs between now and the resolution of the Y2K 
problem. In addition, the Committee believes it may be 
appropriate for the DoD to require that personnel evaluation 
forms include a section addressing the individual's success or 
failure in preparing their organization or program for the year 
2000. Finally, the Committee encourages the Department to 
examine financial incentives, and how they might be used to 
ensure continuity of effort on critical systems and to reward 
exemplary work in addressing this issue.
            HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES REPORTING REQUIREMENTS

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

                 Changes in Application of Existing Law

    Pursuant to clause 3 of rule XXI of the House of 
Representatives, the following statements are submitted 
describing the effect of provisions which directly or 
indirectly change the application of existing law.
    Language is included in various parts of the bill to 
continue on-going activities which require annual authorization 
or additional legislation, which to date has not been enacted.
    The bill includes a number of provisions which place 
limitations on the use of funds in the bill or change existing 
limitations and which might, under some circumstances, be 
construed as changing the application of existing law.
    The bill includes a number of provisions, which have been 
virtually unchanged for many years, that are technically 
considered legislation.
    The bill provides that appropriations shall remain 
available for more than one year for some programs for which 
the basic authorizing legislation does not presently authorize 
each extended availability.
    In various places in the bill, the Committee has earmarked 
funds within appropriation accounts in order to fund specific 
programs and has adjusted some existing earmarkings.
    The bill includes a number of provisions which make 
portions of the appropriations subject to enactment of 
authorizing legislation.
    Those additional changes in the fiscal year 1999 bill, 
which might be interpreted as changing existing law, are as 
follows:

                        appropriations language

    Language has been amended in ``Operation and Maintenance, 
Army'' which changes the amount provided for emergency and 
extraordinary expenses, and language has been deleted which 
earmarked funds for conventional ammunition care and 
maintenance.
    Language has been amended in ``Operation and Maintenance, 
Navy'' which changes the amount provided for emergency and 
extraordinary expenses.
    Language has been amended in ``Operation and Maintenance, 
Air Force'' which changes the amount provided for emergency and 
extraordinary expenses.
    Language has been amended in ``Operation and Maintenance, 
Defense-Wide'' which changes the amount provided for emergency 
and extraordinary expenses.
    Language has been amended in ``Overseas Contingency 
Operations Transfer Fund'' which allows for additional transfer 
authority for the Defense Health Program and procurement 
accounts.
    Language has been deleted in ``Environmental Restoration, 
Army'' which limited obligations for environmental re-mediation 
by the Corps of Engineers.
    Language has been deleted in ``Former Soviet Union Threat 
Reduction'' which earmarked funds for the dismantling and 
disposal of nuclear submarines and submarine reactor components 
in the Russian Far East, and which earmarked funds for the 
Arctic Military Environmental Cooperation Program.
    Language has been amended in ``Quality of Life 
Enhancements, Defense'' to include funding for the Reserve 
components.
    Language has been included in ``Other Procurement, Army'' 
which allows for the purchase of passenger vehicles for 
replacement, for the purchase of passenger vehicles for 
physical security of personnel and which limits the unit cost 
of the vehicles.
    Language has been amended in ``Shipbuilding and Conversion, 
Navy'' which provides a lump sum appropriation instead of 
specific project-level funding.
    Language has been amended in ``Other Procurement, Navy'' 
which changes the number of passenger vehicles for replacement, 
and which limits the unit cost of the vehicles.
    Language has been amended in ``Procurement, Marine Corps'' 
which changes the number of passenger vehicles for replacement.
    Language has been deleted in ``Aircraft Procurement, Air 
Force'' which earmarked funds for long-lead activities related 
to additional B-2 bombers.
    Language has been amended in ``Other Procurement, Air 
Force'' which changes the number of passenger vehicles for 
replacement, and allows for the purchase of passenger vehicles 
for physical security of personnel and limits the unit cost of 
the vehicles.
    Language has been amended in ``Procurement, Defense-Wide'' 
which changes the number of passenger vehicles for replacement, 
includes language for the purchase of passenger vehicles for 
physical security of personnel and limits the unit cost of the 
vehicles, and includes language which earmarks funds only for 
the procurement of high performance computing hardware.
    Language has been included in ``Research, Development, Test 
and Evaluation, Army'' which earmarks funds for certain 
operational tests of the Starstreak and Stinger missiles, and 
prohibits obligation of these funds until certain conditions 
are met.
    Language has been included in ``Research, Development, Test 
and Evaluation, Navy'' which prohibits the expenditure of funds 
for certain tests on the SSN-21 unless certain conditions are 
met, includes language which limits the amount which can be 
spent on certain studies, research, and development for future 
aircraft carriers until certain conditions are met, and 
earmarks funds made available in fiscal year 1998 for 
cooperative engagement capability.
    Language has been deleted in ``Research, Development, Test 
and Evaluation, Air Force'' which earmarked funds for the 
development of coal-derived jet fuel technologies.
    Language has been deleted in ``Research, Development, Test 
and Evaluation, Defense-Wide'' which extended the availability 
of fiscal year 1997 funds for the Dual-Use Applications 
Program, and includes language which earmarks funds for 
research, development and deployment systems engineering for an 
initial Block I capability.
    Language has been included in ``Defense Working Capital 
Funds'', which allows $350,000,000 to be transferred from the 
National Defense Stockpile Fund.
    Language has been included in ``National Defense Sealift 
Fund'' which provides funds for transfer to ``Alterations of 
Bridges''.
    Language has been included to change the name of the 
``Chemical Agents and Munitions Destruction, Defense'' 
appropriation to ``Chemical Agents and Munitions Destruction, 
Army'', and language has been deleted which earmarked funds for 
the Johnston Atoll off-island leave program.
    Language has been amended in ``Office of the Inspector 
General'' which changes the amount available for emergency and 
extraordinary expenses.
    Language has been amended in ``Intelligence Community 
Management Account'' which changes the earmark for Advanced 
Research and Development Committee, and deletes the amount 
earmarked for the Environmental Intelligence and Applications 
Program.

                           general provisions

    Section 8005 has been amended to delete language concerning 
reprogramming authority for the Reserve Mobilization Income 
Insurance Program.
    Section 8008 has been amended to include multiyear 
procurement contracts for the E-2C aircraft, T-45 aircraft, and 
the Medium Tactical Vehicle Replacement (MTVR) vehicle 
programs.
    Section 8017 has been amended to change the word 
``handicapped'' to ``persons with disabilities.''
    Section 8024 has been amended to extend the availability of 
funds appropriated in fiscal year 1998 for the Indian Financing 
Act Incentive payments program.
    Section 8033 has been amended to designate funds 
exclusively for use by the Civil Air Patrol Corporation.
    Section 8034 has been amended to reduce funds for Federally 
Funded Research and Development Centers (FFRDC's) by 
$62,000,000.
    Section 8048 has been amended to allow funds credited to 
the Central Intelligence Agency Central Services Working 
Capital Fund to remain available until expended.
    Section 8056 has been included to rescind funds from the 
following programs:

                                                           (Rescissions)
Missile Procurement, Army:
    EFOGM...............................................     $13,300,000
Procurement of Weapons and Tracked Combat Vehicles, 
    Army:
    M1A1D...............................................       6,700,000
Other Procurement, Army:
    NATO AGS............................................      24,000,000
Weapons Procurement, Navy:
    MA-31 target delay..................................       2,000,000
Procurement of Ammunition, Navy and Marine Corps:
    JDAM................................................      12,000,000
Other Procurement, Navy:
    NULKA decoy delay...................................      15,000,000
    WLQ-4...............................................       1,500,000
    Type 8B Mod 3 periscopes............................       3,000,000
    Other navigation equipment..........................       1,700,000
    Pollution control equipment.........................       3,600,000
    BFTT................................................       1,400,000
    AN/SQQ-62 sonobouy..................................       2,300,000
Aircraft Procurement, Air Force:
    F-15 advance procurement............................      15,000,000
Missile Procurement, Air Force:
    AMRAAM merger savings...............................      14,000,000
    Classified Program..................................       5,840,000
Other Procurement, Air Force:
    Classified Program..................................       4,160,000
Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, Army:
    Near Term Digital Radio.............................      18,000,000
Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, Navy:
    High Power Discriminator............................      15,000,000
    Lightweight torpedo.................................       1,500,000
    Navigation/ID systems...............................       1,000,000
Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, Air Force:
    T&E; Support execution...............................      10,000,000
    South Birk Facility.................................       3,750,000
    AAIS................................................       3,200,000
    Discoverer..........................................       3,000,000
    NATO JSTARS.........................................       7,000,000
    Classified Program..................................       7,420,000
Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, Defense-
    Wide:
    STARLITE............................................       6,000,000
    THAAD...............................................      67,000,000

    Section 8060 has been amended to clarify which activities 
Reserve component members can provide in support of 
intelligence or counterintelligence.
    Section 8077 has been amended to change the amount of funds 
that would be available for transfer from operation and 
maintenance accounts to military personnel accounts for the 
Innovative Readiness Training program.
    Section 8086 has been amended to make permanent, language 
concerning use of the Government travel card by military and 
civilian employees.
    Section 8089 has been amended to make permanent, language 
concerning submission of the ``M-1'' budget justification 
document.
    Section 8094 has been added which limits the amounts for 
payment of satellite on-orbit incentive fees until the fees are 
paid.
    Section 8095 has been added which clarifies that the 
National Imagery and Mapping Agency (NIMA) utilize the 
qualification based selection (QBS) process for private sector 
firms providing services.
    Section 8096 has been added which allows funds provided 
under ``Drug Interdiction and Counter-Drug Activities, 
Defense'' to be available for the Civil Air Patrol, requires 
the establishment of a distance learning program, and waives 
reimbursement from the Federal, State, and local government 
agencies for the use of these funds.
    Section 8097 has been added which directs the review of all 
distributed learning education and training programs and 
requires a report by July 30, 1999.
    Section 8098 has been added which requires that cross deck 
pendants for arresting aircraft on U.S. Navy aircraft carriers 
be manufactured in the United States from components that are 
substantially manufactured in the United States.
    Section 8099 has been added which prohibits any Reserve 
component from establishing new activities to perform depot 
level maintenance and remanufacture of any equipment in 
inventory until certain conditions are met.
    Section 8100 has been added which authorizes a 2-year 
extension of TRICARE contracts under certain conditions.
    Section 8101 has been added which reduces the budget 
request by $204,100,000 to reflect savings from revised 
economic assumptions.
    Section 8102 has been added which authorizes the transfer 
of specific ships under certain conditions, as requested by the 
Administration.
    Section 8103 has been added which prohibits the 
compensation of employees who initiate new start programs 
without notification, as required by DOD financial management 
regulations.
    Section 8104 has been added which directs the transfer of 
funds from selected Operation and maintenance accounts to the 
``Defense Working Capital Funds'' for the purpose of funding 
operations of Department of Defense commissaries. The Committee 
recommends transferring such funds to ensure that the 
Department of Defense continues to obtain the efficiencies 
resulting from consolidated commissary operations.
    Section 8105 has been added which provides funds to address 
claims resulting from the accident on February 3, 1998, 
involving U.S. Marine Corps A-6 aircraft near Cavalese, Italy.
    Section 8106 has been added which prohibits the expenditure 
of funds to initiate or conduct offensive military operations 
by U.S. forces except in accordance with the war powers clause 
of the Constitution.
    A new title IX has been added which provides $1.6 billion 
in contingent emergency funds to address efforts aimed at 
insuring that the information technology and national security 
systems of the Department are prepared for the year 2000 date 
change and for information assurance programs.
    Section 9001 has been added which prohibits the expenditure 
of funds on developing or modernizing any information 
technology or national security system until that system has 
been independently certified as year 2000 (Y2K) compliant.
    Section 9002 has been added which requires that at least 25 
of the Department's major military exercises include a 
simulated Year 2000 as part of the exercise.

                  Appropriations Not Authorized by Law

    Pursuant to clause 3 of rule XXI of the House of 
Representatives, the following lists the appropriations in the 
accompanying bill which are not authorized by law:

Military Personnel, Army
Military Personnel, Navy
Military Personnel, Marine Corps
Military Personnel, Air Force
Reserve Personnel, Army
Reserve Personnel, Navy
Reserve Personnel, Marine Corps
Reserve Personnel, Air Force
National Guard Personnel, Army
National Guard Personnel, Air Force
Operation and Maintenance, Army
Operation and Maintenance, Navy
Operation and Maintenance, Marine Corps
Operation and Maintenance, Air Force
Operation and Maintenance, Defense-Wide
Operation and Maintenance, Army Reserve
Operation and Maintenance, Navy Reserve
Operation and Maintenance, Marine Corps Reserve
Operation and Maintenance, Air Force Reserve
Operation and Maintenance, Army National Guard
Operation and Maintenance, Air National Guard
Overseas Contingency Operations Transfer Fund
United States Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces
Environmental Restoration, Army
Environmental Restoration, Navy
Environmental Restoration, Air Force
Environmental Restoration, Defense-Wide
Environmental Restoration, Formerly Used Defense Sites
Overseas Humanitarian, Disaster, and Civic Aid
Former Soviet Union Threat Reduction
Quality of Life Enhancements, Defense
Aircraft Procurement, Army
Missile Procurement, Army
Procurement of Weapons and Tracked Combat Vehicles, Army
Procurement of Ammunition, Army
Other Procurement, Army
Aircraft Procurement, Navy
Weapons Procurement, Navy
Procurement of Ammunition, Navy and Marine Corps
Shipbuilding and Conversion, Navy
Other Procurement, Navy
Procurement, Marine Corps
Aircraft Procurement, Air Force
Missile Procurement, Air Force
Procurement of Ammunition, Air Force
Other Procurement, Air Force
Procurement, Defense-Wide
National Guard and Reserve Equipment
Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, Army
Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, Navy
Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, Air Force
Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, Defense-Wide
Developmental Test and Evaluation, Defense
Operational Test and Evaluation, Defense,
Defense Working Capital Funds
National Defense Sealift Fund
Defense Health Program
Chemical Agents and Munitions Destruction, Army
Drug Interdiction and Counter-Drug Activities, Defense
Office of the Inspector General
Central Intelligence Agency Retirement and Disability System 
        Fund
Intelligence Community Management Account
Payment to Kaho'olawe Island Conveyance, Remediation and 
        Environmental Restoration Fund
National Security Education Trust Fund
Sec. 8105
Title IX

                           Transfer of Funds

    Pursuant to clause 1(b), rule X of the House of 
Representatives the following is submitted describing the 
transfer of funds provided in the accompanying bill.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                   Appropriations from which                    
    Appropriations to which transfer is made        Amount              transfer is made              Amount    
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Operation and maintenance, Army................   $50,000,000  National Defense Stockpile           $150,000,000
                                                                Transaction Fund.                               
Operation and maintenance, Navy................   $50,000,000                                                   
Operation and maintenance, Air Force...........   $50,000,000                                                   
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Language has been included in ``Overseas Contingency 
Operations Transfer Fund'' which provides for the transfer of 
funds out of this account to other appropriation accounts for 
the Department of Defense.
    Language has been included in ``Environmental Restoration, 
Army'' which provides for the transfer of funds out of and into 
this account.
    Language has been included in ``Environmental Restoration, 
Navy'' which provides for the transfer of funds out of and into 
this account.
    Language has been included in ``Environmental Restoration, 
Air Force'' which provides for the transfer of funds out of and 
into this account.
    Language has been included in ``Environmental Restoration, 
Defense-Wide'' which provides for the transfer of funds out of 
and into this account.
    Language has been included in ``Environmental Restoration, 
Formerly Used Defense Sites'' which provides for the transfer 
of funds out of and into this account.
    Language has been included in ``Defense Working Capital 
Funds'' which provides for the transfer of $350,000,000 from 
the National Defense Stockpile Transaction Fund, and which 
requires that the same amount be transferred out of the 
``Defense Working Capital Funds'' back to the National Defense 
Stockpile Transaction Fund not later than September 30, 1999.
    Language has been included in the ``National Defense 
Sealift Fund'' which provides for the transfer of $28,800,000 
to ``Alteration of Bridges''.
    Language has been included in ``Drug Interdiction and 
Counter-Drug Activities, Defense'' which transfers funds to 
other appropriations accounts of the Department of Defense.
    Language has been included in the ``Intelligence Community 
Management Account'' which transfers funds to the Department of 
Justice.
    Section 8104 has been included which transfers funds as 
follows:

Appropriations to which transfer is made:
    Defense Working Capital Funds.......................    $982,071,000
Appropriations from which transfer is made:
    Operation and maintenance, Army.....................     338,400,000
    Operation and maintenance, Navy.....................     255,000,000
    Operation and maintenance, Marine Corps.............      86,600,000
    Operation and maintenance, Air Force................     302,071,000
                    --------------------------------------------------------
                    ____________________________________________________
      Total.............................................     982,071,000

    Section 8105 has been included which provides for the 
transfer of $20,000,000 in emergency contingent funds 
appropriated to ``Operation and Maintenance, Defense-Wide'' to 
``Funds Appropriated to the President.''
    Seven provisions (Sections 8005, 8006, 8015, 8040, 8062, 
8064, and 8077) contain language which allows the transfer of 
funds between accounts.
    Title IX contains language which provides for the transfer 
of funds made available in that title to other appropriations 
accounts of the Department of Defense.

                              Rescissions

    Pursuant to clause (b) of rule X of the House of 
Representatives, the following table is submitted describing 
the rescissions recommended in the accompanying bill.

Missile Procurement, Army 1998/2000.....................     $13,300,000
Procurement of Weapons and Tracked Combat Vehicles, Army 
    1998/2000...........................................       6,700,000
Other Procurement, Army 1998/2000.......................      24,000,000
Weapons Procurement, Navy 1998/2000.....................       2,000,000
Procurement of Ammunition, Navy and Marine Corps 1998/
    2000................................................      12,000,000
Other Procurement, Navy 1998/2000.......................      28,500,000
Aircraft Procurement, Air Force 1998/2000...............      15,000,000
Missile Procurement, Air Force 1998/2000................      19,840,000
Other Procurement, Air Force 1998/2000..................       4,160,000
Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, Army 1998/
    1999................................................      18,000,000
Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, Navy 1998/
    1999................................................      17,500,000
Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, Air Force 
    1998/1999...........................................      34,370,000
Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, Defense-Wide 
    1998/1999...........................................      73,000,000

                        Constitutional Authority

    Clause 2(l)(4) of rule XI of the Rules of the House of 
Representatives states that: ``Each report of a committee on a 
bill or joint resolution of a public character, shall include a 
statement citing the specific powers granted to the Congress in 
the Constitution to enact the law proposed by the joint 
resolution.''
    The Committee on Appropriations based its authority to 
report this legislation from Clause 7 of Section 9 of Article I 
of the Constitution of the United States of America which 
states: ``No money shall be drawn from the Treasury but in 
consequence of Appropriations made by law . . .''
    Appropriations contained in this Act are made pursuant to 
this specific power granted by the Constitution.

                   Comparison With Budget Resolution

    Section 308(a)(1)(A) of the Congressional Budget and 
Impoundment Control Act of 1974 (Public Law 93-344), requires 
that the report accompanying a bill providing new budget 
authority contain a statement detailing how the authority 
compares with the reports submitted under section 302(b) of the 
Act for the most recently agreed to concurrent resolution on 
the budget for the fiscal year. This information follows:

                                            [In millions of dollars]                                            
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                         302(b) Allocation                   This bill          
                                                 ---------------------------------------------------------------
                                                      Budget                          Budget                    
                                                     authority        Outlays        authority        Outlays   
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Discretionary...................................         250,526         244,992         252,146         245,269
Mandatory.......................................             202             202             202             202
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
FOOTNOTE: The amounts in this bill are technically in excess of the subcommittee section 302(b) suballocation.  
  However, pursuant to section 314 of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974, as amended, increases to the        
  Committee's section 302(a) allocation are authorized for funding in the reported bill designated as emergency 
  requirements. After the bill is reported to the House, the Chairman of the Committee on the Budget will       
  provide an increased section 302(a) allocation consistent with the funding provided in the bill. That new     
  allocation will eliminate the technical difference prior to floor consideration.                              

                    Five-Year Projection of Outlays

    In compliance with section 308(a)(1)(B) of the 
Congressional Budget Act of 1974 (Public Law 93-944), as 
amended, the following table contains five-year projections 
associated with the budget provided in the accompanying bill.

                        [In millions of dollars]

Budget Authority in bill......................................   252,347
    1999......................................................   169,932
    2000......................................................    51,220
    2001......................................................    17,314
    2002......................................................     7,480
    2003......................................................     5,331

          Financial Assistance to State and Local Governments

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

    Pursuant to the provisions of clause 2(l)(2)(b) of rule XI 
of the House of Representatives, the results of each rollcall 
vote on an amendment or on the motion to report, together with 
the names of those voting for and those voting against, are 
printed below:

                             ROLLCALL No. 1

    Date: June 17, 1998.
    Measure: Defense Appropriations Bill, FY 1999.
    Motion by: Mr. Skaggs.
    Description of motion: To prevent funding of any offensive 
military operation except in accordance with the war powers 
clause of the Constitution.
    Results: Adopted 30 yeas to 25 nays.
        Members Voting Yea            Members Voting Nay
Mr. Aderholt                        Mr. Cramer
Mr. Bonilla                         Ms. DeLauro
Mr. Callahan                        Mr. Dicks
Mr. Cunningham                      Mr. Dixon
Mr. Fazio                           Mr. Edwards
Mr. Forbes                          Mr. Hefner
Mr. Frelinghuysen                   Mr. Hoyer
Mr. Hobson                          Mr. Knollenberg
Mr. Istook                          Mrs. Lowey
Ms. Kaptur                          Mr. McDade
Mr. Kingston                        Mrs. Meek
Mr. Kolbe                           Mr. Mollohan
Mr. Latham                          Mr. Moran
Mr. Livingston                      Mr. Murtha
Mr. Miller                          Mr. Obey
Mr. Nethercutt                      Mr. Olver
Mr. Neumann                         Mr. Packard
Mrs. Northup                        Mr. Pastor
Ms. Pelosi                          Mr. Porter
Mr. Regula                          Mr. Price
Mr. Rogers                          Mr. Sabo
Mr. Serrano                         Mr. Stokes
Mr. Skaggs                          Mr. Visclosky
Mr. Skeen                           Mr. Wicker
Mr. Taylor                          Mr. Yates
Mr. Tiahrt
Mr. Torres
Mr. Wamp
Mr. Wolf
Mr. Young






                   DISSENTING VIEWS OF HON. DAVE OBEY

    The Committee has once again produced a military spending 
bill directing substantial sums for lower priority items, while 
shortchanging several programs important to our national 
security. In particular, the Nunn-Lugar reduction program and 
the Navy's number one budget priority to replace aging F-14's 
with new F/A-18 E/F aircraft have been cut to make room for 
other items. This bill is filled with congressional directed 
spending projects selected more on the basis of whose district 
the money will be spent in rather than how the product will be 
used by our fighting forces.
    Further, this bill clearly demonstrates that the Republican 
leadership has not been genuine in its advocacy of strict 
budget discipline and holding down government spending. They 
have taken a number of steps that appear to be at variance with 
the recommendations of the Budget Committee and its chairman, 
and seem to show that they want to make spending decisions on 
an ad hoc basis rather than in conformance with an overall 
budget plan. Ultimately this means that each spending decision, 
whether it is for highways, weapons procurement, or some other 
recently rediscovered priority is made on an ad hoc basis in 
the same way Congress operated prior to the 1974 Budget Act.
    One of the most remarkable aspects of this National 
Security Appropriations bill is that a selected amount of 
outlays from certain accounts will be scored on the basis 
calculated by OMB instead of by CBO (so-called ``directed 
scoring''). What this means is that the House Republican 
leadership chose to ignore the professional judgment of the CBO 
on how to account for the spending in this bill. The result is 
to simply not count billions in military spending that the CBO 
determined should be counted.
    Just two-and-a-half years ago this same Republican 
leadership even went so far as to shut down the government over 
its insistence that the President and the Congress use no other 
spending assumptions than those made by the CBO. What a 
difference two-and-a-half years have made.
    Besides relying on the Speaker's ``directed scoring'' order 
that CBO simply not count billions in military spending, this 
bill employs two other ways to spend another $1.93 billion more 
than would be technically counted against the defense budget 
caps enacted into law by the Balanced Budget Act. Legislative 
language has been inserted to shift the accounting of asset 
sales of surplus Navy ships to allow the Pentagon to re-spend 
the proceeds, and two appropriations in the bill were 
designated to be ``emergency'' items, thereby excluding them 
from the official bill totals.
    When all the accounting gimmicks are pushed aside and the 
real spending in this bill is added up, we find that it spends 
nearly $4.4 billion more for fiscal year 1999 then called for 
under the Balanced Budget outlay cap (embodied in the 302b 
outlay allocation) enacted by Congress less than a year ago.

                         FY 1999 Spending Levels                        
         [Defense discretionary outlays in billions of dollars]         
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                          Scoring by CBO   Scoring after
                                              before           house    
                This bill                   leadership      leadership  
                                           intervention    intervention 
------------------------------------------------------------------------
All appropriation accounts..............         $249.34         $249.34
Budget Cap (302b-defense disc.).........          244.96          244.96
                                         -------------------------------
      Total Spending over Cap...........           +4.38           +4.38
                                         ===============================
Minus Accounting Conventions:                                           
    Outlays not counted due to directed                                 
     scoring............................  ..............           -3.46
    Asset (ship) sale accounting shift..           -0.64           -0.64
    Appropriations designated                                           
     ``emergency''......................           -1.29           -1.29
                                         -------------------------------
      Subtotal, special spending offsets         (-1.93)         (-5.39)
                                         ===============================
Estimated Spending Over/Under Budget Cap           +2.45           -1.01
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The above exercise shows what can be done with a little 
accounting manipulation, converting the exact same bill from a 
$2.45 billion budget buster to a bill that is $1 billion under 
the budget.

                             invisible ink

    The main budget-busting gimmick used by the Republican 
leadership is quite simple. The Speaker simply ordered the 
Budget Committee Chairman to instruct the Congressional Budget 
Office to look the other way and not count nearly $3.5 billion 
of military spending it had planned to score against this bill 
(so-called ``directed scoring'').
    This is truly ironic. Just a little over two years ago this 
Republican leadership shut down the Government over this same 
issue, only from the other side. They created a political 
firestorm over their non-negotiable demand that the President 
use only spending estimates of the CBO when negotiating a 
budget deal. At that time, they insisted on ``no smoke and 
mirrors'' and no ``wiggle room.'' Today their high-sounding 
rhetoric appears a bit hollow as this same Republican 
leadership ``wiggles'' out from under the budget caps that they 
themselves wrote into law.
    This is actually the second large spending bill this year 
in which the Republican leadership has used this ``invisible 
ink'' technique to add billions in extra spending. The recent 
highway bill unfolded under a similar scenario, when the 
Republicans decided to cut off disability payments for veterans 
with smoking-related illnesses. Not only did the Republican 
leadership decree that disabled veterans must pay part of the 
price for a bloated highway bill (characterized as a ``Hog'' by 
some Republicans), it also ordered the CBO to ignore its 
professional judgment and count this provision as saving $6.5 
billion more than it projected.
    All told, in the last month this Republican leadership has 
used smoke and mirrors accounting tactics to shovel an extra 
$10 billion in highway and military spending above the budget 
caps they pledged to keep. Much of this extra spending is for 
unproductive pork barrel projects in the states represented by 
this leadership. It is little wonder that Sen. John McCain, one 
of the lone Republican members left who still vigorously 
opposes pork barrel spending, is quoted by the Associated Press 
to have said the following at the conclusion of the last 
congressional session:

          It was my party that promised in 1994 that we would 
        stop these practices, it's getting steadily worse * * * 
        It's the same old mutual back scratching that we've 
        seen in years past. (AP, 11-24-97)

                           ship sale windfall

    This bill also invents a brand new legislative sleight of 
hand shifting the accounting for the sale of $637 million worth 
of surplus Navy ships so that proceeds can be spent again 
instead of being applied to pay down the national debt. Under 
traditional budget accounting, proceeds from the sale of an 
asset are not allowed to be spent again by an agency. They are 
instead credited to the General Fund of the Treasury to buy 
down the national debt.
    But Section 8102 of this bill changes this long held 
practice. It mandates the sale, grant, or lease of 48 Navy 
ships to 11 countries and then spending the proceeds on other 
military spending items. These ships (mainly frigates and 
destroyers) will go to the following countries:
        Country                                          Number of ships
Turkey............................................................    14
Greece............................................................    11
Taiwan............................................................    10
Brazil............................................................     3
Chile.............................................................     2
Mexico............................................................     2
Spain.............................................................     2
Argentina.........................................................     1
Philippines.......................................................     1
Portugal..........................................................     1
Venezuela.........................................................     1

    This new spending gimmick is cause for concern not only 
from the budget perspective of allowing more backdoor spending, 
but from the global national security perspective as well.
    It is unsettling to create a very large fiscal incentive 
for the Pentagon to spread its lethal technology around the 
world. Under this approach, the more sophisticated weapons the 
Pentagon can sell to other countries, the more it can spend on 
its own weaponry. This is a highly counterproductive policy in 
this post-cold war world in which most policy makers consider 
arms proliferation as the number one threat to world peace and 
stability. I especially question the wisdom of pouring gasoline 
on the flames in the Eastern Mediterranean region right now by 
selling a substantial number of warships to Greece and to 
Turkey at bargain basement prices. With tensions increasing 
over Cyprus and in the Balkans, giving the Pentagon a large 
incentive to pour more arms into this region is bad policy.

            Y2K/Information Security Emergency Appropriation

    This bill also contains a large $1.6 billion emergency 
appropriation to support efforts of the Defense department and 
the Intelligence Agencies to modify its critical computer 
systems to handle the Year 2000 (Y2K) date change and to better 
secure its computer systems from unwanted intruders. These 
funds are added above the budget and above the budget caps 
enacted into law last year.
    The Y2K issue is truly a national security priority and I 
strongly support this appropriation. But the question must once 
again be asked: Why does the Republican leadership appear to be 
following a double standard by not paying for this emergency 
appropriation with other spending reductions?
    Just a month ago, House Republican leaders insisted on 
rescinding $2.35 billion in housing assistance funds for the 
poor and the elderly in order to pay for needed emergency 
disaster relief around the country. This large housing cut, if 
not restored in full for Fiscal Year 1999, will put more than 
900,000 elderly and poor people in jeopardy of losing their 
homes this coming year.
    In this bill, we have another large emergency 
appropriation, but this time it is not paid for with other 
spending reductions.
    By its deeds, this Republican Congress has said that it is 
willing to play Russian roulette with the homes of 900,000 
Americans in order to remain faithful to a Republican Party 
budget principle, but it will ignore that same principle to 
protect defense contractors. This is a morally bankrupt policy.
    When making judgments about emergency spending, I would 
propose Congress get back to adhering to the principles spelled 
out by the Bush Administration in 1990 when the emergency 
concept was first conceived. Instead of picking and choosing 
among political favorites--punishing some groups of Americans 
and rewarding others--the Bush principle deems an emergency 
appropriation justified if it supports a high priority need 
that was unforeseen, unplanned, and unbudgeted. I think these 
are reasonable guidelines whether for domestic, defense, or 
international programs. In this case, I believe the Committee's 
recommendation for an emergency appropriation of $1.6 billion 
for Y2K repairs meets the test and I support it.

        military budget is capped by congress not the president

    Many proponents of this bill believe that our military is 
under-funded. They give strong and impassioned speeches blaming 
the President for not proposing military funding levels they 
believe to be adequate. But proponents of more military 
spending choose to ignore a very important fact. The 
President's military budget is capped by the Balanced Budget 
Act that most of them voted for less than a year ago.
    The Balanced Budget Act set into law discretionary spending 
caps for the next five years. All Members knew when they choose 
to vote for this Act that it called for continuing a declining 
level of defense spending through 2002, whether measured 
against inflation or measured against GDP. The law they voted 
for set into place military spending (outlay) levels that drop 
as a percentage of GDP from 3.4% in FY 1997 to 3.0% in FY 2002. 
The FY 2002 defense budget (outlays) called for under that Act 
will be about $25 billion or 8.2 percent short of what is 
expected to be needed to keep up with inflation since FY 1998.
    The situation for non-defense discretionary programs is far 
worse. The fiscal year 2002 outlay cap for our critical non-
defense programs, as modified by the House Budget Resolution, 
is projected to be $51 billion or 16 percent below the level 
needed to keep pace with inflation since FY 1998.
    The fact is that the Republican Balanced Budget Act sets 
discretionary spending levels that will not be supported over 
time by the American People or by Congress. This bill proves 
it. The Republican Leadership has repudiated its own budget 
policies and has sanctioned spending nearly $4.4 billion more 
than the total specified for 1999 under the Balanced Budget 
Act. The pressure to subvert the Balanced Budget Act will only 
get worse in the next several years because the Balanced Budget 
Act spending caps require much deeper discretionary spending 
cuts in the years ahead.

  Republican Leadership Should Be Consistent When Subverting Spending 
                                  Caps

    The moral test will be whether this Republican leadership 
will choose to look the other way as it did on this bill when 
appropriations bills for our critical domestic programs begin 
to move through the process. The same budget gimmickry employed 
for this bill can also be used for education programs, 
biomedical research, National Parks, clean water programs, 
crime prevention programs, agricultural programs, scientific 
research, housing assistance for the elderly, and veterans 
health care programs that directly effect the quality of life 
in America. To date I see no sign that this Republican 
leadership intends to give the same relief to our critical 
programs that help all American citizens that it gives to 
programs of importance to defense contractors.

              cut military waste before adding more money

    Despite the pleas of some close to the military that the 
Pentagon is having trouble living on a quarter of a trillion 
dollars a year, public opinion polls show that the public looks 
askance at more military spending. This should not be 
surprising. The public knows what some in Washington refuse to 
see, that there are still massive amounts of wasteful, 
inefficient, or totally unnecessary military spending that 
should be cleaned up first before consideration is given to 
adding more funding.
    For instance, all agree that the military has far more 
facilities than it needs. Even after completion of several 
rounds of base closures, the Pentagon calculates that it still 
has a 23% excess base capacity. This drains off billions in 
unnecessary expenditures to keep these bases open. The reason 
more bases aren't being closed is that Congressional Members 
with parochial interests to keep unneeded bases open sit on the 
committees that must decide on the process for closure. But as 
``Archy the cockroach'' said to ``Mehitabel the cat'': hells 
bells mehitabel that's just an explanation not an excuse. Limp 
excuses have been offered as to why a new base closure round 
cannot be allowed to go forward. And it is Members from these 
same committees who call for more tax dollars to support 
military spending for these unneeded bases.
    The public also sees reports of the Pentagon being unable 
to track more than $10 billion of its disbursements against 
specific contracts. Other reports from the GAO charge the 
Pentagon with major deficiencies in keeping track of its $1.2 
trillion inventory of property, plant, and equipment, to 
include major weapons systems that cannot be unaccounted for.
    And of course we all still see reports that the Pentagon is 
still paying $75 for 57-cent screws and $38,000 for $1,500 
worth of aircraft springs.
    For all of the time and money spent on investigations in 
this Congress, there is a cold silence when it comes to serious 
congressional oversight to force the financial belt tightening 
that should occur at the Pentagon.

                        C-130 Transport Aircraft

    In fact, this Congress seems to have a much bigger desire 
to add to low priority military spending than to get rid of it. 
Last year, excesses in this bill sponsored in the Senate earned 
the Senate majority leader an ``Oinker'' award entitled 
``Piracy on the Potomac'' from the Citizens Against Government 
Waste. The prime candidate for this year's award should be the 
sponsor of the $431 million added in this bill for seven C-130 
aircraft that were not requested by the Pentagon. This is a 
continuation of a past practice of adding substantial sums for 
these planes that are built in Georgia.
    The C-130 situation is best summed up by Senator John 
McCain, in his Additional Views printed as part of the Senate 
Armed Services Committee Report (105-189) accompanying the FY 
1999 Defense Authorization Bill. Senator McCain commented on 
the Senate authorization of four C-130J aircraft as follows:

          The problem of continued procurement of C-130 
        aircraft despite an enormous surplus of such platforms 
        in the Air Force inventory solely to provide federal 
        tax dollars for specific congressional districts is 
        worse thanever. During the very time when it is 
incumbent upon Congress to deal responsibly with the budget for 
national defense, the addition of four C-130J aircraft (2 C-130Js, 1 
EC-130J, 1 WC-130J) is irresponsible. To add these aircraft in the same 
bill the accompanying report for which is highly critical of the C-130J 
program for cost overruns and development delays is a disgrace. These 
aircraft represent real money, over $200 million, at a time when the 
majority party is supposed to be concerned about inadequate force 
structure, readiness, missile defense, counterproliferation, and the 
federal deficit, this addition completely defies logic and portrays 
Congress in the worst light. (P.445)

    The Senate Armed Services Committee Report (105-189) 
accompanying the FY 1999 Senate Defense Authorization Bill said 
the following about the C-130J program:

          The committee views with concern the slow progress of 
        the C-130J program, the increased expense of developing 
        the aircraft, which could be borne by the Department in 
        higher prices for production C-130Js, and notes the 
        Department's failure to provide a report on 
        remanufacture of existing C-130 airframes. The C-130J 
        program was initiated by the manufacturer as a 
        commercial development, which would produce an 
        inexpensive, pragmatic, and rapidly developed follow-on 
        to previous C-130 models. Development costs were to be 
        spread over the first 120 aircraft sold, rather than 
        billed to the government as a developmental program. 
        Development costs were initially estimated at $350 
        million, and introduction of the new model forecast to 
        begin in mid-1997. Since the program is a commercial 
        one, exact cost accounting has not been available to 
        the Department to date. However, it has been estimated 
        that the program has cost more than $900 million and is 
        over two years behind schedule. Considering the delay 
        in the development of the aircraft and reported 
        overruns in developmental costs, the committee views 
        with concern the future of the C-130J program. (pp. 
        108-109)

    The unit cost of the C-130J is astounding. We now are 
appropriating about $60 million per plane, which is higher than 
the $48 million flyaway cost for a state of the art F-15E 
fighter. Costs may even go higher as press reports indicate 
that C-130J development problems related to ice formation on 
the vertical tail might still exist. Of the reported 28 planes 
on order by the U.S. military, not one has been delivered. A 
Lockheed spokesman explained these delays in this way:

          The program is behind schedule primarily because we 
        underestimated the complexity of the flight test 
        program. The C-130J is essentially a new aircraft 
        requiring a more extensive flight test program than 
        originally envisioned. (April 17, 1998, Bloomberg 
        News).

    Hard questions should be asked as to how this program was 
allowed to evolve from what was supposed to be a routine 
upgrade to a major development effort for what a Lockheed 
official terms a ``new aircraft.'' Questions should also be 
asked whether the U.S. military is bearing the brunt of the 
enormous cost overruns for this program in order to suppress 
the price to foreign buyers. And serious consideration should 
be given to a May 8, 1998 Defense Department report which 
projected that the Air Force could remanufacture seven existing 
C-130 E and C-130 H airframes into new ``X'' configurations 
that fully meet all military requirements for the cost of a 
single ``J'' aircraft.
    It certainly seems reasonable that with the substantial 
cost increases for the J model, the continuing development 
problems, and the substantial number of planes already on 
order, the $431 million in this bill for more C-130J aircraft 
could be put to higher use.
    I proposed in full committee an amendment to transfer funds 
in the bill earmarked for four of the seven C-130J planes and 
use those funds to
          (1) restore funding for three Navy F/A 18 E/F 
        aircraft the committee had cut out from the budget 
        request to make room for unrequested C-130J aircraft; 
        and
          (2) start a $35 million C-130X remanufacture program 
        to upgrade existing C-130 planes instead of buy 
        expensive new models.
    While this amendment was not agreed to, I was able to 
secure a promise from subcommittee leaders that they will 
ensure that the three Navy F/A 18 E/F aircraft are restored in 
conference.

                  Why Is The Federal Budget Balanced?

    Fiscal Year 1998 will mark the first balanced budget in 29 
years. On May 5, 1998 the Congressional Budget Office revised 
its surplus estimate once gain predicting that the 1998 surplus 
will be between $43 billion and $63 billion. The OMB's Mid-
Session Review issued on May 26, 1998 predicts a 1998 surplus 
of $39 billion. This is a remarkable turnabout given that as 
recently as FY 1992, the federal deficit was $290 billion. This 
surplus--
          is the culmination of six years in a row of 
        successively improved fiscal balances, the longest such 
        period of improvement in history;
          will cause the debt burden to shrink for the fourth 
        year in a row (i.e., debt held by the public as a share 
        of GDP); and
          will cause mandatory net interest payments to start 
        shrinking as a share of the budget and as a share of 
        the economy--leaving more room in the budget for 
        productive activities.
    Soon after these new surplus projections were released, the 
Majority Party issued a flurry of press releases making the 
claim that so-called ``Balanced Budget'' legislation and other 
bills enacted by Congress last year are responsible for this 
turnabout. Such claims are simply not credible. Just as it took 
years of fiscal imprudence in the 1980's and early 1990's to 
build up a $290 billion deficit by 1992, it took years of 
adhering to disciplined and responsible fiscal and monetary 
policies since 1992 to dig out of this deficit position.

            WHAT CAUSED THE 1998 SURPLUS?--CBO'S EXPLANATION

    So what are the precise reasons for this dramatic 
turnaround since President Bush left office with a $290 billion 
deficit? The CBO has issued data that answers this question 
objectively and decisively.
    According to the CBO data, the remarkable fiscal turnabout 
has been due to three primary factors:
          An improved economy with six years of sustained 
        growth;
          Legislation passed by the 103rd Democratic Congress 
        in 1993 and 1994;
          A slower rise in the cost of medical care (e.g., 
        Medicare/Medicaid) than projected.
    Conspicuously absent from CBO's analysis of reasons for the 
1998 surplus is the fiscal effect of laws enacted by Republican 
congresses between 1995 and the present date. The reason for 
this is that the CBO actually totes up legislation enacted in 
the period that Republicans have been in control of Congress as 
raising the deficit by more than it cut in 1998. The sum total 
of laws passed by the 104th and 105th Republican congresses 
will cost the Treasury roughly $11,000,000,000 more in FY 1998 
than they saved.
    In January 1993 when President Clinton took office, CBO 
made the alarming prediction that the federal deficit for the 
next five years would go through the roof--to $357 billion by 
fiscal 1998. This was despite the fact that the economy was 
expected to improve over that five-year timeframe. Since then, 
we have been able to wipe out this $357 billion deficit and 
build a surplus of $43 billion--a net change of $400 billion.
    The CBO attributes this astounding turnaround to the 
following major reasons:

Major reasons for the FY 1998 surplus

                        [In billions of dollars]

                                                            CBO estimate
Projected FY 1998 Deficit (Jan. 1993 CBO forecast)............      $357
Major Factors for Fiscal Change Since 1992:
    Improved economy (revenues higher/entitlement costs lower 
      than 1993 forecast) (min)...............................      -210
    Democratic Congress (budgetary effect of legislation 
      passed in 1993 & 1994)..................................      -141
    Health care costs (lower cost increases for Medicare/other 
      health care programs than 1993 forecast)................       -60
                    --------------------------------------------------------------
                    ____________________________________________________

      Total Deficit Reduction.................................      -411
Republican Congresses (budgetary effect of legislation passed 
    1995-present).............................................       +11
                    --------------------------------------------------------------
                    ____________________________________________________

      Total Fiscal Change.....................................      -400

    Despite claims to the contrary, CBO data show that the 
combined fiscal effect of the laws enacted by the 104th and 
105th Republican Congresses is to add $11,000,000,000 more to 
the deficit than it cut in Fiscal Year 1998.
    Clearly the CBO numbers confirm that the major credit for 
creating the 1998 surplus must go to actions of the 103rd 
Democratic Congress, which not only produced real net savings 
of $141 billion, but created the conditions necessary to adopt 
pro-growth monetary policies that have been very successful. 
The centerpiece of this effort, the deficit reduction bill 
passed in 1993, was described as follows by Federal Reserve 
Chairman Greenspan:

          There's no question that the impact of bringing the 
        deficit down [through the 1993 budget bill] set in 
        place a series of events--a virtuous cycle, if I may 
        put it that way--which has led us to where we are. (In 
        testimony before the House Budget Committee, March 4, 
        1998.)

    The facts show that the 1998 budget is balanced despite 
Republican legislative efforts, not because of them.