Home > Committee Reports > 106th Congress > S. Rept. 106-292

S. Rept. 106-292 - NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2001 REPORT106th Congress (1999-2000)

Committee Report

Report Type:	Senate Report
Accompanies:	S.2549
Committees:	Senate Armed Services Committee

Report text available as:

TXT
PDF (PDF provides a complete and accurate display of this text.) Tip ?

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

NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2001

REPORT

[to accompany s. 2549]

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

together with

ADDITIONAL AND MINORITY VIEWS

----------

COMMITTEE ON ARMED SERVICES
UNITED STATES SENATE

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

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

NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION

ACT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2001

REPORT

[to accompany s. 2549]

together with

ADDITIONAL AND MINORITY VIEWS

__________

COMMITTEE ON ARMED SERVICES

UNITED STATES SENATE

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

__________

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

COMMITTEE ON ARMED SERVICES

(106th Congress, 2d Session)

JOHN WARNER, Virginia, Chairman
STROM THURMOND, South Carolina, CARL LEVIN, Michigan
Chairman Emeritus EDWARD M. KENNEDY, Massachusetts
JOHN McCAIN, Arizona JEFF BINGAMAN, New Mexico
BOB SMITH, New Hampshire ROBERT C. BYRD, West Virginia
JAMES M. INHOFE, Oklahoma CHARLES S. ROBB, Virginia
RICK SANTORUM, Pennsylvania JOSEPH I. LIEBERMAN, Connecticut
OLYMPIA J. SNOWE, Maine MAX CLELAND, Georgia
PAT ROBERTS, Kansas MARY L. LANDRIEU, Louisiana
WAYNE ALLARD, Colorado JACK REED, Rhode Island
TIM HUTCHINSON, Arkansas
JEFF SESSIONS, Alabama
Les Brownlee, Staff Director
David S. Lyles, Staff Director for the Minority

(II)

C O N T E N T S

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

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

_______

May 12, 2000.--Ordered to be printed

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

_______

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

R E P O R T

together with

ADDITIONAL AND MINORITY VIEWS

[To accompany S. 2549]

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

PURPOSE OF THE BILL

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

Committee overview and recommendations

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

Personnel

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

Readiness and Management Support

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

Military construction

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

Emerging Threats and Capabilities

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

Airland

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

Seapower

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

Strategic

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

Department of Energy National Security Programs

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

Explanation of funding summary

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

DIVISION A--DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE AUTHORIZATIONS

TITLE I--PROCUREMENT

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

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

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

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

Army transformation (sec. 112)

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

OTHER ARMY PROGRAMS

Army Aircraft

Utility aircraft

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

UH-60 Blackhawk

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

Longbow

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

Kiowa Warrior

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

Avionics support equipment

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

Aircrew integrated systems

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

Army Missile

Army tactical missile system-system summary

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

Stinger modifications

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

Weapons and Tracked Combat Vehicles

Carrier modifications

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

Breacher system modification

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

Heavy assault bridge system modifications

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

Machine gun, squad automatic weapon

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

Mark-19 grenade launcher

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

M4 carbine modifications

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

Army Ammunition

Procurement of ammunition, Army

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

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

Armament retooling and manufacturing support initiative

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

Other Army Procurement

Family of medium tactical vehicles

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

Weapons of Mass Destruction Civil Support Teams

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

Secure mobile anti-jam reliable tactical terminal

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

Army data distribution system

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

Area common user system modification program

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

Forward area air defense ground based sensor

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

Night vision

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

Forward area air defense command and control

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

Striker-command and control system

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

Standard integrated command post system

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

Lightweight maintenance enclosure

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

Roller, vibratory, self-propelled

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

Deployable universal combat earth mover

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

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

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

Arleigh Burke-class destroyer program (sec. 122)

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

Virginia-class submarine program (sec. 123)

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

ADC(X) ship program (sec. 124)

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

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

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

OTHER NAVY PROGRAMS

Navy Aircraft

Airborne low frequency sonar

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

SH-60 helicopters

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

CH-60 helicopters

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

UC-35 aircraft

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

C-40A aircraft

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

T-45 aircraft

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

Joint primary air training system

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

KC-130J

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

EA-6B aircraft automatic flight control system

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

AV-8B precision targeting pod

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

F-18 modifications

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

AH-1W series

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

H-1 series

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

P-3 aircraft modifications

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

Tactical aircraft moving map capability

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

Navy Weapons

Joint standoff weapon

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

Weapons industrial facilities

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

Mark 48 advanced capability torpedo modifications

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

Navy and Marine Corps Ammunition

Procurement of ammunition, Navy and Marine Corps

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

Laser-guided bomb components

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

Training ordnance

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

Navy Shipbuilding and Conversion

Shipbuilding overview

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

LHD-8 advance procurement

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

Other Navy Procurement

AN/WSN-7 inertial navigation system

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

Surveillance and security for military sealift ships

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

Integrated condition assessment system

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

AN/SPS-73(V) surface search radar

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

Side-scanning sonar for forward deployed minesweepers

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

Joint Engineering Data Management and Information Control System

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

Aviation life support

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

Gun fire control radar performance improvements

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

Cruiser smart ship

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

NULKA anti-ship missile decoy system

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

Civil engineering support equipment

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

Marine Corps Procurement

Night vision

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

Radio systems

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

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

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

OTHER AIR FORCE PROGRAMS

Air Force Aircraft

EC-130J

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

Joint primary aircraft training system

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

Joint surveillance and target attack radar system

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

B-52H aircraft modifications

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

A-10 aircraft integrated flight and fire control computer

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

F-15 aircraft modifications

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

F-16 aircraft modifications

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

C-17 simulator

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

Defense airborne reconnaissance program aircraft modifications

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

ALE-50 towed decoys

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

Compass Call

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

Defense airborne reconnaissance program

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

Air Force Missile

Global Positioning System

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

Titan space boosters

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

Medium launch vehicle

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

Air Force Ammunition

Procurement of ammunition, Air Force

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

Other Air Force Procurement

Combat training ranges

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

Night vision goggles

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

Advanced SEAL delivery system design enhancements

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

Special operations forces small arms and support equipment

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

Nuclear, Biological and Chemical Defense Enhancement Kits

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

Communications assistance for law enforcement act

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

SUBTITLE E--OTHER MATTERS

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

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

OTHER ITEMS OF INTEREST

Acquisition programs at the National Security Agency

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

Army aviation

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

C-5 aircraft upgrades

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

Electronic digital compass system

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

Single channel ground and airborne radio system

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

Soldier's portable on-system repair tool

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

SUBTITLE B--PROGRAM REQUIREMENTS, RESTRICTIONS, AND LIMITATIONS

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

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

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

DD-21 class destroyer program (sec. 213)

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

Delaying the Initial Operating Capability

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

Maintaining Key Capabilities

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

One Year Delay

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

Extending the Construction Performance Period

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

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

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

F-22 aircraft program (sec. 214)

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

Joint strike fighter (sec. 215)

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

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

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

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

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

Air Force Unmanned Combat Air Vehicle (UCAV)

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

Navy Unmanned Combat Air Vehicle

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

Army Future Combat Systems (FCS)

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

Army space control technology (sec. 218)

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

Russian American Observation Satellites program (sec. 219)

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

Joint Biological Defense Program (sec. 220)

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

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

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

SUBTITLE C--OTHER MATTERS

Mobile offshore base (sec. 241)

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

Air Force science and technology planning (sec. 242)

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

Counter-terrorism basic research

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

Composite materials

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

Advanced missile composite components

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

Smart truck initiative

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

Portable hybrid electric power system

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

Thermoelectric power generation

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

Operational support

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

Equipment readiness

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

Fuel cell auxiliary power units

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

Big Crow program office

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

Army Space and Missile Defense Command Simulations

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

Aero-acoustics instrumentation

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

Acoustic technology research

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

Missile defense flight experiment

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

Radar power technology

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

Scramjet acoustic combustion enhancement

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

Space and missile defense battle lab

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

Supercluster distributed memory technology

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

Tactical High Energy Laser

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

Anti-malarial research

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

Electronic warfare development

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

Threat simulator development

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

Multiple launch rocket system product improvement program

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

Joint Land Attack Cruise Missile Defense Elevated Netted Sensor

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

Communications and networking technologies

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

Free electron laser

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

Biodegradable polymers

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

Bioenvironmental hazards research

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

Nontraditional warfare initiatives

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

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

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

Cognitive research

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

Ceramic and carbon based composites

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

Nanoscale sensor research

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

Littoral area acoustic demonstrations

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

Computational engineering design

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

Advanced water-jet technology

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

Composite helicopter hangar door

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

Composite modules for ship hull construction

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

Laser welding and cutting

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

Supply chain best practices

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

Virtual test bed for reconfigurable ship

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

Ocean modeling for mine and submarine warfare

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

Marine Corps advanced technology transition

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

Integrated combat weapons system for mine countermeasures ships

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

Trident SSGN design

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

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

Enhanced performance electric motor brush technology

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

Submarine composite sail

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

Joint command and control ship

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

Shipboard simulators for Marine Corps operations

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

Navy common command and decision system

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

Advanced amphibious assault vehicle

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

Marine corps ground combat/support system

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

Extended range guided munition

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

Nonlethal research and technology development

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

Navy collaborative integrated information technology initiative

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

Parametric airborne dipping sonar

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

Multi-mission helicopter upgrade development

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

Power node control centers

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

Ship manpower reduction initiative

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

SPY-3 and volume search radars

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

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

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

Submarine antenna technology improvement

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

Submarine common architecture

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

Advanced tactical software for submarines

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

NULKA anti-ship missile decoy system

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

Navy single integrated human resources strategy

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

Marine Corps research university

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

Reentry system applications program

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

Joint tactical combat training system

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

F-14 tactical reconnaissance

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

Software interoperability process tools

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

Satellite communications systems integration initiative

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

Distributed engineering plant

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

Laser processing tools

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

Resin systems for Air Force applications

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

Thermal protection systems

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

Aeronautical research

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

Polyphenylene benzobisoxozole membrane fuel cell

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

Variable displacement vane pump

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

High frequency active auroral research

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

Space survivability

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

Aluminum aerostructures

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

Hyperspectral research

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

Fiber optical control technology

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

Low cost launch technology

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

Micro-satellite technology

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

Miniature satellite threat reporting system

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

Next generation composite launch vehicle payload fairings and shrouds

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

Solar orbital transfer vehicle

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

Space maneuver vehicle

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

Upper stage flight experiment

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

Space Based Laser program

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

Airborne laser program

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

Rocket systems launch program

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

Wideband gapfiller military satellite communications

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

B-2 advanced technology bomber

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

Milstar satellite communications

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

F-15E squadrons

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

Hyperspectral system development

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

Extended range cruise missile

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

Joint surveillance and target attack radar system

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

Lighthouse cyber security

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

Dragon U-2

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

Advanced photonic composites research

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

Infrasound detection capability basic research

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

Personnel research initiative

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

Defense experimental program to stimulate competitive research

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

Chemical and biological defense basic research

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

Ballistic Missile Defense Organization funding and programmatic
guidance

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

Support Technology

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

National Missile Defense

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

Navy Theater Wide

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

BMD Technical Operations

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

International Cooperative Programs

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

BMD Targets

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

Bio-defense research

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

Hybrid sensor suite

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

High definition systems

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

Three dimensional structures research

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

Biological agent sensor technologies

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

Blast mitigation testing

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

Facial recognition access control technology

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

Chemical and Biological Incident Response Force detector technologies

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

Consequence Management Information System

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

Reactive materials

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

Complex systems design

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

Competitive sustainment initiative

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

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

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

Integrated data environment technology

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

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

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

Next generation anthrax vaccine

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

Remote Ordnance Neutralization System

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

Cyber attack sensing and warning

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

Information Operations Technology Center

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

Trusted RUBIX

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

Virtual worlds initiative

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

Intelligent spatial technologies for smart mapping systems

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

Joint Mapping Tool Kit

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

Information assurance testbed

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

Joint course of action analysis and targeting support for information
operations

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

Advanced lightweight grenade launcher

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

Management reform for Department of Defense test and evaluation centers

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

Augmented reality fire-fighting training

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

OTHER ITEMS OF INTEREST

Aircraft carrier modernization

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

Advanced ship hull demonstrators

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

Crusader

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

Future ship technology research and development

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

Joint training and experimentation

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

Joint operational test bed system

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

Maritime patrol aircraft

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

Patriot theater missile defense

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

Prophylactic pharmaceuticals

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

Radiation hardened electronics investment strategy

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

Small arms fire control system

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

Transition of successful research projects into the acquisition system

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

Armed Forces Retirement Home (sec. 303)

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

SUBTITLE B--PROGRAM REQUIREMENTS, RESTRICTIONS, AND LIMITATIONS

Impact aid for children with disabilities (sec. 311)

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

Joint Warfighting Capabilities Assessment Teams (sec. 312)

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

SUBTITLE C--HUMANITARIAN AND CIVIC ASSISTANCE

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

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

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

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

SUBTITLE D--DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE INDUSTRIAL FACILITIES

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

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

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

Centers of industrial and technical excellence (sec. 332)

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

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

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

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

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

Manufacturing technical assistance pilot program

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

SUBTITLE E--ENVIRONMENTAL PROVISIONS

Environmental restoration accounts (sec. 341)

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Environmental restoration activities (sec. 347)

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

Ship disposal project (sec. 348)

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

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

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

Report on Plasma Energy Pyrolysis System (sec. 350)

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

SUBTITLE F--OTHER MATTERS

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Investment of commissary trust revolving fund (sec. 368)

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

Economic procurement of distilled spirits (sec. 369)

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

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

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

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

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

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

The committee recommends a provision that would reauthorize
a military service to accept payments for the use of domestic
military and shared use airfields by civil aircraft and to use
those payments for the operation and maintenance of the
airfield. The pilot program would be authorized through fiscal
year 2010.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

ADDITIONAL MATTERS OF INTEREST

Army

Real property maintenance

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

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

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

Excess carryover-defense working capital fund activities

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

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

Foreign currency fluctuation

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

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

Civilian personnel pay in excess of requirements

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

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

Army equipment maintenance

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

Battlefield mobility enhancement system

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

Army aviation spares

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

Adjustments to Junior Reserve Officers Training Corps

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

Navy

Navy spares

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

Ship depot maintenance

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

Oceanography

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

Training range upgrades

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

Adjustments to Junior Reserve Officers Training Corps

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

Navy information technology center

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

US Navy Call Center

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

Marine Corps

USMC initial issue

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

USMC equipment maintenance

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

Adjustments to Junior Reserve Officers Training Corps

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

Air Force

Air Force base operations

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

Adjustments to Junior Reserve Officers Training Corps

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

Air Force readiness spares packages

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

Air Force nuclear, biological and chemical defense

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

Defense-Wide

Mobility enhancements

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

Mechanization of Contract Administration Service (MOCAS)

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

Partnership for Peace Program (Warsaw Initiative)

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

Defense Environmental Security Corporate Information Management Program

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

Domestic preparedness center

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

Cultural and historic activities

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

Defense Travel System

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

Command information superiority architecture program

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

Guard and Reserve Components

Air Force Reserve equipment maintenance

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

National Guard initial issue

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

Distributed mission trainer

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

Miscellaneous

Overseas humanitarian, disaster, and civic affairs

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

OTHER ITEMS OF INTEREST

Charlestown Naval Auxiliary Landing Field, Charlestown, Rhode Island

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

Commander-in-Chiefs Initiative Fund

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

Inventory of financial management and feeder systems

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

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

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

Mechanization of Contract Administration Service

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

National Defense Center for Environmental Excellence

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

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

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

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

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

SUBTITLE A--ACTIVE FORCES

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

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

SUBTITLE B--RESERVE FORCES

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

SUBTITLE C--OTHER MATTERS RELATING TO PERSONNEL STRENGTHS

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

SUBTITLE D--AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS

Authorization of appropriations for military personnel (sec. 431)

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

SUBTITLE A--OFFICER PERSONNEL POLICY

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

SUBTITLE B--JOINT OFFICER MANAGEMENT

Joint officer management (sec. 521-528)

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

SUBTITLE C--EDUCATION AND TRAINING

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

SUBTITLE D--MATTERS RELATING TO RECRUITING

Army recruiting pilot programs (sec. 551)

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

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

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

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

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

SUBTITLE E--OTHER MATTERS

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

OTHER ITEMS OF INTEREST

Automated in- and out-processing of military personnel

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

Funeral honors for members of the uniformed services

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

Information related to alternatives to the Survivor Benefit Plan

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

Prevention of alcohol-related incidents

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

Study on the use of peyote by military personnel

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

SUBTITLE A--PAY AND ALLOWANCES

Increase in basic pay for Fiscal Year 2001 (sec. 601)
The committee recommends a provision that would waive
section 1009 of title 37, United States Code, and increase the
rates of basic pay for members of the uniformed services by 3.7
percent. This increase would be effective January 1, 2001.
Corrections for basic pay tables (sec. 602)
The committee recommends a provision that would make
several technical corrections to the basic pay tables for the
uniformed services. The recommended provision would change the
pay table as it pertains to monthly basic pay for members of
the Joint Chiefs of Staff and the Commandant of the Coast Guard
from $12,441.00 to $12,488.70. Since the pay of these officers
is capped under other provisions of law, there will be no
change in the pay these officers receive. The recommended
provision would also change the monthly basic pay for members
serving as Sergeant Major of the Army, Master Chief Petty
Office of the Navy, Chief Master Sergeant of the Air Force,
Sergeant Major of the Marine Corps, or Master Chief Petty
Officer of the Coast Guard from $4,701.00 to $4,719.00. The
recommended changes would be effective July 1, 2000.
Pay in lieu of allowance for funeral honors duty (sec. 603)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
the secretary of a military department to pay a reserve
component member who performs funeral honors duty using either
the stipend authorized in the National Defense Authorization
Act for Fiscal Year 2000 or one day of basic pay, as if the
funeral honor duty was a unit training assembly.
Clarification of service excluded in computation of creditable service
as a Marine Corps officer (sec. 604)
The committee recommends a provision that would clarify
that the limitation on creditable service computation as a
result of accepting tuition assistance applies only to service
as an enlisted member and not as a commissioned officer.
Calculation of Basic Allowance for Housing (sec. 605)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
the Secretary of Defense to prescribe the Basic Allowance for
Housing based on the cost of adequate housing for civilians of
comparable income levels in the area at rates that would reduce
or eliminate the member's out-of-pocket expenses. The
recommended provision would eliminate the current requirement
that 15 percent of the estimated housing expenses for military
personnel be paid by the service member.
Eligibility of members in grade E-4 to receive basic allowance for
housing while on sea duty (sec. 606)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
the payment of the basic allowance for housing to members
serving in the grade of E-4, without dependents, who are
assigned to sea duty in ships. The recommended provision would
authorize the Secretary of the Navy to permit an E-4 assigned
to a ship to live off-base and receive the basic allowance for
housing while that ship is in port.
Personal money allowance for the senior enlisted members of the armed
forces (sec. 607)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
payment of a personal money allowance of $2,000 per year to the
Sergeant Major of the Army, the Master Chief Petty Officer of
the Navy, the Chief Master Sergeant of the Air Force, the
Sergeant Major of the Marine Corps, and the Master Chief Petty
Officer of the Coast Guard. The personal money allowance is
intended to defray expenses incurred in connection with
official duties not reimbursable through the use of Official
Representation Funds. The Personal Money Allowance is currently
authorized for certain senior officers.
Increased uniform allowances for officers (sec. 608)
The committee recommends a provision that would increase
the initial uniform allowance for officers from $200 to $400
and the additional uniform allowance for officers from $100 to
$200.
Cabinet-level authority to prescribe requirements and allowance for
clothing of enlisted members (sec. 609)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
the Secretary of Defense, and the Secretary of Transportation
with respect to the Coast Guard when it is not operating as a
service of the Navy, to prescribe the clothing to be furnished
annually to enlisted members and to establish the amount of the
cash allowance paid when the prescribed clothing is not
provided.

SUBTITLE B--BONUSES AND SPECIAL INCENTIVE PAYS

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

The committee recommends a provision that would extend,
until December 1, 2001, the authority to pay the special pay
for critically short wartime health care specialists in the
Selected Reserve, the Selected Reserve reenlistment bonuses,
the Selected Reserve enlistment bonuses, the special pay for
enlisted members assigned to certain high priority units in the
Selected Reserve, the Selected Reserve affiliation bonus, the
Ready Reserve enlistment and reenlistment bonus, the repayment
of education loans for certain health professionals who serve
in the Selected Reserve, and the prior service enlistment
bonus.

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

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

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

The committee recommends a provision that would extend,
until December 1, 2001, the authority to pay the aviation
officer retention bonus, the reenlistment bonus for active
members, the enlistment bonuses for critical skills, the Army
enlistment bonus, the special pay for nuclear qualified
officers who extend the period of active service, the nuclear
career accession bonus and the nuclear career annual incentive
bonus.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Career sea pay (sec. 619)

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

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

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

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

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

SUBTITLE C--TRAVEL AND TRANSPORTATION ALLOWANCES

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

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

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

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

Expansion of funded student travel (sec. 633)

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

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

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

SUBTITLE D--RETIREMENT BENEFITS

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

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

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

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

Participation in thrift savings plan (sec. 643)

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

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

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

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

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

SUBTITLE E--OTHER MATTERS

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

OTHER ITEMS OF INTEREST

Adjustments to the Basic Allowance for Housing

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

SUBTITLE A--SENIOR HEALTH CARE

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

SUBTITLE B--TRICARE PROGRAM

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

SUBTITLE C--JOINT INITIATIVES WITH DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS

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

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

Pharmaceutical identification technology (sec. 722)

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

Medical informatics (sec. 723)

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

SUBTITLE D--OTHER MATTERS

Permanent authority for certain pharmaceutical benefits (sec. 731)

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Patient care reporting and management system (sec. 739)

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

Health care management demonstration program (sec. 740)

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

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

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

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

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

OTHER ITEMS OF INTEREST

Consultation with schools of pharmacy and nursing

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

Financial assistance for those beneficiaries requiring animal
assistance

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

Health care benefits for retirees living overseas

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

Implementation of Department of Defense and Veterans Affairs Department
sharing initiatives

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

Notification of persons affected by unanticipated adverse outcomes of
medical care

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

Special pays for military health care professionals

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

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

Tracking of information technology purchases (sec. 804)

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Navy-Marine Corps Intranet (sec. 810)

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

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

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

Defense acquisition workforce (sec. 812)

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

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

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

OTHER ITEMS OF INTEREST

Application of Cost Accounting Standards to universities

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

Appropriate use of the government purchase card

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

Availability of contractor past performance information

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

Contracts for ancillary commercial services

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

Online auctioning

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

Performance goals and measures for quality of equipment and other
products

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

Polyacrylonitrile carbon fibers

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

Procurements from the small arms production industrial base

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

Risk management in the acquisition of major systems

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

Technical data rights for items developed exclusively at private
expense

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

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

Quadrennial National Defense Panel (sec. 904)

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

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

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

Network centric warfare (sec. 906)

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Consolidation of certain Navy gift funds (sec. 912)

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

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

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

SUBTITLE A--FINANCIAL MATTERS

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

SUBTITLE B--COUNTER-DRUG ACTIVITIES

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

Drug Interdiction & Counterdrug Activities, Operations and Maintenance

[In thousands of dollars]

[May not add due to rounding]

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Airborne Reconnaissance Low

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

National Guard counter-drug activities

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

Plan Colombia & Forward Operating Location construction

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

Drug Enforcement Agency transportation support

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

Caribbean law enforcement support

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

SUBTITLE C--STRATEGIC FORCES

Revised nuclear posture review (sec. 1015)

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

SUBTITLE D--MISCELLANEOUS REPORTING REQUIREMENTS

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

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

Joint Requirements Oversight Council (sec. 1022)

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

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

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

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

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

Management review of defense logistics agency (sec. 1025)

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

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

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

SUBTITLE E--INFORMATION SECURITY

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

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

Information security scholarship program (sec. 1042)

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

SUBTITLE F--OTHER MATTERS

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Donation of civil war cannon (sec. 1059)

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

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

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

OTHER ITEMS OF INTEREST

Department of Defense export control procedures

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

Firefighting equipment

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

Peacekeeper intercontinental ballistic missile

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

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

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

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

Leave for crews of certain vessels (sec. 1110)

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Transfers of naval vessels to foreign countries (sec. 1201)
The committee recommends a provision that would transfer to
various countries: on a combined lease-sale basis, four Kidd-
class destroyers; on a grant basis, two Thomaston-class dock
landing ships; on a grant basis, four Garcia-class frigates; on
a combined lease-sale basis, two Oliver Hazard Perry-class
frigates; on a grant basis, one Dixie-class destroyer tender;
on a grant basis, two Knox-class frigates; and, on a combined
lease-sale basis, two Oliver Hazard Perry-class frigates. The
Chief of Naval Operations has certified, pursuant to statutory
requirement, that such naval vessels are not essential to the
defense of the United States. Any expense incurred by the
United States in connection with these transfers would be
charged to the recipient. The provision would also:
(1) direct that, to the maximum extent possible, the
Secretary of the Navy shall require, as a condition of
transfer, that repair and refurbishment associated with
the transfer be accomplished in a shipyard located in
the United States; and
(2) stipulate that the authority to transfer these
vessels will expire at the end of a two-year period
that begins on the date of enactment of the National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2001.
Support of United Nations-sponsored efforts to inspect and monitor
Iraqi weapons activities (sec. 1202)
The committee recommends a provision that extends, for one
year, the Department of Defense's authority to support United
Nations (UN)-sponsored inspection and monitoring efforts to
ensure full Iraqi compliance with its international obligations
to destroy its weapons of mass destruction and associated
delivery systems. The committee is troubled by Iraq's long-
standing suspension of UN inspection and monitoring missions,
and continued defiance of UN Security Council efforts to resume
weapons inspections. Despite the December 17, 1999 adoption by
the UN Security Council of Resolution 1284, which established
the United Nations Monitoring, Verification and Inspection
Commission (UNMOVIC) as the successor to the United Nations
Special Commission on Iraq (UNSCOM), Iraq refuses to comply
with this resolution and allow inspectors to resume operations
in Iraq. The committee continues to believe that it is
imperative that inspections of Iraq weapons sites resume as
soon as possible to ensure Iraqi compliance with the
disarmament obligations it accepted in 1991 at the end of the
Persian Gulf conflict.
Repeal of restriction preventing cooperative airlift support through
acquisition and cross servicing agreements (sec. 1203)
The committee recommends a provision to eliminate the
restriction in section 2350c of title 10, United States Code,
that allows the Secretary of Defense to enter into military
airlift agreements with allied countries only under the
authority of section 2350c. This provision would clear up any
ambiguity regarding the Secretary's authority to include
airlift in cross servicing agreements for ``. . . logistics
support, supplies, and services . . .'' under the authority of
section 2342, title 10, United States Code.
Western Hemisphere Institute for Professional Education and Training
(sec. 1204)
The U.S. Army School of the Americas has been subjected to
a great deal of controversy, mainly for the actions of a
relatively small number of individuals who were graduated from
the school many years ago. The committee is aware that the
school's curricula has undergone significant positive changes
in recent years. The committee believes that there continues to
be a need for an institution that would provide professional
education and training for the military, law enforcement and
civilian (governmental and non-governmental) personnel of the
Western Hemisphere.
The committee recommends a provision that would repeal the
statute authorizing the Army to operate the U.S. Army School of
the Americas and would authorize the Secretary of Defense to
operate a Western Hemisphere Institute for Professional
Education and Training. The institute would be operated for the
purpose of providing professional education and training to
military, law enforcement and civilian personnel of the Western
Hemisphere in areas such as leadership development, counterdrug
operations, peace support operations, and disaster relief. The
curricula of the institution would include, at a minimum, eight
hours of instruction relating to human rights, the rule of law,
due process, civilian control of the military, and the role of
the military in a democratic society. There would be a board of
visitors, including four members of Congress and six members
from academia, the religious community, and the human rights
community, to review the institute's curricula and instruction.
The board would submit an annual report to the Secretary of
Defense. The selection of foreign personnel to attend the
institute would be subject to the concurrence of the Secretary
of State. The Secretary of Defense would submit an annual
report toCongress detailing the activities of the institute
during the previous calendar year.

Biannual report on Kosovo peacekeeping (sec. 1205)

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

TITLE XXI--ARMY

Summary

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

OTHER ITEMS OF INTEREST

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

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

Summary

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

Summary

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

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

This section contains the list of authorized Air Force
construction projects for fiscal year 2001. The authorized
amounts are listed on an installation-by-installation basis.
The state list contained in this report is intended to be the
binding list of the specific projects authorized at each
location.

Family housing (sec. 2302)

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

Improvements to military family housing units (sec. 2303)

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

Authorization of appropriations, Air Force (sec. 2304)

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

Summary

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

OTHER ITEMS OF INTEREST

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

Planning and design, Defense Intelligence Agency

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

Summary

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

Summary

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

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

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

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

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

OTHER ITEMS OF INTEREST

Support for Weapons of Mass Destruction Civil Support Teams

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

Expiration of authorizations and amounts required to be specified by
law (sec. 2701)
This section would provide that authorizations for military
construction projects, repair of real property, land
acquisition, family housing projects and facilities,
contributions to the North Atlantic Treaty Organization
infrastructure program, and National Guard and Reserve projects
will expire on October 1, 2003, or the date of enactment of an
Act authorizing funds for military construction for fiscal year
2004, whichever is later. This expiration would not apply to
authorizations for which appropriated funds have been obligated
before October 1, 2003, or the date of enactment of an Act
authorizing funds for these projects, whichever is later.
Extensions of authorizations of certain fiscal year 1998 projects (sec.
2702)
This section would provide for selected extension of
certain fiscal year 1998 military construction authorizations
until October 1, 2001, or the date of the enactment of an Act
authorizing funds for military construction for fiscal year
2002, whichever is later.
Extensions of authorizations of certain fiscal year 1997 projects (sec.
2703)
This section would provide for selected extension of
certain fiscal year 1997 military construction authorizations
until October 1, 2001, or the date of the enactment of an Act
authorizing funds for military construction for fiscal year
2002, whichever is later.
Effective date (sec. 2704)
This section would provide that titles XXI, XXII, XXIII,
XXIV, and XXVI of this bill shall take effect on October 1,
2000, or the date of the enactment of this Act, whichever is
later.
TITLE XXVIII--GENERAL PROVISIONS

SUBTITLE A--MILITARY CONSTRUCTION PROGRAM AND MILITARY FAMILY HOUSING
CHANGES

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

SUBTITLE B--REAL PROPERTY AND FACILITIES ADMINISTRATION

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

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

Enhancements to military lease authority (sec. 2812)

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

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

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

SUBTITLE C--DEFENSE BASE CLOSURE AND REALIGNMENT

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

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

SUBTITLE D--LAND CONVEYANCES

Part I--Army Conveyances

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Part II--Navy Conveyances

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Part III--Defense Agencies Conveyance

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

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

Subtitle E--Other Matters

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

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

OTHER ITEMS OF INTEREST

Report on Naval Foundry and Propeller Center, Philadelphia,
Pennsylvania

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

Report on requirement for Education Center at Fort Stewart, Georgia

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

Study on commercial leases

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

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

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

TITLE XXXI--DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY NATIONAL SECURITY PROGRAMS

Atomic energy defense activities
Title XXXI authorizes appropriations for the atomic energy
defense activities of the Department of Energy for fiscal year
2001, including: the purchase, construction, and acquisition of
plant and capital equipment; research and development; nuclear
weapons; naval nuclear propulsion; environmental restoration
and waste management; operating expenses; and other expenses
necessary to carry out the purposes of the Department of Energy
Organization Act (Public Law 95-91). The title would authorize
appropriations in six categories: national nuclear security
administration; defense environmental restoration and waste
management; defense environmental management privatization;
other defense activities; Department of Energy Employees
Compensation Initiative; and defense nuclear waste disposal.
The budget request for the atomic energy defense activities
totaled $13.1 billion, an 8.3 percent increase over the
adjusted fiscal year 2000 level. Of the total amount requested:
$4.6 billion was for weapons activities; $1.6 billion was for
other nuclear security activities; $4.6 billion was for defense
environmental restoration and waste management activities; $1.0
billion was for defense facility closure projects; $540.1
million was for defense environmental management privatization;
$555.1 million was for other defense activities; $112.0 million
was for defense nuclear waste disposal; $17.0 million was for a
Department of Energy Employees Compensation Initiative; and
$140.0 million was for the formerly utilized sites remedial
action program.
The committee recommends $12.8 billion for atomic energy
defense activities, a decrease of $323.6 million to the budget
request. The committee recommends $6.2 billion for the national
nuclear security administration (NNSA), an increase of 37.2
million to the budget request. The amount authorized for the
NNSA is as follows: $4.7 billion for weapons activities, an
increase of $78.8 million to the budget request; $847.0 million
for defense nuclear nonproiferation, a decrease of $59.0
million to the budget request; and $695.0 million for naval
reactors, an increase of $17.4 million to the budget request.
The committee further recommends $5.5 billion for defense
environmental restoration and waste management, including
defense facility closure projects, a decrease of $132.0 million
to the budget request; $515.0 million for defense environmental
management privatization, the amount of the budget request;
$466.3 million for other defense activities, a decrease of
$88.8 million to the budget request; $17.0 million for a
Department of Energy Employees Compensation Initiative, the
amount of the budget request; and $112.0 million for defense
nuclear waste disposal, the amount of the budget request. The
committee recommends no funding for the formerly utilized sites
remedial action program, representing a decrease of $140.0
million to the budget request.
The following table summarizes the budget request and the
committee recommendations:

National Nuclear Security Administration (sec. 3101)

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

Weapons activities

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

Directed Stockpile Work

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

Campaigns

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

Readiness in Technical Base and Facilities

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

Construction

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

Program Direction

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

Budget Structure for Office of the Assistant Administrator for Defense
Programs

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

Advanced Simulation and Computing

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

Technology Partnerships and Education

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

Tritium Production

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

Nuclear Weapons Emphasis and Effects

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

Defense Medical Devices Prototyping Pilot

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

Defense nuclear nonproliferation

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

Fissile Materials Control and Disposition

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

Naval reactors

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

Safeguards and security activities

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

Defense environmental restoration and waste management (sec. 3102)

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

Post 2006 Completion

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

Site and Project Completion

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

Science and Technology Development

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

Program Direction

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

Hazardous Materials Management and Emergency Response

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

Columbia River Corridor Initiative

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

Use of Professional and Performance Insurance at DOE Cleanup Sites

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

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

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

Safeguards and Security Activities

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

Other defense activities (sec. 3103)

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

Intelligence

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

Counterintelligence

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

Security and emergency operations

Nuclear safeguards and security

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

Security Investigations

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

Emergency Management

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

Program Direction

The committee recommends $86.9 million for program
direction, a decrease of $2.5 million to the budget request.
This reduction reflects the movement of nuclear emergency
response programs to the weapons activities account.

Independent oversight and performance assurance

The committee recommends $14.9 million for independent
oversight and performance assurance, the amount of the budget
request.

Environment, safety and health-defense

The committee recommends $99.1 million for environment,
safety and health-defense, a decrease of $10.0 million to the
budget request. The reduction would be taken from proposed
increases in risk and health studies at Department of Energy
defense nuclear facilities that do not directly support the
national security missions of the Department and, therefore,
are not appropriately funded in this account.

Worker and community transition

The committee recommends $24.5 million for worker and
community transition, the amount of the budget request.
The committee endorses the Department of Energy's (DOE)
decision to remove the requirement that management and
operating contracts at DOE sites include provisions for
conducting economic development activities in the communities
surrounding such sites. The committee encourages DOE
contractors to continue to be good corporate citizens by
supporting community-based initiatives. The committee believes,
however, that economic development activities of DOE
contractors should not be used as a measure of performance or
as a selection criteria for the award of contracts.

Office of Hearings and Appeals

The committee recommends $3.0 million for the Office of
Hearings and Appeals, the amount of the budget request.

Defense environmental management privatization (sec. 3104)

The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
$515.0 million for defense environmental management
privatization projects, the amount of the budget request. The
amount authorized is for the following projects: $450.0 million
for the Tank Waste Remediation System Project, phase I
(Richland); $65.0 million for the Advanced Mixed Waste
Treatment project (Idaho); and $25.1 million for spent nuclear
fuel dry storage (Idaho). The amount authorized is reduced by
$25.1 million to reflect the use of prior year, uncosted
balances in the defense environmental management privatization
account.
The committee is deeply concerned with the status of the
Tank Waste Remediation System (TWRS) project. The committee
understands that cost estimates for the construction portion of
this project have increased from $3.2 billion to $6.4 billion,
translating into a total estimated project cost increase from
$6.9 billion to over $13.0 billion. The committee further
understands that these cost estimates are based on a project
design that is only 13 to 15 percent complete and, therefore,
subject to additional change.
The committee fully supports the TWRS project and believes
that the technological approach proposed is viable and
realistic. The committee also believes it is vitally important
that this project proceed to full scale construction only when
the Department of Energy has a high degree of confidence in the
overall project cost and other facility requirements. The
committee believes that the Secretary of Energy should not
enter into a fixed price contract for this project until the
contractor has, at a minimum, completed not less than 40
percent of the project design activities.

Energy employees compensation initiative (sec. 3105)

The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
$17.0 million for the establishment of an energy employees
compensation fund to compensate Department of Energy (DOE)
contractor employees that have proven health or other medical
problems that are directly related to their employment at a DOE
nuclear facility.

Defense nuclear waste disposal (sec. 3106)

The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
$112.0 million for the Department of Energy fiscal year 2001
defense contribution to the Defense Nuclear Waste Fund.

SUBTITLE B--RECURRING GENERAL PROVISIONS

Reprogramming (sec. 3121)

The committee recommends a provision that would prohibit
the reprogramming of funds in excess of 110 percent of the
amount authorized for the program, or in excess of $1.0 million
abovethe amount authorized for the program, until the Secretary
of Energy submits a report to the congressional defense committees and
a period of 30 days has elapsed after the date on which the report is
received.

Limits on general plant projects (sec. 3122)

The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
the Secretary of Energy to carry out any construction project
authorized under general plant projects if the total estimated
cost does not exceed $5.0 million. The provision would require
the Secretary to submit a report to the congressional defense
committees detailing the reasons for the cost variation if the
cost of the project is revised to exceed $5.0 million.

Limits on construction projects (sec. 3123)

The committee recommends a provision that would permit any
construction project to be initiated and continued only if the
estimated cost for the project does not exceed 125 percent of
the higher of the amount authorized for the project or the most
recent total estimated cost presented to the Congress as
justification for such project. The provision would prohibit
the Secretary of Energy from exceeding such limits until 30
legislative days after the Secretary submits to the
congressional defense committees a detailed report setting
forth the reasons for the increase. This provision would also
specify that the 125 percent limitation would not apply to
projects estimated to cost under $5.0 million.

Fund transfer authority (sec. 3124)

The committee recommends a provision that would permit
funds authorized by this Act to be transferred to other
agencies of the government for performance of work for which
the funds were authorized and appropriated. The provision would
permit the merger of such transferred funds with the
authorizations of the agency to which they are transferred. The
provision would also limit, to not more than five percent of
the account, the amount of funds authorized by this Act that
may be transferred between authorization accounts within the
Department of Energy.

Authority for conceptual and construction design (sec. 3125)

The committee recommends a provision that would limit the
authority of the Secretary of Energy to request construction
funding until the Secretary has completed a conceptual design.
This limitation would apply to construction projects with a
total estimated cost greater than $5.0 million. If the
estimated cost to prepare the construction design exceeds
$600,000, the provision would require the Secretary to obtain a
specific authorization to obligate such funds. If the estimated
cost to prepare the conceptual design exceeds $3.0 million, the
provision would require the Secretary to request funds for the
conceptual design before requesting funds for construction. The
provision would also provide an exception to these requirements
in the case of an emergency.
The committee directs the Secretary to submit to Congress a
report on each conceptual design completed under this
provision.

Authority for emergency planning, design, and construction activities
(sec. 3126)

The committee recommends a provision that would permit the
Secretary of Energy to perform planning and design with any
funds available to the Department of Energy pursuant to this
title, including those funds authorized for advance planning
and construction design, whenever the Secretary determines that
the design must proceed expeditiously to protect the public
health and safety, to meet the needs of national defense, or to
protect property.

Funds available for all national security programs of the Department of
Energy (sec. 3127)

The committee recommends a provision that would authorize,
subject to section 3121 of this Act, amounts to be appropriated
for management and support activities and for general plant
projects to be made available for use in connection with all
national security programs of the Department of Energy.

Availability of funds (sec. 3128)

The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
amounts to be appropriated for operating expenses or for plant
and capital equipment for the Department of Energy to remain
available until expended. Program direction funds would remain
available until the end of fiscal year 2003.

Transfer of defense environmental management funds (sec. 3129)

The committee recommends a provision that would provide the
manager of each field office of the Department of Energy with
limited authority to transfer up to $5.0 million in fiscal year
2001 defense environmental management funds from one program or
project under the jurisdiction of the office to another such
program or project, once in a fiscal year.

SUBTITLE C--NATIONAL NUCLEAR SECURITY ADMINISTRATION

Term of office of person first appointed as Under Secretary for Nuclear
Security of the Department of Energy (sec. 3031)

The committee recommends a provision that would establish a
fixed term of office for the first individual appointed as the
Under Secretary for Nuclear Security at the Department of
Energy. The individual shall be subject to removal by the
President only for inefficiency, neglect of duty, or
malfeasance in office.

Membership of Under Secretary for Nuclear Security on the Joint Nuclear
Weapons Council (sec. 3132)

The committee recommends a provision that would designate
the Under Secretary for Nuclear Security of the Department of
Energy (DOE) to serve as the DOE representative on the Joint
Nuclear Weapons Council.

Scope of authority of Secretary of Energy to modify organization of
National Nuclear Security Administration (sec. 3133)

The committee recommends a provision that would limit the
authority of the Secretary of Energy to reorganize, abolish,
alter, consolidate, or discontinue any organizational unit or
component of the National Nuclear Security Administration
(NNSA).

Prohibition on pay of personnel engaged in concurrent service or duties
inside and outside National Nuclear Security Administration
(sec. 3134)

The committee recommends a provision that would prohibit
the use of any funds authorized to be appropriated or otherwise
made available to the Department of Energy (DOE) by this or any
other Act to pay the basic pay of an officer or employee of DOE
who: (1) serves concurrently in a position in the National
Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) and a position outside
the NNSA; or (2) performs concurrently the duties of a position
in the NNSA and the duties of a position outside the NNSA.
The committee notes that this provision would not apply to
detailees who are assigned to serve in position within the NNSA
from other federal agencies, other DOE organizations, or
private entities under a loaned executive program if such
employees do not fulfill any of the duties of their permanent
organization during the period of their detail.
The provision prohibits any detailees from serving in
enumerated positions specifically defined in title 32 of the
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2000 (Public
Law 106-65).

Organization plan for field offices of the National Nuclear Security
Administration (sec. 3135)

The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Under Secretary for Nuclear Security of the Department of
Energy to develop an appropriate staffing and organization plan
to carry out the activities of the National Nuclear Security
Administration (NNSA). The plan would identify: (1) the roles
and responsibilities to be assigned to each NNSA field
organizational unit and the NNSA headquarters organization; (2)
any modifications, downsizing, eliminations, or consolidations
of field offices; (3) any modifications to headquarters and
field office staffing levels that the Under Secretary
determines are necessary to implement the plan; and (4) a
schedule by which the plan could be implemented. The plan would
be submitted to the congressional defense committees not later
than March 1, 2001.

Future-years nuclear security program (sec. 3136)

The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Under Secretary for Nuclear Security to submit a future-years
nuclear security program plan that would contain the estimated
expenditures necessary to support the programs, projects, and
activities of the National Nuclear Security Administration
(NNSA), including the anticipated workload requirements at each
site under the jurisdiction of the NNSA, for fiscal year 2001
and the subsequent five-year period. The provision would
require that the Administrator of the NNSA identify how funds
authorized under each program element in the weapons activities
account support the reliability and safety of the nuclear
weapons stockpile. The provision would further require that the
first report be submitted to Congress not later than November
1, 2000.
The committee notes that the Secretary of Energy was
required by section 3135 of the National Defense Authorization
Act for Fiscal Year 1997 (Public Law 104-201) and section 3253
of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2000
(Public Law 106-65) to provide a five-year budget plan, and
that the Secretary failed to comply with such requirements. The
committee further notes that the Secretary of Defense provides
such future-year budget data to Congress with the President's
budget request. The committee believes that such a plan will
provide an important planning tool for the Secretary, the
Administrator, and the Congress, and would serve as a
baselineupon which the congressional defense committees can better
evaluate succeeding budget submissions.

Cooperative research and development of the National Nuclear Security
Administration (sec. 3137)

The committee recommends a provision that would establish
cooperative research and development objectives for the
Administrator of the National Nuclear Security Administration
(NNSA) and require that such cooperative research and
development be consistent with and support the missions of the
National Nuclear Security Administration. The provision would
establish a goal of obligating 0.5 percent of NNSA funds
available during fiscal years 2001 and 2002 for cooperative
research and development agreements, or similar cooperative,
cost-shared research partnerships with non-federal
organizations. The provision would further require the
Administrator of the NNSA to submit a report to the
congressional defense committees setting forth a recommendation
as to the appropriate percentage goal levels. The provision
would require that, beginning in March 2002, and no later than
the end of March of each year thereafter, the Administrator
report to Congress on whether the goals of this section have
been met in the previous fiscal year. If the goals have not
been met, the provision would require the Administrator to
describe the actions he or she will take to achieve such goals
and provide any legislative changes recommended to achieve
them.

SUBTITLE D--PROGRAM AUTHORIZATIONS, RESTRICTIONS, AND LIMITATIONS

Processing, treatment, and disposition of legacy nuclear materials
(sec. 3151)

The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Energy to maintain a high state of readiness at
the F-canyon and H-canyon facilities at the Savannah River
site. The provision would further prohibit use of funds to
begin decommissioning activities at the F-canyon facility,
including studies and planning, until the Defense Nuclear
Facilities Safety Board and the Secretary of Energy submit a
report certifying that all materials currently present in the
facility are safely stabilized and the requirements for the
facility to meet future fissile materials disposition needs can
be fully met utilizing the H-canyon facility. The provision
would require the Secretary to submit to the Committees on
Armed Services of the Senate and the House of Representatives a
plan describing how all long-term chemical separations
activities would be transferred from the F-canyon facility to
the H-canyon facility beginning in fiscal year 2002. The report
would be submitted not later than February 15, 2001.

Formerly Utilized Sites Remedial Action Program (sec. 3152)

The committee recommends a provision that would prohibit
the use of any funds authorized to be appropriated or otherwise
made available to the Department of Energy by this or any other
Act for travel by the Secretary of Energy or any employees of
the Office of Secretary of Energy after March 1, 2001, unless
or until the Secretary certifies to the congressional defense
committees that the Department will not utilize Atomic Energy
Defense funding to conduct treatment, storage, or disposal
activities at sites designated as Formerly Utilized Sites
Remedial Action Program (FUSRAP).
The committee notes that the National Defense Authorization
Act for Fiscal Year 2000 (Public Law 106-65) prohibits any
Atomic Energy Defense funds authorized to be appropriated or
otherwise made available to the Department of Energy for any
fiscal year after fiscal year 1999 from being obligated or
expended to conduct treatment, storage, or disposal activities
at sites designated as FUSRAP sites. The committee continues to
support the cleanup of FUSRAP sites in an expeditious, cost-
effective manner. The committee, however, does not support the
use of scarce Atomic Energy Defense funds for this purpose.

Department of Energy Defense Nuclear Nonproliferation Program (sec.
3153)

The budget request included $682.6 million for the Arms
Control and Nonproliferation and Verification Research and
Development programs of the DOE Defense Nuclear
Nonproliferation Program under the National Nuclear Security
Administration. While the committee considers the activities
included in this account important to U.S. national security,
the committee is concerned with the proposed increase of 25
percent in funding over the fiscal year 2000 appropriated
level. The committee believes this level of growth is
unjustified. Therefore, the committee recommends $571.1 million
for this account in fiscal year 2001, a decrease of $111.6
million from the budget request, reflecting a net increase of
$65.4 million over the fiscal year 2000 appropriated level.

Arms Control Program

The budget request included $408.6 million for the programs
contained within the Defense Nuclear Nonproliferation Program's
Arms Control Program account. The committee notes that
thisaccount was formerly included in the nonproliferation and national
security account during fiscal year 2000. The committee recommends
$308.0 million for fiscal year 2001, a reduction of $100.0 million.
The budget request included $272.8 million for the Arms
Control Operations Program within the Arms Control Program
account. While the committee supports this request, the
committee is concerned that DOE has not been funding a number
of programs within the Arms Control Operations Program at
levels intended by the Congress due to budgetary constraints in
some of the other programs within the Arms Control Program.
Therefore, the committee directs that the following programs
within the Arms Control Operations Program receive no more than
the following amount of funding: $144.8 million for the
Material Protection, Control, and Accounting Program; $5
million for the International Emergency Cooperation Program;
$14.0 million for the Export Control Operations Program; $16.0
million for the Spent Fuel Activities in Kazakhstan Program;
$17.5 million for the Nuclear Cities Initiative (NCI); $22.5
million for the Initiatives for Proliferation Prevention
Program (IPP); $15.2 million for the Transparent and
Irreversible Nuclear Reductions Program; and $37.6 million for
other arms control program activities.

Material Protection, Control, and Accounting Program

The budget request included $144.8 million for the Material
Protection, Control, and Accounting (MPC&A) Program. The
committee supports this request, however, the committee is
concerned with the findings of a recent General Accounting
Office report on this program.
Approximately half of the threat reduction funds spent to
date by DOE have been expended by the MPC&A Program. In March
2000, the GAO issued a report entitled ``Limited Progress in
Improving Nuclear Material Security in Russia and the Newly
Independent States.'' The report found that the MPC&A Program
had spent $481.2 million dollars in Russia and the newly
independent states since the program's inception in 1994. These
funds were spent for a variety of MPC&A activities, including
security training, improvements to weapons-usable nuclear
materials transport vehicles, and have improved the security of
approximately 70 percent of the total weapons-usable material
at risk. Just seven percent of the weapons-usable material at
risk for theft or diversion, however, has been protected by
fully installed security systems.
The committee is concerned that for almost half a billion
dollars invested in this threat reduction work, the MPC&A
Program has not made significant progress toward reducing the
threat posed by unsecured weapons-usable nuclear materials in
the former Soviet Union. Therefore, the committee recommends a
provision requiring DOE to provide an annual report to the
Senate and House Armed Services Committees on the MPC&A Program
that describes the status of securing weapons-usable nuclear
material identified by DOE as being at risk for theft and
diversion that has received complete and integrated material
protection, control, and accounting systems in Russia. The
report should specifically describe: (1) the number of
buildings and site locations with completed and integrated
material protection, control, and accounting upgraded systems;
(2) the total amount of highly-enriched uranium and plutonium
secured to date in Russia under the auspices of the program;
(3) the amount of weapons-usable nuclear material remaining
that still requires complete and integrated material
protection, control, and accounting systems; (4) the out year
budget costs and planning estimated to secure the remaining
material; and (5) the total cost to date and by fiscal year of
the completed material protection, control, and accounting
systems. This report for the previous fiscal year is due no
later than January 1, each year during the lifetime of the
program. The first report, covering fiscal year 2000 is due
January 1, 2001.
According to the March 2000 GAO report, little progress has
been made in installing nuclear security systems in Russia's
nuclear weapons complex, where over 90 percent of all the
nuclear material in the former Soviet Union is located. This is
primarily due to the reluctance of Russian officials to grant
DOE access to buildings in the nuclear weapons complex. It is
the committee's understanding that DOE is negotiating with
Russia to gain better access in the nuclear weapons complex,
but to date no agreement has been achieved.
The committee believes obtaining an appropriate access
policy is necessary to ensure that U.S. funding for this
program achieves its intended purpose. Because the MPC&A
Program has enjoyed good access at the Russian Navy sites
utilizing a model that is acceptable to both parties, the
committee recommends that this model be examined as an option
for gaining access to the nuclear weapons complex. The
committee believes that until such an access policy is agreed
to, the MPC&A Program will be unable to adequately address the
threat of unsecured weapons-usable nuclear materials in Russia.
Therefore, the committee recommends a provision prohibiting the
obligation of funds for any MPC&A Program projects in the
Russian weapons complex after October 1, 2000, until an access
policy is agreed to with the Russians and implemented by the
Secretary of Energy. The committee requires the Secretary of
Energy to notify the committee in writing that an access policy
has been established and implemented prior to obligating funds
for an MPC&A Program project in the Russian nuclear weapons
complex.

Nuclear cities initiative

The budget request included $17.5 million for the NCI, an
increase of $10.0 million over the fiscal year 2000
appropriated level. The committee supports this request. As
part of its efforts to address the threat posed by diversion of
former Soviet Union scientific expertise, DOE created the NCI
in 1998 to work exclusively in Russia's closed cities to create
jobs for displaced Russian workers in the nuclear complex, and
to assist the Russian Federation in reducing the size of its
nuclear weapons complex.
Last year the committee included a provision prohibiting
funds for the NCI from being obligated or expended until the
Secretary of Energy certified to Congress that Russia had
agreed to close some of its facilities engaged in work on
weapons of mass destruction. The committee was disappointed by
the certification provided by the Secretary of Energy pursuant
to this provision. The evidence provided by the Secretary to
support the certification failed to demonstrate that an
agreement had been reached between the United States and the
Russian Federation stating that Russia would close some of its
facilities engaged in work on weapons of mass destruction, as
the committee had intended.
The committee continues to believe that a binding agreement
should be concluded to ensure the U.S. taxpayer that their
investment in this program is facilitating closure of some
facilities of the Russian nuclear weapons complex, thereby
effectively reducing this threat to U.S. national security.
Therefore, the committee recommends a provision which
reiterates its requirement that of the amounts authorized to be
appropriated for the NCI Program, no funds may be obligated or
expended for purposes of providing assistance under this
program to more than three nuclear cities, and more than two
serial production facilities in Russia in fiscal year 2001,
until 30 days after the Secretary of Energy reports to the
Senate and House Armed Services Committees, in writing, that a
signed agreement has been reached between the U. S. Government
and the Government of the Russian Federation that provides that
Russia will close some of its facilities engaged in nuclear
weapons assembly and disassembly work.
The committee notes the similarity between the projects in
the NCI and those of the IPP Program. Last year the committee
imposed project review procedures for the IPP Program to
improve the program management and effectiveness of IPP
projects in Russia. Since those requirements were imposed, the
IPP Program has been able to demonstrate to Congress an
effective process for evaluating projects to identify those
that have the greatest likelihood for success and to ensure
that these projects are consistent with U.S. national security
interests. Since the IPP and the NCI have similar objectives,
the committee believes that a similar project review procedure
should be instituted for NCI projects. Therefore, the committee
recommends a provision requiring that no more than 50 percent
of the funds made available for the NCI for fiscal year 2001
may be obligated until after the Secretary of Energy
establishes and implements project review procedures for
projects under the NCI. These procedures must ensure that all
scientific, technical, and commercial projects proposed under
the NCI: will not enhance Russian military or weapons of mass
destruction capabilities; are not inadvertently transferred or
utilized for military purposes; are commercially viable; and
have a commercial, industrial or other nonprofit entity
partner. A report on the project review procedures established
and implemented for NCI projects shall be submitted to the
Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and House not later
than January 1, 2001.

International Nuclear Safety Program

The budget request included $20 million for the
International Nuclear Safety Program. The committee supports
this request, however the committee is troubled by the
expanding scope of the program. The committee believes the
program has inappropriately expanded beyond its mission of
working to improve the safety of Soviet-designed reactors and
upgrading the nuclear safety infrastructure of the countries
where these reactors operate. In particular, the committee is
concerned that program funds are being used to fund such items
as environmental centers and DOE representative offices in
Paris and Tokyo. Since the program has not yet completed its
safety and training mission, the committee is concerned that
its expanding scope has hampered the program from realizing its
intended goal of nuclear safety. The committee believes that
the program should refocus its efforts on addressing the most
immediate safety concerns, such as providing fire doors for
these facilities to prevent fires from spreading from area to
area within these reactor facilities, and providing sufficient
training to minimize human error, a lead cause of reactor
accidents. The committee directs the funding authorized to be
appropriated or otherwise made available for fiscal year 2001
for the International Nuclear Safety program shall be available
only for purposes of providing basic nuclear safety upgrades
and training related to preventing nuclear operator error and
improving the operational safety of Soviet designed nuclear
reactors.

Long-Term nonproliferation initiative

The budget request included $100.0 million for a new long
term nonproliferation initiative proposed by the Secretary of
Energy. The committee believes the case for this initiative has
not been made by the DOE. Therefore, the committee does not
authorize the $100.0 million requested for this initiative.
The committee believes funding this initiative is
premature. DOE requested $70.0 million of the initiative for
long term nuclear fuel cycle cooperative research and
development. The committee is concerned that to date the DOE
has been unable to provide clear, fundamental program planning
parametes necessary to ensure successful implementation,
management, oversight, and accountability for the initiative.
The DOE is unable to demonstrate clear program parameters in
the initiative, such as how the initiative would be able to
expend effectively the $70.0 million requested during fiscal
year 2001. In addition, the initiative lacks any government-to-
government agreements with the Russians to indicate Russia's
commitment to the initiative.
The remaining $30.0 million in the request for the
initiative consists of additional funding for ongoing programs
within the Nonproliferation and National Security Account. The
committee is concerned that requests for these ongoing programs
were made not only through the Nonproliferation and National
Security Account, but also under this initiative, and that
these activities have been described as new initiatives by DOE.
These activities are already being funded under existing
programs. Therefore, the committee will not fund these
activities under this new initiative.

Nonproliferation and Verification Research and Development

The budget request included $232.9 million for the
Nonproliferation and Verification Research and Development
Program. The committee strongly supports the ongoing work in
this program and recommends an increase of $30.0 million over
the budget request. The committee believes the vital
technologies being developed and tested in this program play a
critical role in detecting and deterring weapons of mass
destruction proliferation, monitoring nuclear explosions, and
detecting and responding to chemical and biological weapons
attacks.
It is the committee's understanding that the Secretary of
Energy is concerned with the high emphasis on nonproliferation
programs with Russia, while possible proliferation activities
and threats from other countries of concern remain relatively
understudied and unanalyzed. The committee concurs with the
Secretary of Energy's concerns for the need for broader
regional arms control research. Therefore, the committee
directs the Secretary of Energy to utilize a portion of the
amounts for this program to conduct evaluations of the
technical capabilities of other geographic areas of concern to
U.S. national security to develop and deliver weapons of mass
destruction.

Modification of counterintelligence polygraph program (sec. 3154)

The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 3154 of the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2000 (Public Law 106-65) by authorizing the
Secretary of Energy to waive the requirement that certain
Department of Energy (DOE) employees and DOE contractor
employees successfully pass a counterintelligence polygraph
exam before such employees can be granted access to high-risk
programs. The provision would allow the Secretary to waive this
requirement for any individual for a period not to exceed 120
days, if the Secretary determines that: (1) such a waiver is in
the national security interests of the United States; (2) the
covered employee has been granted a security clearance; and (3)
the covered employee signs a written acknowledgment that the
employment is conditional upon successfully passing a
counterintelligence polygraph exam within 120 days of the date
of signing such an acknowledgment. The provision would also
allow the Secretary to waive this requirement for any
individual who the Secretary determines: (1) has completed
successfully a full-scope counterintelligence polygraph exam
while employed with another federal agency; or (2) should not
be examined by reason of treatment for a medical or
psychological condition.

Employee incentives for employees at closure project facilities (sec.
3155)

The committee recommends a provision that would provide
incentives for retention and separation of federal employees at
closure facilities of the Department of Energy (DOE)
established pursuant to section 3143 of the National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1997 (Public Law 104-106).
Incentives would include the accumulation of annual leave up to
720 hours, lump sum retention allowances, authority to pay
voluntary separation incentive payments (also referred to as
buyouts), freeze the cost of and continue health benefits for
employees who are either voluntarily or involuntarily
separated, and authority to make temporary assignments of
certain DOE employees to private sector organizations, on a
non-reimbursable basis.
The committee notes that, currently, only the Rocky Flats
Environmental Technology and Ohio Field Office sites are
designated as defense closure facilities, but that additional
facilities may be so designated in the future if such sites
meet the requirements established in section 3143 of the
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1997 (Public
Law 104- 106). The committee believes that incentives are
needed to mitigate the anticipated high attrition rate of
certain federal employees with critical skills. The committee
expects the Department to use this authority to retain such
critical skills during potentially disruptive reductions-in-
force at those sites designated to close prior to fiscal year
2006.

SUBTITLE E--OTHER MATTERS

Extension of authority for appointment of certain scientific,
engineering, and technical personnel (sec. 3171)

The committee recommends a provision that would extend
excepted service hiring authority for up to 200 positions,
originally authorized in the National Defense Authorization Act
for Fiscal Year 1995 (Public Law 103-337). The committee
understands that this provision would allow the Department of
Energy to continue to compete more effectively for high quality
employees with the specialized technical skills needed by the
Department.

Updates of report on nuclear test readiness postures (sec. 3172)

The committee recommends a provision that would require the
Secretary of Energy to update the nuclear test readiness report
established by section 3152 of the National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1996 (Public Law 104-106) on
a biannual basis. The Secretary would be required to submit the
first updated report to the congressional defense committees
beginning on February 15, 2001. The reports would include a
listing and description of those workforce skills and
capabilities that are essential to carry out the missions of
the site, a listing and description of the required
infrastructure and physical plant that are essential to carry
out the missions of the site, and an assessment of the
readiness status of the workforce and infrastructure. The
report would be submitted in both classified and unclassified
form.

Frequency of reports on inadvertent releases of restricted data and
formerly restricted data (sec. 3173)

The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 3161 of the Strom Thurmond National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2000 (Public Law 106-65) by
requiring the Secretary of Energy to report inadvertent
releases of restricted data and formerly restricted data on a
quarterly basis rather than 30 days after any such release.

Form of certifications regarding the safety or reliability of the
nuclear weapons stockpile (sec. 3174)

The committee recommends a provision that would require the
annual certification to the President regarding the safety and
reliability of the U.S. nuclear stockpile be submitted in
classified form.
The committee notes that, beginning in 1996, the Department
of Energy (DOE) weapons laboratory directors, the Commander in
Chief of the U.S. Strategic Command, and the Nuclear Weapons
Council have certified to the President on an annual basis that
the U.S. nuclear deterrent is safe, effective, and reliable,
and that there is no need to resume underground nuclear testing
at this time. To date, these certifications have been submitted
in unclassified form. The committee is concerned that should an
issue arise in the future that would require a higher
classification level, the current process might provide a
disincentive to report such issues for fear of advertising a
problem with the stockpile. The committee believes that any
such disincentive to report fully issues regarding the
condition of the U.S. nuclear stockpile should be removed. The
committee further notes that the Panel to Assess the
Reliability, Safety, and Security of the United States Nuclear
Stockpile recommended in its November 8, 1999, report to
Congress that such annual certification reports to the
President be submitted in classified form.

Engineering and manufacturing research, development and demonstration
by plant managers of certain nuclear weapons production plants
(sec. 3175)

The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
the Secretary of Energy to establish a Plant Manager Research,
Development and Demonstration (PMRDD) program to support
innovative engineering and systems activities at the nuclear
weapons production plants. The program would be limited to the
Y-12 plant in Oak Ridge, Tennessee, the Kansas City plant in
Kansas City, Missouri, and the Pantex plant in Amarillo, Texas.
The program would be authorized at a level not to exceed two
percent of the funds available for weapons activities at such
plants.
The committee anticipates that the PMRDD program would be
used to explore viable tools and techniques for understanding
and replacing sunset technologies and for developing more agile
manufacturing techniques. The committee believes the creation
of this program will support recommendations for addressing
workforce problems at the production plants identified by the
Commission on Retaining Nuclear Weapons Expertise (also known
as the Chiles Commission), by assisting with recruiting and
retention of outstanding engineers and craftsmen.

Cooperative research and development agreements for government-owned,
government-operated laboratories (sec. 3176)

The committee recommends a provision that would modify the
Stevenson-Wydler Technology Innovation Act of 1980 (15
U.S.C.3710) to streamline the approval process for cooperative research
and development agreements (CRADA) at government-owned, contractor-
operated (GOCO) facilities by authorizing federal agencies to
substitute an annual strategic plan for individual joint work
statements. The provision would further streamline the CRADA process
for GOCO facilities by authorizing federal agencies to permit routine
CRADAs to be negotiated and signed by GOCO employees, rather than
federal employees.

Commendation of Department of Energy and contractor employees for
Exemplary Service in Stockpile Stewardship and Security (sec.
3177)

The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
the Secretary of Energy to award a certificate of commendation
for meritorious service to current and former Department of
Energy (DOE) employees, and current and former DOE contractor
employees who worked in programs related to stewardship of the
Nation's nuclear weapons stockpile.
The committee notes that the dedication, intellect, and
hard work of the scientists and craftsmen employed at DOE
laboratories and manufacturing plants are essential to
maintaining a credible U.S. nuclear deterrent. The committee
further notes that former scientists and craftsmen at DOE
laboratories, plants, and materials production sites were
instrumental in ensuring that the United States prevailed
during the Cold War. The committee recommends this provision in
an effort to recognize the contributions of former employees at
these facilities and to highlight the Nation's continued
reliance on the capabilities of the skilled workers at DOE
weapons laboratories and manufacturing plants. The committee
commends these individuals for their continued service to the
Nation and for the peace that they have helped to preserve.

OTHER ITEMS OF INTEREST

Department of Energy participation in the Interstate Technology
Reciprocity Council

The committee commends the Department of Energy (DOE) and
state environmental agencies for their cooperative efforts to
accelerate the deployment of innovative technologies at DOE and
Department of Defense cleanup sites. The committee notes that
over 30 states have joined with the DOE Environmental
Management program to form the Interstate Technology Regulatory
Cooperation Working Group, which provides guidance documents,
training, and other means to accelerate regulatory acceptance
and implementation of advanced technologies that are capable of
saving both time and money. The committee encourages DOE to
continue its participation and support for this cooperative
program.

Laboratory directed research and development

The committee notes that the Laboratory Directed Research
and Development (LDRD) funds available to the Department of
Energy (DOE) laboratories were reduced by section 308 of the
Energy and Water Development Appropriations Act for Fiscal Year
2000, from the customary six percent to four percent for fiscal
year 2000, and that the LDRD program was removed from the
environmental management program. The committee directs the DOE
to return the LDRD program to its full scope and to its full
normal six percent funding level in fiscal year 2001.
The committee further notes that this funding, in most
instances, would be the only available source of basic funding
for research and development (R&D) for the DOE laboratories.
The January 27, 2000, external review of the LDRD program by
the DOE Laboratory Operations Board found that ``. . . the LDRD
programs are vital in recruiting, retaining, and integrating
the best scientific talent into the laboratories and their
mission programs'' and that the LDRD program at the DOE
laboratories has won more R&D 100 awards than any other
organization or program in the world.

Report on Post-closure employee benefits at closure project facilities

The committee directs the Secretary of Energy to submit a
report, not later than June 1, 2001, to the congressional
defense committees detailing any plans for the transfer and
post-closure administration of benefits for employees of
Department of Energy contractors at closure project facilities
established pursuant to section 3143 of the National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1997 (Public Law 104-106).
The report shall include the following: (1) strategies to
ensure that long-term employee and retiree benefits are
consistent; in terms of cost and longevity, with such benefits
for employees at other DOE facilities; (2) an analysis of the
long-term funding required for the administration of pension
and health benefits plans at each closure facility; (3) plans
for transfer and post-closure administration of any DOE-funded
pension plans at each closure facility; and (4) plans for the
transfer and post closure administration of DOE-funded long-
term health benefits plans at each closure facility.
The committee notes that, currently, only the Rocky Flats
Environmental Technology and Ohio Field Office sites are
designated as defense closure facilities, but that additional
facilities may be so designated in the future if such sites
meetthe requirements established in section 3143 of the
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1997 (Public Law
104-106).
TITLE XXXII--DEFENSE NUCLEAR FACILITIES SAFETY BOARD

Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board (sec. 3201)
The committee recommends $18.5 million for the Defense
Nuclear Facilities Safety Board (DNFSB) for fiscal year 2001,
the amount of the budget request.
The committee notes that the National Nuclear Security
Administration Act (Public Law 106-65), which established the
National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) within the
Department of Energy (DOE), does not repeal or amend the
requirements of Chapter 21 of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954.
The committee further notes that the independent oversight
authority of the DNFSB related to health and safety matters at
DOE and NNSA defense nuclear facilities was not changed by the
National Nuclear Security Administration Act.
The committee commends the DNFSB for its continuing efforts
to foster positive change in the safety culture at DOE's
defense nuclear facilities. The committee notes that the DNFSB
is an independent technical body that continually assesses
safety issues at DOE facilities and submits formal safety
findings and recommendations to the Secretary of Energy, the
Assistant Secretary of Energy for Environment, Safety and
Health, and Congress. The committee believes that the external
oversight provided by the DNFSB is comparable to or better than
the external regulation that could be provided by another
Federal agency, such as the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. As
such, the committee believes that the DNFSB is the most cost-
effective means of ensuring continuous improvement of the
safety culture at DOE nuclear facilities.
The committee remains concerned that establishing a new,
untested external regulation regime at DOE weapons facilities
could have an adverse effect on U.S. national security
interests. The committee is equally concerned that such a
regime would draw scarce resources away from high priority,
compliance-driven clean up actions and critical national
security activities. As a result, the committee does not
support any further move toward external regulation of DOE
defense nuclear facilities. The committee notes that the
Secretary of Energy has likewise concluded that the cost of
implementing a new external regulation regime at DOE defense
nuclear facilities would not be cost effective.
TITLE XXXIII--NAVAL PETROLEUM RESERVES

Minimum price of petroleum sold from the naval petroleum reserves (sec.
3301)
The committee recommends a provision that would repeal the
authority for the Secretary of Energy to sell oil from the
naval petroleum reserves for less than full market value.
Repeal of authority to contract for cooperative or unit plans affecting
Naval Petroleum Reserve Numbered 1 (sec. 3302)
The committee recommends a provision that would amend
section 7426 of title 10, United States Code, by deleting
language that authorized the Federal Government to contract for
cooperative or unit plans in the administration of the Naval
Petroleum Reserve Numbered 1 at Elk Hills. The committee notes
that the United States interests to Naval Petroleum Reserve
Numbered 1 at Elk Hills was sold to the private sector.
TITLE XXXIV--NATIONAL DEFENSE STOCKPILE

National defense stockpile (secs. 3401-3402)
The committee recommends a provision that would authorize
the stockpile manager to obligate $75.0 million from the
National Defense Stockpile Transfer Fund during fiscal year
2001 for the authorized uses of funds under section 9(b)(2) of
the Strategic and Critical Materials Stock Piling Act.
The committee further recommends a provision that would
increase the amount of revenues that could be achieved through
the sale of unneeded materials from the national defense
stockpile.

LEGISLATIVE REQUIREMENTS

Departmental Recommendations

By letter dated March 6, 2000, the Acting General Counsel
of the Department of Defense forwarded to the President of the
Senate proposed legislation ``To authorize appropriations for
fiscal year 2001 for military activities of the Department of
Defense, to prescribe military personnel strengths for fiscal
years 2000 and 2001, and for other purposes.'' The transmittal
letter and proposed legislation were officially referred as
Executive Communication 8129 to the Committee on Armed Services
on March 6, 2000. Executive Communication 8129 is available for
review at the committee. Senators Warner and Levin introduced
this legislative proposal as S. 2481, by request, on April 27,
2000.

Committee Action

In accordance with the Legislative Reorganization Act of
1946, as amended by the Legislative Reorganization Act of 1970,
there is set forth below the committee vote to report the
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2001.
Vote: Adopted by a roll call vote of 19-1.
The roll call votes on amendments to the bill which were
considered during the course of the mark-up have been made
public and are available at the committee.

Congressional Budget Office Cost Estimate

It was not possible to include the Congressional Budget
Office cost estimate on this legislation because it was not
available at the time the report was filed. It will be included
in material presented during floor debate on the legislation.

Regulatory Impact

Paragraph 11(b) of rule XXVI of the Standing Rules of the
Senate requires that a report on the regulatory impact of the
bill be included in the report on the bill. The committee finds
that there is no regulatory impact in the case of the National
Defense Authorization Bill for Fiscal Year 2001.

Changes in Existing Law

Pursuant to the provisions of paragraph 12 of rule XXVI of
the Standing Rules of the Senate, the changes in existing law
made by certain portions of the bill have not been shown in
this section of the report because, in the opinion of the
committee, it is necessary to dispense with showing such
changes in order to expedite the business of the Senate and
reduce the expenditure of funds.

ADDITIONAL VIEWS

Our armed forces remain the best-trained, best-equipped and
most capable fighting force in the world. This bill continues
the bipartisan partnership between the Congress and the
Administration to improve the quality of life for the men and
women of our armed forces and their families, and to transform
our military forces to ensure that they are capable of meeting
all of the threats to America's security in the 21st Century.
We have additional views on two issues addressed in the
bill.
1. Vieques
The Secretary of the Navy, the Chief of Naval Operations
and others have testified before the Committee that there is no
adequate substitute for live training by the Navy on the island
of Vieques. Earlier this year, the President entered into an
agreement with the Governor of Puerto Rico, which establishes
an orderly process for what we all hope will be the resumption
of such training. Under this agreement, we would provide $40
million of economic assistance to the citizens of Vieques and
transfer unneeded Department of Defense property on the western
end of the island to the government of Puerto Rico with no
strings attached. If a referendum on Vieques approves a
resumption of live-fire training, an additional $50 million of
economic assistance would be provided. If the referendum does
not approve a resumption of training, Department of Defense
property on the eastern end of the island would be transferred
to the General Services Administration for disposal.
As of the conclusion of the Committee mark-up, the
government of Puerto Rico had lived up to its obligations under
the agreement. The Navy training range on the Vieques has been
cleared of protestors with the assistance of the government of
Puerto Rico. Navy training exercises have now resumed on the
island, with the use of inert ordnance as provided in the
agreement.
The Committee considered proposed legislation that would
have been inconsistent with this agreement. In our view, these
unilateral changes to the terms of the agreement, at a time
when the government of Puerto Rico is living up to its
obligations under the agreement, could have been perceived by
some as a continuation of the kind of behavior that the Navy
acknowledges got them into problems in Vieques in the first
place. Such changes would have offended many citizens of
Vieques and others throughout Puerto Rico, undermining the
efforts of the Navy, and this Committee, to ensure the eventual
resumption of live-fire training on Vieques. For this reason,
we are pleased that the Committee did not adopt this proposal.
Instead, the provision in the bill would authorize $40
million of economic assistance, a referendum on the future of
training on Vieques, and an additional $50 million of economic
assistance if a resumption of live-fire training is approved--
all of which were requested by the President in accordance with
the agreement. With regard to the other element of the
agreement--the transfer of various lands to Puerto Rico under
certain circumstances--the provision is silent, deferring
congressional action until a later date. Finally, the provision
in the bill would require a study of future requirements at
Fort Buchanan and a moratorium on improvements at the facility
until the study can be completed, but would not require the
closure of Fort Buchanan or any other facility in Puerto Rico
in the event of a negative vote on the referendum.
Our preference is to fully implement the agreement between
the President and the Governor of Puerto Rico at this time.
However, avoiding unilateral changes to the terms of the
agreement is the next best outcome.
2. Department of Energy Organization
Last year, the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2000 contained provisions reorganizing the entire
Department of Energy nuclear weapons complex by creating a new,
``semi-autonomous'' National Nuclear Security Administration
(NNSA) within the Department. These provisions, which were
added in conference, were inconsistent with legislation passed
in the Senate by a vote of 96-1 and went far beyond anything
that was even considered by the House of Representatives.
The Secretary chose to implement this legislation by ``dual
hatting'' a number of key NNSA employees, authorizing them to
serve concurrently in both NNSA positions and DOE positions
outside NNSA. Although the provisions establishing the NNSA did
not contain any provision prohibiting dual-hatting and the
Secretary received a legal opinion concluding that such dual-
hatting was permissible, a number of Members of our Committee
felt that this approach was inconsistent with the legislation.
This bill responds to that perceived violation of the statute
with provisions that would: (1) prohibit DOE from paying any
NNSA officials who are ``dual-hatted'; and (2) prohibit the
Secretary of Energy from changing the organization of the NNSA
in any way.
These are unprecedented restrictions on the ability of a
Cabinet Secretary to manage his own Department, and undermine
our ability to hold Secretary Richardson and his successors
accountable for the activities of the Department of Energy.
Dual-hatting is commonplace throughout the government and
has been legally permissible since we repealed the Dual Office
Holding Act of 1894 more than 35 years ago. We have required
the NNSA to handle 18 separate functions, including program
management, safeguards and security, emergency management,
environment, safety and health operations, contracting,
intelligence, counterintelligence, personnel, legal matters,
legislative affairs, and public affairs, among others. We may
want all of these positions to be staffed overnight, but that
doesn't make it happen. During the transition period, somebody
has to fill these positions, and dual-hatting was probably the
most economical and effective approach for the Secretary to
take.
We are particularly concerned that the enactment of this
provision would preclude the Department from creating a single
Counter-Intelligence czar, who serves as both the head of the
Department-wide Office of Counterintelligence and the Chief of
Defense Nuclear Counterintelligence. We believe that this
consolidation of responsibilities could actually clarify
responsibilities and eliminate opportunities for buck-passing
in a way that makes sense.
In any case, the prohibition on reorganization is
completely unnecessary in light of the express prohibition on
dual-hatting. This provision would go far beyond its stated
purpose of addressing dual-hatting, and prohibit the Secretary
of Energy from even establishing, altering or consolidating any
organizational unit, component

All Congresses 93-117 (1973-2022)
117 (2021-2022)
116 (2019-2020)
115 (2017-2018)
114 (2015-2016)
113 (2013-2014)
112 (2011-2012)
111 (2009-2010)
110 (2007-2008)
109 (2005-2006)
108 (2003-2004)
107 (2001-2002)
106 (1999-2000)
105 (1997-1998)
104 (1995-1996)
103 (1993-1994)
102 (1991-1992)
101 (1989-1990)
100 (1987-1988)
99 (1985-1986)
98 (1983-1984)
97 (1981-1982)
96 (1979-1980)
95 (1977-1978)
94 (1975-1976)
93 (1973-1974)

Any Version of Legislation
AS - Amendment Ordered to be Printed
ASH - Additional Sponsors House
ATH - Agreed to House
ATS - Agreed to Senate
CDH - Committee Discharged House
CDS - Committee Discharged Senate
CPH - Considered and Passed House
CPS - Considered and Passed Senate
EAH - Engrossed Amendment House
EAS - Engrossed Amendment Senate
EH - Engrossed in House
ENR - Enrolled
ES - Engrossed in Senate
FPH - Failed Passage House
HDS - Held at Desk Senate
IH - Introduced in House
IPS - Indefinitely Postponed Senate
IS - Introduced in Senate
LTH - Laid on Table in House
LTS - Laid on Table in Senate
PAP - Printed as Passed
PCS - Placed on Calendar Senate
PP - Public Print
Private Law
Public Law
RCH - Reference Change House
RCS - Reference Change Senate
RDS - Received in Senate
RFH - Referred in House
RFS - Referred in Senate
RH - Reported in House
RIH - Referral Instructions House
RS - Reported to Senate
RTH - Referred to Committee House
RTS - Referred to Committee Senate
SC - Sponsor Change

All Congresses 97-117 (1981-2022)
117 (2021-2022)
116 (2019-2020)
115 (2017-2018)
114 (2015-2016)
113 (2013-2014)
112 (2011-2012)
111 (2009-2010)
110 (2007-2008)
109 (2005-2006)
108 (2003-2004)
107 (2001-2002)
106 (1999-2000)
105 (1997-1998)
104 (1995-1996)
103 (1993-1994)
102 (1991-1992)
101 (1989-1990)
100 (1987-1988)
99 (1985-1986)
98 (1983-1984)
97 (1981-1982)

Any State or Territory
Alabama
Alaska
American Samoa
Arizona
Arkansas
California
Colorado
Connecticut
Delaware
District of Columbia
Florida
Georgia
Guam
Hawaii
Idaho
Illinois
Indiana
Iowa
Kansas
Kentucky
Louisiana
Maine
Maryland
Massachusetts
Michigan
Minnesota
Mississippi
Missouri
Montana
Nebraska
Nevada
New Hampshire
New Jersey
New Mexico
New York
North Carolina
North Dakota
Northern Mariana Islands
Ohio
Oklahoma
Oregon
Panama Canal Zone
Pennsylvania
Puerto Rico
Rhode Island
South Carolina
South Dakota
Tennessee
Texas
Utah
Vermont
Virgin Islands
Virginia
Washington
West Virginia
Wisconsin
Wyoming

Any State
Alabama
Alaska
American Samoa
Arizona
Arkansas
California
Colorado
Connecticut
Delaware
District of Columbia
Florida
Georgia
Guam
Hawaii
Idaho
Illinois
Indiana
Iowa
Kansas
Kentucky
Louisiana
Maine
Maryland
Massachusetts
Michigan
Minnesota
Mississippi
Missouri
Montana
Nebraska
Nevada
New Hampshire
New Jersey
New Mexico
New York
North Carolina
North Dakota
Northern Mariana Islands
Northern Mariana Islands
Ohio
Oklahoma
Oregon
Panama Canal Zone
Panama Canal Zone
Pennsylvania
Puerto Rico
Rhode Island
South Carolina
South Dakota
Tennessee
Texas
Utah
Vermont
Virgin Islands
Virginia
Washington
West Virginia
Wisconsin
Wyoming

All Congresses 96-117 (1979-2022)
117 (2021-2022)
116 (2019-2020)
115 (2017-2018)
114 (2015-2016)
113 (2013-2014)
112 (2011-2012)
111 (2009-2010)
110 (2007-2008)
109 (2005-2006)
108 (2003-2004)
107 (2001-2002)
106 (1999-2000)
105 (1997-1998)
104 (1995-1996)
103 (1993-1994)
102 (1991-1992)
101 (1989-1990)
100 (1987-1988)
99 (1985-1986)
98 (1983-1984)
97 (1981-1982)
96 (1979-1980)

All Congresses 81-117 (1949-2022)
117 (2021-2022)
116 (2019-2020)
115 (2017-2018)
114 (2015-2016)
113 (2013-2014)
112 (2011-2012)
111 (2009-2010)
110 (2007-2008)
109 (2005-2006)
108 (2003-2004)
107 (2001-2002)
106 (1999-2000)
105 (1997-1998)
104 (1995-1996)
103 (1993-1994)
102 (1991-1992)
101 (1989-1990)
100 (1987-1988)
99 (1985-1986)
98 (1983-1984)
97 (1981-1982)
96 (1979-1980)
95 (1977-1978)
94 (1975-1976)
93 (1973-1974)
92 (1971-1972)
91 (1969-1970)
90 (1967-1968)
89 (1965-1966)
88 (1963-1964)
87 (1961-1962)
86 (1959-1960)
85 (1957-1958)
84 (1955-1956)
83 (1953-1954)
82 (1951-1952)
81 (1949-1950)

Any Topic
Agriculture
Arms Control
Aviation
Commercial
Consular
Dispute Settlement and Arbitration
Drugs/Illegal Substances
Environment
Extradition
Extradition and Criminal Assistance
Fisheries and Wildlife
Human Rights
Intellectual Property/Copyrights
International Law
International Law and Organization
Investment
Labor
Maritime Boundaries and Claims
Mutual Legal Assistance
Shipping and Marine Pollution
Taxation
Telecommunications
Terrorism
Trademarks/Patents
United Nations