106th Congress Report
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
1st Session 106-162
=======================================================================
NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2000
----------
R E P O R T
OF THE
COMMITTEE ON ARMED SERVICES
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
ON
H.R. 1401
together with
ADDITIONAL, SUPPLEMENTAL, AND
DISSENTING VIEWS
[Including cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Office]
May 24, 1999.--Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the
State of the Union and ordered to be printed
NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2000
106th Congress Report
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
1st Session 106-162
_______________________________________________________________________
NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2000
__________
R E P O R T
OF THE
COMMITTEE ON ARMED SERVICES
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
ON
H.R. 1401
together with
ADDITIONAL, SUPPLEMENTAL, AND
DISSENTING VIEWS
[Including cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Office]
__________
U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
56-735 WASHINGTON : 1999
May 24, 1999.--Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the
State of the Union and ordered to be printed
HOUSE COMMITTEE ON ARMED SERVICES
One Hundred Sixth Congress
FLOYD D. SPENCE, South Carolina, Chairman
BOB STUMP, Arizona IKE SKELTON, Missouri
DUNCAN HUNTER, California NORMAN SISISKY, Virginia
JOHN R. KASICH, Ohio JOHN M. SPRATT, Jr., South
HERBERT H. BATEMAN, Virginia Carolina
JAMES V. HANSEN, Utah SOLOMON P. ORTIZ, Texas
CURT WELDON, Pennsylvania OWEN PICKETT, Virginia
JOEL HEFLEY, Colorado LANE EVANS, Illinois
JIM SAXTON, New Jersey GENE TAYLOR, Mississippi
STEVE BUYER, Indiana NEIL ABERCROMBIE, Hawaii
TILLIE K. FOWLER, Florida MARTIN T. MEEHAN, Massachusetts
JOHN M. McHUGH, New York ROBERT A. UNDERWOOD, Guam
JAMES TALENT, Missouri PATRICK J. KENNEDY, Rhode Island
TERRY EVERETT, Alabama ROD R. BLAGOJEVICH, Illinois
ROSCOE G. BARTLETT, Maryland SILVESTRE REYES, Texas
HOWARD ``BUCK'' McKEON, California TOM ALLEN, Maine
J.C. WATTS, Jr., Oklahoma VIC SNYDER, Arkansas
MAC THORNBERRY, Texas JIM TURNER, Texas
JOHN N. HOSTETTLER, Indiana ADAM SMITH, Washington
SAXBY CHAMBLISS, Georgia LORETTA SANCHEZ, California
VAN HILLEARY, Tennessee JAMES H. MALONEY, Connecticut
JOE SCARBOROUGH, Florida MIKE McINTYRE, North Carolina
WALTER B. JONES, Jr., North CIRO D. RODRIGUEZ, Texas
Carolina CYNTHIA A. McKINNEY, Georgia
LINDSEY GRAHAM, South Carolina ELLEN O. TAUSCHER, California
JIM RYUN, Kansas ROBERT BRADY, Pennsylvania
BOB RILEY, Alabama ROBERT E. ANDREWS, New Jersey
JIM GIBBONS, Nevada BARON P. HILL, Indiana
MARY BONO, California MIKE THOMPSON, California
JOSEPH PITTS, Pennsylvania JOHN B. LARSON, Connecticut
ROBIN HAYES, North Carolina
STEVEN KUYKENDALL, California
DONALD SHERWOOD, Pennsylvania
Andrew K. Ellis, Staff Director
(ii)
C O N T E N T S
----------
Page
Explanation of the Committee Amendments.......................... 1
Purpose.......................................................... 2
Relationship of Authorization to Appropriations.................. 2
Summary of Authorization in the Bill............................. 2
Summary Table of Authorizations................................ 3
Rationale for the Committee Bill................................. 10
The Administration's Defense Budget Request.................... 11
The Committee Bill: Managing Risk.............................. 12
Hearings......................................................... 13
DIVISION A--DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION.................. 13
TITLE I--PROCUREMENT............................................. 13
OVERVIEW....................................................... 13
Aircraft Procurement, Army................................... 17
Overview................................................... 17
Items of Special Interest.................................. 21
AH-64 modifications...................................... 21
Aircraft survivability equipment (ASE)................... 21
Aircraft survivability equipment (ASE) modifications..... 22
CH-47 cargo helicopter modifications..................... 22
Longbow.................................................. 22
UH-60 Blackhawk.......................................... 23
UH-60 modifications...................................... 23
Utility/cargo airplane modifications..................... 24
Missile Procurement, Army.................................... 24
Overview................................................... 24
Items of Special Interest.................................. 27
Avenger modifications.................................... 27
Avenger system summary................................... 27
Brilliant anti-armor (BAT) submunition................... 27
Multiple launch rocket system (MLRS) launcher systems.... 27
Weapons and Tracked Combat Vehicles, Army.................... 28
Overview................................................... 28
Items of Special Interest.................................. 32
Abrams upgrade program/heavy assault bridge (HAB)........ 32
Bradley base sustainment................................. 32
M113 carrier modifications............................... 33
M240 series medium machine gun........................... 33
M249 squad automatic weapon (SAW)........................ 33
MK19-3 grenade launcher.................................. 33
Ammunition Procurement, Army................................. 34
Overview................................................... 34
Items of Special Interest.................................. 38
Ammunition............................................... 38
Hydra 70 rockets......................................... 38
Provision of industrial facilities....................... 38
Other Procurement, Army...................................... 39
Overview................................................... 39
Items of Special Interest.................................. 51
Area common user system (ACUS) modification program...... 51
Army data distribution system (ADDS)..................... 51
Artillery accuracy equipment............................. 51
Automated data processing equipment (ADPE)............... 52
Combat support medical................................... 52
Family of heavy tactical vehicles........................ 53
General purpose vehicles................................. 53
High speed compactor..................................... 53
Hunter unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV)..................... 53
Information system security program (ISSP)............... 54
Integrated family of test equipment (IFTE)............... 54
Items less than $2.0 million (construction equipment).... 54
Joint surveillance target attack radar system (Joint
STARS) Common ground station (CGS)..................... 55
Lightweight video reconnaissance system (LVRS)........... 55
M56 smoke generator system............................... 55
Modification of in-service equipment..................... 56
Modification of in-service equipment (tactical
surveillance).......................................... 56
Night vision devices..................................... 57
Nonsystem training devices............................... 57
Product improved (PI) combat vehicle crewman (CVC)
headset................................................ 58
Ribbon bridge............................................ 58
Shortstop................................................ 59
Single channel ground and airborne radio systems
(SINCGARS) family...................................... 59
Small pusher tug......................................... 60
Standard teleoperating kit............................... 60
Super high frequency (SHF) terminal...................... 60
Vibratory self-propelled roller.......................... 61
Wheel-mounted 25-ton crane............................... 61
Chemical Agents and Munitions Destruction, Army.............. 61
Overview................................................... 61
Item of Special Interest................................... 63
Chemical agents and munitions destruction................ 63
Aircraft Procurement, Navy................................... 63
Overview................................................... 63
Items of Special Interest.................................. 68
CH-60S................................................... 68
Common data link (CDL)................................... 68
Common ground equipment.................................. 68
E-2 modifications........................................ 68
EA-6B modifications...................................... 69
F-18 series modifications................................ 69
F/A-18E/F................................................ 69
Joint primary air training system (JPATS)................ 70
KC-130J.................................................. 70
Lightweight environmentally sealed parachute assembly
(LESPA)................................................ 71
MV-22.................................................... 71
P-3 series modifications................................. 71
T-45 training system (TS)................................ 72
UC-35.................................................... 72
Weapons Procurement, Navy.................................... 72
Overview................................................... 72
Items of Special Interest.................................. 76
Aerial targets........................................... 76
Evolved seasparrow missile (ESSM)........................ 76
Hellfire II missile...................................... 76
Joint stand-off weapon (JSOW)............................ 76
Rolling airframe missile................................. 77
Standard missile......................................... 77
Tomahawk missiles........................................ 78
Ammunition Procurement, Navy/Marine Corps.................... 78
Overview................................................... 78
Items of Special Interest.................................. 81
Navy ammunition.......................................... 81
Marine corps ammunition.................................. 81
Shipbuilding and Conversion, Navy............................ 81
Overview................................................... 81
Items of Special Interest.................................. 84
Attack submarine force level............................. 84
LHD-8 amphibious assault ship............................ 84
Strategic sealift........................................ 84
Other Procurement, Navy...................................... 85
Overview................................................... 85
Items of Special Interest.................................. 96
AN/BPS-16 submarine navigation radar upgrade............. 96
AN/SPS-73 (V) surface search radar....................... 96
AN/USC-42 mini-demand assigned multiple access (DAMA)
ultra-high frequency (UHF) satellite communications
(SATCOM) terminals..................................... 96
Computer aided submode training (CAST) lesson authoring
system (CLASS)......................................... 97
Fire fighting equipment.................................. 97
Joint engineering data management and information control
system (JEDMICS)....................................... 97
Minesweeping equipment................................... 98
Mobile remote emitter simulator (MRES)................... 98
Other training equipment................................. 98
Shipboard display emulator (SDE) equipment............... 99
Sonobuoys................................................ 99
Surface sonar support equipment.......................... 99
WSN-7B ring laser gyro (RLG) and WQN-2 doppler sonar
velocity log (DSVL).................................... 100
Undersea Warfare support equipment....................... 100
Procurement, Marine Corps.................................... 100
Overview................................................... 100
Items of Special Interest.................................. 106
155 millimeter (mm) lightweight towed howitzer........... 106
Body armor............................................... 106
Communications and electronic infrastructure support..... 106
Marine corps air ground task force (MAGTF) command,
control, communications, computers, and intelligence
(C4I) modification kits................................ 107
Material handling equipment.............................. 107
Modification kits (tracked vehicles)..................... 107
Night vision equipment................................... 108
Aircraft Procurement, Air Force.............................. 108
Overview................................................... 108
Items of Special Interest.................................. 114
Bomber modernization..................................... 114
C-17..................................................... 114
C-17A aircraft modifications............................. 114
C-130J................................................... 115
C-135 modifications...................................... 115
Defense airborne reconnaissance program (DARP)........... 115
E-8C joint surveillance and target attack radar system
(STARS)................................................ 116
F-15 modifications....................................... 116
F-16C.................................................... 117
F-16 improved avionics intermediate shop (IAIS).......... 117
F-16 modifications....................................... 117
F-22..................................................... 118
Predator unmanned aerial vehicle......................... 119
T-38 modifications....................................... 120
Terrain awareness and warning system (TAWS).............. 120
Ammunition Procurement, Air Force............................ 120
Overview................................................... 120
Items of Special Interest.................................. 123
Air Force ammunition..................................... 123
Laser guided bombs (LGB)................................. 123
Missile Procurement, Air Force............................... 123
Overview................................................... 123
Items of Special Interest.................................. 127
AGM-65 modifications..................................... 127
Minuteman III modifications.............................. 127
Spaceborne equipment..................................... 127
Titan.................................................... 128
Other Procurement, Air Force................................. 128
Overview................................................... 128
Items of Special Interest.................................. 135
60K a/c loader........................................... 135
Aircrew laser eye protection............................. 135
Automatic data processing equipment (ADPE)............... 135
Master crane............................................. 135
Military satellite communications terminals.............. 136
National eagle system.................................... 136
Radio equipment.......................................... 136
Supply asset tracking system (SATS)...................... 137
Tactical communications-electronics (CE) equipment....... 137
Theater air control system (TACSI)....................... 137
Procurement, Defense-Wide.................................... 138
Overview................................................... 138
Items of Special Interest.................................. 143
Automated document conversion system (ADCS).............. 143
Mentor protege........................................... 143
Nightstar binocular...................................... 143
National Guard and Reserve Equipment......................... 143
Overview................................................... 143
Items of Special Interest.................................. 145
National guard and reserve equipment..................... 145
Reconnaissance aircraft augmentation..................... 145
Chemical Agents and Munitions Destruction, Defense........... 146
Overview................................................... 146
Items of Special Interest.................................. 148
Chemical agents and munitions destruction................ 148
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS......................................... 149
Subtitle A--Authorization of Appropriations.................. 149
Sections 101-109--Authorization of Appropriations.......... 149
Subtitle B--Army Programs.................................... 149
Section 111--Multiyear Procurement Authority for Army
Program.................................................. 149
Section 112--Extension of Pilot Program on Sales of
Manufactured Articles and Services of Certain Army
Industrial Facilities Without Regard to Availability from
Domestic Sources......................................... 149
Section 113--Revision to Conditions for Award of a Second-
Source Procurement Contract for the Family of Medium
Tactical Vehicles...................................... 149
Subtitle C--Navy Programs.................................... 150
Section 121--F/A-18E/F Super Hornet Aircraft Program....... 150
Subtitle D--Chemical Stockpile Destruction Program........... 150
Section 141--Destruction of Existing Stockpile of Lethal
Chemical Agents and Munitions............................ 150
Section 142--Alternative Technologies for Destruction of
Assembled Chemical Weapons............................. 151
Subtitle E--Other Matters.................................... 151
Section 151--Limitation on Expenditures for Satellite
Communications........................................... 151
TITLE II--RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST, AND EVALUATION............ 152
OVERVIEW....................................................... 152
Army RDT&E................................................... 155
Overview................................................... 155
Items Of Special Interest.................................. 164
Aircraft avionics........................................ 164
All source analysis system............................... 164
Alternative vehicle propulsion initiative................ 164
Armament enhancement initiative.......................... 164
Army aircrew coordination training program............... 165
Army technical test instrumentation and targets.......... 165
Comanche................................................. 165
Combat vehicle improvement programs...................... 165
Combined turbine diesel engine........................... 166
Combustion driven eye-safe laser......................... 166
Concepts experimentation program......................... 166
Defense healthcare information assurance program......... 166
Defense manufacturing technology program................. 167
Environmental quality technology......................... 168
Full spectrum active protection.......................... 168
Future combat vehicle.................................... 168
Geographic synthetic aperture radar...................... 170
Geo-positioning system--inertial measurement unit
integration............................................ 170
Heart rate variability technology........................ 170
High energy laser test facility.......................... 171
High mobility artillery rocket system.................... 172
Joint service small arms program......................... 172
Joint surveillance target attack radar system (Joint
STARS)................................................. 172
Kwajalein missile range modernization.................... 173
Lightweight x-band radar................................. 173
Medical materiel/medical biological defense equipment.... 173
MedTeams................................................. 174
Night vision advanced technology......................... 174
Panoramic night vision goggle............................ 174
Passive millimeter wave imaging.......................... 174
Patriot anti-cruise missile defense...................... 174
Plasma energy pyrolysis system........................... 175
Proximity fuzing for dual-purpose improved conventional
munition submunitions.................................. 175
Security and intelligence activities..................... 176
Self-destruct fuse....................................... 176
Semi-automated imagery processor......................... 177
Small arms fire control system........................... 177
Tactical voice control for maneuver control system....... 177
Trichloromelamine testing................................ 177
University and industrial research centers............... 178
Navy RDT&E................................................... 178
Overview................................................... 178
Items Of Special Interest.................................. 188
Advanced amphibious assault vehicle...................... 188
Advanced anti-radiation guided missile................... 188
Advanced waterjet propulsor demonstration program........ 188
Affordable advanced acoustical arrays.................... 189
Analysis of alternatives for follow-on support jammer.... 189
Aquifer vulnerability/contamination assessment........... 190
Aviation depot maintenance technology.................... 190
Beartrap nonlinear dynamics and environmental
characterization....................................... 190
C-2 eight-blade composite propeller system............... 191
Claymore marine.......................................... 191
Cooperative engagement capability........................ 191
Cruiser conversion....................................... 192
Distributed surveillance system.......................... 193
DP-2 thrust vectoring system proof-of-concept
demonstration.......................................... 193
E-2C radar modernization................................. 194
Electric drive propulsion for Navy ships................. 194
Electro-optical framing technologies..................... 195
Environmentally safe energetic materials................. 195
Extended range guided munition and projectile common
guidance............................................... 195
F/A-18C/D BOL chaff countermeasure....................... 196
Free electron laser...................................... 197
Hybrid fiberoptic/wireless communications system
technology............................................. 197
Hyper-spectral analysis.................................. 198
Improved software production management.................. 198
Intercooled recuperated gas turbine engine............... 199
Joint experimentation program............................ 200
Joint non-lethal weapons programs........................ 200
Joint tactical combat training system.................... 200
Lightweight 155MM howitzer............................... 201
Littoral warfare fast patrol craft....................... 201
Location of global positioning systems jammers........... 202
Marine Corps H-1 helicopter upgrade...................... 202
Marine mammal research................................... 203
Multi-function self-aligned gate technology.............. 203
Multipurpose processor................................... 203
National oceanographic partnership program............... 204
Navy aviation survivability.............................. 205
Navy land attack missile program......................... 205
Navy theater missile defense and fleet defense radar
upgrades............................................... 206
NSSN advanced submarine systems technology development
and insertion.......................................... 207
Optical correlation technology for automatic target
recognition............................................ 208
Optically fed and controlled phased array antenna........ 208
Optically multiplexed wideband radar beamformer.......... 208
P-3 maritime patrol aircraft combat systems research and
development............................................ 209
Parametric airborne dipping sonar........................ 209
Phased array weather radar............................... 210
Power electronic building blocks and power node control
centers................................................ 211
Project ``M''............................................ 211
S-3B surveillance system upgrade program................. 212
Ship survivability and personnel protection.............. 212
Silicon carbide semiconductor substrates................. 212
Smart propulsor product model............................ 213
SSGN conversion from Trident-class SSBN submarines....... 213
Superconducting waveform generator....................... 214
SWATH ship mine counter-measures demonstrator............ 214
Tactical control system.................................. 215
Tactical Tomahawk........................................ 215
Trajectory correctable munitions development............. 216
Ultra-high thermal conductivity fibers................... 217
Undersea warfare advanced technology..................... 217
Unmanned aerial vehicles................................. 217
Upgrading fleet systems.................................. 218
Vacuum electronics....................................... 218
Vectored thrust ducted propeller compound helicopter
demonstration.......................................... 218
Virtual test bed for advanced electrical ship systems.... 219
Air Force RDT&E.............................................. 219
Overview................................................... 219
Items Of Special Interest.................................. 229
Airborne Laser........................................... 229
Aircrew laser eye protection............................. 229
Air Force/National Reconnaissance Office partnership..... 230
Air Force science and technology funding................. 230
Automatic target recognition........................... 231
Crew technology........................................ 231
Friction stir welding.................................. 231
Hyperspectral imaging.................................. 231
Tactical missile propulsion............................ 232
Ballistic missile technology............................. 232
B-2 upgrades............................................. 232
B-52 squadrons........................................... 233
Combat training ranges................................... 233
Commercial standardized cockpit and crew seats........... 234
Common imagery processor................................. 234
Evolved expendable launch vehicle........................ 235
Global combat support system............................. 235
Global Hawk high altitude endurance unmanned aerial
vehicle................................................ 235
Integrated satellite communications control.............. 235
Joint airborne SIGINT program............................ 236
Joint air-to-surface standoff missile.................... 236
Joint strike fighter..................................... 236
Kinetic energy anti-satellite............................ 237
Microsatellite technology................................ 237
Military spaceplane...................................... 238
Miniature satellite threat reporting system.............. 238
Miniaturized munitions capability........................ 238
National polar-orbiting operational environmental
surveillance system.................................... 239
Precision location and identification (PLAID) technology. 239
Satellite control network................................ 240
Simulation based forecasting decision support system
(SBFDSS)............................................... 240
Space-based infrared system-high......................... 240
Space-based infrared system-low.......................... 242
Space launch and spacelift ranges........................ 242
Spacetrack............................................... 244
Synthetic theater operations research model.............. 244
Defense Agencies RDT&E....................................... 244
Overview................................................... 244
Items of Special Interest.................................. 253
Advanced concept technology demonstration................ 253
Advanced moving target indicator radar................... 253
Aeronautical test facilities............................. 253
Airborne common sensor................................... 254
Ballistic missile defense................................ 255
Advanced technology development........................ 255
Applied research....................................... 256
Atmospheric interceptor technology..................... 256
Ballistic missile defense test targets................. 257
International cooperative programs..................... 257
Low cost launch technology............................. 257
Medium extended air defense system..................... 258
National missile defense............................... 258
Navy area defense...................................... 259
Patriot advanced capability-3 (PAC-3).................. 260
Space-based laser...................................... 261
Technical operations................................... 261
Theater high altitude area defense..................... 262
Upper tier............................................. 262
Biological warfare defense program....................... 263
Chemical-biological defense program...................... 264
Chemical and biological point detectors................ 265
Optical computing device materials for chemical sensors 265
Safeguard.............................................. 265
Small unit biological detector and chemical-biological
individual sampler................................... 266
Complex systems design................................... 266
Cryofracture disposal of anti-personnel landmines........ 267
CV-22 Osprey............................................. 267
Domestic preparedness for response to terrorism involving
weapons of mass destruction............................ 267
Facial recognition technology............................ 268
Flat panel displays...................................... 268
Forging lead time technology............................. 269
Ground-based common sensor/prophet....................... 269
Information systems technology, superiority, and security 269
Global networked information enterprise security....... 270
Information assurance.................................. 271
Information assurance for national critical
infrastructures...................................... 271
Report on information superiority...................... 271
Joint theater air and missile defense organization....... 272
Logistics sustainment technology......................... 272
Medical free electron laser.............................. 273
National technology alliance............................. 273
Pilot program for revitalizing the laboratories and test
and evaluation centers of the Department of Defense.... 274
Special operations forces reconnaissance................. 274
Special operations forces small boat improvements........ 274
Special operations tactical systems development.......... 275
Strategic environmental research program................. 275
Thermionics.............................................. 275
University research initiatives.......................... 276
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS......................................... 276
Subtitle A--Authorization of Appropriations.................. 276
Section 201--Authorization of Appropriations............... 276
Section 202--Amount For Basic and Applied Research......... 276
Subtitle B--Program Requirements, Restrictions, and
Limitations................................................ 276
Section 211--Collaborative Program To Evaluate And
Demonstrate Advanced Technologies For Advanced Capability
Combat Vehicles.......................................... 276
Section 212--Revisions in Manufacturing Technology Program. 277
Subtitle C--Ballistic Missile Defense........................ 277
Section 231--Additional Program Elements for Ballistic
Missile Defense Programs................................. 277
Subtitle D--Other Matters.................................... 277
Section 241--Designation of the Secretary of the Army as
Executive Agent for High Energy Laser Technologies....... 277
TITLE III--OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE............................. 277
OVERVIEW....................................................... 277
ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST...................................... 309
Budget Request Increases..................................... 309
Critical Readiness Accounts Increases...................... 309
Aircraft spare parts..................................... 309
Depot Maintenance........................................ 309
Training Accounts........................................ 309
Real property maintenance and base operations support.... 310
Miscellaneous unfunded requirements...................... 311
Mobility Enhancement Funding............................. 311
Modern Field Kitchen Burner Unit........................... 311
Army Cold Weather Clothing................................. 312
Budget Request Reductions.................................... 312
Administration and Support Accounts........................ 312
Advisory and Assistance Services........................... 313
Civilian Personnel Overstatement Reductions................ 313
Joint Chiefs of Staff Training Exercises................... 313
Other Items of Special Interest.............................. 314
Commercial Activity Studies................................ 314
Defense Fuel Surcharges.................................... 314
Information Technology..................................... 315
Environmental Issues......................................... 315
Alternative Technologies for Asbestos Treatment and
Disposal................................................. 315
Environmental Contamination in Watershed Surrounding the
Former Naval Weapons Industrial Reserve Plant at
McGregor, Texas.......................................... 316
Navy Environmental Leadership Program...................... 316
Morale, Welfare, and Recreation Issues....................... 316
Overview................................................... 316
Appropriated Fund Support of Morale, Welfare, and
Recreation Programs...................................... 316
Combined Stores at Closed Installations.................... 317
Commissary Surcharge Fund.................................. 317
Military Exchange Privileges for Disabled Veterans......... 318
Nonappropriated Fund Retirement Plans...................... 318
Restrictions on Patron Access to Overseas Commissaries and
Exchange Stores.......................................... 318
Sale of Value Brand Products in Commissary Stores.......... 319
Vendor Representatives Overseas............................ 319
Other Issues................................................. 319
Abrams Integrated Management Program....................... 319
Apache Helicopter Support.................................. 320
Army Battery Management Program............................ 321
Army Maintenance and Personnel Systems..................... 321
Automatic Document Conversion Technology................... 322
Centers of Industrial and Technical Excellence--Public-
Private Partnerships..................................... 322
Civilian Marksmanship Program.............................. 322
Commercial Technologies for Maintenance Activities......... 323
Communicator Automated Emergency Notification System....... 323
Corrosion Prevention and Control Programs.................. 324
Department of Defense Dependent Schools.................... 324
Excess Military Property for Law Enforcement Agencies...... 325
Home Schooled Children Overseas............................ 325
Information Systems Security Education..................... 325
Joint Warfare Analysis Center.............................. 326
Military Affiliate Radio System............................ 326
Tugboat Operations......................................... 327
Urban Warfare Training..................................... 327
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS......................................... 328
Subtitle A--Authorization of Appropriations.................. 328
Section 301--Operation and Maintenance Funding............. 328
Section 302--Working Capital Funds......................... 328
Section 303--Armed Forces Retirement Home.................. 328
Section 304--Transfer From National Defense Stockpile
Transaction Fund......................................... 328
Section 305--Transfer to Defense Working Capital Funds to
Support Defense Commissary Agency........................ 328
Subtitle B--Program Requirements, Restrictions, and
Limitations................................................ 329
Section 311--Reimbursement of Navy Exchange Service Command
for Relocation Expenses.................................. 329
Subtitle C--Environmental Provisions......................... 329
Section 321--Remediation of Asbestos and Lead Based Paint.. 329
Subtitle D--Performance of Functions by Private-Sector
Sources.................................................... 329
Section 331--Expansion of Annual Report on Contracting for
Commercial and Industrial type Functions................. 329
Section 332--Congressional Notification of A-76 Cost
Comparison Waivers....................................... 329
Section 333--Improved Evaluation of Local Economic Effect
of Changing Defense Functions to Private Sector
Performance.............................................. 330
Section 334--Annual Report on Expenditures for Performance
of Depot-Level Maintenance and Repair Workloads by Public
and Private Sectors...................................... 330
Section 335--Applicability of Competition Requirement in
Contracting Out Workloads Performed by Depot-Level
Activities of Department of Defense...................... 330
Section 336--Treatment of Public Sector Winning Bidders for
Contracts for Performance of Depot-Level Maintenance and
Repair Workloads Formerly Performed at Certain Military
Installations............................................ 330
Section 337--Process for Modernization of Computer Systems
at Army Computer Centers................................. 330
Section 338--Evaluation of Total System Performance
Responsibility Program................................... 331
Section 339--Identification of Core Logistics Capability
Requirements for Maintenance and Repair of C-17 Aircraft. 331
Subtitle E--Defense Dependents Education..................... 332
Section 341--Assistance to Local Education Agencies that
Benefit Dependents of Members of the Armed Forces and
Department of Defense Civilian Employees................. 332
Section 342--Continuation of Enrollment at Department of
Defense Domestic Dependent Elementary and Secondary
Schools.................................................. 332
Section 343--Technical Amendments to Defense Dependents'
Education Act of 1978.................................... 332
Subtitle F--Military Readiness Issues........................ 333
Section 351--Independent Study of Department of Defense
Secondary Inventory and Parts Shortages.................. 333
Section 352--Independent Study of Adequacy of Department
Restructured Sustainment and Reengineered Logistics
Product Support Practices................................ 333
Section 353--Independent Study of Military Readiness
Reporting System......................................... 334
Section 354--Review of Real Property Maintenance and its
Effect on Readiness...................................... 335
Section 355--Establishment of Logistics Standards for
Sustained Military Operations............................ 335
Subtitle G--Other Matters.................................... 336
Section 361--Discretionary Authority to Install
Telecommunication Equipment for Persons Performing
Voluntary Services....................................... 336
Section 362--Contracting Authority for Defense Working
Capital Funded Industrial Facilities..................... 336
Section 363--Clarification of Condition on Sale of Articles
and Services of Industrial Facilities to Persons Outside
Department of Defense.................................... 336
Section 364--Special Authority of Disbursing Officials
Regarding Automated Teller Machines on Naval Vessels..... 336
Section 365--Preservation of Historic Buildings and Grounds
at United States Soldiers' and Airmen's Home, District of
Columbia................................................. 337
Section 366--Clarification of Land Conveyance Authority,
United States Soldiers' and Airman's Home................ 337
Section 367--Treatment of Alaska, Hawaii, and Guam in
Defense Household Goods Moving Programs.................. 337
MILITARY PERSONNEL OVERVIEW...................................... 338
TITLE IV--MILITARY PERSONNEL AUTHORIZATIONS...................... 342
Subtitle A--Active Forces.................................... 342
Section 401--End Strengths for Active Forces............... 342
Section 402--Revision in Permanent End Strength Minimum
Levels................................................... 342
Section 403--Appointments to Certain Senior Joint Officer
Positions................................................ 343
Subtitle B--Reserve Forces................................... 344
Section 411--End Strengths for Selected Reserve............ 344
Section 412--End Strengths for Reserves on Active Duty in
Support of the Reserves.................................. 344
Section 413--End Strengths for Military Technicians (Dual
Status).................................................. 345
Section 414--Increase in Number of Army and Air Force
Members in Certain Grades Authorized to Serve on Active
Duty in Support of the Reserves.......................... 346
Section 415--Selected Reserve End Strength Flexibility..... 346
Subtitle C--Authorization of Appropriations.................. 346
Section 421--Authorization of Appropriations for Military
Personnel................................................ 346
TITLE V--MILITARY PERSONNEL POLICY............................... 348
ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST...................................... 348
Backlog in Requests for Replacement of Military Awards and
Decorations.............................................. 348
Commissioning of Ms. Ella E. Gibson........................ 348
Electronic Transmission of Certificates of Release or
Discharge from Active Duty............................... 349
Enlisted Promotions........................................ 349
Junior Reserve Officer Training Program (JROTC)............ 349
Merchant Marine Academy Midshipmen......................... 350
Recruiting................................................. 350
Senior Reserve Officers' Training Program (SROTC).......... 351
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS......................................... 351
Subtitle A--Officer Personnel Policy......................... 351
Section 501--Recommendations for Promotion by Selection
Boards................................................... 351
Section 502--Technical Amendments Relating to Joint Duty
Assignments.............................................. 352
Subtitle B--Matters Relating to Reserve Components........... 352
Section 511--Continuation on Reserve Active Status List to
Complete Disciplinary Action............................. 352
Section 512--Authority to Order Reserve Component Members
to Active Duty to Complete a Medical Evaluation.......... 352
Section 513--Eligibility for Consideration for Promotion... 352
Section 514--Retention until Completion of 20 Years of
Service for Reserve Component Majors and Lieutenant
Commanders Who Twice Fail of Selection for Promotion..... 352
Section 515--Computation of Years of Service Exclusion..... 352
Section 516--Authority to Retain Reserve Component
Chaplains Until Age 67................................... 353
Section 517--Expansion and Codification of Authority for
Space-Required Travel for Reserves....................... 353
Section 518--Financial Assistance Program for Specially
Selected Members of the Marine Corps Reserve............. 353
Section 519--Options to Improve Recruiting for the Army
Reserve.................................................. 353
Subtitle C--Military Technicians............................. 354
Section 521--Revision to Military Technician (Dual Status)
Law...................................................... 354
Section 522--Civil Service Retirement of Technicians....... 354
Section 523--Revision to Non-Dual Status Technicians
Statute.................................................. 355
Section 524--Revision to Authorities Relating to National
Guard Technicians........................................ 355
Section 525--Effective Date................................ 355
Section 526--Secretary of Defense Review of Army Technician
Costing Process.......................................... 355
Section 527--Fiscal Year 2000 Limitation on Number of Non-
Dual Status Technicians.................................. 355
Subtitle D--Service Academies................................ 356
Section 531--Waiver of Reimbursement of Expenses for
Instruction at Service Academies of Persons from Foreign
Countries................................................ 356
Section 532--Compliance by United States Military Academy
with Statutory Limit on Size of Corps of Cadets.......... 356
Section 533--Dean of Academic Board, United States Military
Academy, and Dean of the Faculty, United States Air Force
Academy.................................................. 356
Section 534--Exclusion from Certain General and Flag
Officer Grade Strength Limitations for the
Superintendents of the Service Academies................. 356
Subtitle E--Education and Training........................... 357
Section 541--Establishment of a Department of Defense
International Student Program at the Senior Military
Colleges................................................. 357
Section 542--Authority for Army War College to Award Degree
of Master of Strategic Studies........................... 357
Section 543--Authority for Air University to Award
Graduate-Level Degrees................................... 357
Section 544--Correction of Reserve Credit for Participation
in Health Professional Scholarship and Financial
Assistance Program....................................... 357
Section 545--Permanent Expansion of ROTC Program to Include
Graduate Students........................................ 357
Section 546--Increase in Monthly Subsistence Allowance for
Senior ROTC Cadets Selected for Advanced Training........ 358
Section 547--Contingent Funding increase for Junior ROTC
Program.................................................. 358
Section 548--Change from Annual to Biennial Reporting under
the Reserve Component Montgomery GI Bill................. 358
Section 549--Recodification and Consolidation of Statutes
Denying Federal Grants and Contracts by Certain
Departments and Agencies to Institutions of Higher
Education that Prohibit Senior ROTC Units or Military
Recruiting on Campus..................................... 358
Subtitle F--Decorations and Awards........................... 358
Section 551--Waiver of Time Limitations for Award of
Certain Decorations to Certain Persons................... 358
Section 552--Sense of Congress Concerning Presidential Unit
Citation for Crew of the U.S.S. Indianapolis............. 358
Subtitle G--Other Matters.................................... 359
Section 561--Revision in Authority to Order Retired Members
to Active Duty........................................... 359
Section 562--Temporary Authority for Recall of Retired
Aviators................................................. 359
Section 563--Service Review Agencies Covered by
Professional Staffing Requirement........................ 359
Section 564--Conforming Amendment to Authorize Reserve
Officers and Retired Regular Officers to Hold a Civil
Office while Serving on Active Duty for Not More than 270
Days..................................................... 359
Section 565--Revision to Requirement for Honor Guard
Details at Funerals of Veterans.......................... 360
Section 566--Purpose and Funding Limitations for National
Guard Challenge Program.................................. 361
Section 567--Access to Secondary School Students for
Military Recruiting Purposes............................. 361
Section 568--Survey of Members Leaving Military Service on
Attitudes Toward Military Service........................ 361
Section 569--Improvement in System for Assigning Personnel
to Warfighting Units..................................... 361
Section 570--Requirement for Department of Defense
Regulations to Protect the Confidentiality of
Communications Between Dependents and Professionals
Providing Therapeutic or Related Services Regarding
Sexual or Domestic Abuse................................. 362
TITLE VI--COMPENSATION AND OTHER PERSONNEL BENEFITS.............. 363
OVERVIEW....................................................... 363
ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST...................................... 364
Tax Deferred Savings Plans................................... 364
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS......................................... 364
Subtitle A--Pay and Allowances............................... 364
Section 601--Fiscal Year 2000 Increase in Military Basic
Pay and Reform of Basic Pay Rates........................ 364
Section 602--Pay Increases for Fiscal Years after Fiscal
Year 2000................................................ 364
Section 603--Additional Amount Available for Fiscal year
2000 Increase in Basic Allowance for Housing Inside the
United States............................................ 365
Subtitle B--Bonuses and Special and Incentive Pays........... 365
Section 611--Extension of Certain Bonuses and Special Pay
Authorities for Reserve Forces........................... 365
Section 612--Extension of Certain Bonuses and Special Pay
Authorities for Nurse Officer Candidates, Registered
Nurses, and Nurse Anesthetists........................... 365
Section 613--Extension of Authorities Relating to Payment
of Other Bonuses and Special Pays........................ 366
Section 614--Aviation Career Incentive Pay for Air Battle
Managers................................................. 366
Section 615--Expansion of Authority to Provide Special Pay
to Aviation Career Officers Extending Period of Active
Duty..................................................... 366
Section 616--Diving Duty Special Pay....................... 366
Section 617--Reenlistment Bonus............................ 366
Section 618--Enlistment Bonus.............................. 366
Section 619--Revised Eligibility Requirements for Reserve
Component Prior Service Enlistment Bonus................. 366
Section 620--Increase in Special Pay and Bonuses for
Nuclear-Qualified Officers............................... 367
Section 621--Increase in Authorized Monthly Rate of Foreign
Language Proficiency Pay................................. 367
Section 622--Authorization of Retention Bonus for Special
Warfare Officers Extending period of Active Duty......... 367
Section 623--Authorization of Surface Warfare Officer
Continuation Pay......................................... 367
Section 624--Authorization of Career Enlisted Flyer
Incentive Pay............................................ 367
Section 625--Authorization of Judge Advocate Continuation
Pay...................................................... 368
Subtitle C--Travel and Transportation Allowances............. 368
Section 631--Provision of Lodging in Kind for Reservists
Performing Training Duty and Not Otherwise Entitled to
Travel and Transportation Allowances..................... 368
Section 632--Payment of Temporary Lodging Expenses for
Members Making their First Permanent Change of Station... 368
Section 633--Emergency Leave Travel Cost Limitations....... 368
Subtitle D--Retired Pay Reform............................... 368
Section 641-644--Redux Retired Pay System Applicable Only
to Members Electing New 15-Year Career Status Bonus...... 368
Subtitle E--Other Retired Pay and Survivor Benefits Matters.. 369
Section 651--Effective Date of Disability Retirement for
Members Dying in Civilian Medical Facilities............. 369
Section 652--Extension of Annuity Eligibility for Surviving
Spouses of Certain Retirement Eligible Reserve Members... 369
Section 653--Presentation of United States Flag to Retiring
Members of the Uniformed Services Not Previously Covered. 370
Section 654--Accrual Funding for Retirement System for
Commissioned Corps of National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration........................................... 370
Subtitle F--Other Matters.................................... 370
Section 671--Payments for Unused Accrued Leave as Part of
Reenlistment............................................. 370
Section 672--Clarification of Per Diem Eligibility for
Military Technicians Serving on Active Duty without Pay
Outside the United States................................ 370
Section 673--Overseas Special Supplemental Food Program.... 370
Section 674--Special Compensation for Severely Disabled
Uniformed Services Retirees.............................. 371
Section 675--Tuition Assistance for Members Deployed in a
Contingency Operations................................... 371
TITLE VII--HEALTH CARE MATTERS................................... 372
OVERVIEW....................................................... 372
ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST...................................... 372
Automated Clinical Practice Guidelines..................... 372
Defense Health Program Unfunded Requirements............... 373
Report on Portability of TRICARE Prime Benefits............ 373
Report on Preventive Healthcare Services................... 373
Study on the Effect of TRICARE Cost Sharing on the
Financial Status of Enlisted Service Members in Pay
Grades E-1 Through E-4................................... 374
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS......................................... 374
Subtitle A--Health Care Services............................. 374
Section 701--Provision of Health Care to Members on Active
Duty at Certain Remote Locations......................... 374
Section 702--Provision of Chiropractic Health Care......... 375
Section 703--Continuation of Provision of Domiciliary and
Custodial Care for Certain CHAMPUS Beneficiaries......... 375
Section 704--Removal of Restriction on Use of Funds for
Abortions in Cases of Rape or Incest..................... 376
Subtitle B--TRICARE Program.................................. 376
Section 711--Improvements to Claims Processing Under the
TRICARE Program.......................................... 376
Section 712--Authority to Waive Certain TRICARE Deductibles 376
Subtitle C--Other Matters.................................... 376
Section 721--Pharmacy Benefits Program..................... 376
Section 722--Improvements to third-Party Payer Collection
Program.................................................. 377
Section 723--Authority of Armed Forces Medical Examiner to
Conduct Forensic Pathology Investigations................ 378
Section 724--Trauma Training Center........................ 378
Section 725--Study on Joint Operations for the Defense
Health Program........................................... 378
TITLE VIII--ACQUISITION POLICY, ACQUISITION MANAGEMENT, AND
RELATED MATTERS.............................................. 379
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS......................................... 379
Section 801--Sale, Exchange, and Waiver Authority for Coal
and Coke................................................. 379
Section 802--Extension of Authority to Issue Solicitations
for Purchases of Commercial Items in Excess of Simplified
Acquisition Threshold.................................... 379
Section 803--Expansion of Applicability of Requirement to
Make Certain Procurements From Small Arms Production
Industrial Base.......................................... 379
Section 804--Repeal of Termination of Provision of Credit
Towards Subcontracting Goals for Purchases Benefiting
Severely Handicapped Persons............................. 379
Section 805--Extension of Test Program for Negotiation of
Comprehensive Small Business Subcontracting Plans........ 379
Section 806--Facilitation of National Missile Defense
System................................................... 380
Section 807--Options for Accelerated Acquisition of
Precision Munitions...................................... 380
Section 808--Program to Increase Opportunity for Small
Business Innovation in Defense Acquisition Programs...... 380
TITLE IX--DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE ORGANIZATION AND MANAGEMENT...... 381
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS......................................... 381
Section 901--Limitation on Amount Available for Contracted
Advisory and Assistance Services......................... 381
Section 902--Responsibility for Logistics and Sustainment
Functions of the Department of Defense................... 381
Section 903--Management Headquarters and Headquarters
Support Activities....................................... 382
Section 904--Further Reductions in Defense Acquisition and
Support Workforce........................................ 383
Section 905--Center for the Study of Chinese Military
Affairs.................................................. 383
Section 906--Responsibility Within Office of the Secretary
of Defense for Monitoring OPTEMPO and PERSTEMPO.......... 384
Section 907--Report on Military Space issues............... 385
Section 908--Employment and Compensation of Civilian
Faculty Members of Department of Defense African Center
for Strategic Studies.................................... 385
Section 909--Additional Matters for Annual Report on Joint
Warfighting Experimentation.............................. 385
TITLE X--GENERAL PROVISIONS...................................... 386
ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST...................................... 386
Counter-Drug Activities........................................ 386
Overview..................................................... 386
Items of Special Interest.................................... 387
Air National Guard fighter operations...................... 387
Colombian detection and monitoring......................... 387
Joint interagency task force-West.......................... 388
Other joint military intelligence programs................. 388
Requirement for Report on Forward Operating Locations...... 388
Southwest border fence..................................... 389
Tethered aerostat radar system............................. 389
Transfer of military construction funding for forward
operating locations...................................... 389
Transit zone detection and monitoring...................... 389
Other Matters................................................ 390
Counterterrorism and Defense Against Weapons of Mass
Destruction.............................................. 390
Department of Defense Responsiveness to Congressional
Questions for the Record................................. 392
Illegal Immigration to Guam................................ 392
Pentagon Reservation Renovation Security Upgrades.......... 392
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS......................................... 393
Subtitle A--Financial Matters................................ 393
Section 1001--Transfer Authority........................... 393
Section 1002--Incorporation of Classified Annex............ 393
Section 1003--Authorization of Prior Emergency Military
Personnel Appropriations................................. 393
Section 1004--Repeal of Requirement for Two-Year Budget
Cycle for the Department of Defense...................... 394
Section 1005--Consolidation of Various Department of the
Navy Trust and Gift Funds................................ 394
Section 1006--Budgeting for Operations in Yugoslavia....... 394
Subtitle B--Naval Vessels and Shipyards...................... 396
Section 1011--Revision to Congressional Notice-and-Wait
Period Required Before Transfer of a Vessel Stricken from
Naval Vessel Register.................................... 396
Section 1012--Authority to Consent to Retransfer of Former
Naval Vessel............................................. 396
Section 1013--Report on Naval Vessel Force Structure
Requirements............................................. 396
Section 1014--Auxiliary Vessels Acquisition Program for the
Department of Defense.................................... 396
Section 1015--Authority to Provide Advance Payments for the
National Defense Features Program........................ 396
Subtitle C--Matters Relating to Counter Drug Activities...... 396
Section 1021--Support for Detection and Monitoring
Activities in the Eastern Pacific Ocean.................. 396
Section 1022--Condition on Development of Forward Operating
Locations for United States Southern Command Counter-Drug
Detection and Monitoring Flights......................... 397
Section 1023--United States Military Activities in Colombia 398
Subtitle D--Other Matters.................................... 399
Section 1031--Identification in Budget Materials of Amounts
for Declassification Activities and Limitation on
Expenditures for Such Activities......................... 399
Section 1032--Notice to Congressional committees of
Compromise of Classified Information within Defense
Programs of the United States............................ 400
Section 1033--Revision to Limitation on Retirement or
Dismantlement of Strategic Nuclear Delivery Systems...... 400
Section 1034--Annual Report by Chairman of Joint Chiefs of
Staff on the Risks in Executing the Missions Called for
Under the National Military Strategy..................... 401
Section 1035--Requirement to Address Unit Operations Tempo
and Personal Tempo in Department of Defense Annual Report 402
Section 1036--Preservation of Certain Defense Reporting
Requirements............................................. 403
Section 1037--Technical and Clerical Amendments............ 403
Section 1038--Contributions for Spirit of Hope Endowment
Fund of United Service Organizations, Incorporated....... 403
Section 1039--Chemical Defense Training Facility........... 403
TITLE XI--DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE CIVILIAN PERSONNEL............... 404
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS....................................... 404
Section 1101--Increase of Pay Cap for Nonappropriated Fund
Senior Executive Employees............................... 404
Section 1102--Restoration of Leave for Certain Department
of Defense Employees who Deploy to a Combat Zone Outside
the United States........................................ 404
Section 1103--Expansion of Guard-and-Reserve Purposes for
which Leave under Section 6323 of Title 5, United States
Code, May be Used........................................ 404
TITLE XII--MATTERS RELATING TO OTHER NATIONS..................... 405
ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST...................................... 405
Arms Control Implementation.................................. 405
Ballistic Missile Defense Discussions with Russia............ 406
Department of Defense Review of Satellite Licenses........... 406
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS......................................... 407
Section 1201--Report on Strategic Stability Under START III 407
Section 1202--One Year Extension of Counterproliferation
Authorities for Support of United Nations Weapons
Inspection Regime in Iraq................................ 408
Section 1203--Military-to-Military contacts with Chinese
People's Liberation Army................................. 408
Section 1204--Report on Allied Capabilities to Contribute
to Major Theater Wars.................................... 410
Section 1205--Limitation on Funds for Bosnia Peacekeeping
Operations for Fiscal Year 2000.......................... 410
TITLE XIII--COOPERATIVE THREAT REDUCTION WITH STATES OF FORMER
SOVIET UNION................................................. 411
OVERVIEW....................................................... 411
ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST...................................... 412
Arms Elimination Projects in Russia........................ 412
Arms Elimination Projects in Ukraine....................... 414
Biological Weapons Proliferation Prevention in Russia...... 414
Chemical Weapons Destruction in Russia..................... 415
Fissile Material Storage Facility.......................... 417
Nuclear Reactor Core Conversion............................ 418
Nuclear Warhead Dismantlement Processing in Russia......... 419
Nuclear Weapons Storage Security in Russia................. 419
Nuclear Weapons Transportation Security.................... 419
Other Support Programs..................................... 419
Prohibition of Specified Activities........................ 420
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS......................................... 420
Section 1301--Specification of Cooperative Threat Reduction
Programs and Funds....................................... 420
Section 1302--Funding Allocations.......................... 420
Section 1303--Prohibition on Use of Funds for Specified
Purposes................................................. 420
Section 1304--Limitation on Use of Funds for Fissile
Material Storage Facility................................ 420
Section 1305--Limitation on Use of Funds for Chemical
Weapons Destruction...................................... 421
Section 1306--Limitation on Use of Funds for Biological
Weapons Proliferation Prevention Activities.............. 421
Section 1307--Limitation on Use of Funds Until Submission
of Report and Multiyear Plan............................. 421
Section 1308--Requirement to Submit Report................. 421
Section 1309--Report on Expanded Threat Reduction
Initiative............................................... 421
DIVISION B--MILITARY CONSTRUCTION AUTHORIZATIONS................. 423
PURPOSE........................................................ 423
MILITARY CONSTRUCTION OVERVIEW................................. 423
STRUCTURE OF THE BUDGET REQUEST................................ 424
TITLE XXI--ARMY.................................................. 444
SUMMARY........................................................ 444
ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST...................................... 444
Improvements to Military Family Housing.................... 444
Environmental Remediation at Volunteer Army Ammunition
Plant, Chattanooga, Tennessee............................ 444
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS......................................... 444
Section 2101--Authorized Army Construction and Land
Acquisition Projects..................................... 444
Section 2102--Family Housing............................... 445
Section 2103--Improvements to Military Family Housing Units 445
Section 2104--Authorization of Appropriations, Army........ 445
TITLE XXII--NAVY................................................. 446
SUMMARY........................................................ 446
ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST...................................... 446
Headquarters, Commander-in-Chief, Pacific.................. 446
Acquisition of Prepositioned Equipment Maintenance
Facilities, Blount Island Jacksonville, Florida.......... 446
Improvements to Military Family Housing.................... 447
Unspecified Minor Construction............................. 447
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS......................................... 447
Section 2201--Authorized Navy Construction and Land
Acquisition Projects..................................... 447
Section 2202--Family Housing............................... 447
Section 2203--Improvements to Military Family Housing Units 447
Section 2204--Authorization of Appropriations, Navy........ 447
Section 2205--Authorization to Accept Electrical Substation
Improvements, Guam....................................... 447
Section 2206--Correction in Authorized Use of Funds, Marine
Corps Combat Development Command, Quantico, Virginia..... 448
TITLE XXIII--AIR FORCE........................................... 449
SUMMARY........................................................ 449
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS......................................... 449
Section 2301--Authorized Air Force Construction and Land
Acquisition Projects..................................... 449
Section 2302--Family Housing............................... 449
Section 2303--Improvements to Military Family Housing Units 449
Section 2304--Authorization of Appropriations, Air Force... 449
TITLE XXIV--DEFENSE AGENCIES..................................... 450
SUMMARY........................................................ 450
ITEM OF SPECIAL INTEREST....................................... 450
Military Construction in Support of Base Closure and
Realignment Activities................................... 450
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS......................................... 450
Section 2401--Authorized Defense Agencies Construction and
Land Acquisition Projects................................ 450
Section 2402--Improvements to Military Family Housing Units 450
Section 2403--Military Housing Improvement Program......... 451
Section 2404--Energy Conservation Projects................. 451
Section 2405--Authorization of Appropriations, Defense
Agencies................................................. 451
Section 2406--Increase in Fiscal Year 1997 Authorization
for Military Construction Projects Pueblo Chemical
Activity, Colorado....................................... 451
Section 2407--Condition on Obligation of Military
Construction Funds for Drug Interdiction and Counter-Drug
Activities............................................... 451
TITLE XXV--NORTH ATLANTIC TREATY ORGANIZATION.................... 452
SUMMARY........................................................ 452
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS......................................... 452
Section 2501--Authorized NATO Construction and Land
Acquisition Projects..................................... 452
Section 2502--Authorization of Appropriations, NATO........ 452
TITLE XXVI--GUARD AND RESERVE FORCES FACILITIES.................. 453
SUMMARY........................................................ 453
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS......................................... 453
Section 2601--Authorized Guard and Reserve Construction and
Land Acquisition Projects................................ 453
TITLE XXVII--EXPIRATION AND EXTENSION OF AUTHORIZATIONS.......... 454
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS......................................... 454
Section 2701--Expiration of Authorizations and Amounts
Required to be Specified by Law.......................... 454
Section 2702--Extensions of Authorizations of Certain
Fiscal Year 1997 Projects................................ 454
Section 2703--Extension of Authorizations of Certain Fiscal
Year 1996 Projects....................................... 454
Section 2704--Effective Date............................... 454
TITLE XXVIII--GENERAL PROVISIONS................................. 455
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS......................................... 455
Subtitle A--Military Construction Program and Military Family
Housing Changes.......................................... 455
Section 2801--Contributions for North Atlantic Treaty
Organization Security Investment......................... 455
Section 2802--Development of Ford Island, Hawaii........... 455
Section 2803--Restriction on Authority to Acquire or
Construct Ancillary Supporting Facilities for Housing
Units.................................................... 456
Section 2804--Planning and Design for Military Construction
Projects for Reserve Components.......................... 456
Section 2805--Limitation on Authority to Carry Out Small
Projects for Acquisition of Facilities for Reserve
Components............................................... 456
Section 2806--Expansion of Entities Eligible to participate
in Alternative Authority for Acquisition and Improvement
of Military Housing...................................... 456
Subtitle B--Real Property and Facilities Administration...... 457
Section 2811--Extension of Authority for Lease of Land for
Special Operations Activities............................ 457
Section 2812--Utility Privatization Authority.............. 457
Section 2813--Acceptance of Funds to Cover Administrative
Expenses Relating to Certain Real Property Transactions.. 457
Section 2814--Study and Report on Impacts to Military
Readiness of Proposed Land Management Changes on Public
Lands in Utah............................................ 457
Subtitle C--Defense Base Closure and Realignment............. 458
Section 2821--Continuation of Authority to Use Department
of Defense Base Closure Account 1990 for Activities
Required to Close or Realign Military Installations...... 458
Subtitle D--Land Conveyances................................. 458
Part I--Army Conveyances................................... 458
Section 2831--Transfer of Jurisdiction, Fort Sam Houston,
Texas.................................................... 458
Section 2832--Land Conveyance, Army Reserve Center,
Kankakee, Illinois....................................... 458
Section 2833--Land Conveyance, Fort Des Moines, Iowa....... 458
Section 2834--Land Conveyance, Army Maintenance Support
Activity (Marine) Number 84, Marcus Hook, Pennsylvania... 458
Section 2835--Land Conveyance, Army Docks and Related
Property, Alaska......................................... 459
Section 2836--Land Conveyance, Fort Huachuca, Arizona...... 459
Section 2837--Land Conveyance, Army Reserve Center, Cannon
Falls, Minnesota......................................... 459
Section 2838--Land Conveyance, Nike Battery 80 Family
Housing Site, East Hanover Township, New Jersey.......... 459
Section 2839--Land Exchange, Rock Island Arsenal, Illinois. 460
Section 2840--Modification of Land Conveyance, Joliet Army
Ammunition Plant, Illinois............................... 460
Section 2841--Land Conveyance, Twin Cities Army Ammunition
Plant, Minnesota......................................... 460
Part II--Navy Conveyances.................................. 460
Section 2851--Land Conveyance, Naval Weapons industrial
Reserve Plant No. 387, Dallas, Texas..................... 460
Section 2852--Land Conveyance, Naval and Marine Corps
Reserve Center, Orange County, Texas..................... 461
Section 2853--Land Conveyance, Marine Corps Air Station,
Cherry Point, North Carolina............................. 461
Part III--Air Force Conveyances............................ 461
Section 2861--Conveyance of Fuel Supply Line, Pease Air
Force Base, New Hampshire................................ 461
Section 2862--Land Conveyance, Tyndall Air Force Base,
Florida.................................................. 461
Section 2863--Land Conveyance, Port of Anchorage, Alaska... 462
Section 2864--Land Conveyance, Forestport Test Annex, New
York..................................................... 462
Subtitle E--Other Matters.................................... 462
Section 2871--Expansion of Arlington National Cemetery..... 462
DIVISION C--DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY NATIONAL SECURITY AUTHORIZATION
AND OTHER AUTHORIZATIONS..................................... 463
TITLE XXXI--DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY NATIONAL SECURITY PROGRAMS...... 463
OVERVIEW....................................................... 463
ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST...................................... 476
Accelerated Strategic Computing Initiative................. 476
Accelerated Strategic Computing Initiative Construction
Projects................................................. 476
Arms Control and Nonproliferation.......................... 477
Commercializing Initiatives for Proliferation Prevention... 477
Commission to Review Nuclear Policy and Management......... 478
Comptroller General Audit of Department of Energy Contract
Management Practices..................................... 478
Construction Projects...................................... 479
Education.................................................. 479
Eligibility to Bid on Excess Department of Energy Equipment
at the Savannah River Site............................... 480
Environmental Management Science Program................... 480
Environmental Management Environmental, Safety, and Health. 480
Formerly Utilized Sites Remedial Action Program (FUSRAP)... 480
Hanford Site Tri-Party Agreement Compliance................ 481
Hanford Plutonium Finishing Plant Deactivation............. 481
Hanford Reactor Decontamination and Decommissioning........ 481
Idaho National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory
(INEEL) Post 2006 Completion............................. 481
Inertial Confinement Fusion................................ 481
In-Tank Precipitation Process.............................. 482
International Materials Protection, Control, and Accounting 482
International Nuclear Safety............................... 482
Naval Reactors............................................. 483
Nuclear Weapons Industrial Complex......................... 483
Nuclear Weapons Personnel Reserve.......................... 483
Oak Ridge Operations Compliance Obligations................ 484
Office of Counterintelligence.............................. 484
Pit Production............................................. 484
Program Direction for Defense Programs..................... 485
Program Direction for Environmental Management............. 485
Records Declassification................................... 485
Rocky Flats Environmental Technology Site Closure Project.. 485
Savannah River Site Infrastructure Investment.............. 485
Security Investigations.................................... 486
Stockpile Management....................................... 486
Stockpile Management Fissile Material Storage and
Disposition.............................................. 487
Technology Partnerships.................................... 487
Worker and Community Transition............................ 488
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS......................................... 488
Subtitle A--National Security Programs Authorization......... 488
Section 3101--Weapons Activities........................... 488
Section 3102--Defense Environmental Restoration and Waste
Management............................................... 488
Section 3103--Other Defense Activities..................... 488
Section 3104--Defense Nuclear Waste Disposal............... 488
Section 3105--Defense Environmental Management
Privatization............................................ 489
Subtitle B--Recurring General Provisions..................... 489
Section 3121--Reprogramming................................ 489
Section 3122--Limits on General Plant Projects............. 489
Section 3123--Limits on Construction Projects.............. 489
Section 3124--Fund Transfer Authority...................... 489
Section 3125--Authority for Conceptual and Construction
Design................................................... 489
Section 3126--Authority for Emergency Planning, Design and
Construction Activities.................................. 490
Section 3127--Funds Available for all National Security
Programs of the Department of Energy..................... 490
Section 3128--Availability of Funds........................ 490
Section 3129--Transfers of Defense Environmental Management
Funds.................................................... 490
Subtitle C--Program Authorizations, Restrictions, and
Limitations................................................ 490
Section 3131--Limitation on Use at Department of Energy
Laboratories of Funds Appropriated for the Initiatives
for Proliferation Prevention Program..................... 490
Section 3132--Prohibition on Use for Payment of Russian
Government Taxes and Customs Duties of Funds Appropriated
for the Initiatives for Proliferation Prevention Program. 491
Section 3133--Modification of Laboratory Directed Research
and Development to Provide Funds for Theater Ballistic
Missile Defense.......................................... 491
Section 3134--Support of Theater Ballistic Missile Defense
Activities of the Department of Defense.................. 492
Subtitle D--Commission on Nuclear Weapons Management......... 492
Section 3151-3159--Commission to Examine Nuclear Weapons
Policy Management and Oversight.......................... 492
Subtitle E--Other Matters.................................... 493
Section 3161--Procedures for Meeting Tritium Production
Requirements............................................. 493
Section 3162--Extension of Authority of Department of
Energy to Pay Voluntary Separation Payments.............. 493
Section 3163--Fellowship Program for Development of Skills
Critical to the Department of Energy Nuclear Weapons
Complex.................................................. 494
Section 3164--Department of Energy Records Declassification 494
Section 3165--Management of Nuclear Weapons Production
Facilities and National Laboratories..................... 494
Section 3166--Notice to Congressional Committees of
Compromise of Classified Information within Nuclear
Energy Defense Programs.................................. 495
TITLE XXXII--DEFENSE NUCLEAR FACILITIES SAFETY BOARD............. 496
LEGISLATIVE PROVISION.......................................... 496
Section 3201--Authorization................................ 496
TITLE XXXIII--NATIONAL DEFENSE STOCKPILE......................... 497
LEGISLATIVE PROVISION.......................................... 497
Section 3301--Definitions.................................. 497
Section 3302--Authorized Uses Of Stockpile Funds........... 497
Section 3303--Elimination of Congressionally Imposed
Disposal Restrictions on Specific Stockpile Materials.... 497
TITLE XXXIV--MARITIME ADMINISTRATION............................. 498
ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST...................................... 498
Great Lakes Maritime Academy............................... 498
Merchant Marine Academy.................................... 498
Repair and Maintenance of Maritime Administration Vessels.. 498
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS......................................... 499
Section 3401--Short Title.................................. 499
Section 3402--Authorization of Appropriations for Fiscal
Year 2000................................................ 499
Section 3403--Amendments to Title XI of the Merchant Marine
Act of 1936.............................................. 499
Section 3404--Extension of War Risk Insurance.............. 499
Section 3405--Ownership of the JEREMIAH O'BRIEN............ 500
TITLE XXXV--PANAMA CANAL COMMISSION.............................. 501
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS......................................... 501
Section 3501--Short Title.................................. 501
Section 3502--Authorization of Expenditures................ 501
Section 3503--Purchase of Vehicles......................... 501
Section 3504--Office of Transition Administration.......... 501
Departmental Data................................................ 502
Department of Defense Authorization Request.................... 502
Military Construction Authorization Request.................... 502
Committee Position............................................... 503
Communications From Other Committees............................. 503
Fiscal Data...................................................... 511
Congressional Budget Office Estimate........................... 511
Congressional Budget Office Cost Estimate...................... 512
Authorization of Appropriations.............................. 512
Committee Cost Estimate........................................ 527
Oversight Findings............................................... 527
Constitutional Authority Statement............................... 527
Statement of Federal Mandates.................................... 527
Roll Call Votes.................................................. 528
Changes in Existing Law Made by the Bill, as Reported............ 534
Additional, Dissenting, and Supplemental Views................... 685
Additional views of Roscoe G. Bartlett, Gene Taylor, Joseph R.
Pitts........................................................ 685
Additional views of Patrick J. Kennedy......................... 687
Additional views of Loretta Sanchez, Robert A. Brady, Lane
Evans, Thomas H. Allen, Ellen O. Tauscher, Patrick J.
Kennedy, Neil Abercrombie, Rob R. Blagojevich, Mike Thompson. 688
Additional views of Ike Skelton................................ 689
Additional views of Ike Skelton, Norman Sisisky, John M.
Spratt, Jr., Solomon P. Ortiz, Owen Pickett, Lane Evans, Gene
Taylor, Neil Abercrombie, Martin T. Meehan, Robert A.
Underwood, Patrick J. Kennedy, Rod R. Blagojevich, Silvestre
Reyes, Thomas H. Allen, Jim Turner, Adam Smith, Loretta
Sanchez, James H. Maloney, Ellen O. Tauscher, Robert A.
Brady, Robert E. Andrews, Baron P. Hill, Mike Thompson, John
B. Larson.................................................... 690
Additional views of James M. Talent--Army Logistics
Modernization................................................ 692
Additional views of James M. Talent--Navy's F/A 18E/F Super
Hornet....................................................... 695
Additional views of Gene Taylor................................ 696
Additional views of Robert A. Underwood........................ 698
Additional views of Robert A. Underwood, Lane Evans, Norman
Sisisky, Thomas H. Allen, Solomon P. Ortiz, and Neil
Abercrombie.................................................. 700
Supplemental views of Ciro D. Rodriguez........................ 702
Dissenting views of Cynthia A. McKinney........................ 704
106th Congress Report
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
1st Session 106-162
======================================================================
NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2000
_______
May 24, 1999.--Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the
State of the Union and ordered to be printed
_______________________________________________________________________
Mr. Spence, from the Committee on Armed Services, submitted the
following
R E P O R T
together with
ADDITIONAL, SUPPLEMENTAL, AND DISSENTING VIEWS
[To accompany H.R. 1401]
[Including cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Office]
The Committee on Armed Services, to whom was referred the
bill (H.R. 1401) to authorize appropriations for fiscal year
2000 and 2001 for military activities of the Department of
Defense, to prescribe military personnel strengths for fiscal
years 2000 and 2001, and for other purposes, having considered
the same, report favorably thereon with amendments and
recommend that the bill as amended do pass.
The amendment strikes out all after the enacting clause of
the bill and inserts a new text which appears in italic type in
the reported bill.
The title of the bill is amended to reflect the amendment
to the text of the bill.
EXPLANATION OF THE COMMITTEE AMENDMENTS
The committee adopted an amendment in the nature of a
substitute during the consideration of H.R. 1401. The title of
the bill is amended to reflect the amendment to the text of the
bill. The remainder of the report discusses the bill, as
amended.
PURPOSE
The bill would--(1) Authorize appropriations for fiscal
year 2000 for procurement and for research, development, test
and evaluation (RDT&E); (2) Authorize appropriations for fiscal
year 2000 for operation and maintenance (O&M) and for working
capital funds; (3) Authorize for fiscal year 2000: (a) the
personnel strength for each active duty component of the
military departments; (b) the personnel strength for the
Selected Reserve for each reserve component of the armed
forces; (c) the military training student loads for each of the
active and reserve components of the military departments; (4)
Modify various elements of compensation for military personnel
and impose certain requirements and limitations on personnel
actions in the defense establishment; (5) Authorize
appropriations for fiscal year 2000 for military construction
and family housing; (6) Authorize appropriations for fiscal
year 2000 for the Department of Energy national security
programs; (7) Modify provisions related to the National Defense
Stockpile; (8) Authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2000
for the operation of the Panama Canal Commission; and (9)
Authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2000 for the Maritime
Administration.
RELATIONSHIP OF AUTHORIZATION TO APPROPRIATIONS
The bill does not generally provide budget authority. The
bill authorizes appropriations. Subsequent appropriation acts
provide budget authority. The bill addresses the following
categories in the Department of Defense budget: procurement;
research, development, test and evaluation; operation and
maintenance; working capital funds, military personnel; and
military construction and family housing. The bill also
addresses Department of Energy National Security Programs, the
Panama Canal Commission and the Maritime Administration.
Active duty and reserve personnel strengths authorized in
this bill and legislation affecting compensation for military
personnel determine the remaining appropriation requirements of
the Department of Defense. However, this bill does not provide
authorization of specific dollar amounts for personnel.
SUMMARY OF AUTHORIZATION IN THE BILL
The President requested budget authority of $280.5 billion
for the national defense budget function for fiscal year 2000.
Of this amount, the President requested $266.9 billion for the
Department of Defense (including $5.4 billion for military
construction and family housing) and $12.4 billion for
Department of Energy national security programs and the Defense
Nuclear Facilities Safety Board.
The committee recommends an overall level of $288.8 billion
in budget authority. This amount is consistent with the
discretionary defense spending limitations imposed by the
Balanced Budget Act of 1997 and it represents an increase of
approximately $18.3 billion from the amount authorized for
appropriation by the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 1999 (Public Law 105-261). Overall, the committee's
recommendation is consistent with the amounts established in
the Concurrent Resolution on the Budget for Fiscal Year 2000
for the national defense budget function.
SUMMARY TABLE OF AUTHORIZATIONS
The following table provides a summary of the amounts
requested and that would be authorized for appropriation in the
bill (in the column labeled ``Budget Authority Implication of
Committee Recommendation'') and the committee's estimate of how
the committee's recommendations relate to the budget totals for
the national defense function. For purposes of estimating the
budget authority implications of committee action, the table
reflects the numbers contained in the President's budget for
proposals not in the committee's legislative jurisdiction.
RATIONALE FOR THE COMMITTEE BILL
The National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2000
once again reflects the committee's efforts to address decade-
long concerns about the declining state of the U.S. armed
forces. The combination of reduced defense resources and
increased military commitments around the world has resulted in
a diminished quality of military life, a severe degradation in
the readiness of units to train for and execute their primary
combat missions, and an erosion of the technological advantages
enjoyed by U.S. forces on the battlefield as a result of
delayed equipment modernization.
Over the past several months, the challenges confronting
U.S. armed forces have been put into stark relief by the war in
the former Yugoslav republic of Kosovo. The unanticipated
strength of Serb resistance has resulted in a significant
expansion of the U.S. and NATO air war, to the point where the
number of aircraft involved in Operation Allied Force is
nearing levels anticipated in a major theater war. As a result,
the ability of U.S. armed forces to meet their worldwide
commitments is increasingly in question. From substantial gaps
in the regional deployment of aircraft carriers, to shortages
of cruise missiles and other precision munitions, to strains on
the fleets of specialized electronic warfare and tanker
aircraft, and even to stresses on the conventional fighter and
attack aircraft force, the air campaign over Yugoslavia has
revealed the extent to which today's U.S. military is
overextended.
Should current operations against Yugoslavia evolve into
ground combat or even peacekeeping operations involving U.S.
troops, the strains that such a ground operation would place on
U.S. forces worldwide would escalate rapidly. According to the
Administration, just a peacekeeping force in Kosovo would
require 50,000 to 60,000 NATO troops, with perhaps 20,000 U.S.
soldiers participating in what would likely become a long-term,
open-ended commitment. There should be no doubt that any future
requirement for the U.S. Army to sustain a force of such size
in the Balkans, on a rotational basis, will increase the
exposure of U.S. interests in other regions of the world to
challenge.
For years, the committee has highlighted the difficulties
U.S. armed forces would face in executing the National Military
Strategy's requirement to be capable of fighting nearly
simultaneous wars in the Persian Gulf and in Korea. The
unforeseen challenges and shortfalls revealed by the need to
wage a third ``major theater war'' in Europe--even absent the
deployment of U.S. ground forces--unfortunately affirms the
committee's long-standing concerns. Testifying earlier this
month about ongoing operations in the Balkans, Secretary of
Defense William Cohen admitted that ``we have a situation where
we have a smaller force and we have more missions, and so . . .
we are wearing out systems, wearing out people.'' These
problems are not new, and they are getting worse. The committee
hopes that the obvious strains being placed on the military
services as a result of Operation Allied Force will at least
compel some broader recognition of the shortfalls confronting
the nation's armed forces and lead to a sustained and
bipartisan commitment to revitalizing America's military.
The Administration's Defense Budget Request
In the context of mounting quality of life, readiness, and
modernization shortfalls, the committee once again believes the
Administration's defense budget request falls short. Earlier
this year, the President declared in his State of the Union
address that ``it is time to reverse the decline in defense
spending that began in 1985....My balanced budget calls for a
sustained increase over the next six years for readiness, for
modernization, and for pay and benefits for our troops and
their families.'' The President's words, following as they did
on the heels of last fall's testimony by the Joint Chiefs of
Staff (JCS) that the military services had critical unfunded
requirements of at least $150 billion over the next six years,
provided a degree of hope that the Administration had ``turned
the corner'' and recognized the need to substantially increase
defense spending. The unfortunate reality became apparent,
however, when the President unveiled his fiscal year 2000
budget request and six-year defense plan--a plan that relied
heavily on budgetary gimmicks and optimistic economic
assumptions and which provided increased funding sufficient to
address only about one half of the Joint Chiefs' identified
shortfalls in critical military requirements. Moreover, the
Administration conditioned even its ``50 percent solution'' on
the achievement of domestic political objectives involving
Social Security reform.
Earlier this year, the Joint Chiefs updated their estimates
of unfunded quality of life, readiness, and modernization
requirements. Even assuming the validity of the budget gimmicks
and optimistic assumptions contained in the Administration's
budget request, the Joint Chiefs testified that the six-year
defense plan still fell $46.7 billion short of their minimal
requirements. If the Administration's budget gimmicks and
optimistic economic assumptions are judged invalid, the six-
year defense plan falls at least $70 billion short of
addressing the services' shortfalls.
Even as the Administration was crafting its fiscal year
2000 budget request, the Joint Chiefs of Staff were concluding
that the ability of U.S. armed forces to execute the full range
of missions required by the National Military Strategy entailed
``moderate to high'' risk. Marine Commandant General Charles
Krulak summarized the JCS' assessment in testimony before the
committee, stating, ``In terms of risk to the [ability to
execute] the National Military Strategy, I think we've gone too
far; I think we're there now. If we don't do something about
this, we're going to be back into the hollow armed forces and
this nation can't have that, can't take that, because the world
is changing so rapidly, is so dangerous, that we need to stop
this now.''
During months of oversight hearings, the motto of the post-
Cold-War military--``doing more with less''--was once again the
predominant theme heard from all ranks and services. As Army
Chief of Staff General Dennis Reimer informed the committee in
January, ``Army leaders at all levels have been fighting to
meet expanding requirements with diminishing resources. Our
commanders are struggling to balance operational readiness--
supporting training and maintaining equipment--with base
operations expenses and maintaining soldiers' quality of
life.'' Likewise, Chief of Naval Operations Admiral Jay Johnson
expressed ``serious concerns'' about personnel, training, and
equipment maintenance problems that were creating an ``erosion
of readiness at home and even the beginning stages of
degradation in our deployed forces.'' A decade ago, Navy non-
deployed units reported high states of readiness nearly 70
percent of the time, while today the figure has slipped to
approximately 50 percent.
The Air Force is confronting similar problems. Air Combat
Command has suffered a 56 percent drop in readiness rates since
1996. The aging of the Air Force fleet and the resulting
increased costs and expanded maintenance workload caused by
aircraft fatigue, corrosion, and parts obsolescence underlies
the Air Force's worsening readiness problems. Under projected
budgets and modernization plans, the average Air Force aircraft
will be 20 years old by the turn of the century and 30 years
old by 2015. Air Force ``non-mission capable'' rates have
increased 53 percent since the Persian Gulf War while the rate
of ``cannibalization''--the practice of stripping parts from
one aircraft or system to replace broken parts on another--has
increased 75 percent.
The services' long-term quality of life, readiness, and
modernization problems seem to be worsening at an exponential
rate as the force shrinks, the equipment ages, and the pace of
operations mounts. The mismatch between military ends and means
is so large that the services' ability to conduct even smaller-
scale contingencies is at risk. In the committee's view, the
expanding and potentially open-ended mission in the Balkans not
only highlights these risks, but exacerbates them at the same
time.
The Committee Bill: Managing Risk
The committee's recommendations in the bill have been
shaped by the above concerns and guided in large part by the
priorities identified by the military service chiefs. The
committee's first step is to put the defense budget on somewhat
sounder fiscal footing. Thus, the committee bill increases the
President's budget request by $8.3 billion. Within this topline
increase, the committee has taken a number of steps to improve
the quality of military life, to improve the readiness of the
force, and to accelerate the pace of equipment modernization.
Major quality of life initiatives include a 4.8 percent
basic military pay raise, substantial pay table reform, and
reform of the military retirement system. The committee also
rejected the Administration's inexplicable $3.1 billion cut to
the already underfunded military construction accounts, instead
fully funding military construction at a level of $8.6 billion
to provide important improvements to the quality of military
life. The committee also increased spending on critical
readiness accounts by more than $2 billion, including
significant increases for real property maintenance and base
operations support, depot maintenance, aircraft spare parts,
combat training center operations, as well as more than $700
million for other unfunded readiness priorities identified by
the military service chiefs. The committee has also increased
funding for equipment modernization, adding approximately $4
billion to the President's underfunded budget request for
research, development, and procurement programs. Important
modernization initiatives include the addition of more than
$400 million to the Administration's request for missile
defense programs, and substantial increases to upgrade the B-2
bomber fleet, and for EA-6B, F-15, F-16, Joint Strike Fighter,
V-22, AH-64 Apache Longbow and Comanche helicopter programs.
Despite the substantial improvements this bill has made to
the President's budget request, the committee is under no
illusions concerning the rising level of risk U.S. armed forces
are facing. The committee does not believe that ``high risk''
in executing the core missions of our National Military
Strategy is acceptable. The nation is facing a dilemma that
Secretary Cohen recently articulated in testimony to the
Congress. The Secretary noted the multiple strains caused by
conducting Operation Allied Force simultaneously with having to
meet other important requirements, and commented that ``we've
got to find a way to either increase the size of our forces or
decrease the number of our missions.''
The committee believes that unless the nation fields the
forces and provides the resources required by the National
Military Strategy, the inevitable alternative is for the United
States to retreat from its global responsibilities and
interests. As it does with regard to the growing risk
confronting our military forces, the committee also believes it
is unacceptable for the United States to retreat from the
aggressive promotion and protection of our interests around the
world.
HEARINGS
Committee consideration of the National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2000 results from extensive
hearings that began on February 2, 1999 and that were completed
on March 25, 1999. The full committee conducted 6 sessions. In
addition, a total of 26 sessions were conducted by five
different subcommittees and two panels of the committee on
various titles of the bill.
DIVISION A--DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION
TITLE I--PROCUREMENT
OVERVIEW
The President's $53.0 billion procurement budget request
for fiscal year 2000 represents a decrease of $1.1 billion
below the amount forecast in fiscal year 1999, $9.3 billion
below the amount first forecast in fiscal year 1996, and
continues the Department of Defense's delay in achieving the
Joint Chiefs of Staff goal of a $60.0 billion procurement
budget by three years (from fiscal year 1998 to fiscal year
2001). Even before the initiation of Operation Allied Force the
service chiefs of staff were lamenting a budget that leaves
them far short of attaining their modernization requirements,
despite Congress' having added over $15.0 billion to the
procurement accounts in the past four years. The ongoing
campaign in the Balkans has only exacerbated this situation.
For example, the Army Chief of Staff testified to the
committee that ``modernization is still underfunded. What I
don't think will be fixed out of this [referring to the funding
he expects to receive in fiscal year 2000] will be the
modernization. We'll have to defer that . . . further.''
Commenting on his inability to recapitalize the fleets of naval
ships and aircraft, the Chief of Naval Operations noted, ``We
continue to compensate [for readiness and personnel needs] by
shifting resources from modernization and recapitalization
accounts to operations and support accounts.'' Even more
critical of the current predicament, he was the Commandant of
the Marine Corps, who testified that, ``As I've said for years
[our problem] is long-term procurement. I have got very great
concerns about the cancer of modernization that I must
address.'' And the Air Force Chief of Staff declared that ``if
we don't modernize by replacing aircraft that are beyond their
useful life and revitalize those with life left in them, we can
expect significant additional maintenance requirements, reduced
reliability, and increased costs as these aircraft
deteriorate.''
In order to bring the modernization problem into focus, the
committee held a hearing on the Department's fleet of aging
equipment. The Department clearly acknowledged that reduced
modernization budgets, combined with increased deployments,
have taken their toll. Its inventory of weapons is not only
aging chronologically but also technologically, as older and
overworked weapons systems continue to drain resources because
of more frequent and more expensive maintenance. Equipment
expected to leave the inventory years ago is still operational
and, in some cases, approaching nearly double expected service
lives. Yet, despite this situation, the procurement budget
continues to receive low priority.
Although much has been touted by the Department concerning
a major increase in its budget in the next six fiscal years,
the procurement accounts are not the beneficiaries of any
largesse. As noted above, the fiscal year 2000 procurement
request actually declines from the amount forecast only one
year ago. The cumulative addition to these accounts over the
next four years is projected to be only $4.1 billion-hardly a
significant part of a proposed six-year $84.0 billion overall
increase.
Unfortunately, unless a sustained increase in procurement
funding is forthcoming, the aging equipment situation will only
get worse, as the impact of Operation Allied Force is felt.
With the United States shouldering the largest share of the
burden in the North Atlantic Treaty Organization's air campaign
against Yugoslavia, inventories of key precision weapons are
being depleted at much faster rates than ever anticipated;
units deployed for combat are stripping vital supplies from
U.S.-based units, contributing to a dramatic drop in their
readiness ratings; and cannibalization rates are climbing
rapidly within deployed units because of spare parts shortages.
Even with the substantial amount of additional funding provided
by the Congress in fiscal year 1999 supplemental
appropriations, the process of ``getting well'' from this
ongoing operation will be slow and likely require substantial
additional funding in the future.
Against this backdrop, the committee successfully argued
for an increase to the funds allocated for national defense in
the fiscal year 2000 budget resolution and has applied much of
this additional money to procurement. This marks the fifth
consecutive year the committee has added funds to modernize the
Department's weaponry, including:
[In millions of dollars]
Army:
UH-60L helicopters............................................ 27.0
CH-47F upgrades............................................... 56.0
AH-64D upgrades............................................... 45.0
MLRS rocket launchers......................................... 56.0
Bradley fighting vehicles upgrades............................ 72.0
M113A3 carrier mods........................................... 25.0
Small arms.................................................... 48.0
Ammunition.................................................... 55.0
Night vision devices.......................................... 33.0
Shortstop..................................................... 40.0
Communications equipment...................................... 92.0
Combat support equipment...................................... 63.0
Construction equipment........................................ 33.0
Navy/Marine Corps:
KC-130J....................................................... 252.0
MV-22......................................................... 60.0
CH-60S........................................................ 38.0
UC-35......................................................... 18.0
E/A-6B upgrades............................................... 45.0
F/A-18 series modifications................................... 63.0
P-3 series modifications...................................... 75.0
Tomahawk missiles............................................. 300.0
Joint stand-off weapon........................................ 75.0
Hellfire missiles............................................. 52.0
Joint direct attack munition.................................. 48.0
Maritime prepositioning ship-advance procurement.............. 80.0
Base telecommunications upgrades.............................. 50.0
Improve & recovery vehicle.................................... 49.0
AH-1/UH-1 upgrades............................................ 27.0
Ammunition.................................................... 75.0
Air Force:
E-8C-advance procurement...................................... 46.0
B-2 upgrades.................................................. 187.0
F-15 upgrades................................................. 50.0
F-16 upgrades................................................. 47.0
C-135 upgrades................................................ 68.0
Defense airborne reconnaissance program....................... 40.0
Joint stand-off weapon........................................ 35.0
Minuteman III upgrades........................................ 40.0
AGM-65D Maverick upgrades..................................... 10.0
Joint direct attack munition.................................. 66.0
Ammunition.................................................... 75.0
Theater deployable communications............................. 35.0
Defense-Wide:
National guard/reserve miscellaneous equipment................ 60.0
Aircraft Procurement, Army
Overview
The budget request contained $1,229.9 million for Aircraft
Procurement, Army in fiscal year 2000. The committee recommends
authorization of $1,415.2 million for fiscal year 2000.
The committee recommends approval of the request except for
those programs adjusted in the following table. Unless
otherwise specified, adjustments are without prejudice and
based on affordability considerations.
Items of Special Interest
AH-64 modifications
The budget request contained $22.6 million for AH-64
modifications, but included no funds for an oil debris
detection system (ODDS) or the continuation of the vibration
management enhancement program (VMEP).
The ODDS is an on-board detection system that alerts
aircrews to the presence of metal chips in engines and
propeller gear boxes, allowing flights to be terminated prior
to catastrophic failure of critical components. It also permits
the clearing of smaller particles that routinely accumulate in
engine oil and cause false impending engine failure alarms,
resulting in unnecessary termination of aircraft missions and
costly engine diagnostics.
The VMEP is an Army National Guard (ARNG) effort currently
directed toward resolving vibration management problems on the
ARNG's AH-64 Apache fleet, but the committee understands the
technology is also applicable to the UH-60 Blackhawk, the CH-47
Chinook, and the OH-58D Kiowa Warrior. The committee continues
to support the VMEP because of its belief that such on-board
diagnostic capabilities contribute significantly to both
aircrew safety and improved aircraft reliability.
Since the ODDS, which has been successfully integrated into
many other Department of Defense aircraft, both reduces
aircraft maintenance costs and enhances aircrew safety, the
committee recommends an increase of $3.0 million to incorporate
the ODDS on AH-64 Apaches. The committee also recommends an
increase of $7.0 million to continue VMEP procurement for the
ARNG Apache fleet and to transition this technology to other
aircraft.
Aircraft survivability equipment (ASE)
The budget request contained $88,000 for ASE, but included
no funds for the procurement of upgrades to the Aircraft
Survivability Equipment Trainer (ASET) IV.
ASET IV is a ground-based, mobile aviation threat emitter
simulation and training system which enables both fixed and
rotary wing aviators to recognize surface-to-air-missile (SAM)
and anti-aircraft artillery threats in order to employ the
correct aircraft evasive maneuvers. ASET IV systems are
currently fielded at major training centers throughout the
United States and Germany and require that an aircraft have a
fully operational ASE suite of sensors on board for training.
The Congress added $7.4 million in fiscal year 1998 and
$6.4 million in fiscal year 1999 for ASET IV upgrades. However,
additional validated requirements exist and several systems in
their present configuration still lack the capability to
simulate the most current infrared (IR) and radio frequency
(RF) SAM threats, thereby limiting aircrew training against
older threats-a situation which is not representative of the
Army's ``train as you fight'' concept.
Consistent with past committee actions and based on the
Army's requirement for forces to train in realistic threat
environments, the committee recommends $18.2 million, an
increase of $18.1 million for upgrading ASET IV systems with
current IR and RF SAM threat simulators.
Aircraft survivability equipment (ASE) modifications
The budget request contained $11.8 million for the
procurement of ASE modifications, but included no funds for AN/
AVR-2A laser detecting sets (LDS).
The LDS is the only device in the Army inventory that
provides warning to helicopter crews when they have been
illuminated by a laser-targeted weapon. It detects, identifies,
and characterizes threats 360-degrees-around and plus-or-minus
45 degrees above-and-below an aircraft. The committee is
concerned with the growing laser threat to helicopter aircrews
and notes the limited situational awareness that is currently
provided by existing AN/AVR-2A technology. The committee
understands that a quantum improvement to aircrew situational
awareness is achievable by incorporating the precise laser
azimuth and discrimination capabilities of the AN/VVR-1 ground
LDS into the AN/AVR-2A aviation LDS.
Accordingly, the committee directs the Secretary of the
Army to expeditiously establish an engineering change proposal
(ECP) to integrate the precision laser azimuth and
discrimination capabilities of the AN/VVR-1 into the AN/AVR-2A
and recommends an increase of $11.5 million, which includes a
$5.5 million increase for the ECP, and, $6.0 million to procure
additional AN/AVR-2A LDS until the ECP is in production.
CH-47 cargo helicopter modifications
The budget request contained $70.7 million for procurement
of CH-47 Chinook helicopter modifications.
The CH-47D, the Army's only heavy lift helicopter, is
capable of lifting multiple types of cargo weighing up to
26,000 pounds or carrying 33 personnel. The committee
understands that the average age of the CH-47 fleet is 31 years
old, yet notes that the Army has delayed the start of a
comprehensive CH-47 upgrade from fiscal year 1999 to fiscal
year 2001. However, the committee also notes that the Army
Chief of Staff has identified a $56.1 million unfunded
requirement in fiscal year 2000 to accelerate fielding of
improved CH-47Ds in Korea by 30 months.
Therefore, based on the critical need to upgrade these
helicopters, the committee recommends $126.8 million, an
increase of $56.1 million for CH-47D modifications.
Longbow
The budget request contained $729.5 million to modify 74
AH-64A Apache helicopters to the AH-64D Apache Longbow
configuration and $35.7 million in advance procurement to
modify 60 aircraft in fiscal year 2001. The budget request did
not include funds to upgrade Longbow sensor and avionics
integrated circuits.
The AH-64D Apache Longbow, a day/night, all weather, heavy
attack helicopter, is capable of engaging and destroying
advanced, multiple threat armor targets on the future digital
battlefield with minimum exposure time. The committee continues
to support this upgrade. However, it notes that many of the
aircraft sensors and avionics on the Longbow were not designed
with an ``open information architecture,'' and, as a result of
the rapid rate of information technology advances driven by the
commercial information technology market, military
specification integrated circuits (IC) in these avionics and
sensors are no longer produced, resulting in processor
obsolescence.
Consequently, replacement of ICs for these components will
require redesign. The committee understands the cost of this
redesign is estimated to be $45.0 million. Therefore, the
committee recommends $45.0 million to replace obsolete Apache
Longbow ICs.
The committee is concerned that the current plan for fiscal
year 2001-the first year of a second five-year multiyear
procurement (MYP) contract for this aircraft--only includes 60
airframe upgrades--a 12 aircraft reduction from previously
approved plans. The committee understands that an additional
$4.9 million in advance procurement is needed to restore the
program to previously approved levels.
Therefore, the committee recommends $774.5 million, an
increase of $45.0 million for obsolete IC replacement, and
$40.6 million, an increase of $4.9 million for advance
procurement for 12 additional aircraft modifications in fiscal
year 2001. The committee also recommends approval of a second
five-year MYP contract.
UH-60 Blackhawk
The budget request contained $86.1 million for procurement
of eight UH-60L Blackhawk helicopters for the Army National
Guard (ARNG), of which $283,000 was included for engines and
accessories.
The UH-60 Blackhawk is the Army's primary utility
helicopter in both the active and reserve components. The
committee understands that a validated requirement for 83
additional ARNG Blackhawks remains unfilled and, therefore,
consistent with past committee actions, recommends an increase
of $27.0 million to accelerate fielding of 3 additional
Blackhawks.
The committee is aware that the Army procured 28 additional
Blackhawk engines in fiscal year 1998 and intends to use some
of these engines for the helicopters to be procured in fiscal
year 2000. Additionally, the Army provided no justification for
accessory equipment. Therefore, the committee recommends a
decrease of $283,000. In total, the committee recommends $112.8
million for UH-60L Blackhawks.
UH-60 modifications
The budget request contained $12.1 million for UH-60
modifcations, but included no funds to procure either UH-60Q
aeromedical evacuation (MEDEVAC) modification kits for the Army
National Guard (ARNG) or a UH-60Q medical mockup training
device.
The committee notes that new production UH-60Q MEDEVAC
aircraft are not planned to be procured until fiscal year 2002;
however, an interim capability exists through UH-60Q
modification kits, which internally reconfigure UH-60A utility
aircraft into MEDEVAC variants.
The committee also notes that while the Army plans to
procure UH-60Q aircraft in the future, it has not included
funds in the Future Years Defense Program for the one required
UH-60Q medical mockup training device. This fully functional
training device accurately replicates the interior of a UH-60Q
MEDEVAC helicopter and will provide flight medics a classroom-
based, ``hands-on,'' training capability, eliminating the
current need to use dedicated aircraft on the ground for
extended periods of time for this purpose.
Therefore, the committee recommends $22.6 million, an
increase of $9.0 million to procure UH-60Q medical evacuation
modification kits to reconfigure two ARNG UH-60A Blackhawk
helicopters and an increase of $1.5 million to accelerate
procurement of the UH-60Q medical mockup training device.
Utility/cargo airplane modifications
The budget request contained $6.3 million for avionics
modifications to the C-12 utility aircraft.
The C-12 is the Army's primary short to medium range
utility and personnel transport. The 62 aircraft in the
service's inventory are located throughout the world, and the
majority of them continue to operate with analog avionics
technology that was current at the time they were procured in
the 1970s and 1980s. Replacement of obsolete avionics with
state-of-the-art communications, navigation, surveillance and
flight management equipment will enable the aircraft to be more
easily deployed around the world to meet emerging global
requirements.
The committee is pleased that the Army has requested funds
for these safety of flight upgrades but believes additional
funds are required. Accordingly, and consistent with actions
taken in past fiscal years, the committee recommends $9.3
million, an increase of $3.0 million to more efficiently
procure C-12 avionics upgrades.
Missile Procurement, Army
Overview
The budget request contained $1,358.1 million for Missile
Procurement, Army in fiscal year 2000. The committee recommends
authorization of $1,416.0 million for fiscal year 2000.
The committee recommends approval of the request except for
those programs adjusted in the following table. Unless
otherwise specified, adjustments are without prejudice and
based on affordability considerations.
Items of Special Interest
Avenger modifications
The budget request contained no funds to procure Avenger
slew-to-cue (STC) modifications.
The STC upgrade enables the Avenger turret to automatically
and rapidly slew in azimuth and elevation resulting in a 55
percent increase in target engagements. The committee
understands that existing Army National Guard (ARNG) Avenger
fire units require installation of a fire control computer with
embedded STC capability to provide the most lethal and rapid
force protection air defense capability.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $4.3
million to upgrade one ARNG Avenger battalion with STC-capable
fire control computers.
Avenger system summary
The budget request contained $33.8 million to procure 15
Avengers for the Army National Guard (ARNG), of which $636,000
was for the installation of environmental control units/prime
power units (ECU/PPU).
The Avenger, the Army's primary mobile, short-range,
surface-to-air defense missile and antiaircraft artillery
system, is mounted on and operates off the internal power of a
High Mobility Multipurpose Wheeled Vehicle. The committee
understands that some Avenger turrets do not have a climate
control unit, resulting in either extremely high or low turret
temperatures during hot and cold weather. The committee is
aware of an ongoing ECU/PPU retrofit program, which provides
stable turret temperatures as well as an independent power
supply for the turret.
Based on the added benefits of these enhancements, the
committee recommends $35.1 million, an increase of $1.3 million
for additional ECU/PPU upgrades to ARNG Avengers.
Brilliant anti-armor (BAT) submunition
The budget request contained $149.3 million to procure 846
BAT submunitions, of which $5.0 million was included for test
and evaluation.
The committee notes that the amount of funds requested for
test and evaluation represents a 285 percent increase over the
amount that was authorized and appropriated in fiscal year 1999
for 420 submunitions. Additionally, the amount planned for this
same requirement in fiscal year 2001 is only $2.3 million for a
corresponding 1,028 missiles.
The committee is concerned with this unjustified, sharp
increase in test and evaluation funds, and, therefore,
recommends a decrease of $2.7 million.
Multiple launch rocket system (MLRS) launcher systems
The budget request contained $114.6 million for the
procurement of 47 MLRS launcher systems for the active Army,
but included no funds for the procurement of launcher systems
for the Army National Guard (ARNG).
The committee notes that the ARNG provides nearly 70
percent of the total Army's artillery fire support but further
notes that an MLRS launcher shortfall continues to exist for
ARNG units. However, the committee is aware that the Army Chief
of Staff's fiscal year 2000 unfunded requirements list included
MLRS launcher systems to fill ARNG MLRS battalion readiness
shortfalls as a top priority.
Consistent with actions taken in past fiscal years, the
committee recommends $170.1 million, an increase of $55.5
million for additional MLRS launcher systems for the ARNG.
Weapons and Tracked Combat Vehicles, Army
Overview
The budget request contained $1,416.8 million for
procurement of Army weapons and tracked combat vehicles for
fiscal year 2000. The committee recommends authorization of
$1,575.1 million for fiscal year 2000.
The committee recommends approval of the request except for
those programs adjusted in the following table. Unless
otherwise specified, adjustments are without prejudice and
based on affordability considerations.
Items of Special Interest
Abrams upgrade program/heavy assault bridge (HAB)
The budget request contained $423.0 million to procure 120
M1A2 Abrams System Enhancement Program (SEP) tanks and $67.3
million to procure 13 HABs, but included no funds for HAB
advance procurement.
The HAB is an 85-foot, military-load class bridge
transported on a modified M1A2 SEP tank chassis. The system is
capable of spanning up to 79-foot spaces, is deployable in five
minutes, and can be retrieved in less than ten minutes--
requirements that resulted from Army bridging system
deficiencies identified during Operation Desert Storm.
The committee notes the Secretary of the Army's request for
a second multiyear procurement (MYP) contract for the M1A2 SEP
tank beginning in fiscal year 2001 and that an estimated $118.0
million in savings is expected from the MYP contract through
fiscal year 2005. Due to the 80 percent commonality between HAB
and M1A2 hardware, the committee also notes that an estimated
$190.0 million in savings from fiscal year 2001 through fiscal
year 2005 could be achieved from the efficiencies of a combined
HAB and M1A2 MYP contract.
Based on these larger savings, the committee recommends a
combined M1A2 SEP/HAB MYP contract. The committee also
recommends an increase of $14.0 million to synchronize HAB
advance procurement in fiscal year 2000 with M1A2 SEP tank
advance procurement.
Bradley base sustainment
The budget request contained $281.1 million for the
procurement of 104 Bradley A3 fighting vehicle upgrades, but
included no funds for upgrading first-generation Bradley A0
fighting vehicles to the A2 Operation Desert Storm (ODS)
variant for the Army National Guard (ARNG).
The Bradley A2ODS variant improves the vehicle's lethality,
survivability, and mobility, as well as the situational
awareness of its crew. Modifications include installation of a
laser range finder, Global Positioning System navigation
capability, a combat identification system, a driver's thermal
viewer and a missile countermeasure device.
When the Army completes all of its planned upgrades to the
Bradley, the active fleet will include a mix of the most
advanced A3 variant, along with A2 and A2ODS versions. The
majority of the ARNG's Bradley fleet, on the other hand, will
remain unmodified and be comprised mainly of first-generation
A0 vehicles, which, because of major survivability
deficiencies, were not used in the Persian Gulf War. However,
as part of the new ARNG enhanced brigades, the committee notes
that some of these A0 vehicles will be required to deploy with
active Army forces.
Because ARNG enhanced brigades will comprise an increasing
percentage of the Army's warfighting capability as a result of
active force reductions, and consistent with actions taken in
past fiscal years, the committee recommends $353.1 million, an
increase of $72.0 million for modifying Bradley ``A0'' vehicles
to the A2ODS variant for the ARNG.
M113 carrier modifications
The budget request contained $53.5 million for 198 M113A3
carrier modifications.
The M113A3 upgrade program, forecast to add an additional
20 years of service life to the vehicle, includes installation
of a new engine, transmission, external fuel tanks, driver
controls, and kevlar spall liners. The committee is aware that
M113A3 upgrades are one of the Army Chief of Staff's fiscal
year 2000 top unfunded priorities.
Therefore, consistent with actions taken in past fiscal
years, the committee recommends $78.5 million, an increase of
$25.0 million for additional M113A3 upgrade kits.
M240 series medium machine gun
The budget request contained $12.2 million for the
procurement of 1,304 M240 series medium machine guns.
The M240B is the infantry version of the vehicle-mounted
M240 machine gun and replaces the older M60 series machine gun
in light and mechanized infantry and combat engineer units. The
committee notes that the Army has a validated requirement for
over 6,000 M240Bs to upgrade its current inventory of 7.62mm
machine guns.
Therefore, consistent with actions taken in past fiscal
years, the committee recommends $40.0 million, an increase of
$27.8 million to accelerate the fielding of M240B medium
machine guns.
M249 squad automatic weapon (SAW)
The budget request contained no funds for the procurement
of M249 SAW machine guns.
The M249 SAW is a lightweight weapon capable of delivering
a sustained volume of automatic, accurate, and highly lethal
fire up to ranges of 800 meters. This highly mobile machine gun
is being widely fielded throughout the Army to airborne, light
and mechanized infantry, as well as air cavalry units. The
committee is concerned that the Army has eliminated funds for
this weapon throughout the Future Years Defense Program, yet an
unfunded requirement for nearly 8,000 SAWs exists. Therefore,
the committee recommends $10.1 million to continue procurement
of M249 SAWs to reduce this shortfall.
MK19-3 grenade launcher
The budget request contained $18.3 million to procure 1,085
MK19-3 grenade launchers.
The MK19-3 is a 40 millimeter automatic grenade launcher
capable of engaging point targets up to 1,500 meters and
providing suppressive fire up to 2,200 meters in range. This
infantry weapon can also be mounted on armored vehicles and
High Mobility Multipurpose Wheeled Vehicles.
The committee notes that the Army has an unfulfilled
requirement of over 3,600 MK19-3s and that there are critical
shortages of this weapon in European-, Republic of Korea-, and
continental United States-based units. The committee also notes
this weapon's increased importance in military operations in
urban terrain (MOUT) and close combat operations.
Because of the MK19-3's critical shortages and the fact
that United States military forces are increasingly being
deployed into MOUT and potential close combat situations, the
committee recommends $28.3 million, an increase of $10.0
million to accelerate procurement of MK19-3 grenade launchers.
Ammunition Procurement, Army
Overview
The budget request contained $1,140.8 million for
Ammunition Procurement, Army in fiscal year 2000. The committee
recommends authorization of $1,196.2 million for fiscal year
2000.
The committee recommends approval of the request except for
those programs adjusted in the following table. Unless
otherwise specified, adjustments are without prejudice and
based on affordability considerations.
Items of Special Interest
Ammunition
The budget request contained $987.0 million for procurement
of ammunition. The committee recommends $1,037.0 million, an
increase of $50.0 million for the following types of
ammunition, which include top unfunded priorities of the Chief
of Staff of the Army for fiscal year 2000:
[In millions of dollars]
Small/Medium Cal Ammunition:
CTG 25mm All Types............................................ 2.0
CTG 40mm All Types............................................ 8.0
Mortar Ammunition:
CTG 120mm Illum XM930 w/MTSQ FZ............................... 5.0
CTG 120mm WP Smoke M929A1..................................... 5.0
Artillery Ammunition:
CTG Arty 105mm DPICM XM915.................................... 5.0
Mines:
Mine, Antitank (Volcano)...................................... 10.0
Rockets:
Bunker Defeating Munition..................................... 10.0
Grenade, All Types:
Smoke Screening, XM 90........................................ 5.0
Hydra 70 rockets
The budget request contained $144.8 million for Hydra 70
rockets.
The committee acknowledges the Army's actions to identify
and eliminate the problem of early motor blows (EMB)
experienced by the Hydra 70 from 1992 to 1995. The committee
asked the General Accounting Office to conduct a review of the
service's ongoing inspection program and was generally pleased
with the information it received. However, the committee
understands that because some of the Army's Hydra 70 rockets
are prepositioned on ships and in-theater, they will not be
accessible for inspection before the current inspection
contract expires in November 1999. Given the potential threat
EMBs pose to aircraft and crew, the committee urges the Army to
extend this contract and make every reasonable effort to
inspect the entire inventory of Hydra 70 rockets that could
experience this problem.
Provision of industrial facilities
The budget request contained $46.1 million for Army
ammunition plant (AAP) future project design, obsolete
production line equipment replacement, and environmental
deficiencies and infrastructure corrections, of which $9.1
million was for production line and facility upgrades to Iowa
AAP. However, the budget request did not include non-recurring
engineering costs for the 120 millimeter (mm) tank ammunition
load, assemble, and pack (LAP) production line enhancements at
this plant.
The committee is aware of the Army's future plans to
improve the Iowa AAP production line, resulting in increased
efficiency, safety, and reliability, as well as production line
output. However, based on the implementation timeline of these
plans, an estimated $4.7 million in annual savings is not
expected to accrue until fiscal year 2004.
The committee understands that a $5.4 million increase in
non-recurring engineering for the LAP production line will
accelerate these enhancements. Therefore, the committee
recommends $51.5 million, an increase of $5.4 million for this
purpose.
Other Procurement, Army
Overview
The budget request contained $3,423.9 million for Other
Procurement, Army in fiscal year 2000. The committee recommends
authorization of $3,799.9 million for fiscal year 2000.
The committee recommends approval of the request except for
those programs adjusted in the following table. Unless
otherwise specified, adjustments are without prejudice and
based on affordability considerations.
Items of Special Interest
Area common user system (ACUS) modification program
The budget request contained $109.1 million for the ACUS
modification program in order to support its migration to the
Warfighter Information Network (WIN) systems architecture, but
included no funds for the procurement of high speed
multiplexers (HSMUX) for Army National Guard (ARNG) signal
brigades.
The WIN architecture will seamlessly link the Army's
diverse information systems on the 21st century digitized
battlefield. HSMUX will provide increased bandwidth to the WIN
in response to the growing demand for video and data in the
battlefield tactical communications environment. As part of the
echelon above and below corps force support packages, ARNG
signal brigades will be required to deploy with these early
entry units; however, they will not be able to provide state-
of-the-art video and data communications support without HSMUX
upgrades.
The committee notes that the Army Chief of Staff has
identified the ACUS modification program as a fiscal year 2000
top unfunded priority. In response to this requirement, the
committee recommends $110.0 million, an increase of $900,000 to
procure and field HSMUX upgrades to ARNG signal brigades.
Army data distribution system (ADDS)
The budget request contained $38.8 million to procure 1,280
Enhanced Position Location Reporting System (EPLRS) radios, but
included no funds for the procurement of EPLRS for the Army
National Guard (ARNG).
The EPLRS radio is the Army's and Marine Corps' primary
position location reporting system, providing battlefield
commanders combat information on the position of their forces
in addition to supporting the majority of the services' data
communications requirements for brigade and below tactical
command and control. The system provides secure, jam-resistant,
near-real-time communications and is essential to support
tactical operations on the battlefield.
The committee notes that procurement and fielding of
additional EPLRS is on both the Army Chief of Staff's and
Commandant of the Marine Corps' fiscal year 2000 unfunded
priorities lists. The committee also notes that ARNG enhanced
brigades must have the necessary data communications
capabilities to operate alongside active Army units.
Accordingly, the committee recommends $64.7 million, an
increase of $25.9 million for the procurement of EPLRS for ARNG
enhanced brigades. The committee also recommends $103.2
million, an increase of $20.3 million to procure of EPLRS for
the Marine Corps.
Artillery accuracy equipment
The budget request contained $4.3 million to procure the
Artillery Muzzle Velocity System, but included no funds to
procure the Meteorological Measuring System (MMS). The MMS
provides data to field artillery units that improves firing
accuracy. The committee is encouraged that the Army plans to
procure 14 MMSs for the Army National Guard (ARNG) in fiscal
year 2001, however, it recognizes that accelerated fielding of
MMS to the ARNG would benefit total Army mission requirements
since the ARNG provides nearly 70 percent of the total Army's
artillery fire support.
Therefore, the committee recommends $7.3 million for
artillery accuracy equipment, an increase of $3.0 million to
accelerate procurement of the MMS for the ARNG.
Automated data processing equipment (ADPE)
The budget request contained $138.6 million for procurement
of ADPE, of which $38.9 million was included for the
procurement of Major Army Command (MACOM) automation systems
and $4.2 million was for automatic identification technology
(AIT).
The committee notes a 27 percent increase in the amount
requested for MACOM automation systems over the amount
authorized and appropriated in fiscal year 1999 and believes
this growth to be excessive. Therefore, the committee
recommends a decrease of $4.5 million for production of these
systems.
AIT devices, which consist of various radio frequency (RF),
bar code scanning, and data carrier devices, are used as
components of automated logistics systems, contributing to
expedited receiving, storage, distribution, and inventory
management of new and repairable items. For example, the
committee understands that RF tagging devices are currently
used in a pilot program implemented at six locations worldwide
in fiscal year 1998 to track ammunition from point of origin to
place of destination. The committee understands that these
devices are also used to automate manufacturing process
controls for aircraft repair parts and to track ground support
equipment at various military depots.
The committee is impressed with the promising results
achieved to date with RF tagging devices and believes that
substantial savings can be achieved from further implementation
of these devices in automated inventory and repair processes.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $11.0
million for ammunition AIT integration efforts and $8.7 million
for maintenance AIT implementation. In total, the committee
recommends $153.8 million for ADPE.
Combat support medical
The budget request contained $25.3 million for the
procurement of deployable medical systems and field medical
equipment, but included no funds for the procurement of the
advanced surgical suite for trauma casualties (ASSTC) for the
Army National Guard (ARNG).
The ASSTC is a lightweight, highly mobile, self-contained
medical facility for on-scene triage, minor surgery, diagnostic
and preventive medical treatment, which can also be used for
life-saving, resuscitative surgery for 20 casualties. It is
capable of operating independently for up to 48 hours in
support of contingency operations and disaster relief.
Based on the ARNG's evolving role as ``first responders''
to weapons of mass destruction and domestic terrorist
incidents, and its requirement to deploy in response to natural
disasters, the committee recommends $40.3 million, an increase
of $15.0 million for the procurement of ASSTCs for the ARNG.
Family of heavy tactical vehicles
The budget request contained $190.4 million to procure
palletized load systems and related equipment, heavy expanded
transporter system trucks, and heavy repair vehicles, of which
$36.8 million was for 119 M984 heavy expanded mobility tactical
truck (HEMTT) wreckers. However, no HEMTT wreckers were
requested for the Army Reserve (AR). The HEMTT wrecker is a 10-
ton, diesel-powered, eight-wheel drive vehicle designed to
retrieve other heavy wheeled combat and support vehicles.
The committee notes that the AR's evolving combat support
and combat service support mission requirements necessitate the
need for HEMTT wreckers.
Therefore, the committee recommends $196.4 million, an
increase of $6.0 million for 21 HEMTT wreckers for the AR.
General purpose vehicles
The budget request contained $1.0 million for the
procurement of general purpose vehicles, but included no funds
for the procurement of Military (M) Gators.
The M Gator is a low cost, air-deployable, multipurpose
vehicle designed for transport of logistics equipment and
personnel on the battlefield and in urban terrain. The
committee understands that the XVIII Airborne Corps has
submitted an urgent operational needs statement for procurement
of 600 M Gators to the Chief of Staff of the Army and that an
operational requirements document is currently being staffed.
The committee also understands that this vehicle has been
extensively tested and used by both the Army and Special
Operations Command in Bosnia and in the Middle East.
Therefore, to fill the XVIII Airborne Corps' urgent
operational needs, the committee recommends $13.0 million, an
increase of $12.0 for M Gators.
High speed compactor
The budget request contained $9.8 million to procure 67
815F high-speed compactors. The 815F high-speed compactor is a
commercially produced, self-propelled, diesel powered, tamping
machine used to build roads, airfields, and dams. The committee
notes that the amount in this budget request would enable the
service to reach 199 of its 212 vehicle acquisition objective
but that the remaining vehicles are not planned to be procured
until fiscal year 2005.
The committee believes that meeting the acquisition
objective should be accelerated and, therefore, recommends
$12.4 million, an increase of $2.6 million for this purpose.
Hunter unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV)
The budget request contained no funds for the procurement
of upgrades for the Hunter UAV.
The Hunter UAV is the Army's only operational UAV system
and is used to develop corps-, division-, and brigade-level
tactics, techniques, and procedures, and is also available for
worldwide contingency operations. It is currently deployed to
the Balkans as part of Operation Allied Force supporting North
Atlantic Treaty Organization operations.
The committee understands that the fielded Hunter systems
have only partially received hardware and software upgrades
which improve their operational effectiveness and reduce
operations and support costs. Additional Hunter systems being
readied for fielding and those in storage have not been
similarly upgraded.
The committee believes that the Hunter UAV system will play
a major role in tactics development and the enhancement of
battlefield commander's tactical awareness until the follow-on
Tactical UAV is fielded.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $9.0
million to provide these upgrades to the Hunter UAV inventory.
Information system security program (ISSP)
The budget request contained a total of $28.8 million,
$64.1 million, and $13.3 million to procure secure voice and
data terminal equipment for the Army, Navy, and Air Force
respectively.
The committee understands that the services are replacing
older secure voice and data systems with newer multi-media
secure digital communications equipment and that the systems
available today provide significant operations and maintenance
savings over legacy systems.
Therefore, in order to accelerate the replacement of
obsolete secure voice and data terminals, the committee
recommends an increase of $9.0 million to procure additional
secure terminal equipment: $3.0 million for the Army ISSP, $3.0
million for the Navy ISSP, and $3.0 million for the Air Force
command, control, and communications countermeasures program.
Integrated family of test equipment (IFTE)
The budget request contained $41.6 million to procure IFTE,
including $12.7 million for 4 IFTE electro-optic test
facilities (EOTF).
The EOTF provides automatic electro-optics (EO) test and
diagnostic support and is capable of satisfying the full range
of Army EO test requirements. These facilities will replace
existing electronic equipment repair facilities and the
committee understands that they will initially support the OH-
58D Kiowa Warrior and the Improve Target Acquisition System
(ITAS).
The committee notes that the Army Chief of Staff identified
a fiscal year 2000 unfunded priority for additional EOTFs.
Accordingly, the committee recommends $51.6 million, an
increase of $10.0 million to procure additional EOTFs for Kiowa
Warrior and ITAS support.
Items less than $2.0 million (construction equipment)
The budget request contained $4.3 million to procure
various construction equipment items less than $2.0 million,
but included no funds to procure ultimate building machines.
The ultimate building machine system is a highly mobile steel
fabrication mechanism which can be rapidly set up to construct
complex steel structures in support of field operations and
interim shelter requirements.
The committee notes that each of the services has had
additional requirements placed on its engineer support and
construction units as a result of increased deployments for
contingency, humanitarian assistance, and disaster relief
operations. The committee recognizes the benefits that easily
and rapidly constructed shelters contribute to these types of
operations.
Therefore, the committee recommends $6.3 million, an
increase of $2.0 million to procure ultimate building machines
for the Army and the Army National Guard. The committee also
recommends an increase of $1.0 million each for procurement of
these machines by the Navy, Marine Corps, Air National Guard,
and Air Force Reserve.
Joint surveillance target attack radar system (Joint STARS) common
ground station (CGS)
The budget request contained $82.2 million to procure 12
Joint STARS CGSs, of which $6.0 million was included for pre-
planned product improvements (P3I).
The Joint STARS CGS improves ground commanders' battlefield
command and control capability by integrating into a single
station the processing of signals, imagery, and other
intelligence received through a data link from the Air Force's
E-8 Joint STARS aircraft radar. The system detects, locates,
tracks, and classifies both moving and stationary targets
beyond the forward line of troops. The P3I program provides the
Joint STARS an expanded capability to interface with additional
airborne intelligence assets while incorporating joint message
processing and information security upgrades.
The committee is aware of the proven success of the CGS and
believes the P3I upgrades will greatly enhance the ground
commanders' situational awareness. Therefore, the committee
recommends $112.2 million for Joint STARS CGS, an increase of
$30.0 million for these upgrades.
Lightweight video reconnaissance system (LVRS)
The budget request contained $3.4 million to procure 145
LVRSs.
The LVRS consists of a small, ruggedized, open architecture
processor and generation III image intensification night
vision-capable video camera/recorder. The system allows special
operations forces (SOF) and light force scout and
reconnaissance units to photograph, record, and transmit near
real-time video images over Single Channel Ground and Airborne
Radio Systems from forward deployed field positions back to
tactical operations centers. It facilitates rapid target
identification and analysis critical to mission planning and
execution on the digitized battlefield and in urban
environments. The committee notes that the Army Chief of Staff
identified a $2.5 million unfunded requirement for fiscal year
2000 to procure an additional 268 LVRSs for SOF and light
forces.
Therefore, the committee recommends $5.9 million, an
increase of $2.5 million to procure 268 additional LVRSs.
M56 smoke generator system
The budget request contained $6.3 million for the
procurement of 14 M56 smoke generator systems.
The M56 smoke generator system, the primary battlefield
obscurant for Army light forces, is a High Mobility
Multipurpose Wheeled Vehicle-mounted system capable of
disseminating smoke in both stationary positions and on the
move. The M56 can defeat enemy sensors such as tank thermal
sights as well as smart and guided munitions which operate in
the visual through far infrared portions of the electromagnetic
spectrum.
The committee understands that the M56 has been designated
as an essential item of equipment for early entry forces. The
committee further understands that while the Army's force
package one units have a requirement of 300 of these smoke
generators, only 25 have been funded in fiscal years 2000 and
2001. Therefore, the committee recommends $22.3 million, an
increase of $16.0 million for additional M56 smoke generator
systems.
Modification of in-service equipment
The budget request contained $24.9 million for upgrades to
various marine vessels and onboard equipment, construction, and
logistic vehicles, but included no funds to conduct an Army
National Guard (ARNG) D-7 dozer service life extension program
(SLEP).
The committee understands that the majority of the
currently fielded ARNG D-7 dozers have an average fleet age of
27 years, well beyond their intended 15 year service lives and
that there are no plans to replace the D-7s. The committee
notes that a reserve component D-7 dozer limited rebuild
program was initiated in fiscal year 1995, but that a more
extensive SLEP which would extend the D-7 service life and
eliminate its ``unsatisfactory'' readiness rating is not
contemplated in the Future Years Defense Program. This, despite
the greater demand placed on overage D-7 dozers by increased
``operations-other-than-war'' deployments.
Therefore, the committee recommends $34.9 million, an
increase of $10.0 million for an ARNG D-7 dozer SLEP.
Modification of in-service equipment (tactical surveillance)
The budget request contained $6.5 million to procure fire
support digitization hardware and software upgrades for the AN/
TPQ-36 and AN/TPQ-37 Firefinder radars, but included no funds
to procure additional AN/TPQ-36 radars.
The AN/TPQ-36 is a High Mobility Multipurpose Wheeled
Vehicle-mounted, phased-array, X-band radar, which locates
mortars and short-range rocket launchers. The system transmits
near-real time target data to friendly artillery elements
enabling these units to rapidly engage the targeted mortars and
rocket launchers with counterfire.
The committee notes that the Army does not plan to resume
procurement of AN/TPQ-36 Firefinder radars until fiscal year
2002 and is concerned both with this two-year break in
production and the force protection implications related to it.
Accordingly, the committee recommends $11.5 million, an
increase of $5.0 million to continue procurement of AN/TPQ-36
Firefinder radars.
Night vision devices
The budget request contained $21.0 million for the
procurement of night vision devices, of which $19.0 million was
included for 4,550 AN/PVS-7D night vision goggles, but included
no funds for the procurement of generation III 25 millimeter
(mm) image intensification tubes.
The AN/PVS-7D night vision goggle is a head- or helmet-
mounted, third-generation, image intensifying, device used by
soldiers for nighttime operations. The committee notes that the
Army acquisition objective for this device has increased by
100,000 units since fiscal year 1998 to 381,000; however, at
the end of fiscal year 1999 only 194,409 units will have been
procured. The committee also notes that the ``Own the Night''
concept--the Army's strategy of fighting, dominating and
winning battles during nighttime operations--remains as one of
the Army Chief of Staff's top priorities.
The committee is aware of the joint Army/Navy/Marine Corps
program to procure generation III 25mm image intensification
tubes as replacements for less capable generation II tubes
fielded in the AN/PVS-4 and AN/TVS-5 night vision goggles and
notes that the generation III tubes provide a minimum 25
percent resolution increase.
The committee is aware that the Army Chief of Staff has
identified several fiscal year 2000 unfunded requirements, two
of which are, $8.0 million for AN/PVS-7D night vision goggles
and $25.0 million for generation III 25mm image intensification
tubes.
Based on existing shortfalls, the enhanced operational
capability that night vision devices provide to combat forces,
and the committee's belief that these devices will provide a
pivotal ``force multiplier'' in future Army deployments, the
committee recommends $8.0 million for AN/PVS-7D night vision
goggles and $25.0 million for generation III 25mm image
intensification tubes, for a total increase of $33.0million for
these devices.
Nonsystems training devices
The budget request contained $67.4 million to procure
nonsystem training devices, but included no funds to procure
the area weapons scoring system (AWSS), improved moving target
simulator (IMTS) upgrades, or the deployable force-on-force
instrumented range system (DFIRST).
The AWSS is an electronic aerial gunnery scoring system
used to accurately score helicopter units in day/night, live
fire air-to-ground gunnery training. The committee notes that
this type of training is directly related to the readiness of
attack helicopter aircrews, especially for short-notice combat
operations such as Operation Allied Force. The committee
understands that the Army procured three AWSSs in fiscal year
1991, however, these systems are capable of supporting only 40
percent of the total Army's training requirement. The committee
further understands that a validated requirement for three
additional systems has existed since fiscal year 1995, yet none
of these has been procured.
The 360 degree, high-resolution IMTS is an Army and Marine
Corps air defense simulation system which trains personnel on
Stinger surface-to-air missile operations and launch
proficiency. The committee is aware of IMTS upgrades that would
provide computer-generated targets, variable scenario computer-
generated background video images, and computer workstations
for modeling air defense encounters. The committee understands
that these upgrades would enhance both Army and Marine Corps
air defense forces' operational proficiency by providing rapid,
effective, real-world training prior to deploying into
potential combat situations.
The committee understands that the DFIRST Global
Positioning System satellite-based instrumentation system for
mounted maneuver training exercises would contribute
significantly to the furtherance of the Army National Guard's
(ARNG) regional home station instrumentation training plan.
This plan calls for force-on-force, simulation-based training
at a number of regional centers that would produce experiences
for ARNG units comparable to those received at the Army's
combat training centers. The committee notes the impressive
results obtained during the DFIRST evaluation and believes that
this system will not only increase the readiness of ARNG units
through more effective training but do so at a lower cost and
with greater safety than is currently done.
Therefore, the committee recommends $80.7 million, an
increase of $3.8 million to procure three AWSSs; $1.5 million
for three Army IMTS upgrades; $1.0 million for an ARNG IMTS
upgrade; and, an increase of $7.0 million to field two DFIRST
regional ARNG training sites. In total, the committee
recommends $13.3 for nonsystems training devices for the Army
and ARNG. The committee also recommends an increase of $1.0
million for a Marine Corps IMTS upgrade.
Product improved (PI) combat vehicle crewman (CVC) headset
The budget request contained no funds to procure PI CVC
headsets.
The committee understands that loss of communications in
CVC headsets was identified in late fiscal year 1998 during
armored vehicle Force XXI Battle Command Brigade and Below
(FBCB2) testing and evaluation. Army testing revealed that
electromagnetic interference (EMI) created by new, higher
powered Single Channel Ground and Airborne Radio Systems
installed in armored vehicles to transmit FBCB2 data creates
these communication problems. The committee believes that such
communication problems could endanger crews as a result of not
receiving complete command and control information and data
transmissions in a high operational tempo or combat
environment.
Since the PI CVC headset eliminates EMI communication
losses, the committee recommends an increase of $15.0 million
to procure PI CVC headsets to address this safety issue.
Ribbon bridge
The budget request contained $12.1 million to procure
ribbon bridge equipment, but included no funds to procure this
equipment for Army National Guard (ARNG) multi-role bridge
companies (MRBC).
Ribbon bridge equipment consists of 10-ton, 8-wheel drive
M1977 Heavy Expanded Mobility Tactical Truck Common Bridge
Transporters, M15 Bridge Adaptor Pallets, and M14 Improved Boat
Cradles. The committee understands that seven ARNG MRBC are
being established in fiscal year 2001 using existing engineer
bridging equipment and older, lower capacity five-ton trucks.
Without increased funds, these new ARNG units will not begin
conversion to the new equipment required for MRBC until fiscal
year 2004.
Therefore, the committee recommends $25.6 million for
ribbon bridging equipment, an increase of $13.5 million to
accelerate the fielding of one ARNG MRBC.
Shortstop
The budget request contained no funds to procure the
Shortstop Electronic Protection System (SEPS).
The SEPS is a commercial electronics radio frequency
countermeasure system that protects personnel and high value
assets from artillery, mortar rounds, and rockets by detonating
their proximity fuzes well before they impact. Developed as a
quick reaction capability system, SEPS was deployed during
Operation Desert Storm and more recently in Operation Joint
Endeavor. The committee understands that initial Army testing
of 5,000 rounds fired at the SEPS resulted in a 100 percent
pre-detonation success rate and that follow-on tests against
both artillery and rockets were also highly successful.
The committee notes that, although the theater commanders-
in-chief have submitted urgent SEPS requirements, the Army has
failed to fund this system for the fourth straight year. The
Commander, United States Army Forces Europe has submitted the
most recent such requirement for over 200 SEPS to support
Balkan operations. In consideration of this requirement, in
recognition of the fact that SEPS is also one of the Army Chief
of Staff's fiscal year 2000 top unfunded priorities, and
consistent with actions taken in past fiscal years, the
committee recommends an increase of $40.0 million for the
procurement of additional SEPS. The committee also recommends
an increase of $4.0 million for the Marine Corps to ensure that
Marine expeditionary forces have adequate protection from
proximity-fuzed artillery rounds, mortars, and rockets.
Single channel ground and airborne radio systems (SINCGARS) family
The budget request contained $13.2 million for the fielding
of SINCGARS, but included no funds to procure SINCGARS advanced
system improvement program (ASIP) radios for the Army National
Guard (ARNG).
The SINCGARS ASIP radio upgrades earlier version, voice-
only radios and includes a tactical Internet controller and
integrated communications security enhancements, which provides
commanders a highly reliable, easily maintained, secure voice
and data handling command and control capability. The committee
is aware of the Army Chief of Staff's unfunded requirement for
5,100 SINCGARS ASIP radios for force package three, which
includes the ARNG. The committee understands that without these
radios, ARNG forces will be unable to transmit to and receive
data from their active Army components when operating together.
Therefore, consistent with prior fiscal years, the
committee recommends $60.4 million, an increase of $47.2
million to procure SINCGARS ASIP radios for the ARNG.
Small pusher tug
The budget request contained no funds to procure small
pusher tugs.
The small pusher tug is a 60-foot, steel hull, twin
propeller vessel designed to tow general cargo barges in
harbors, inland waterways, and along coastlines. It is also
capable of assisting larger tugs in docking and undocking ships
of all sizes, movement of floating cranes and machine shops,
and performing line handling duties.
The committee is aware of the Army's intent to replace its
unreliable 40-year old small tugs that were used in Operations
Desert Shield and Desert Storm and understands that it has
recently increased its requirement for seven additional tugs to
replace these older vessels. The committee included an increase
of $4.7 million in fiscal year 1999 to procure two additional
tugs to complete the earlier requirement of eight tugs.
However, the committee notes that the Army has not budgeted for
the additional seven new tugs in its Future Years Defense
Program.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $9.0
million to accelerate procurement of three vessels towards the
new Army requirement.
Standard teleoperating kit
The budget request contained $4.0 million to procure 12
Standardized Robotic System (SRS) vehicle teleoperating kits.
The SRS kit can be installed on existing tracked,
construction, or wheeled vehicles to enable them to be operated
by remote control, if circumstances dictate, to clear mines.
The committee understands that SRS contingency sets have been
responsible for detonating hundreds of mines while deployed in
Bosnia.
The committee notes that redesigned combat engineer force
structure requires SRS equipment at all force levels, but that
the Army only intends to procure 12 kits in a ``one-time buy''
during fiscal year 2000. The committee disagrees with the
Army's procurement strategy for this equipment and recommends
$24.0 million, an increase of $20.0 million for additional SRS
kits.
Super high frequency (SHF) terminal
The budget request contained $32.0 million for the
procurement of 13 SHF Tri-Band Advanced Range Extension
Terminals (STAR-T). The STAR-T is a High Mobility Multipurpose
Wheeled Vehicle-mounted, multi-channel, tactical tri-band
satellite terminal capable of operating with both commercial
and military SHF satellites.
The committee understands that the system has experienced
an eight month delay in its initial operational test and
evaluation as a result of contractor team restructuring, a
$20.0 million cost overrun; program complexities with the
integration of asynchronous transfer mode, integrated services
digital network and Internet routing capability; and antennae
design, and power amplification problems. As a result of this
delay, the Milestone III procurement decision will not be made
until September 2000.
The committee is concerned with these problems but
recommends the amount requested. However, the committee expects
the Secretary of the Army to report to the Congressional
defense committees about any further complications and delays
with the program and such recommendations as he may deem
appropriate for dealing with them.
Vibratory self-propelled roller
The budget request contained no funds to procure vibratory
self-propelled rollers. The vibratory self-propelled roller is
a commercial compacting vehicle used to support construction of
airfields, logistic areas, and roads required to deploy and
sustain Army forces.
The committee notes that the last major procurement of this
equipment occurred in the early 1980s and that its 22-year
average age, combined with increased deployments, has reduced
its readiness ratings to unsatisfactory levels. The committee
also notes that the Army Chief of Staff identified the
replacement of vibratory self-propelled rollers for both the
active and reserve components as a fiscal year 2000 unfunded
priority.
Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $10.3
million to procure additional vibratory self-propelled rollers:
$5.3 million for active Army units, and $5.0 million for Army
Reserve units.
Wheel-mounted 25-ton crane
The budget request contained $12.1 million to procure 47
wheel-mounted, 25-ton all-terrain cranes (ATECs), but no ATECs
were requested for the Army Reserve (AR).
The ATEC is a multi-use, state-of-the-art, commercial all-
terrain crane used for engineer construction excavation,
lifting and loading general supplies and materiel, and bridging
movement. The ATEC replaces three existing cranes, which range
in age from 19 to 30 years old and suffer from low operational
readiness rates and high operations and support costs with a
single, state-of-the-art unit that exceeds all three obsolete
cranes' capabilities and mobility characteristics.
The committee notes the importance of ATECs in fulfilling
Army Reserve combat support and combat service support mission
requirements and recommends $20.1 million, an increase of $8.0
million to procure ATECs for the Army Reserve.
Chemical Agents and Munitions Destruction, Army
Overview
The budget request contained $1,169.0 million for Chemical
Agents and Munitions Destruction, Army for fiscal year 2000.
The committee recommends authorization of no funds for fiscal
year 2000.
Item of Special Interest
Chemical agents and munitions destruction
The budget request contained $1,169.0 million for Chemical
Agents and Munitions Destruction, Army.
Section 1412(f) of the National Defense Authorization Act
for Fiscal Year 1986 (Public Law 99-145) requires that funds
for the destruction of the U.S. stockpile of lethal chemical
agents and munitions, including funds for military construction
projects necessary to carrying out the demilitarization
program, shall be set forth in the budget of the Department of
Defense as a separate program and shall not be included in the
budget accounts for any military department.
The committee reaffirms its belief that funds for the
chemical demilitarization program must be authorized and
appropriated in a defense-wide budget account in order to
emphasize that destruction of the chemical weapons stockpile is
a national issue, which affects all of the Department of
Defense, not just a single military service. Section 1412(f)
was intended to keep this funding separate in order to prevent
it from being subject to internal service budget priorities and
to avoid artificially inflating the budgets of any of the
military departments. The committee believes that the reasoning
behind the legislative mandate was sound in 1986, when the
estimated life cycles cost of the chemical stockpile
demilitarization program was approximately $1.5 billion, and is
even more valid today, when the estimated cost of the program
has grown almost ten-fold.
Accordingly, the committee recommends no funding for
Chemical Agents and Munitions Destruction, Army, a decrease of
$1,169.0 million. The committee recommends an increase of
$1,012.0 million for Chemical Agents and Munitions Destruction,
Defense.
Aircraft Procurement, Navy
Overview
The budget request contained $8,228.7 million for Aircraft
Procurement, Navy in fiscal year 2000. The committee recommends
authorization of $8,804.1 million for fiscal year 2000.
The committee recommends approval of the request except for
those programs adjusted in the following table. Unless
otherwise specified, adjustments are without prejudice and
based on affordability considerations.
Items of Special Interest
CH-60S
The budget request contained $208.5 million for 13 CH-60S
helicopters and $73.8 million for advance procurement of 18 CH-
60S helicopters in fiscal year 2001.
The CH-60S replaces the H-46, H-1, H-3, and HH-60
helicopters, which meet combat support taskings for vertical
replenishment, cargo and personnel transfer, medical
evacuation, and search and rescue. The committee notes that the
Chief of Naval Operations included additional CH-60S
helicopters in his unfunded priority list for fiscal year 2000,
of which two would be assigned to the Naval Reserve.
Consequently, the committee recommends $246.5 million, an
increase of $38.0 million for two additional CH-60S helicopters
for the Naval Reserve.
Common data link (CDL)
The budget request contained $28.8 million for
modifications to special project aircraft, of which $2.0
million was included for the CDL.
The CDL, consisting of aircraft and ground terminals,
allows special project P-3 aircraft to transfer data between
shore- and sea-based intelligence communication systems. The
committee understands that the Navy requires two ground
terminals and all four special project P-3 aircraft to be
configured with the CDL, but the budget request included
sufficient funding for only one ground terminal and
installation of equipment on two aircraft.
Therefore, the committee recommends $30.8 million, an
increase of $2.0 million for one additional CDL ground terminal
and to procure and install the CDL equipment on the remaining
two special project P-3 aircraft.
Common ground equipment
The budget request contained $413.7 million for common
ground equipment.
The committee notes an approximately 30 percent increase in
the budget request for common ground equipment when compared to
previous and future years. The committee also notes that cost,
schedule, and contractor data is not provided in the
Department's budget justification material for such equipment.
Based on the information provided, the committee believes that
the request exceeds requirements by $20.0 million and,
therefore, recommends $393.7 million, a decrease of $20
million.
E-2 modifications
The budget request contained $28.2 million for E-2
modifications, but included no funds to upgrade the E-2C
aircraft fleet to the Hawkeye 2000 configuration.
The Hawkeye 2000 modification upgrades the E-2C aircraft
with satellite communications; a commercial-off-the-shelf,
high-capacity mission computer and associated workstations; and
cooperative engagement capability. The committee understands
that this modification will provide the E-2C fleet with a
quantum leap in situational awareness and fleet-wide
connectivity and that two aircraft are available to accept this
modification in fiscal year 2000.
Consequently, the committee recommends an increase of $45.0
million: $15.0 million for non-recurring engineering and $30.0
million for the modification of two aircraft to the Hawkeye
2000 configuration.
EA-6B modifications
The budget request contained $161.0 million for EA-6B
modifications, but included no funds for the band 9/10
transmitter/receiver upgrade.
The band 9/10 transmitter/receiver upgrade is designed to
counter the high-frequency radar techniques of a new family of
electronic threats. In recognition of this emerging
requirement, the committee recommended an increase of $39.0
million for fiscal year 1999 and the Congress appropriated
$20.0 million for this purpose. Additionally, the committee
notes that the Department has an inventory objective of 196
band 9/10 transmitter/receiver systems but currently plans to
procure only 120. The committee understands that the existing
band 9 transmitter is based on 1960's technology and that the
cost to maintain these systems through 2015 is approximately
$25.0 million.
Consistent with its previous actions, the committee
recommends $206.0 million, an increase of $45.0 million to
procure additional band 9/10 transmitter/receivers for the EA-
6B.
F-18 series modifications
The budget request contained $308.8 million for F-18 series
modifications, of which $35.1 million was included for
engineering change proposal (ECP)-583 kits to modify four
Marine Corps F/A-18A aircraft.
The ECP-583 modification kit upgrades the avionics and
weapons capability of the F/A-18A to the same capability as the
newer F/A-18C. Without this capability, the F/A-18A cannot
autonomously deliver precision-guided munitions or employ the
AIM-120 Advanced Medium Range Air-to-Air Missile. Despite the
fact that the Marine Corps has a requirement to upgrade 76 of
its F/A-18As with this modification, the Department only
budgeted to upgrade 24 aircraft in its Future Years Defense
Program.
Since the Commandant of the Marine Corps identified ECP-583
among his highest unfunded priorities for fiscal year 2000, the
committee recommends an increase of $63.0 million to procure 14
additional upgrade kits: 7 for the active and 7 for the reserve
components.
F/A-18E/F
The budget request contained $2,692.0 million for 36 F/A-
18E/F aircraft, and $162.2 million for advance procurement of
42 aircraft in fiscal year 2001. The committee notes that the
36 aircraft requested would begin a five-year, 222 aircraft
multiyear procurement through fiscal year 2004 which is
projected to cost 7.4 percent less than annual procurement of
these aircraft.
During the past two years, the committee has expressed its
concerns with the F/A-18E/F program due to its higher cost for
a relatively small capability increase when compared to the
existing F/A-18C/D aircraft. As a result of prior year
testimony by the Department's Director of Operational Test and
Evaluation, the committee has also expressed concern that the
final production configuration may not be determined until the
completion of the aircraft's operational evaluation in October
1999 and that deficiencies in survivablility and radar jamming
systems may not be corrected until after full-rate production
begins. However, the committee supports the Navy's requirement
to replace its aging fighter attack aircraft fleet and believes
that the Department's proposed multiyear procurement should
proceed if the aircraft demonstrates that it meets key
performance parameters and requirements for effectiveness and
suitability upon completion of the operational evaluation and
can be procured at the Department's projected 7.4 percent
multiyear contract cost savings.
Consequently, the committee recommends a provision (Section
121) that would limit the Secretary of the Navy's authority to
enter into the multiyear contract until the Secretary of
Defense certifies that the results of the aircraft's
operational test and evaluation meet both key performance
parameters and requirements for operational effectiveness and
suitability and that the multiyear procurement contract cost is
at least 7.4 percent less than procurement of the same number
of aircraft would be through annually funded contracts. Since
the committee understands that the five-year multiyear contract
award date is scheduled for April 2000, it believes that the
Department will be afforded ample time to review and assess the
results of the F/A-18E/F's operational evaluation prior to the
Secretary's certification to the congressional defense
committees.
Joint primary air training system (JPATS)
The budget request contained $44.8 million for 8 T-6A
aircraft and associated ground training systems, and $9.6
million for advance procurement of 24 aircraft in fiscal year
2001.
The JPATS, consisting of the T-6A aircraft and a ground-
based training system, will be used by both the Navy and Air
Force for primary pilot training. The committee notes that the
Navy has budgeted $1.0 million for engineering change orders
(ECO), but the Air Force included no funds for this purpose.
Since the Navy and Air Force T-6A are the same aircraft, the
committee does not understand how one service's aircraft
requires ECOs and the other's does not.
Consequently, the committee recommends $43.8 million, a
decrease of $1.0 million.
KC-130J
The budget request contained $12.3 million for KC-130J
support costs, but included no funds for procurement of KC-130J
aircraft.
The KC-130J is a tactical transport aircraft that also
serves as a tanker for both helicopters and tactical fighters.
The KC-130J replaces the Marine Corps' existing KC-130F, R, and
T model aircraft, providing a 40 percent increase in range, a
25 percent higher cruise ceiling, a 21 percent increase in
maximum speed, and a 41 percent decrease in take-off distance
over the existing older models.
The Marine Corps currently has an inventory of 35 KC-130Fs,
14 KC-130Rs, and 28 KC-130Ts. The KC-130F, which was procured
between 1960 and 1962, is the oldest aircraft in the inventory
and is approaching the end of its service life. The committee
understands that a December 1998 assessment of the KC-130F
fleet revealed that, unless procurement of KC-130Js is
accelerated or a comprehensive and costly service life
extension is undertaken, an inventory shortfall of 15 aircraft
may occur as early as 2001.
The committee recommended an increase of two KC-130Js in
fiscal year 1999 and notes that additional KC-130J aircraft is
the Commandant of the Marine Corps' number two unfunded
aviation procurement priority for fiscal year 2000.
Therefore, consistent with its prior actions and the
Commandant's priorities, the committee recommends $264.3
million, an increase of $252.0 million for four KC-130J
aircraft.
Lightweight environmentally sealed parachute assembly (LESPA)
The budget request contained no funds for the LESPA.
Due to its longer repack cycle and extended service life,
the committee continues to believe that the Navy will realize
substantial life cycle cost savings by procuring LESPA, as
compared to the use of existing parachutes. Accordingly, the
committee strongly supports the LESPA to replace old parachutes
in the P-3 and E-2C aircraft.
Consistent with its previous actions, the committee
recommends $10.0 million to procure additional LESPAs: $5.0
million for the P-3 and $5.0 million for the E-2C.
MV-22
The budget request contained $796.4 million to procure 10
MV-22 tiltrotor aircraft and $71.0 million for advance
procurement of 16 aircraft in fiscal year 2001.
The committee continues to support accelerated MV-22
procurement and endorses the Quadrennial Defense Review's (QDR)
recognition of the urgent need to replace the Marine Corps'
aging fleet of Vietnam-era CH-46 medium lift helicopters. The
committee notes that the procurement of additional MV-22
aircraft in fiscal year 2000 is the Commandant of the Marine
Corps' highest unfunded aviation procurement priority.
Therefore, consistent with its prior actions, the QDR's
findings, and the Commandant's priorities, the committee
recommends $856.4 million, an increase of $60.0 million to
procure one additional MV-22 aircraft.
P-3 series modifications
The budget request contained $276.2 million for P-3 series
modifications, of which $106.0 million was included for six
anti-surface warfare improvement program (AIP) kits.
The AIP improves the P-3's communications, survivability,
and over-the-horizon targeting capabilities through the
installation of commercial-off-the-shelf components. The
committee understands that the Navy's operational objective is
56 AIP-configured aircraft by fiscal year 2000 but notes that
only 44, including the six requested in fiscal year 2000, have
been funded. The committee also notes that the Chief of Naval
Operations (CNO) has included additional AIP kits among his
highest unfunded priorities for fiscal year 2000.
To reduce the Navy's shortfall and in consonance with the
CNO's priorities, the committee recommends an increase of $70.0
million for an additional five AIP kits.
T-45 training system (TS)
The budget request contained $325.5 million for 15 T-45
aircraft and associated ground training systems, and $9.6
million for advance procurement of 15 aircraft in fiscal year
2001.
The T-45TS, consisting of the T-45 aircraft and ground-
based training, replaces the Navy's TA-4J and T-2C as advanced
pilot training aircraft.
The committee supports the T-45TS but notes unexplained
cost growth for engineering change orders. Consequently, the
committee recommends $323.5 million, a decrease of $2.0
million.
UC-35
The budget request contained no funds for the UC-35.
The UC-35 is a long-range medium-lift operational support
aircraft. The committee understands that the Future Years
Defense Program includes procurement of three UC-35s in fiscal
years 2001 and 2002 to replace older CT-39s. However, the
committee further understands that, since submission of the
budget request, the need to replace the CT-39 has been
accelerated because two of the Marine Corps' CT-39s have been
transferred to the Navy for Undergraduate Naval Flight Officer
training and the third aircraft is approaching the end of its
service life.
Since the Commandant of the Marine Corps has included three
UC-35s among his unfunded priorities for fiscal year 2000, the
committee recommends $18.0 million to procure these aircraft.
Weapons Procurement, Navy
Overview
The budget request contained $1,357.4 million for Weapons
Procurement, Navy in fiscal year 2000. The committee recommends
authorization of $1,764.7 million for fiscal year 2000.
The committee recommends approval of the request except for
those programs adjusted in the following table. Unless
otherwise specified, adjustments are without prejudice and
based on affordability considerations.
Items of Special Interest
Aerial targets
The budget request contained $21.2 million for aerial
targets, but included no funds for the BQM-74.
The BQM-74 is a practice aerial target designed to
replicate anti-ship cruise missiles, and the committee
understands that, since entering the Navy's inventory, it has
satisfied over 80 percent of missions requiring high-speed
aerial targets. While the Department has informed the committee
that its inventory objective for BQM-74 targets is 240 at the
end of each fiscal year in the Future Years Defense Program, no
future BQM-74 targets have been budgeted. The committee is
concerned that without BQM-74s, adequate crew training and
weapons system tests will not be possible. Therefore, the
committee recommends an increase of $25.0 million to procure
BQM-74 targets.
The committee notes $2.1 million of unexplained government
costs for other aerial targets and recommends a decrease of
this amount.
In total, the committee recommends $44.1 million for aerial
targets, an increase of $22.9 million.
Evolved seasparrow missile (ESSM)
The budget request contained $11.7 million for the ESSM, of
which $1.1 million was included for fleet support and
integrated logistics support (ILS).
The ESSM program is a cooperative effort among 10 North
Atlantic Treaty Organization nations to develop and produce an
improved version of the Navy's shipboard ``RIM-7P'' surface-to-
air missile. The committee notes that production of the
missiles for which funds were appropriated in fiscal year 1999
has been delayed due to software problems and further notes
that no missiles are planned for production in fiscal year
2000.
Consequently, the committee believes that no funds are
required for fleet support and ILS and recommends $10.6
million, a decrease of $1.1 million.
Hellfire II missile
The budget request contained no funds for Hellfire II
missiles.
The Hellfire II missile is a laser-guided, anti-armor and
anti-ship weapon used by the Marine Corps on the AH-1W
helicopter and by the Navy on the SH-60B helicopter. The
committee notes that, despite additional funding provided by
Congress in fiscal year 1998, the Department has still not met
its inventory requirement for these missiles. Consequently, the
Chief of Naval Operations (CNO) has included procurement of 750
Hellfire II missiles among his unfunded priorities for fiscal
year 2000.
The committee supports the CNO's request and recommends an
increase of $52.0 million to procure 750 Hellfire II missiles.
Joint stand-off weapon (JSOW)
The Navy budget request contained $154.9 million for 615
JSOWs, and the Air Force budget request contained $80.0 million
for 193 JSOWs.
The JSOW is an air-to-ground glide weapon that uses the
global positioning system and an inertial navigation system for
its precision guidance and can be launched outside the range of
most target-area surface-to-air threat systems. The committee
understands that the JSOW performed flawlessly on its first 17
combat deliveries in the first half of fiscal year 1999 during
Operation Southern Watch in Southwest Asia. As a result of its
success rate, the committee also understands that current JSOW
demand for both the European Operation Allied Force and the
Southwest Asian Operation Southern Watch combat operations
exceeds supply.
Consequently, the committee recommends $229.9 million for
the Navy, an increase of $75.0 million for 401 JSOWs, and
$115.0 million for the Air Force, an increase of $35.0 million
for 207 JSOWs.
Rolling airframe missile
The budget request contained $45.4 million for 90 rolling
airframe missiles (RAM). The RAM is a lightweight ship self-
defense system designed to engage anti-ship missiles.
The committee notes unexplained cost growth for component
improvement, government in-house engineering, and production
acceptance. Consequently, the committee recommends $44.4
million, a decrease of $1.0 million.
Standard missile
The budget request contained $198.9 million for Standard
missiles, of which $45.9 million was included for 75 Block IIIB
missiles, $43.6 million for 16 Block IVA missiles, and $93.5
million for procurement support costs.
The Standard missile is a surface-to-air missile employed
on AEGIS cruisers and destroyers. The Block III series missiles
have improved homing and guidance mechanisms, while the Block
IVA missile is upgraded with a new booster for better range and
maneuverability and would add a near-term capability against
theater ballistic missiles.
Subsequent to submission of the budget request, the
committee has learned that technical problems with the
development of the Block IVA missile have resulted in testing
delays. The committee understands that, as a result of these
delays, development and operational evaluation of the Block IVA
will not be complete until early in fiscal year 2001. Since
procurement of the Block IVA missile will not occur before
fiscal year 2001, the committee recommends no funds for this
program, a decrease of $43.6 million. Elsewhere in this report,
the committee recommends an increase for Block IVA missile
engineering and manufacturing development.
The committee notes, however, that the Chief of Naval
Operations has included additional Block IIIB missiles among
his unfunded priorities for fiscal year 2000. Accordingly, the
committee recommends an increase of $19.0 million for 27
additional Block IIIB missiles.
The committee also notes a 39 percent increase in
procurement support costs from fiscal year 1999 appropriated
levels, despite the fact that the total number of missiles to
be procured decreases. Therefore, the committee recommends a
reduction of $14.4 million.
In total, the committee recommends a decrease of $39.0
million for the Standard missile.
Tomahawk missiles
The budget request contained $50.9 million for the
remanufacture of 148 Block II Tomahawk land attack missiles
(TLAM) to the Block III configuration, but included no funds to
remanufacture Tomahawk anti-ship missiles (TASM) to the TLAM
Block III configuration or to re-start TLAM Block III missile
production.
The Tomahawk missile is a long range, precision strike
cruise missile launched from surface ships or submarines and is
produced in both TASM or TLAM versions for conventional
warfare. The TLAM Block III, the most current and the most
sought-after version by theater commanders-in-chief, has
increased range and accuracy and involves decreased planning
time compared to the earlier TLAM block II configuration. In
the first half of fiscal year 1999, over 500 TLAMs have been
expended in Southwest Asia and European combat operations,
substantially reducing the TLAM inventory below required
levels.
As a result of the TLAM shortage, the Department requested
$421.2 million in fiscal year 1999 emergency supplemental
appropriations for the remanufacture of 424 Block II TLAMs and
200 TASMs to the Block III configuration. Despite this
increase, the committee has learned that Tomahawk inventory
requirements will still not be met in the Future Years Defense
Program.
Consequently, the committee recommends $350.9 million, an
increase of $300.0 million. Of this amount, $260.8 million is
for the remanufacture of 326 TASMs to the TLAM Block III
configuration, $40.0 million is for non-recurring costs to re-
start the TLAM Block III production line, and $50.1 million is
for the procurement of new production TLAM Block III missiles.
Ammunition Procurement, Navy/Marine Corps
Overview
The budget request contained $484.9 million for Ammunition
Procurement, Navy/Marine Corps in fiscal year 2000. The
committee recommends authorization of $612.9 million for fiscal
year 2000.
The committee recommends approval of the request except for
those programs adjusted in the following table. Unless
otherwise specified, adjustments are without prejudice and
based on affordability considerations.
Items of Special Interest
Navy ammunition
The budget request contained $328.7 million for procurement
of ammunition. The committee recommends $381.7 million, an
increase of $53.0 million to procure additional Joint Direct
Attack Munitions which were among the top unfunded priorities
of the Chief of Naval Operations for fiscal year 2000:
[In millions of dollars]
JDAM.............................................................. 48.0
MJU-52 BOL IR..................................................... 5.0
Marine Corps ammunition
The budget request contained $156.2 million for procurement
of ammunition. The committee recommends $231.2 million, an
increase of $75.0 million for the following types of
ammunition, which are among the top unfunded priorities of the
Commandant of the Marine Corps for fiscal year 2000:
[In millions of dollars]
5.56mm, all types................................................. 9.0
7.62mm, all types................................................. 5.0
Linear charges, all types......................................... 10.0
.50 Caliber....................................................... 4.0
40mm, all types................................................... 1.3
60mm, all types................................................... 4.0
CTG 25mm, all types............................................... 8.2
Rocket, 83mm Dual Mode HE......................................... 14.0
Artillery, all types.............................................. 8.0
Fuze, Hand Grenade, practice...................................... 3.0
Charge, Demolition Assembly....................................... 7.2
Items less than $5.0 million...................................... 1.3
Shipbuilding and Conversion, Navy
Overview
The budget request contained $6,678.5 million for
Shipbuilding and Conversion, Navy in fiscal year 2000. The
committee recommends authorization of $6,687.2 million for
fiscal year 2000.
The committee recommends approval of the request except for
those programs adjusted in the following table. Unless
otherwise specified, adjustments are without prejudice and
based on affordability considerations.
Items of Special Interest
Attack submarine force level
Although a baseline force of 50 nuclear powered attack
submarines (SSNs) was established in the 1997 Quadrennial
Defense Review, Department of the Navy witnesses testified in
1998 that theater Commanders-in-Chief (CINC) requirements for
SSNs, including aircraft carrier battlegroup deployments,
Arctic operations, special forces missions, and independent
presence missions dictate a force of 72 SSNs. Near term fiscal
constraints make such a force unaffordable.
Early in the next century, LOS ANGELES Class SSNs, procured
at relatively high rates of two to four boats per year during
the 1980s, will reach the end of their service lives and begin
to leave the fleet in large numbers. The low SSN procurement
rate between 1990 and 2005, if not redressed, will drive the
SSN force level below 50 boats. Moreover, by 2015 significant
military challenges from modernized military forces and the
proliferation of advanced military weapons could confront our
armed forces. This situation may require a Navy that has a
larger SSN force. The committee is concerned that potential
future threats to U.S. national security interests warrant the
establishment of an absolute minimum SSN force level of 50
boats and believes the SSN procurement rates in the Future
Years Defense Program must be increased and maintained at a
rate to ensure that this minimum force level is sustained.
LHD-8 amphibious assault ship
The budget request contained no funds for procurement of a
Wasp-class (LHD) amphibious assault ship.
The committee understands that the Navy intends to procure
the LHD-8 amphibious assault ship in fiscal year 2005 but has
yet to decide whether or not to conduct a service life
extension program (SLEP) to the older Tarawa-class (LHA)
amphibious assault ships in the fleet. Should the Navy choose
to SLEP the LHA ships, it could cost almost $1.0 billion per
ship and add only 15 years to the service life of each ship. An
alternative to the LHA SLEP may be the new construction of LHD-
class amphibious assault ships. The LHD is larger than the LHA
and in most respects provides more capability. The committee
understands that, with some modifications, the LHD could meet
or exceed the capabilities of the LHA in all regards. The
committee believes that avoiding a break in the production of
LHD-class ships preserves the option of procuring these vessels
as an alternative to an LHD SLEP until the Navy determines
which option is more cost-effective.
Therefore, to preserve this option, the committee
recommends an additional $15.0 million for advance procurement
of long lead materials for the construction of LHD-8.
Strategic sealift
The budget request contained no funds for the acquisition
of new sealift ships in the National Defense Sealift Fund.
The committee is concerned that the Maritime Prepositioning
Force (Enhanced) MPF(E) conversion program that was intended to
provide the Marine Corps with three additional prepositioning
ships by purchasing and converting used foreign vessels has
proven to be more costly than originally envisioned. Since
there are insufficient funds to complete all of the planned
conversions and the Marine Corps prepositioning requirement has
not been reduced, the committee continues to believe that the
most sensible way to address the shortfall is to convert a
Large Medium Speed Roll-on/Roll-off (LMSR) vessel to the Marine
Corps-required configuration.
Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $80.0
million in the National Defense Sealift Fund: $50.0 million for
the advance procurement of long lead components for the
construction of an additional LMSR and $30.0 million for
modification of an existing LMSR for the Marine Corps mission.
Other Procurement, Navy
Overview
The budget request contained $4,100.1 million for Other
Procurement, Navy in fiscal year 2000. The committee recommends
authorization of $4,260.4 million for fiscal year 2000.
The committee recommends approval of the request except for
those programs adjusted in the following table. Unless
otherwise specified, adjustments are without prejudice and
based on affordability considerations.
Items of Special Interest
AN/BPS-16 submarine navigation radar upgrade
The budget request contained no funds for upgrading the AN/
BPS-16 submarine navigation radar to make it compliant with the
Navy's electronic chart display information systems (ECDIS-N).
ECDIS-N compliance will eliminate the requirement for paper
navigational charts on submarines by upgrading radar navigation
systems with computer-based charts designed to international
commercial standards.
The committee added $9.0 million in fiscal year 1999 to
upgrade AN/BPS-15(H) submarine radar systems to the ECDIS-N
standard. The committee continues to support the ECDIS-N
compliance and recommends an increase of $8.0 million to
provide for the procurement and installation of nine ship sets
of equipment to upgrade the AN/BPS-16 submarine navigation
radar.
AN/SPS-73 (V) surface search radar
The budget request contained $1.1 million for the
procurement and installation of AN/SPS-73 (V) surface search
radars.
The committee understands that the Navy currently operates
several different surface search radar variants as well as
commercial navigational radars and plans to replace these
systems with the AN/SPS-73 (V) surface search radar, a
commercial-off-the-shelf (COTS) system, in order to improve
performance and standardize logistics and maintenance
requirements. The committee supports the accelerated adoption
of a standard COTS surface search radar and believes it can be
expected to greatly reduce total ownership costs to the Navy.
Therefore, the committee recommends $15.1 million, an
increase of $14.0 million for necessary non-recurring combat
systems integration costs and to procure and install additional
AN/SPS-73 (V) surface search radars.
AN/USC-42 mini-demand assigned multiple access (DAMA) ultra-high
frequency (UHF) satellite communications (SATCOM) terminals
The budget request contained $237.7 million for SATCOM ship
terminals, but included no funds for AN/USC-42 mini-DAMA UHF
SATCOM terminals.
The AN/USC-42 mini-DAMA terminal is a commercial-off-the-
shelf variant of the shipboard DAMA transceiver miniaturized
for submarine application. It provides two-way satellite
encrypted voice and data communications in a much smaller
package than other DAMA and non-DAMA terminals.
The committee understands that DAMA terminals may provide
up to four times more UHF satellite channel capacity than
conventional terminals through multiplexing, thereby providing
increased utilization of existing satellite channels and
reducing the requirement for additional satellites. The
committee further understands that the Navy plans no additional
procurement of AN/USC-42 mini-DAMA UHF SATCOM terminals even
though there remains a shortfall of these units.
Therefore, the committee recommends $247.7 million, an
increase of $10.0 million to procure additional mini-DAMA UHF
SATCOM terminals and associated spares.
Computer aided submode training (CAST) lesson authoring system (CLASS)
The budget request contained $86.7 million for AEGIS
support equipment, but included no funds for CLASS to be
expanded to ships or systems other than AN/UYQ-70-equipped
AEGIS destroyers.
CLASS is a commercial-off-the-shelf training system that
operates with the Navy's existing CAST system, but adds multi-
media capabilities such as video, audio, three-dimensional
graphics, animation, and interactive simulations. The committee
understands that the CLASS is being installed on AN/UYQ-70-
equipped AEGIS destroyers, but the Navy does not plan to
backfit this system on other AEGIS-equipped platforms or to
expand it to other systems. The committee supports the
incorporation of effective commercial training technologies
into Navy warships and believes that the CLASS can provide
flexible low-cost training capabilities to all AEGIS class
ships.
Accordingly, the committee recommends $94.7 million for
AEGIS support equipment, an increase of $8.0 million for the
purpose of backfitting CLASS on non-AN/UYQ-70-equipped AEGIS
cruisers and destroyers and to expand this technology to other
systems such as cooperative engagement capability, joint
maritime command information system, and global command and
control system.
Firefighting equipment
The budget request contained $17.0 million for fire
fighting equipment, of which $12.0 million was included for the
procurement and installation of the Fire Fighters Breathers
Apparatus (FFBA).
The FFBA is a self-contained, compressed air breathing
device that is compatible with fire fighter protective wear,
helmet and other damage control equipment. The committee
understands that it is a safer system that provides breathable
air to the fire fighter for a longer period of time than the
current, less capable oxygen breathing apparatus (OBA).
Accordingly, the committee recommends $32.0 million, an
increase of $15.0 million to accelerate the replacement of
existing OBA systems with the FFBA.
Joint engineering data management and information control system
(JEDMICS)
The budget request contained no funds for JEDMICS, a
Department of Defense-wide repository for engineering drawings
and related text.
The committee believes that the transfer of unclassified
sensitive information contained in the JEDMICS database via the
Internet may lead to unacceptable national security risks and
is aware that, in order to provide better security for the
system, the program office has identified DiamondTEK, a
commercial-off-the-shelf network security product as the
solution to the problem.
The committee fully supports the integration of DiamondTEK
technology into JEDMICS and recommends an increase of $12.0
million for this purpose.
Minesweeping equipment
The budget request contained $16.3 million for minesweeping
equipment, of which $900 thousand was included for procurement
of the versatile mine exercise system (VEMS). The budget
request included no funds for procurement of the Dyad mine
countermeasures system.
The VEMS is a simulation system that provides realistic
training for fleet and mine countermeasures forces. The system
also aids in evaluating the effectiveness of mine warfare
tactics and provides a quantitative assessment of equipment and
ship vulnerability. The committee understands that the Navy has
not met its inventory objective for the VEMS.
The Dyad mine countermeasures system is an influence
minesweeping system towed behind a small craft that can mimic
the magnetic and acoustic signature of a larger vessel to clear
a path through a minefield for that vessel. The committee
understands that the Navy evaluated this system in 1996 and
favorably reported its potential for port breakout minesweeping
missions.
Accordingly, the committee recommends $24.9 million for
minesweeping equipment, an increase of $4.1 million to procure
additional VEMS and an increase of $4.5 million to procure Dyad
countermeasures systems.
Mobile remote emitter simulator (MRES)
The budget request contained $12.2 million for weapons
range support but included no funds to procure MRES systems.
The MRES is a ground-based, high-power electronic warfare
threat simulator that is capable of tracking fast-moving
tactical aircraft, surface ships and other signal collection
platforms. The committee believes that the Navy currently
operates outdated electronic simulators that are incapable of
tracking fast-moving tactical aircraft and do not provide high
fidelity threat representations so critical for realistic
training.
Therefore, to improve the quality and availability of
electronic warfare threat training, the committee recommends
$20.2 million, an increase of $8.0 million to procure and
install one MRES system.
Other training equipment
The budget request contained $44.2 million for other
training equipment, of which $27.9 million was included to
procure Battle Force Tactical Training (BFTT) equipment.
The BFTT system allows surface combatants, submarines and
aircraft carriers to conduct realistic, coordinated training
scenarios using ownship equipment instead of shore-based
training simulators. The committee understands that while BFTT
is a valuable training system, it currently lacks an Air
Traffic Control (ATC) training capability for aircraft carriers
and a complete BFTT Electronic Warfare Trainer (BEWT)
interface.
Therefore, in order to improve the utility of the BFTT
system and to provide realistic low-cost ATC and electronic
warfare training, the committee recommends $56.2 million, an
increase of $12.0 million: $7.0 million for the procurement and
installation of 12 ATC trainers and $5.0 million to complete
the procurement of 30 BEWT systems.
Shipboard display emulator (SDE) equipment
The budget request contained no funds for SDE equipment for
Perry and Spruance class surface combatants and older AEGIS
class ships not equipped with the Vertical Launching System.
The committee understands that older surface combatants use
obsolete display systems that are no longer in production and
are increasingly more difficult to maintain due to the scarcity
of repair parts. Consequently, the committee believes that
these ships, which constitute over one quarter of the Navy's
surface combatant force and are expected to remain in active
service for several years, should be upgraded with modern,
supportable display systems.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $10.0
million to procure and install modern state-of-the-art SDE
equipment in older surface combatants.
Sonobuoys
The budget request contained $48.0 million for the
procurement of sonobuoys, including the AN/SSQ-36, AN/SSQ-53E,
AN/SSQ-57, AN/SSQ-62E, AN/SSQ-101, and Signal Underwater Sound
buoys.
The committee notes that the Navy's peacetime annual
requirement for sonobuoys is approximately 100,000 units, but
that the budget request only funds approximately 50,000
sonobuoys of all types. Despite the end of the Cold War, anti-
submarine warfare remains a primary mission of the Navy that
requires coordinated realistic training of air, surface, and
submarine units. Such training necessarily consumes large
numbers of sonobuoys, and the Navy's procurement rate fails to
meet the annual peacetime requirements.
Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $20.0
million to address this shortfall, to be distributed as
follows: $12.8 million for AN/SSQ-53E, $6.0 million for AN/SSQ-
62E, and $1.2 million for AN/SSQ-101.
Surface sonar support equipment
The budget request contained no funds for surface sonar
support equipment.
The committee understands that the Navy has developed a new
material and production process for surface ship sonar dome
windows and that initial testing on FFG-7 frigate keel sonar
domes has thus far validated the expected performance
improvements. While the FFG-7 application is useful, the
majority of Navy surface ships that are equipped with hull
mounted sonars, including DDG-51 and DD-963 class destroyers,
and CG-47 class cruisers, have bow-mounted sonar domes which
require more complex sonar dome windows.
The committee further understands that efforts are underway
to fabricate a dome made from the new material for installation
on a DDG-51 destroyer and recommends an increase of $5.0
million to refine manufacturing processes and reduce production
costs of the new sonar dome.
WSN-7B ring laser gyro (RLG) and WQN-2 doppler sonar velocity log
(DSVL)
The budget request contained $67.5 million for navigation
equipment, of which $40.4 million was included for the
procurement of 43 WSN-7 RLGs, but included no funds for the
procurement of WQN-2 DSVLs.
The WSN-7 RLG is the common RLG ship navigation system for
surface ships and submarines. The WQN-2 has been designated by
the Navy as the fleet standard speed log to replace obsolete
and maintenance intensive electro-magnetic speed logs currently
in service throughout the fleet. The committee added $18.0
million in fiscal year 1999 to accelerate introduction of these
systems into the fleet in order to reduce the life cycle costs
of ship navigational systems and continues to strongly support
an accelerated program.
The committee recommends an increase of $12.0 million for
the procurement and installation of 30 additional WSN-7B RLGs
to significantly accelerate the replacement of maintenance
intensive WSN-2 ship conventional gyro navigation systems in
surface ships. The committee also recommends an increase of
$10.0 million for the procurement and installation of 30
additional WQN-2 DSVLs to upgrade ship speed logs concurrent
with navigation system upgrades.
Undersea warfare support equipment
The budget request contained $2.6 million for undersea
warfare support equipment, of which $1.2 million was included
for procurement of 55 Launched Expendable Acoustic Devices
(LEADs).
The committee is concerned that the Navy has not widely
fielded effective countermeasures against submarine launched
torpedoes but notes that the LEAD was approved for full
production in May 1998.
To address this concern the committee recommends $11.2
million, an increase of $8.6 million for procurement of 300
LEADs and two SSTD test beds for large deck ships in order to
widely disseminate throughout the fleet a capable defense
against torpedoes.
Procurement, Marine Corps
Overview
The budget request contained $1,137.2 million for
Procurement, Marine Corps in fiscal year 2000. The committee
recommends authorization of $1,297.5 million for fiscal year
2000.
The committee recommends approval of the request except for
those programs adjusted in the following table. Unless
otherwise specified, adjustments are without prejudice and
based on affordability considerations.
Items of Special Interest
155 millimeter (mm) lightweight towed howitzer
The budget request did not contain funds to procure the
155mm lightweight towed howitzer.
The committee notes that, as a result of production delays,
the 155mm lightweight towed howitzer program was restructured
and a new prime contractor was selected. Since this
restructuring, program performance has improved dramatically
with engineering, testing and schedule milestones being met
successfully. While litigation pursued by an arsenal union/
industry team against the Army regarding the original 155mm
lightweight towed howitzer contract award is unfortunate and a
cause for concern, the committee believes it should not be
allowed to interfere with other business opportunities for the
arsenal.
The committee also believes that arsenals possess valuable
capabilities that are underutilized, especially in the areas of
recoil mechanisms, carriages and gun barrels. The committee
further believes that given the opportunity, arsenals could
contribute to improved quality and reduced costs for these and
other components being subcontracted for the restructured 155mm
lightweight howitzer program.
Accordingly, the committee expects the Army to establish a
process by which arsenals shall be afforded an opportunity to
submit challenge proposals for appropriate artillery and tank
system components to be considered for incorporation into these
weapons systems.
Body armor
The budget request contained no funds in Procurement,
Marine Corps for body armor.
In previous years, the committee noted the effectiveness of
the all-torso body armor used during Operation Provide Hope in
Mogadishu, Somalia, and that subsequent analyses have indicated
that more than 50 percent of all life-threatening wounds
received in combat could be prevented by using this armor.
The committee continues to believe that the costs of
procuring and fielding this type of armor far outweigh the
medical expenses and loss of human life that would be avoided
by its employment. Therefore, the committee recommends an
increase of $5.0 million, for the procurement of all-torso body
armor.
Communications and electronic infrastructure support
The budget request contained $81.8 million for
communications and electronic infrastructure support equipment,
of which $43.0 million was included for the upgrades to and
fielding of base telecommunications upgrades.
For each of the last three years, the Commandant of the
Marine Corps has designated base telecommunications upgrades to
the Marine Corps Enterprise Network as his number one non-
aviation unfunded priority.
Consistent with its past actions to support the Marine
Corps' demands for transfer of all types of data among its
bases, the committee recommends $131.8 million, an increase of
$20.0 million for telecommunications infrastructure upgrades at
Marine Corps Base Camp Pendleton, $5.0 million for upgrades at
Marine Corps Mountain Warfare Training Center Bridgeport, and
$25.0 million for upgrades at Marine Corps Air Station Miramar.
Marine Corps air ground task force (MAGTF) command, control,
communications, computers, and intelligence (C4I) modification
kits
The budget request contained $13.8 million for
modifications to previously fielded MAGTF C4I equipment, of
which $5.0 million was included to procure product improvements
for the mobile electronic warfare support system (MEWSS).
The MEWSS is an electronic warfare equipment suite included
in a variant of the Light Armored Vehicle (LAV). The MEWSS
product improvement program (PIP) replaces obsolete components
with upgrades that can detect, locate, and demodulate advanced
adversary communications.
The committee notes that the Army and the Marine Corps were
working together to field a joint, seamless ground signals
intelligence collection capability. The MEWSS PIP was the
Marine Corps' system, and the ground based common sensor (GBCS)
was the Army's. However, the Army terminated its portion of the
program in fiscal year 1998. This action directly impacted the
MEWSS PIP, resulting in increased costs and delayed fielding.
The committee understands that the Army has decided to lessen
the impact of the GBCS termination on the MEWSS by providing
GBCS residual equipment to the Marine Corps. However,
modifications to this equipment will be required in order to
retrofit it into the MEWSS LAV and the Marine Corps did not
budget for these.
Therefore, the committee recommends $18.8 million for MAGTF
C4I modification kits, an increase of $5.0 million to modify
GBCS sensor systems into the MEWSS LAV.
Material handling equipment
The budget request contained $50.0 million for the
procurement of various types of material handling equipment,
but included no funds for the remanufacture of D7G bulldozers.
The D7G bulldozer is used throughout Marine Corps combat
engineer and support units to build airfields, as well as for
combat clearing and debris excavation.
The committee notes that the service's bulldozer fleet is
14 years old and rapidly deteriorating. The committee also
notes that the D7G remanufacturing program is one of the
Commandant of the Marine Corps' fiscal year 2000 unfunded
priorities and that this program will extend the life of 200
bulldozers for an additional 10 years.
Accordingly, the committee recommends $66.5 million, an
increase of $16.5 million for D7G bulldozer remanufacturing.
Modification kits (tracked vehicles)
The budget request contained $22.9 for the procurement of
various modifications to tracked vehicles, but included no
funds for upgrading M88A1 recovery vehicles to the more capable
M88A2 Hercules Improved Recovery Vehicle (IRV) variant.
The 56-ton M88A1 is capable of towing only vehicles
weighing less than 60 tons. Consequently, two M88A1s are
required to safely tow an Abrams tank if it is rendered
immobile due to combat damage or mechanical failure. The A2
upgrade includes increased engine horsepower, as well as
braking, steering, winch, lift, and suspension capabilities
required to safely recover Abrams tanks and other heavy combat
systems.
The committee has recommended an increase for Army IRV
upgrades elsewhere in this report, and based on the critical
role that this vehicle will fulfill in future expeditionary
operations and warfare, the committee also recommends $72.3
million, an increase of $49.4 million for 24 M88A2 IRV upgrades
for the Marine Corps.
Night vision equipment
The budget request contained $9.0 million for the
procurement of night vision equipment, of which $3.2 million
was included for the procurement of generation III 25
millimeter (mm) image intensification tubes, but no funds were
included to procure AN/PEQ-2 laser Target/Illuminator/Aiming
Light (TPIAL).
The committee is aware of the joint Army/Navy/Marine Corps
program to procure generation III 25mm image intensification
tubes as replacements for less capable generation II tubes
fielded in the AN/PVS-4 and AN/TVS-5 night vision goggles and
notes that the generation III tubes provide a minimum 25
percent resolution increase. The AN/PEQ-2 TPIAL is a dual
laser, consisting of highly collimated infrared aiming light
and infrared target illuminator, which are visible only through
night vision goggles. These lasers can either be operated
independently or in combination.
The committee notes that both generation III 25mm image
intensification tubes and AN/PEQ-2 laser TPIALs are top
unfunded priorities of the Commandant of Marine Corps in fiscal
year 2000. Based on the enhanced operational capability that
night vision devices provide to combat forces and the
committee's belief that these devices will provide a pivotal
``force multiplier'' in future Marine Corps expeditionary
operations and warfare, the committee recommends $17.5 million,
an increase of $3.5 million for generation III 25mm image
intensification tubes and an increase of $5.0 million for AN/
PEQ-2 laser TPIALs.
Aircraft Procurement, Air Force
Overview
The budget request contained $9,302.1 million for Aircraft
Procurement, Air Force in fiscal year 2000. The committee
recommends authorization of $9,647.7 million for fiscal year
2000.
The committee recommends approval of the request except for
those programs adjusted in the following table. Unless
otherwise specified, adjustments are without prejudice and
based on affordability considerations.
Items of Special Interest
Bomber modernization
The committee report on H.R. 3616 (H. Rept. 105-532)
required the Secretary of the Air Force to submit a bomber
modernization plan that identified upgrades required for the
current bomber fleet, a funding profile for these upgrades, and
a timeline for consideration of the acquisition of a follow-on
bomber. The plan submitted by the Secretary would sustain the
current bomber force structure, consisting of B-2, B-1, and B-
52 bombers, through 2037 and would delay any planning for
procurement of a new bomber until 2013. The committee considers
this planned force structure is unacceptable.
Consistent with the March 1998 conclusions of the
Congressionally-directed Long Range Air Power Panel, the
committee continues to believe that a replacement bomber will
be required much sooner than predicted in Air Force bomber
roadmap. The committee notes that by 2037, on average, B-2
bombers will have been in service over 40 years, the B-1 over
50 years, and the B-52 nearly 80 years, with a fleet average of
over 60 years. Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary
of the Air Force to provide to the House Committee on Armed
Services and Senate Committee on Armed Services by February 15,
2000, a conceptual study of a next generation bomber, including
cost estimates, to be deployed by approximately 2015.
C-17
The budget request contained $3,080.1 million to procure 15
C-17 aircraft and $304.9 million for advance procurement of 15
aircraft in fiscal year 2001. The budget request did not
include advance procurement funds for a maintenance training
system (MTS) for the Air National Guard.
The C-17 MTS is designed to qualify personnel to maintain
the C-17 aircraft. The committee understands that the Air
National Guard unit that will receive C-17 aircraft in fiscal
year 2003 requires an MTS for initial qualification of its
maintenance personnel prior to the arrival of the aircraft.
Accordingly, the committee recommends $3,083.6 million, an
increase of $3.5 million for advance procurement of an Air
National Guard MTS.
C-17A aircraft modifications
The budget request contained $95.6 million for C-17A
aircraft modifications, of which $11.9 million was included for
the electronic flight control system (EFCS) modification.
The EFCS modification updates the C-17A's flight control
computers with increased memory and allows for future system
expansion. The committee supports the EFCS upgrade but notes
unexplained equipment cost growth for this modification.
Consequently, the committee recommends $93.5 million for C-
17 modifications, a decrease of $2.1 million for the EFCS
modification.
C-130J
The committee notes that the Marine Corps has a clear
requirement for 51 KC-130J aircraft to replace existing KC-
130F/Rs, many of which are already almost 40 years old. In
addition, the Air Force has reported a requirement for 150 C-
130J-30s to replace C-130Es delivered in the early 1960s. None,
however, were included in the budget request, and the Air Force
currently plans to delay procurement until fiscal year 2002. An
aircraft production line cannot be simply turned off and on
without major disruption to the total supplier network across
the country and the loss of skilled employees it represents.
Such a shutdown and restart of the C-130J production is
estimated to cost $500.0 million.
The committee encourages the Department of Defense to
include the necessary funds in the President's fiscal year 2001
budget request for the procurement of both Marine Corps KC-
130Js and Air Force C-130J-30s, in order to meet the
requirement without the adverse disruption resulting from the
shutdown and restart of the production line.
C-135 modifications
The budget request contained $347.1 million for C-135
modifications, of which $170.7 million was included for the
compass, radar, and global positioning system modification
known as PACER CRAG, but included no funds for reengining older
model KC-135E tanker aircraft.
The committee has long been a strong supporter of the KC-
135 reengining program and notes that 414 KC-135A/Q/E model
tankers have been funded to date. The committee also notes its
past disagreement with the Department's decision to cancel the
KC-135E reengining modification and has added additional
funding for such purpose in each of the last several years.
Consistent with its past actions, the committee recommends an
increase of $52.0 million for two KC-135E reengining kits.
The committee also notes excessive cost growth in PACER
CRAG installation equipment when compared to prior years.
Consequently, the committee recommends a decrease of $2.1
million for the PACER CRAG modification.
In total, the committee recommends an increase of $49.9
million for these C-135 modifications.
Defense airborne reconnaissance program (DARP)
The budget request contained $138.4 million for various RC-
135 and U-2 aircraft modifications, but included no funds for
RC-135 Rivet Joint (RJ) quick reaction capabilities (QRCs) or
an upgraded U-2 common data link (CDL).
The RC-135 RJ is a tactical reconnaissance aircraft that
provides real-time intelligence to combat forces. The QRCs
consist of new software and hardware processing modifications
that allow the aircraft and its crews to exploit new adversary
systems. Since the Air Force Chief of Staff included additional
funding for these QRCs among his unfunded priorities for fiscal
year 2000, the committee recommends $13.4 million for these
modifications.
The U-2 is a high altitude reconnaissance aircraft, and the
CDL is its data link to ground stations. The committee
understands that the U-2's current CDL, designed over 20 years
ago, has limited jam resistance and is increasingly costly to
operate and maintain. The committee also understands that an
upgraded CDL improves jam resistance, is less costly to operate
and maintain, provides enhanced throughput capacity, and is
compatible with the Department's existing information
architecture. Therefore, the committee recommends an increase
of $5.0 million to upgrade the U-2's CDL.
In total, the committee recommends $178.1 million for DARP,
an increase of $39.7 million. Explanations for other increases
are addressed in the classified annex to this report.
E-8C joint surveillance and target attack radar system (STARS)
The budget request contained $280.3 million to procure one
E-8C Joint STARS aircraft, but included no funds for advance
procurement to continue its production.
The Department's Quadrennial Defense Review (QDR)
recommended reducing the number of Joint STARS aircraft to be
procured from 19 to 13 based on the assumption that the North
Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) would select and purchase
six Joint STARS to meet its requirements for Alliance Ground
Surveillance (AGS) aircraft. Despite NATO's rejection of the
Joint STARS as its AGS aircraft in 1998, the Department did not
change its recommendation nor budget for more than 13 Joint
STARS aircraft in its fiscal year 1999 budget request.
Accordingly, the committee recommended $72.0 million in fiscal
year 1999 for advance procurement of two aircraft, and the
Congress appropriated $36.0 million for one aircraft.
While the committee is encouraged that the Department has
funded the 14th Joint STARS aircraft in its budget request, the
committee remains concerned that, despite the Joint
Requirements Oversight Council-validated requirement for 19
aircraft, the Department once again intends to shut down the E-
8C production line after this aircraft is produced. These
``low-density, high demand'' aircraft are among the most
sought-after assets by the regional commanders-in-chief for a
range of reconnaissance and surveillance operations.
Therefore, the committee recommends $326.3 million, an
increase of $46.0 million for advance procurement of one
additional E-8C Joint STARS aircraft in fiscal year 2001.
F-15 modifications
The budget request contained $263.5 million for F-15
modifications, of which $17.6 million was included for 10
modification kits that convert the F100 engine to the F100-220E
configuration. However, no funds were included for conversion
of the Air National Guard's (ANG) F-15A and F-15B aircraft
engines to the F100-220E configuration.
Conversion kits for the F100 engine, also known as ``E-
kits'', will provide increased thrust, greater reliability,
reduced maintenance requirements, and better fuel efficiency.
The committee understands that, without the E-kit modification,
the ANG's F-15A/B fleet will be increasingly costly to operate
and maintain, less safe, and have diminished availability to
respond to contingency operations.
Consequently, the committee recommends $313.5 million for
F-15 modifications, an increase of $50.0 million for upgrading
for the ANG's F-15A/B aircraft with E-kits.
F-16C
The budget request contained $252.6 million for 10 F-16C
aircraft, of which $5.0 million was included for engineering
change orders (ECOs).
The F-16C is the Air Force's primary multi-mission fighter
aircraft. The committee notes that F-16Cs have been delivered
to the Air Force since fiscal year 1992 and believes that ECOs
to the aircraft should be minimal at this point in the
production cycle.
Consequently, the committee recommends $250.1 million, a
decrease of $2.5 million.
F-16 improved avionics intermediate shop (IAIS)
The budget request contained $30.0 million for F-16 post
production support, of which $10.0 million was included for two
IAIS systems.
The F-16 IAIS is a mobile test station used to diagnose and
repair F-16 avionics problems at deployed locations. Because
the F-16 IAIS uses fewer people and requires less cargo space
for transit than the existing avionics intermediate shop, F-16
units have reported a savings of greater than $450 thousand per
deployment. The committee understands that 55 F-16 IAISs are
required, but notes that only 44 have been, or are planned to
be, procured in the Future Years Defense Program.
Consequently, the committee recommends $50.0 million, an
increase of $20.0 million for four F-16 IAIS systems-two for
active units, and one each for Air National Guard and Air Force
Reserve units.
F-16 modifications
The budget request contained $249.5 million for various F-
16 modifications, including $50.0 million to procure 32
LITENING II precision attack targeting systems (PATS). However,
the request included no funds for long range fuel tanks or for
the Digital Terrain System (DTS) upgrade.
The committee understands that Air National Guard (ANG) F-
16 units are currently restricted from participation in combat
operations because of their limited capability to perform
precision strikes. The committee further understands that, due
to this situation, the ANG Chief has designated procurement of
additional LITENING II PATS as his number one unfunded priority
for fiscal year 2000. This system, which consists of a third-
generation forward-looking infrared and a laser spot tracker,
will allow older ANG F-16s to participate in future Air
Expeditionary Force deployments in support of theater
commanders-in-chief precision strike taskings.
The committee believes the integration of ANG F-16s into
precision strike operations is essential to the Total Force
concept and, therefore, recommends $80.0 million for LITENING
II PATS, an increase of $30.0 million to procure 18 additional
systems.
The committee notes that the Congress provided $4.0 million
in fiscal year 1999 for continued procurement of 600 gallon
fuel tanks for the F-16. The committee believes that additional
tanks are required to support testing with different aircraft
configurations and, therefore, recommends an increase of $4.0
million for this purpose.
The DTS is designed to reduce controlled flight into
terrain mishaps by providing F-16 pilots with a precise
navigation and a ground collision avoidance capability. The
committee has strongly supported the DTS upgrade in previous
fiscal years. The committee is aware that the Air Force has a
firm requirement for the DTS and is in the process of modifying
the F-16's operational flight program to accommodate DTS
integration. However, the committee understands that no funds
are budgeted to continue this upgrade until fiscal year 2001.
Consistent with its earlier recommendations and Air Force
requirements, the committee recommends an increase of $20.0
million to accelerate fielding of the DTS upgrade.
The committee supports all the modifications for which
funds were requested but notes unexplained cost growth in the
following projects: F110 digital engine control; global
positioning system; mission computer kits; and engineering
change orders. Consequently, the committee recommends a
decrease of $7.1 million for these projects.
In total, the committee recommends $296.4 million for F-16
modifications, an increase of $46.9 million.
F-22
The budget request contained $1,575.0 million for 6 F-22
aircraft and $277.1 million for advance procurement of 10
aircraft in fiscal year 2001. The budget request also contained
$1,222.2 million in PE 0604239F for F-22 engineering and
manufacturing development (EMD).
The F-22, the Air Force's next-generation air superiority
fighter aircraft, is currently approximately 80 percent
complete in the EMD phase of acquisition and low rate initial
production is planned to begin in fiscal year 2000. The
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1998 (P.L.
105-85) established a cost limitation for both the EMD and
procurement phases of the program, which are $18.9 billion for
EMD and $43.4 billion for procurement.
Over the past year, the committee has learned that
potential EMD costs could exceed the cost limitation by $667.0
million. To retain EMD costs within the cost ceiling, the Air
Force has identified proposed actions to offset this amount,
which included the depletion of the contractor's management
reserve, deferral of external combat stores certification until
after the F-22 EMD program is complete and reductions to test
and laboratory infrastructure.
The committee also notes that the Department's fiscal year
2000 request for six F-22s has increased by $312.7 million, or
25 percent, compared to its forecast cost submitted with the
fiscal year 1999 budget request. The committee understands that
the Department based its fiscal year 1999 forecast on a cost
model estimate but the fiscal year 2000 budget request reflects
negotiated values and actual contractor costs. As a result of
this increase, the committee also understands that costs for
aircraft to be procured beyond fiscal year 2000 have been
planned to cost less so that the Department can procure the
planned number of aircraft within the cost limitation.
While the committee continues to support the F-22 aircraft,
it is disturbed by continuing EMD cost growth; the prospect
that EMD actions being eliminated or deferred will result in
higher future costs, increased program risk, or both; and by
unforeseen increases in procurement costs. Since future budget
requests for research and development are projected to decrease
and for procurement are likely to rise only modestly, the
committee is concerned that future F-22 EMD and procurement
cost increases could impact other programs, may require a
reduction to the number of F-22s procured, or eliminate some of
the aircraft's intended capabilities to remain within cost
limits. Thus, the committee questions whether the present F-22
EMD and procurement programs can be completed as planned within
projected budgets and limitations.
Accordingly, the committee directs the Secretary of the Air
Force to provide a report to the congressional defense
committees by February 1, 2000, that certifies that F-22 EMD
and production can remain within the cost limits and that
testing of the aircraft will be performed in accordance with
test plans that were in place when the cost limits were
established. If the Secretary is unable to make such
certification, he shall inform the committees of the reasons
therefor and present a revised plan, including new cost
estimates, for the acquisition of this aircraft.
Predator unmanned aerial vehicle
The budget request contained $38.0 million for three
Predator unmanned aerial vehicles (UAV) and one ground control
station (GCS).
The committee notes that the Predator has been flying
support missions in Bosnia, and now Kosovo, for over three and
one-half years, logging more than 11,000 total flight hours.
Because of its importance to theater commanders' intelligence
needs, a solid production base for this system must be
continued, attrition reserve vehicles must be maintained, and
improvements must be made to fully exploit the potential of
this system. For example, the committee believes the laser
designator upgrades now being integrated into the aircraft for
immediate contingency needs should be put into long-term
production.
Also, Predator operations are expected to be expanded to
other theaters and operational areas. However, the committee
understands Predator is currently not deployable worldwide
because of some host-nation communications frequency
restrictions. The committee believes the Air Force needs to add
the tactical common data link (TCDL) to the air vehicles and
the GCS to overcome this operational limitation.
Finally, the committee notes that when using satellite
communications control of an aircraft, the GCS can only control
a single air vehicle at a time. This precludes dual aircraft
control for on-station relief that has been demonstrated with
the line-of-sight data link. A dual-channel beyond-line-of-
sight satellite communications capability needs to be
retrofitted into existing aircraft.
Therefore, the committee recommends $58.0 million, an
increase of $20.0 million to procure two additional attrition
reserve UAVs and for production versions/kits of the laser
designator, the dual-channel satellite communications suite and
the TCDL.
T-38 modifications
The budget request contained $94.5 million for T-38
modifications, of which $85.7 million was included for the
avionics upgrade program (AUP).
The AUP updates the T-38 cockpit configuration to provide
state-of-the-art avionics and improve instrument management
training. The committee supports the AUP but notes an
unexplained increase in engineering change orders.
Consequently, the committee recommends $91.1 million, a
decrease of $3.4 million.
Terrain awareness and warning system (TAWS)
The budget request contained $35.7 million for procurement
and installation of the TAWS upgrade on the C-135, KC-10, and
C-20 aircraft, but included no funds for upgrade of the T-43
aircraft.
The TAWS upgrade projects an aircraft's position relative
to the ground and improves pilot situational awareness by
warning of potential ground impact, thus preventing controlled
flight into terrain (CFIT). The committee notes that CFIT is
the leading cause of airline fatalities worldwide and that the
TAWS is required on commercial airliners.
Therefore, the committee recommends $81.0 million, an
increase of $18.2 million for the C-135, $6.0 million for the
KC-10, $10.3 million for the T-43, and $10.8 million for the C-
20, to accelerate the TAWS upgrade and understands that this
amount will complete its procurement and installation of this
equipment on these aircraft.
Ammunition Procurement, Air Force
Overview
The budget request contained $419.5 million for Ammunition
Procurement, Air Force in fiscal year 2000. The committee
recommends authorization of $560.5 million for fiscal year
2000.
The committee recommends approval of the request except for
those programs adjusted in the following table. Unless
otherwise specified, adjustments are without prejudice and
based on affordability considerations.
Items of Special Interest
Air force ammunition
The budget request contained $416.1 million for procurement
of ammunition. The committee recommends $557.1 million, an
increase of $141.0 million for the following types of
ammunition, which are among the top unfunded priorities of the
Chief of Staff of the Air Force for fiscal year 2000:
[In millions of dollars]
Rockets:
2.75 inch rocket motors....................................... 5.0
Cartridges:
.50 caliber ball, linked...................................... 1.5
.50 caliber ball/tracer, linked............................... 0.5
20mm PGU-27/B................................................. 12.6
Bombs:
Practice Bombs (BDU-50/56).................................... 23.2
General Purpose Bombs......................................... 10.0
MK-84 HE...................................................... 7.5
JDAM.......................................................... 66.0
Flares
MJU-23........................................................ 6.8
LUU-19........................................................ 5.4
LUU-2......................................................... 2.5
Of the amount recommended for practice bombs, the committee
expects $6.0 million to be designated for MK-84 (BDU-56) cast
ductile iron practice bombs.
Laser guided bombs (LGB)
The bombing campaign of Operation Allied Force clearly
illustrates the importance of precision-guided munitions as a
weapon-of-choice and the necessity to maintain an adequate
production base of these weapons for surge requirements,
replenishment, and war reserves.
The committee is concerned that reliance on a single
producer could result in unnecessary delays in replenishing and
rebuilding the inventory of LGBs. The committee is aware that
the Air Force previously qualified a second source for LGB
production and believes that a second source should be
reestablished.
Consequently, the committee directs the Secretary of the
Air Force to submit a report analyzing alternative production
options to the Congressional defense committees by June 30,
1999.
Missile Procurement, Air Force
Overview
The budget request contained $2,359.6 million for Missile
Procurement, Air Force in fiscal year 2000. The committee
recommends authorization of $2,303.7 million for fiscal year
2000.
The committee recommends approval of the request except for
those programs adjusted in the following table. Unless
otherwise specified, adjustments are without prejudice and
based on affordability considerations.
Items of Special Interest
AGM-65 modifications
The budget request contained $2.8 million to convert 200
AGM-65G missiles to the AGM-65K configuration, but included no
funds to upgrade AGM-65B missiles to the AGM-65H configuration
or for training missiles.
The AGM-65 is a precision guided tactical missile employed
on the F-16 and A-10 aircraft. The ``G'' configuration uses an
infrared (IR) target seeker, while the ``K'' and ``H''
configurations use an updated electro-optical (EO) seeker. The
``B'' configuration uses an obsolete EO target seeker.
The committee understands that the Air Force planned to
retain its AGM-65G IR-guided missiles and convert obsolete EO-
guided AGM-65B missiles to the updated AGM-65H configuration,
but, due to funding constraints, chose to modify its inventory
of 1200 AGM-65Gs to the AGM-65K configuration, which would
eliminate IR-guided AGM-65s from its inventory.
Since the committee believes that a mix of both IR- and EO-
guided AGM-65s are required for mission flexibility, it
recommends $12.8 million, an increase of $10.0 million to
convert AGM-65B missiles to the AGM-65H and AGM-65K
configurations and to procure training missiles and associated
test equipment for these variants.
Minuteman III modifications
The budget request contained $146.5 million for the
Minuteman III guidance replacement program (GRP).
The committee notes that the Air Force has substantially
delayed the planned procurement of GRP, which will replace
older guidance packages in the Minuteman III intercontinental
ballistic missile fleet. The committee understands that the
delay in the program also will force a delay of the propulsion
replacement program (PRP). The PRP will replace aging solid
rocket motors, but installation of the new rocket motors
depends on prior installation of GRP computers. The committee
also understands that the condition of solid rocket fuel in
some of these rocket motors will render them unreliable prior
to GRP completion and that the delay of GRP and PRP will
significantly lower the operational effectiveness of the
Minuteman force in the middle of the next decade.
To avoid these unacceptable operational consequences, the
committee recommends $186.5 million, an increase of $40.0
million to accelerate the procurement of GRP.
Spaceborne equipment
The budget request contained $9.6 million for spaceborne
communications security equipment.
The committee notes that these funds were requested to
support the global positioning system and the space based
infrared system but understands that these requirements have
already been met.
Consequently, the committee recommends $4.6 million, a
decrease of $5.0 million.
Titan
The budget request contained $431.2 million for the Titan
launch vehicle and launch operations.
The committee notes a substantial increase in the request
for payload integration compared to the amount appropriated in
fiscal year 1999. The committee also notes that the expenditure
rate for prior year funds is lagging behind DOD end-of-year
standards.
Consequently, the committee believes that the request
exceeds requirements and recommends $411.2 million, a reduction
of $20.0 million.
Other Procurement, Air Force
Overview
The budget request contained $7,085.2 million for Other
Procurement, Air Force in fiscal year 2000. The committee
recommends authorization of $7,077.8 million for fiscal year
2000.
The committee recommends approval of the request except for
those programs adjusted in the following table. Unless
otherwise specified, adjustments are without prejudice and
based on affordability considerations.
Items of Special Interest
60K a/c loader
The budget request contained $81.2 million to procure 39
60K aircraft loaders.
The 60K loader replaces the Air Force's aging fleet of
1960s-era 40K loaders and wide-body elevator loaders. They
provide the critical high-reach capability required to load the
KC-10 and other commercial wide-body aircraft that comprise the
Civil Reserve Air Fleet. The committee understands that there
are 55 60K loaders currently fielded at locations around the
world, providing a critical link in the responsive projection
of U.S. forces and in the delivery of materiel to support
humanitarian operations.
The committee notes that the Air Force Chief of Staff has
included 60K loaders on his list of unfunded priorities for
fiscal year 2000. In order to accelerate production and
fielding of this key material handling equipment, the committee
recommends $93.7 million, an increase of $12.5 million to
procure an additional nine 60K loaders. The committee
understands that this action will enable the maximum annual
production rate of the 60 K loader to be attained.
Aircrew laser eye protection
The budget request contained no funds to procure aircrew
laser eye protection (LEP) equipment.
The committee notes that the Air Force Chief of Staff
recently directed that plans to procure and field LEP equipment
be immediately accelerated. The committee has provided
additional funds in prior years for the Air Force to complete
development and evaluation of aircrew LEP technologies and
understands that, as a result, two mature LEP technologies have
emerged--FV-9 dye-based spectacles and visors and the clear
laser eye protection for infrared (CLEPIR) dielectric
spectacles. The FV-9 spectacles and visors provide protection
in the visible portion of the electromagnetic spectrum, and the
CLEPIR spectacles provide protection in the invisible, near
infrared portion of the spectrum.
The committee strongly supports the Chief's direction to
accelerate procurement and fielding of LEP spectacles and
visors. Therefore, the committee recommends $6.6 million to
expeditiously begin procurement of the FV-9 and CLEPIR
equipment.
Automatic data processing equipment (ADPE)
The budget request contained $71.2 million for ADPE but
included no funds for the spare parts production and
reprocurement system (SPARES).
The committee notes the usefulness of this information
system in supporting spare parts buys at the Ogden Air
Logistics Center and believes it should be expanded to other
installations Department-wide.
Therefore, the committee recommends $81.2 million for ADPE,
an increase of $10.0 million for this purpose.
Master crane
The budget request contained no funds for the master crane.
The master crane is an aircraft component hoisting system
for use on all aircraft, both fixed-wing and rotary. It is
currently only in limited use within the Air National Guard
(ANG) but has been found to be safer to operate, faster to use,
easier to deploy, and to require much less maintenance than
other cranes in the ANG's inventory.
The committee believes that the master crane is kind of
equipment that is needed for today's rapid deployment forces.
Therefore, the committee recommends $5.0 million to procure
additional master cranes for the ANG.
Military satellite communications terminals
The budget request contained $46.3 million for military
satellite communications terminals.
The committee understands that the request exceeds
requirements because of a schedule delay in a military
communications satellite program. Accordingly, the committee
recommends $40.0 million, a decrease of $6.3 million.
National eagle system
The budget request contained no funds to upgrade the
national eagle system.
The deployable national eagle system provides U.S. forces
with time-sensitive, commercial satellite imagery that allows
aircrews to have up-to-date access to imagery of an adversary's
terrain. Such imagery can be immediately used in aircraft
mission planning and rehearsal systems, contributing both to
survivability and mission effectiveness. However, the committee
understands that the national eagle system does not currently
have an antenna or a data acquisition capability, as does the
upgraded eagle vision system.
Accordingly, the committee recommends $5.0 million to
procure an eagle vision antenna and data acquisition segment to
upgrade the national eagle system.
Radio equipment
The budget request contained $16.7 million for radio
equipment, including $15.7 million for Scope Command.
The Scope Command program provides for consolidating and
upgrading the Department's network of high frequency (HF)
ground stations around the world with commercial-off-the-shelf,
state-of-the-art HF radio equipment. These ground stations
provide the sole command and control resource for Air Mobility
Command cargo and tanker aircraft.
The committee has been a strong supporter of Scope Command
and understands that, with minor modifications, the network is
capable of performing HF e-mail gateway functions. Since HF
radio signals use the ionosphere for propagation, incorporating
an e-mail capability into this network will provide an
inexpensive method for forward-deployed forces to communicate
with friends and families in the CONUS.
Consequently, the committee recommends $20.5 million for
radio equipment, an increase of $3.8 million to incorporate an
HF e-mail capability into the Scope Command network.
Supply asset tracking system (SATS)
The budget request contained $1.1 million for SATS.
SATS is one example of the Department's effort to achieve
Total Asset Visibility--the ability to quickly and accurately
identify and locate personnel, equipment, and supplies--through
the use of commercial automated information technology (AIT).
It incorporates radio frequency terminals and smart cards,
enabling electronic status confirmation of supply assets from
receipt to issue. The committee notes that the Congress has
provided additional funds for SATS installation over the past
two fiscal years and is supportive of the use of AIT to
streamline business processes.
Therefore, the committee recommends $11.1 million for SATS,
an increase of $10.0 million to accelerate its installation at
Air Force bases worldwide.
Tactical communications-electronics (CE) equipment
The budget request contained $49.7 million for tactical CE
equipment, of which $36.4 million is for theater-deployable
communications (TDC) sets. TDC is a compact, ruggedized, high-
bandwidth communications system used by forward-deployed Air
Expeditionary Force units. Its state-of-the-art technology is
much more capable than the aging equipment it replaces, and it
requires significantly reduced airlift support.
In 1997, the Air Force conducted a command and control (C2)
task force to establish an air and space C2 policy for the 21st
century. One key finding of the task force was that the service
should accelerate procurement of TDC sets and complete the
buyout of this equipment by fiscal year 2001. The committee
endorsed this finding and added $25.0 million ($18.0 million of
which was appropriated) for this purpose in fiscal year 1998
and $20.0 million (none of which was appropriated) in fiscal
year 1999.
The committee notes that the Air Force Chief of Staff has
included TDC sets on his list of unfunded priorities for fiscal
year 2000. Accordingly, the committee recommends $84.2 million
for tactical communications-electronics equipment, an increase
of $34.5 million to accelerate the production and fielding of
the two key components of the TDC set, the lightweight mobile
satellite terminal and the integrated communications access
package.
Theater air control system (TACSI)
The budget request contained $37.9 million for TACSI, but
contained no funds for mobile radar approach controls (RAPCON)
for the Air National Guard (ANG).
The committee is aware that the ANG has a requirement for
12 mobile RAPCONs, since, even though it is responsible for
over 60 percent of the Department's wartime air traffic control
(ATC) mission, it is using ATC systems originally fielded in
the 1960s. The committee understands these systems are
difficult to deploy, are becoming unsupportable due to lack of
spare parts, and lack current-generation automation aids that
reduce controller workload and fatigue. In view of this
situation, funds were appropriated for fiscal year 1999 to
procure the first replacement mobile RAPCON, an off-the-shelf,
solid-state design system that corrects these deficiencies.
The committee supports continued modernization of ANG ATC
units and recommends $61.9 million for TACSI, an increase of
$24.0 million to procure an additional three mobile RAPCONs.
Procurement, Defense-Wide
Overview
The budget request contained $2,129.0 million for
Procurement, Defense-Wide in fiscal year 2000. The committee
recommends authorization of $2,107.8 million for fiscal year
2000.
The committee recommends approval of the request except for
those programs adjusted in the following table. Unless
otherwise specified, adjustments are without prejudice and
based on affordability considerations.
Items of Special Interest
Automated document conversion system (ADCS)
The budget request contained no funds for the ADCS.
The committee recognizes that the ADCS is the Department's
single most productive program in the conversion of legacy
engineering drawings. However, a significant inventory of these
drawings remain to be converted if the Department is to achieve
its goal to digitize them by fiscal year 2002.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $32.0
million to continue procurement of ADCS hardware and software
for this purpose.
Mentor protege
The budget request contained $26.3 million for the Mentor
Protege program. This program provides funds to major
Department of Defense prime contractors for the purpose of
developing the technical capabilities of Small Disadvantaged
Businesses to perform as subcontractors.
The committee notes that the legal authority for this pilot
program expires at the end of fiscal year 1999. Therefore, the
committee recommends no funds for the Mentor Protege program.
Nightstar binocular
The budget request contained $23.4 million for special
operations forces small arms and weapons, but included no funds
for nightstar binoculars.
The nightstar binocular is a compact, lightweight, hand-
held binocular that combines night vision and laser range-
finding capabilities that allows the operator to transmit
range, azimuth, and elevation data to external systems such as
the global positioning system for immediate coordination
definition. The committee understands that the Department's
initial operational test and evaluation of the nightstar
binocular indicates that it provides increased capabilities
compared to existing night vision devices.
Consequently, the committee recommends $30.4 million, an
increase of $7.0 million to initiate procurement of nightstar
binoculars.
National Guard and Reserve Equipment
Overview
The budget request did not contain any funds for National
Guard and Reserve Equipment for fiscal year 2000. The committee
recommends authorization of $60.0 million for fiscal year 2000.
Items of Special Interest
National guard and reserve equipment
The budget request did not contain any funds for National
Guard and Reserve Equipment for fiscal year 2000. The committee
recommends an increase of $60.0 million for this equipment.
[In millions of dollars]
Army Reserve:
Miscellaneous................................................. 10.0
Navy Reserve:
Miscellaneous................................................. 10.0
Marine Corps Reserve:
Miscellaneous................................................. 10.0
Air Force Reserve:
Miscellaneous................................................. 10.0
Army National Guard:
Miscellaneous................................................. 10.0
Air National Guard:
Miscellaneous................................................. 10.0
The committee expects that priority consideration be given
to the following items: fire fighting aircraft (with preference
to U.S.-manufactured aircraft), cargo compartment expanded
range fuel systems, medium tactical wreckers, night vision
devices, ALR-56M radar warning receivers, and night targeting
systems.
Reconnaissance aircraft augmentation
Following the end of the Cold War, conventional thinking
concluded that the relatively high operations tempo rates and
the numbers of reconnaissance aircraft could be reduced
significantly. Indeed, the operations tempo rates for these
aircraft have increased significantly since the demise of the
Soviet Union. In addition to their strategic reconnaissance and
operations-other-than-war roles, reconnaissance aircraft have
been increasingly called on to provide direct tactical
intelligence to forces engaged in numerous regional conflicts
or supporting peacekeeping operations.
Unfortunately, fiscal realities make it unlikely that new
reconnaissance aircraft will be procured in the near future.
Further, the numbers of reconnaissance aircraft have been
reduced over time due to accidents or to decisions such as the
Navy's to terminate the ES-3 Shadow aircraft in fiscal year
2000 and the Air Force's to terminate the Senior Scout platform
in fiscal year 2002. Although unmanned aerial vehicles may
mitigate some of these force size limitations, the committee
believes there is a need to enhance the reconnaissance
capabilities of manned systems that are already available and
in service.
The committee is aware of an initiative by the Air Force
Chief of Staff (CSAF) to use the EC-130H Compass Call offensive
information operations aircraft in a secondary reconnaissance
role. The committee fully understands that Compass Call system
operators are the same specialists that operate reconnaissance
systems such as the Rivet Joint and Senior Scout. The committee
also understands that the Compass Call mission equipment has
some of the same technical characteristics of the Rivet Joint
and Senior Scout. Consequently, the committee believes that by
exercising the full extent of the Compass Call operators'
skills and by employing the Compass Call equipment in a
different manner, a reconnaissance capability can be realized
with only minor investment.
The committee further believes the CSAF initiative has two
other important potential benefits. The first is linguist
training. Currently, Compass Call linguists train primarily in
language laboratories or in the Compass Call mission simulator,
while their reconnaissance aircrew contemporaries train daily
against their real-world mission targets. By using the Compass
Call aircraft in a reconnaissance role, its operators would
have the benefit of real-world operations, thereby having
better training for their wartime offensive information
operations role.
Second, the Air Force decision to terminate Senior Scout
leaves a mission gap for the Air National Guard's 169th
Intelligence Squadron (IS). This squadron provides a unique
linguistic talent pool that must be retained and kept
operationally proficient. Assuming the Air Force decides to use
Compass Call in the additional reconnaissance role, there
appears to be a logical force management decision to move part
of the Compass Call mission to the Air National Guard. The
169th IS would be fully taskable for peacetime reconnaissance
missions and would also be available for Air Combat Command war
or contingency missions.
The committee commends the CSAF initiative and requests the
Secretary of the Air Force to provide an analysis of this
initiative to the Congressional defense and intelligence
committees concurrent with the submission of the fiscal year
2001 budget request.
Chemical Agents and Munitions Destruction, Defense
Overview
The budget request contained no funds for Chemical Agents
and Munitions, Defense, for fiscal year 2000.
The committee recommends authorization of $1,012.0 million
for fiscal year 2000, including $230.0 million for research and
development, $232.0 million for procurement, and $550.0 million
for operations and maintenance, as noted in the following
table. Unless otherwise specified, adjustments are without
prejudice and based on affordability considerations.
Item of Special Interest
Chemical agents and munitions destruction
Elsewhere in this report, the committee recommends
transferring the budget request of $1,169.0 million for
Chemical Agents and Munitions Destruction, Army, to Chemical
Agents and Munitions Destruction Defense.
The committee notes the progress that has been made during
the last fiscal year in the continuing effort to dispose of the
U.S. stockpile of lethal chemical agents and munitions and of
chemical warfare related materiel, while ensuring maximum
protection of the public, personnel involved in the
destruction, and the environment. Of the original stockpile of
31,495 tons of chemical agent, 13.4 percent has been destroyed
and 90 percent of the stockpile is under contract for
destruction (as of February 28, 1999). Destruction facilities
at Johnston Atoll and Tooele, Utah, are operational. Five
facilities are in the design phase or under construction:
Anniston, Alabama; Umatilla, Oregon; Pine Bluff, Arkansas;
Aberdeen, Maryland; and Newport, Indiana. Facilities at Pueblo,
Colorado, and Blue Grass, Kentucky, are on hold pending
completion of the Assembled Chemical Weapons Assessment (ACWA)
program demonstration.
The committee notes that the current estimate of the total
cost of the chemical agents and munitions destruction program
is $14.9 billion, continues to be concerned about the cost of
the program, and believes that attention needs to be given to
measures that could reduce this overall cost, including
potential alternatives relating to the destruction of non-
stockpile related materiel and to the ultimate disposition of
the destruction facilities themselves. Accordingly the
committee recommends a provision (sec.141) that would address
the cost issue and would require the Secretary of Defense to
report to the Congressional defense committees on cost
reduction measures he might recommend.
The committee recommends $1,012.0 million for Chemical
Agents and Munitions Destruction, Defense, a decrease of $157.0
million. The committee notes that even after the reduction, the
amount authorized is still almost $250.0 million greater than
the fiscal year 1999 appropriation for this account. The
committee believes this reduction can be accommodated without a
breach in U.S. compliance with the Chemical Weapons Convention
(CWC) Treaty and with no disincentive to the Russian effort to
destroy its chemical munitions stockpile.
The committee understands that the ability to complete
destruction of the chemical munitions stored at Pueblo by the
CWC date of April 29, 2007, requires the design and
construction phase for the Pueblo facility to begin in June
1999. To meet this requirement, the committee further believes
that there must be close coordination between the Project
Manager for Chemical Demilitarization and the Project Manager
for ACWA in order to accommodate future implementation of ACWA
technologies in the design of the baseline facility currently
planned for construction at Pueblo. The committee recommends a
provision (sec. 142) that would require the USD (A&T) and the
Secretary of the Army to ensure coordination of the activities
and plans of the two project managers and would also require
the Secretary to take measures necessary to facilitate the
integration of ACWA alternative technologies in the design of
the baseline facility for Pueblo.
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS
Subtitle A--Authorization of Appropriations
Sections 101-109--Authorization of Appropriations
These sections would authorize the recommended fiscal year
2000 funding levels for all procurement accounts.
Subtitle B--Army Programs
Section 111--Multiyear Procurement Authority for Army Programs
This section would authorize the Secretary of the Army to
enter into multiyear procurement contracts for the Javelin
missile system, the M2A3 Bradley fighting vehicle, the AH-64D
Longbow Apache attack helicopter, and a combined M1A2 Abrams
tank/Heavy Assault Bridge multiyear procurement contract in
fiscal year 2000.
Additionally, this section would require the Secretary of
Defense to submit a report on the composition of multiyear
procurements in the procurement portion of the Future Years
Defense Program prior to the execution of any multiyear
contract.
Section 112--Extension of Pilot Program on Sales of Manufactured
Articles and Services of Certain Army Industrial Facilities Without
Regard to Availability from Domestic Sources
This section would authorize the Secretary of the Army to
extend an existing pilot program through fiscal year 2001 that
enables McAlester Army Ammunition Plant and Rock Island and
Watervliet arsenals to continue to provide articles and
services under this authority. This pilot program allows the
sale of articles or services to an entity that will incorporate
those articles or services into a weapon system to be procured
by the Department of Defense or will use those articles or
services to manufacture weapon systems that will ultimately be
procured by the Department of Defense. This extension should
allow sufficient time to further evaluate the viability of the
program and the opportunity it provides for these facilities to
generate significant additional work.
Section 113--Revision to Conditions for Award of a Second-Source
Procurement Contract for the Family of Medium Tactical Vehicles
This section would clarify section 112 of the National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1999 (Public Law 105-
261). It would enable the Secretary of the Army to award a
second-source full-rate production contract for the Family of
Medium Tactical Vehicles only after he certifies in writing
that the total quantity of trucks required by the Army will be
sufficient to enable the prime contractor to maintain a minimum
production level of 150 trucks per month over any given 12
month period.
Subtitle C--Navy Programs
Section 121--F/A-18E/F Super Hornet Aircraft Program
This section would authorize the Secretary of the Navy to
enter into a multiyear procurement contract for the F/A-18E/F
aircraft subject to the Secretary of Defense's certification
that the results of the aircraft's operational test and
evaluation meet both key performance parameters and
requirements for operational effectiveness and suitability and
that the multiyear procurement contract cost is at least 7.4
percent less than procurement of the same number of aircraft
through annually funded contracts.
Additionally, this section would require the Secretary of
Defense to submit a report on the composition of multiyear
procurements in the procurement portion of the Future Years
Defense Program prior to the execution of a multiyear contract
for the F/A-18E/F.
Subtitle D--Chemical Stockpile Destruction Program
Section 141--Destruction of Existing Stockpile of Lethal Chemical
Agents and Munitions
This section would require the Secretary of Defense to
conduct an assessment of the current chemical munitions
stockpile destruction program with the purposes of reducing the
overall cost of the program and ensuring completion of the
destruction program by the date required under the Chemical
Weapons Convention Treaty, while maintaining maximum protection
of the environment, the general public, and the personnel
involved in the actual destruction of the munitions. It would
authorize the Secretary to take those actions to achieve the
purposes of the assessment that could be accomplished under
existing authorities and would direct the Secretary to
recommend additional legislative authority that may be needed.
The section would amend paragraph 1412(c)(2) of the
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1986 (Public
Law 99-145) to provide that facilities constructed to carry out
the chemical stockpile destruction program shall be disposed of
in accordance with site-specific, mutual agreements between the
Secretary of the Army and the governor of the state in which
the facility is located. The committee notes the increasing
practice in the stockpile destruction program, the chemical
stockpile emergency preparedness program, and the Assembled
Chemical Weapons Assessment, of meaningful involvement by state
and local jurisdictions and others in the development of
programmatic and policy decisions that are specific to their
local stockpile storage sites and to the construction and
operation of the stockpile destruction facilities at those
sites. The committee believes that such authority should be
extended to decisions regarding the ultimate disposition of the
chemical munitions stockpile destruction facilities.
The section would also amend subsection 1412(c) to allow
non-stockpile chemical agents, munitions, or related materials
specifically designated by the Secretary of Defense to be
destroyed at stockpile facilities once the affected states have
issued the appropriate permits.
Section 142--Alternative Technologies for Destruction of Assembled
Chemical Weapons
This section would direct and establish conditions for the
transfer of management oversight responsibility for the
assembled chemical weapons assessment (ACWA) program from the
Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Technology to
the Secretary of the Army.
The ACWA program was established under section 8065 of the
Omnibus Consolidated Appropriations Act for Fiscal Year 1998
(Public Law 104-208) as the Department of Defense program for
assessment of the feasibility of alternative technologies for
the destruction of assembled chemical munitions. Such
technologies could provide an alternative to the baseline
program, which uses incineration of chemical agents and
munitions as the means for destruction of the chemical
munitions stockpile. In order to facilitate coordination of the
ACWA program with the baseline program during ACWA's
demonstration and pilot facility phase, the provision would
require the Under Secretary and the Secretary to ensure
coordination of the activities and plans of the program manager
for the Assembled Chemical Weapons Assessment and the program
manager for Chemical Demilitarization. Further, if the Under
Secretary decides to proceed with pilot facility testing of
technologies demonstrated under the ACWA program, the provision
would transfer oversight and management of the ACWA program
from the Under Secretary to the Secretary.
Subtitle E--Other Matters
Section 151--Limitation on Expenditures for Satellite Communications
This section would prohibit the Department from obligating
funds to procure communications systems or lease communications
services from commercial satellites, unless such systems or
services have been proven through independent testing not to
disrupt the reception of Global Positioning System (GPS)
signals.
The committee notes the increasing importance of GPS to
military operations. In recognition of this fact, the National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1999 (Public Law 105-
261) mandated that all new Department of Defense aircraft,
ships, armored vehicles, and indirect fire systems be equipped
with GPS by 2005. The committee also notes that GPS is very
important to civil and commercial activities as well.
The committee is disturbed that commercial satellite
communications systems that provide mobile subscriber services
(MSS) are increasingly likely to interfere with GPS signals.
Although MSS communications are important to U.S. military
forces, the committee believes that the overarching
significance of GPS to the military and as a world navigation
standard for commercial and civil users mandates the protection
of GPS frequencies.
TITLE II--RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST, AND EVALUATION
OVERVIEW
The budget request contained $34,375.2 million for
research, development, test, and evaluation (RDT&E),
representing a decrease of $3,067.8 million from the amount
provided for fiscal year 1999.
The committee recommends authorization of $35,835.7
million, an increase of $1,460.5 million from the budget
request.
The committee expresses great concern with the reluctance
on the part of Department of Defense officials to acknowledge
the numerous modernization programs and science and technology
efforts that have been adversely impacted by the decrease in
overall research and development funding over the past several
years. During the presentation of the fiscal year 1999 budget
request, the Department forecasted RDT&E funding to decrease by
14 percent over the Future Years Defense Program (FYDP) and
maintained this planned decrease was appropriately based on a
ratio of two-to-one between procurement and RDT&E. The
committee notes that the Department has not justified the
decline in overall RDT&E on the basis of an assessment of
procurement needs versus RDT&E needs, but rather on the
subjective position that a two-to-one ratio seems ``about
right'' and has worked in the past. While the Department
continues to justify this planned decline, DOD officials
routinely announce that high priority programs such as Army and
Navy theater missile defense programs, tactical information
systems, space based early warning systems, other satellite
programs, and a host of others can no longer support critically
needed deployment schedules primarily due to insufficient
funding.
The committee further notes that the Department's claim of
increased modernization funding in the fiscal year 2000 budget
request is composed of an increase of $4 billion in
procurement, while RDT&E, the other half of modernization, is
proposed to be reduced by over $3 billion. The committee is
concerned that the Department's emphasis on addressing the
backlog of military procurement is occurring at the direct
expense of the nation's critical military technologies.
The committee notes that the Department's ability to pursue
application of leading edge technologies is also severely
constrained by the fact that over 33 percent of the total RDT&E
request is for modifications to mature and aging fielded
systems, while the accounts that lead to development of new
capabilities have been decreased by almost 25 percent. This
trend appears to continue throughout the declining RDT&E FYDP.
The committee believes that this trend, if continued, will
seriously undermine our nation's technological advantage.
The committee remains concerned that an alarmingly large
number of high priority service programs are experiencing
schedule delays and restructuring due primarily to service-wide
shortages of RDT&E funds while a significant number of defense-
wide RDT&E efforts appear adequately funded and in some cases
are experiencing growth. The committee also questions the
Department's continued trend of investing large levels of
funding in environmental and other non-defense initiatives
while reducing funding necessary for efficient completion of
high priority defense programs.
The committee concludes that the Department's declining
RDT&E strategy does not support the critical tenets of the
Quadrennial Defense Review which stressed the need for a
smaller, but more modern, more capable military force, and
seriously threatens the ability of the United States to
maintain the technological superiority critical to ensuring
U.S. military dominance of tomorrow's battlefields.
Army RDT&E
Overview
The budget request contained $4,426.2 million for Army
RDT&E. The committee recommends authorization of $4,708.2
million, an increase of $282.0 million.
The committee recommendations for the fiscal year 2000 Army
RDT&E program are identified in the table below. Major changes
to the Army request are discussed following the table.
Items of Special Interest
Aircraft avionics
The budget request contained $6.4 million in PE64201A for
the Army Airborne Command and Control System (A2C2S).
The A2C2S is a UH-60 deployable command post, which
provides a secure and nonsecure, highly mobile data, voice, and
imagery command and control (C2) capability in support of Corps
through Brigade level commanders. The committee is aware that
the A2C2S is one of the Army Chief of Staff's top unfunded
priorities in fiscal year 2000 and that additional funding
would enable the system to complete engineering and
manufacturing development, initial operational test and
evaluation, and be fielded to the first digital corps.
Therefore, the committee recommends $21.7 million in
PE64201A, an increase of $15.3 million for these purposes.
All source analysis system
The budget request contained $49.7 million in PE 64321A,
including $43.7 million for the Army's all source analysis
system (ASAS), an increase of over 50 percent from the fiscal
year 1999 estimate.
The committee recognizes the importance of the ASAS
capability. However, it is troubled by the development costs of
this service intelligence support system, particularly when
compared to the modest costs for the other services'
intelligence systems.
The committee recommends $45.0 million in PE 64321A, a
decrease of $4.7 million.
Alternative vehicle propulsion initiative
The budget request contained $39.7 million in PE 62601A for
combat vehicle and automotive technology, but included no
funding for the alternative vehicle propulsion program.
The committee notes that one of the Army's most significant
challenges is to develop lighter, more efficient propulsion
systems for future vehicles. The committee believes that
dramatic advances in vehicle propulsion require harnessing the
combined capabilities of academia, the private sector, and
government research facilities.
The committee recommends an increase of $10.0 million in PE
62601A for the ongoing alternative propulsion initiative and
urges the Army to aggressively pursue greater private and
public sector involvement in this effort.
Armament enhancement initiative
The budget request contained $36.9 million in PE 63639A for
the armament enhancement initiative, but included no funding
for the tank extended range munition-kinetic energy (TERM-KE).
The committee notes that the armament enhancement
initiative is intended to develop improved tank ammunition to
continue providing an overmatch capability for tanks. TERM-KE
is intended to provide a higher lethality, extended range
kinetic energy munition for the M1 tank main gun.
The committee supports development of improved munitions
and recommends $44.9 million, an increase of $8.0 million for
TERM-KE.
Army aircrew coordination training program
The budget request contained $3.0 million in PE 63007A for
manpower, personnel and training, but included no funding for
aircrew coordination training.
The committee notes the recent increase in the Army
aviation accident rate and believes that aviation safety must
be enhanced. The committee is aware that the aircrew
coordination training program holds promise in reducing
aviation accident rates, and strongly urges the Army to
accelerate this program and field an enhanced air crew training
capability for Army aviation units as soon as possible.
The committee recommends $5.0 million in PE 63007A, an
increase of $2.0 million for aircrew coordination training.
Army technical test instrumentation and targets
The budget request contained $30.5 million in PE 65602A for
Army technical test instrumentation and targets, but included
no funding for characterization and quantification of missile
debris hazards to aircraft.
The committee recommends $31.7 million in PE 65602A, an
increase of $1.2 million for continuation of characterization
and quantification of missile hazards to aircraft.
Comanche
The budget request contained $427.0 million in PE 64223A
for Comanche demonstration and validation.
Comanche is the Army's highest priority modernization
program and is often referred to as the ``quarterback of the
digital battlefield.'' The committee notes that while the
capabilities provided by the Comanche are described as vital to
the success of the Army in the next century, the Army is still
struggling to complete development flight testing of a totally
new, state-of-the-art aircraft with a single test aircraft.
Though the Army has received the second Comanche prototype, it
is not scheduled to be flown in the flight test program until
fiscal year 2001, due only to a shortage of funding.
The committee is aware that additional funding is necessary
to accelerate development of the mission electronics package
and enable a more aggressive flight test program using at least
two aircraft. The committee notes that additional funding for
Comanche is the Army's number one unfunded modernization
requirement and strongly supports the earliest possible
fielding of this important new capability. The committee
recommends $483.0 million in PE 64223A, an increase of $56.0
million for Comanche program acceleration.
Combat vehicle improvement programs
The budget request contained $29.5 million in PE 23735A for
combat vehicle improvement programs.
The committee notes that tracks for existing and future
tracked vehicles are a life-cycle cost driver. The committee
supports development of a lighter, higher performance track
that offers the potential of life-cycle cost improvement.
The committee recommends $31.5 million in PE 23735A, an
increase of $2.0 million for improved vehicle track
development.
Combined turbine diesel engine
The budget request contained $90.9 million in PE 63005A for
combat vehicle and automotive advanced technology, but
contained no funding for the ongoing turbine diesel engine.
The committee notes that turbine diesel engine development
has been slowed by technical obstacles and funding delays. The
committee also notes that the contractor has successfully
developed an operating prototype.
The committee recommends $92.9 million in PE 63005A, an
increase of $2.0 million to complete development and testing of
a prototype engine. The committee urges the Army to support any
further funding required for follow-on evaluation.
Combustion driven eye-safe laser
The budget request contained $30.6 million in PE 64710A for
night vision systems, but included no funding for the
combustion driven eye-safe laser.
The committee notes increasing concern for laser hazards
and supports development of eye-safe lasers. The committee also
notes that emerging combustion driven selective emitter
technology can be used to pump an eye-safe, portable, stealthy,
low cost radar system that identifies friend and foe.
The committee recommends $33.6 million in PE 64710A, an
increase of $3.0 million for combustion driven eye-safe laser.
Concepts experimentation program
The budget request contained $17.0 million in PE 65326A for
the concept experimentation program.
The committee notes that the Army mounted maneuver
battlespace lab (MMBL) has formulated a strategic research plan
to develop strategies and doctrine for the application of Force
XXI technologies on the battlefield. The new strategies and
doctrine are intended to give combat commanders the ability to
dominate the future maneuver battlespace.
The committee recommends $22.0 million in PE 65326A, an
increase of $5.0 million for execution of the MMBL strategic
research plan.
Defense healthcare information assurance program
The budget request contained $9.4 million in PE 33140A for
the Army information systems security program.
The Congress provided $2.5 million in fiscal year 1998 to
initiate a demonstration program for military healthcare
information protection that would be consistent with national
healthcare and information protection initiatives. An
additional $4.0 million was provided in fiscal year 1999 to
continue the program. The two-phased program will initially
establish a prototype for protection of sensitive data integral
to the military healthcare information system at a single
service medical facility, then extend the prototype evaluation
to other military services, regional medical centers, and
civilian medical treatment facilities.
The committee notes the progress that has been made to date
in the prototype phase of the program and supports the plans
for extending the program to additional sites, refinement of
information protection technology, policy, procedures, and
development of industry wide security criteria for healthcare
systems. The committee understands that available funds are
sufficient for completion of the demonstration program and test
of the prototype, and that a decision could be made to begin
fielding a defense healthcare information assurance system in
fiscal year 2000.
The committee recommends $15.4 million in PE 33140A, an
increase of $6.0 million to support initiating deployment of
the defense healthcare information assurance system. The
additional funds may not be obligated until 30 days after the
Secretary of the Army reports to the Congressional defense
committees the results of the beta-test of the system and gives
recommendations for continuation of the program.
Defense manufacturing technology program
The budget request contained a total of $132.5 million for
the manufacturing technology (ManTech) program, including $14.9
million in PE 78045A, $59.1 million in PE 78011N, $51.8 million
in PE 78011F, and $6.7 million in PE 78011S.
The committee has reviewed the Department's ``Five-Year
Plan (FY00-FY04) for the Manufacturing Technology Program.''
Although the committee supports the overall direction of the
ManTech program, the committee notes that, for the second year
in a row, the total program falls far short (approximately
$60.0 million) of the Congressional funding guidelines for the
program that are contained in the statement of managers
accompanying the conference report on H.R. 1119 (H. Rept. 105-
340).
Section 213 of the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 1999 (Public Law 105-736) amended section 2525 of
title 10, United State Code, to establish annual goals for cost
sharing in the DOD ManTech program and procedures for waiver of
the cost sharing requirements in the program. The intent of the
Congress in the amendment was to provide increased flexibility
to the Secretary of Defense in the administration of the cost
sharing requirement, rather than establishing fixed, rigid
guidelines. To clarify the Congress' intent regarding the
flexibility available to the Secretary in his administration of
the cost sharing requirement, the committee recommends a
provision (sec. 212), which would eliminate percentages goals
for cost sharing in manufacturing technology projects.
The committee notes a significant reduction in the
manufacturing technology program managed by the Defense
Logistics Agency. The committee also notes a significant
reduction in the Army's manufacturing technology program,
including the failure to continue increased funding for
development of munitions manufacturing technology that could
result in reduced production costs for ammunition in the
future. In view of the fact that the Army is the single service
manager for the defense ammunition program, the committee
believes that insufficient priority is being given in the
Army's ManTech program for this critical area. The committee is
aware that the estimated cost of air burst munitions for the
objective individual combat weapon (OICW) will probably limit
their use in training and believes that increased emphasis
should be given to a small arms ammunition ManTech initiative
that is specifically focused on decreasing the overall cost of
the OICW air burst munitions through warhead and fuse cost
reductions.
The committee recommends $34.9 million in PE 78045A for the
Army's manufacturing technology program, an increase of $17.0
million for munitions manufacturing technology (including the
small arms ammunition initiative) and $3.0 million for rotary
wing sustainment manufacturing technology, and $74.1 million in
PE 78011N, an increase of $15.0 million for the Navy's ManTech
program. Elsewhere in this report the committee recommends
additional funding to accelerate new initiatives in the Defense
Logistics Agency's ManTech program.
Environmental quality technology
The budget request contained $12.8 million in PE 62720A for
environmental quality technology, but included no funding for
the Texas Regional Institute for Environmental Studies (TRIES).
The committee notes that TRIES, working with the Army
Construction Engineering Research Laboratory, has been
developing a computer-based land management model to reduce
costs and time for training area recovery.
The committee supports well focused military environmental
clean-up efforts and recommends $15.8 million in PE 62720A, an
increase of $3.0 million to complete development of the TRIES
computer-based land management model.
Full spectrum active protection
The budget request contained $39.7 million in PE 62601A for
combat vehicle and automotive technology.
The committee is aware that the Army needs a capability to
defend armored vehicles against attack by hit-to-kill anti-tank
guided missiles, as well as kinetic energy and high explosive
anti-tank projectiles.
The committee recommends an increase of $2.5 million for
development of full spectrum active protection within the tank
and automotive technology effort.
Future combat vehicle
The budget request contained $39.8 million in PE 62601A for
armored systems modernization.
The committee notes that the Army's armored system
modernization strategy has become more an incidental by-product
of the administrative process of the Army budget than a
commitment to a vision. The consequences of this approach to
modernization increases program instability and reinforces
short term reactive planning rather than adherence to a
strategy. Moreover, the committee believes that the
consequences for not having a comprehensive, coherent, and
enduring armored system modernization strategy are no longer
acceptable.
The committee is encouraged, however, by the Army's vision
for the Army After Next. In particular, the committee fully
supports the attributes and capabilities described by both the
Army and the Quadrennial Defense Review as essential in future
combat vehicles, and believes that the development efforts
essential for their fielding should begin immediately. However,
there is a serious mis-match between what the vision calls for
and the Army's ability without full DOD support and
participation, to execute the necessary experimentation and
demonstration of future alternatives while attempting to
sustain its current aging fleet of over 6,000 M-1 tanks.
The committee understands that the current fleet demands an
exponentially increasing sustainment budget that is depleting
funds intended for incremental modernization of the fleet. Left
unchecked, it would soon take the entire armored systems
modernization budget to sustain an M1 fleet that will have
further compounded its problems by evolving into at least four
different configurations. The Army's current armored systems
modernization budget has been decreased to such a low level
that between the years of 2000 and 2030 the resulting tank
fleet will be composed of only 17 percent modernized M1A2 SEP
tanks, while the remaining 4,000 plus tanks will be in varying
stages of deterioration and questionable deployability. The
committee believes current armored systems cannot be evolved to
meet the critical land warfare requirements identified by the
QDR and as essential to the Army After Next. Thus, a commitment
to decisive action must be made now to redress the armor system
modernization dilemma. To delay is to limit the possibilities
and make them unaffordable.
Therefore, the committee recommends a legislative provision
(Sec. 211) that would direct the Secretary of the Defense to
establish a collaborative combat vehicle demonstration program
between the Army and the Defense Advanced Research Projects
Agency (DARPA). While the Army has committed $67.0 million of
its fiscal year 2000 RDT&E science and technology request
toward this critical requirement, related DARPA efforts are not
focused to support any similar initiative. The committee
further directs the Secretary to establish the necessary DOD-
level priority for this program to ensure that both the Army
and DARPA complete this effort in an efficient and timely
manner. While the committee understands that the Army fully
intends to pursue this critical modernization initiative, DARPA
participation is also required to enable rapid prototyping,
special contract authorities, and pursuit of high risk, high
gain technologies essential to the success of this program.
Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of the Army
and the Director of DARPA to establish and enter into a
Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) to develop an appropriate
competitive demonstration project that will consider and
evaluate all promising combat vehicle technologies including
lethality, propulsion, mobility, survivability, robotics, human
engineering, and C4ISR technologies. The project will conduct
competitive demonstrations of these technologies integrated
into potential combat vehicle platforms with an objective of
identifying the most promising candidates for a full
development program to begin by fiscal year 2006. The Secretary
and the Director shall provide a report to the Congressional
defense committees with submission of the fiscal year 2001
budget request that outlines the MOA, objective schedule, and
required funding for the joint Army/DARPA project.
Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $12.0
million for the future combat vehicle modernization program for
fiscal year 2000. Additionally, the committee recommends that
of the amounts authorized and appropriated for DARPA fiscal
year 2000 funding, not less than $38.0 million in PE 63764E and
$18.2 million in PE 62702E shall be for the Army/DARPA future
combat vehicle program.
Geographic synthetic aperture radar
The budget request contained $41.1 million in PE 62784A for
military engineering technology, but included no funding for
geographic synthetic aperture radar (SAR).
The committee notes that an airborne geographic SAR is
being developed to generate high-resolution, three dimensional
maps of the earth. This dual band interferometric SAR will be
able to map above, through, and below the vegetation canopy.
The committee is aware that airborne foliage penetrating
radar may offer potential target identification enhancement to
the Army and recommends $56.1 million in PE 62784A, an increase
of $15.0 million to evaluate dual band airborne interferometric
SAR technology for possible Army applications.
Geo-positioning system--inertial measurement unit integration
The budget request contained $23.0 million in PE 62120A for
sensors and electronics survivability.
The committee notes that uses for the geo-positioning
system (GPS) and inertial measurement units (IMU) include
personnel, weapon and non-weapon system platforms, and an
increasing variety of smart weapons. The burgeoning
applications for these types of systems, coupled with advances
in electronics integration and the emergence of micro electro
mechanical systems (MEMS) technology now make possible full
integration of GPS and MEMS on a single chip that offers the
possibility of dramatic reductions in the cost. Though the
development cost of full GPS-IMU integration may be
unattractive to an individual acquisition program, the
recurring cost savings make such development an imperative for
the Department of Defense as a whole.
The committee strongly supports efforts to reduce the cost
of smart weapons and directs the Secretary of the Army to
establish a focused program to develop a fully integrated GPS-
IMU on a single chip capable of meeting the needs of service
missile, artillery, and other appropriate applications. The
committee is aware that there are disparate efforts in
industry, government laboratories, and academia to reduce the
size and cost of GPS and IMUs which may be leveraged.
The committee recommends an increase of $1.0 million for
GPS-IMU chip level integration.
Heart rate variability technology
The budget request contained $70.1 million in PE 62787A for
medical technology.
The committee notes that heart rate variability technology
offers potential for enhancing on-site assessment of disease
and trauma by enabling physiological measurement of the nervous
system functioning and balance. Improvements in these areas
could lead to improved treatment and victim survivability. The
committee believes that this technology, designed for point-of-
injury assessment for emergency response personnel in civilian
and military trauma environments, may also have significant
applications for enhancing early detection and prevention of
chemical and biological agent effects.
The committee urges the Army Medical Command to pursue
testing of this technology and to assess its potential for
improved chem-bio detection and prevention, as well as other
military emergency response applications, and recommends $74.1
million, an increase of $ 4.0 million in PE 62787A.
High energy laser test facility
The budget request contained $14.2 million in PE 65605A for
the high energy laser system test facility (HELSTF).
The committee notes that the Army has taken the initiative
to develop and publish a Directed Energy Master Plan, laying
out a road map for future high power directed energy technology
exploitation. However, the committee is concerned that the
Department of Defense does not have a central directed energies
(DE) technology clearing house to identify, assess, and develop
the full range and potentials of these promising technologies.
The committee further notes that Space and Missile Defense
Command (SMDC) has proposed that HELSTF be the premier joint
service open-air laser test facility for all high power DOD
laser programs, providing testing for laser lethality and
system effectiveness as well as threat exploitation, directed
energy bio-effects, and susceptibility testing. A high-power
laser facility capable of testing lasers over a broad range of
wavelengths is required to support all these critical
parameters. The committee believes that leveraging past
investments in HELSTF infrastructure and building on past Army
research and development in high power lasers is a cost
effective means of developing next generation high power lasers
capable of operating with variable wavelengths and pulse
formats.
The committee supports the use of the HELSTF to focus
development of high power free electron and other solid-state
lasers as a complement to various chemical laser development
programs, and recommends a provision (Sec. 241) that would
direct the Secretary of Defense to designate the Commander,
SMDC as the DOD executive agent for oversight of high-power
solid state laser and directed energy technologies with
potential weapons applications. The committee notes that the
HELSTF is currently controlled by SMDC and directs that HELSTF
be established as the DOD center of excellence for high-power,
solid state laser and directed energy technologies.
Additionally, the committee recommends the establishment of a
relationship between Livermore National Laboratory, with its
high power laser expertise, and appropriate industry
participants to create a national center of excellence for high
power solid-state laser development.
The committee recommends $38.2 million for the HELSTF in PE
65605A, an increase of $20.0 million for assessment and
development of high energy solid state lasers and other
directed energy technologies, and an increase of $4.0 million
for evaluation of the Navy's free electron laser technology
program.
High mobility artillery rocket system
The budget request contained $36.5 million in PE 63778A for
the multiple launch rocket system (MLRS) product improvement
program (PIP), and included $6.0 million for the MLRS high
mobility rocket system (HIMARS).
The committee notes that the HIMARS is a C-130
transportable, wheeled version of the MLRS launcher, capable of
firing all rockets and missiles in the current and future MLRS
family of missiles. The committee is aware that the Department
of Defense recognizes the importance of the improved
deployability provided by HIMARS and supports accelerated
development of the program.
The committee strongly encourages accelerated development
and fielding of HIMARS and recommends $67.4 million in PE
63778A, an increase of $30.9 million for HIMARS.
Joint service small arms program
The budget request contained $4.9 million in PE 63607A for
the joint service small arm program.
The committee is aware that the present family of
individual weapons as well as the objective individual combat
weapon (OICW) for the future will have a 5.56mm capability. The
committee is informed that accuracy of the 5.56mm round can be
improved significantly as was the 7.62mm round with relatively
little expense.
The committee believes that, despite the emergence of
``smart weapons,'' the importance of individual combat weapons
will remain and that ammunition for these weapons should be as
accurate as modern production technology will allow. The
committee also notes that there is a new technology which
reduces drag in the barrel that offers much higher projectile
velocity from the same caliber small arms cartridges. The
committee is also aware that features such as laser ranging and
target tracking which are important for the OICW air-burst
round could be included in the initial OICW with a small
additional investment.
Therefore, the committee recommends $9.9 million, an
increase of $5.0 million in PE 63607A for OICW improvements,
development of more accurate 5.56 ammunition, and assessment of
new high-velocity small arms projectile technology.
Joint surveillance target attack radar system (Joint STARS)
The budget request contained $11.5 million in PE 64770A for
system improvements to the Joint STARS Common Ground Station
(CGS).
The committee notes the proven success of the Joint STARS
system in both Operation Desert Storm and Operation Joint
Endeavor in Bosnia and its current support to the North
Atlantic Treaty Organization's Operation Allied Force. A key
feature of Joint STARS is the secure, encrypted, anti-jam
Surveillance Control Data Link (SCDL), which links the Air
Force's E-8 Joint STARS aircraft to the Army's ground support
modules and CGSs, enabling real-time data transfer of command
and control information between the aircraft and ground
stations.
The committee is aware that the ongoing SCDL System
Improvement Program (SIP), which eliminates obsolete parts and
updates older digital circuit boards with state-of-the-art,
software-based array boards, will increase data transfer rates
as well as reduce component size, weight, and power
requirements by as much as 50 percent. Consistent with past
committee actions and based on the benefits of the SIP, the
committee recommends $19.5 million, an increase of $8.0 million
in PE 64770A to complete this upgrade.
Kwajalein missile range modernization
The budget request contained $140.3 million in PE 65301A
for Kwajalein missile range (KMR) modernization.
The committee is concerned that delays in KMR modernization
will increase risk in key tests of the national missile defense
(NMD) system. This modernization effort includes replacement of
obsolete components, upgrade of hardware and software
architectures, and provision for remote operation of range
sensors and instrumentation. The committee believes that
accelerating modernization of the range will not only reduce
NMD development risks, but will substantially reduce annual KMR
operations and maintenance costs.
The committee recommends $148.3 million in PE 65301A, an
increase of $8.0 million for KMR modernization.
Lightweight x-band radar
The budget request contained $24.9 million in PE 12419A for
the Aerostat Joint Project Office, but included no funds for
lightweight x-band radar technology.
The committee understands that the Ballistic Missile
Defense Organization has examined the potential of lightweight
x-band radar technology for application to the Army's Aerostat
project and found it to be useful to the requirement for fire
control radar.
The committee recommends that the Army evaluate this
technology from within existing funds and make a recommendation
to the Congressional defense committees providing the results
of the evaluation.
Medical materiel/medical biological defense equipment
The budget request contained $9.70 million in PE 64807A for
medical materiel/medical biological defense equipment,
including $491,000 for the Life Support Trauma and Transport
(LSTAT) system EMD program.
The committee has learned that the EMD program is
underfunded and that it could easily be completed in fiscal
year 2000 if properly resourced. Furthermore, the committee
understands that the Army does support the LSTAT program and
plans to procure the system on a multiyear basis.
Accordingly, the committee recommends $13.2 million in PE
64807A, an increase of $3.5 million to complete LSTAT EMD in
fiscal year 2000.
MedTeams
The budget request contained $16.4 million in PE 62716A for
human factors engineering technology, but included no funding
for continuation of the medical teams (MedTeams) program.
The committee notes that the MedTeams effort provides
development and testing of methods to provide improved
coordination of emergency medical teams.
The committee supports development of improved medical care
and recommends $19.8 million in PE 62716A, an increase of $3.4
million.
Night vision advanced technology
The budget request contained $36.6 million in PE 63710A for
night vision advanced technology.
The committee notes that damage control capability is
critical to military survivability. Sensor technology has been
and is being developed for ground forces to improve night
vision situational awareness. Damage control personnel also
require night vision situational awareness. The committee
supports adaptation of emerging sensor technology to develop
helmet mounted sensors for firefighters and damage control
personnel.
The committee recommends $39.6 million in PE 63710A, an
increase of $3.0 million for helmet mounted sensors for
firefighters and damage control personnel.
Panoramic night vision goggle
The budget request contained $20.1 million in PE 62709A for
night vision technology.
The committee notes that wide field of view night vision
capability for aviation is increasingly critical as operations
migrate from daylight to dark. Existing night vision equipment
has a very narrow field of view, excessive weight, and very
poor depth perception in inclement weather.
The committee supports development of superior night vision
equipment to improve safety and increase the capability of our
forces. The committee recommends $30.1 million in PE 62709A, an
increase of $10.0 million for the panoramic night vision
goggle, including emerging technologies that may be generally
applicable to night vision improvement.
Passive millimeter wave imaging
The budget request contained $23.0 million in PE 62120A for
sensors and electronics survivability, but contained no funding
for passive millimeter wave imaging.
The committee is aware that passive millimeter wave and
associated devices may offer the ability to solve problems in
the nap-of-the-earth wire and other obstacle collision
avoidance for the Apache and other aircraft.
The committee recommends an increase of $3.0 million for
passive millimeter wave imaging for obstacle/collision
avoidance.
Patriot anti-cruise missile defense
The budget request contained no funding in PE 23801A for
the Patriot anti-cruise missile (PACM) seeker upgrade.
In the statement of managers accompanying the conference
report on H.R. 3616 (H. Rept. 105-736), the conferees directed
the Secretary of the Army to complete a rigorous PACM test
program and to evaluate the effectiveness of the PACM seeker
against a full range of cruise missile threats. The committee
notes that a preliminary evaluation has been completed prior to
flight testing of the seeker, and that a more thorough
evaluation will be possible only after the flight testing is
completed. Without this more thorough evaluation, the committee
is unable to reach a definitive conclusion on the ability of
PACM to meet the cruise missile threat cost effectively.
The committee understands that the Patriot advanced
capability-3 (PAC-3) will have substantial capability against
cruise missiles, in addition to providing effective ballistic
missile defense. The committee also understands that the PACM
seeker would be used to upgrade older PAC-1 missiles that have
very limited capabilities to defend against ballistic missile
attack. The committee notes that a thorough analysis of the
cost trade-offs between acquisition of PACM and PAC-3 is also
needed prior to consideration of PACM acquisition.
The committee recommends no funding in PE 23801A for PACM.
The committee directs the Secretary of the Army to prepare a
report, following completion of PACM flight testing, with a
thorough assessment of PACM capabilities and the opportunity
costs of additional PACM development and eventual PACM
procurement. The report shall be submitted to the Congressional
defense committees prior to any budget request for additional
PACM funds.
Plasma energy pyrolysis system
The budget request contained $12.8 million in PE 62720A for
environmental quality technology, but included no funds for the
plasma energy pyrolysis system (PEPS).
A total of $15.9 million has been invested in this program
to develop a transportable PEPS prototype which is now
undergoing testing. The committee is aware that PEPS testing is
intended to determine its ability to destroy, vitrify, and
dispose of several hazardous waste streams. The Army intends to
await completion of the PEPS evaluation program and analysis of
the results to determine cost and performance of PEPS prior to
proceeding further in acquisition.
The committee supports development of safe, economical
means to eliminate hazardous waste and encourages the Army to
continue its efforts with PEPS.
Proximity fuzing for dual-purpose improved conventional munition
submunitions
The budget request contained $39.9 million in PE 63004A for
the Army's weapons and munitions advanced technology
development program and $101.5 million in PE 63795N for the
Navy's land attack technology development program.
The committee notes the common use by the Army and the Navy
of the M80 grenade submunition. This submunition is now
dispensed by the dual-purpose improved conventional munition
(DPICM) 120 mm mortar, the 5-inch gun, 155mm cannon
projectiles, the multi-launch rocket system (MLRS) warhead, the
extended range guided munition (ERGM), and the Best Buy
projectile advanced technology demonstration. The committee
also notes that Army and Navy studies and tests indicate that
lethality gains of 10 percent to 200 percent are possible if a
height of burst proximity fusing option were incorporated in
the M80 submunition. The committee understands that the Army
and the Navy are teaming to develop a proximity fuzing feature
that could be added to the existing self-destruct fuze in the
M80 grenade and greatly increase the armor penetration and
anti-personnel lethality of the grenade. The committee believes
that a joint program to develop a common proximity fuze for
DPICM submunitions could capitalize on the efforts of both the
Army and the Navy by deferring the development and testing of
individual service prototypes and result in significantly
reduced costs through the economy of scale that would be gained
by the production of a single fuse and submunition for both
services.
The committee recommends an increase of $2.5 million in PE
63004A and $2.5 million in PE 63795N to establish a joint Army/
Navy program to develop a proximity fuze for DPICM
submunitions. The committee directs the Secretary of the Army
and the Secretary of the Navy to report to the Congressional
defense committees on the establishment of the joint program
and the plan and funding for the proximity fuze development
with the submission of the fiscal year 2001 budget request.
Security and intelligence activities
The budget request contained no funding for security and
intelligence activities in PE 35128A.
The committee notes the government's increasing dependence
on computer-based information systems and the growing world-
wide threat to these systems. It is also aware of the Army
Intelligence Command's (INSCOM) state-of-the-art land
information warfare activity (LIWA) and its developing
capability to protect the worldwide computer infrastructure.
The LIWA has recently demonstrated a significantly enhanced
capability for responding to computer systems viruses and
attacks by rapidly identifying and providing protection and
corrective actions to all supported systems. The committee is
also aware that the Department of Defense has recognized the
potential of the LIWA to offer significant improvements in
providing timely assessments of intelligence information to the
warfighter.
The committee strongly supports improved and strengthened
information system protection and processing and recommends
$10.0 million in PE 35128A for the INSCOM LIWA.
Self-destruct fuse
The committee notes that there are a number of apparently
duplicative efforts within service and defense-wide programs to
pursue self-destruct fuzes for munitions. The Army has recently
type-classified self-destruct fuses for some Army munitions,
and yet it appears that there is no Department wide program
development to the share the Army's completed development or to
coordinate other service efforts.
The committee directs that the Secretary of Defense conduct
a study of unexploded ordnance problems and establish a
defense-wide program to develop affordable, reliable self-
destruct fuses for munitions, and report the results of this
study and the actions being by December 31, 1999.
Semi-automated imagery processor
The budget request contained no funding in PE 63766A for
tactical electronic surveillance systems.
The committee notes that the semi-automated imagery
processor (SAIP) is an advanced concept technology
demonstration (ACTD) designed to provide automatic target
cueing to support imagery analysts. Further, the tool provides
a limited capability for automated target recognition. While
the SAIP is not perfected, the committee notes the development
effort and results to date. The committee remains concerned
that current and future imagery collection systems are
overwhelming the limited number of imagery analysts available
to put ``eyes on target.'' Automated capabilities to reduce
imagery analyst workloads are critically needed. The committee
believes that the SAIP represents the best effort to date to
provide such radar imagery automation. However, the Department
has failed to provide sufficient funding to transition a needed
ACTD capability to an operational application.
The committee recommends an increase of $2.5 million in PE
63766A to transition the SAIP effort from an ACTD to an
operational capability. The committee notes that the SAIP is
not a total solution and expects the Army to continue efforts
to refine and improve the SAIP.
Small arms fire control system
The budget request contained $54.9 million in PE 64802A for
weapons and munitions, but included no funding for the small
arms fire control system (SAFCS).
SAFCS is a lightweight optical sight that corrects the
aimpoint of small arms. The committee notes that the SAFCS
offers potential for improved accuracy and probability of hit
for small arms.
The committee supports improvements in small arms accuracy
and recommends $57.4 million in PE 64802A, an increase of $2.5
million for engineering development and type classification for
SAFCS.
Tactical voice control for maneuver control system
The budget request contained $45.1 million in PE 23740A for
the maneuver control system (MCS).
The committee notes that tactical voice recognition systems
have been proven to provide more accurate, faster and robust
command and control than conventional input/output devices.
The committee recommends $46.1 million for PE 23740A , an
increase of $1.0 million for tactical voice control for MCS.
Trichloromelamine testing
The National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1997
(Public Law 104-201) directed the Secretary of the Army to
conduct toxicity studies of trichloromelamine (TCM)
disinfectant to provide appropriate Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) registration for Army future procurement from TCM
suppliers, thus ensuring competition and recommend additional
funding for this purpose.
The committee notes that the Army has failed to complete
directed testing and, therefore, reiterates its earlier
direction that the Army complete testing and EPA registration
for TCM as rapidly as possible from within funding in PE 63002A
for medical advanced technology.
University and industrial research centers
The budget request contained $47.1 million in PE 61104A for
university and industrial research centers, and included $5.9
million for advanced displays.
The committee notes that, despite the importance of
advanced and interactive displays for the Army After Next,
funding for the advanced and interactive displays consortium
has been reduced over the past four years. The committee
supports the development of innovative, cost-effective displays
and recommends $48.5 million in PE 61104A, an increase of $1.4
million for the advanced and interactive displays consortium.
Navy RDT&E
Overview
The budget request contained $7,984.0 million for Navy
RDT&E. The committee recommends authorization of $8,358.5
million, an increase of $374.5 million.
The committee recommendations for the fiscal year 2000 Navy
RDT&E program are identified in the table below. Major changes
to the Navy request are discussed following the table.
Items of Special Interest
Advanced amphibious assault vehicle
The budget request contained $94.8 million in PE 63611M for
the advanced amphibious assault vehicle (AAAV).
The AAAV is a self-deploying, high water-speed, armored,
amphibious assault vehicle capable of operating in all weather
and in nuclear, chemical, and biological environments. The
committee notes that the AAAV is the Marine Corps highest
priority ground modernization requirement and that additional
funding will permit incorporation of improvements identified
during testing, reduce program technical risk, and position the
program for acceleration of initial operational capability from
fiscal year 2006 to fiscal year 2005.
The committee recommends $121.2 million in PE 63611M, an
increase of $26.4 million, for the AAAV.
Advanced anti-radiation guided missile
The budget request contained $23.6 million in PE 25601N,
including $10.8 million to continue development and
demonstration of the advanced anti-radiation guided missile
(AARGM).
The committee notes that ARRGM is a Phase III small
business innovative research (SBIR) program to develop and
demonstrate a dual-mode guidance section on a high-speed anti-
radiation missile (HARM). Program objectives are to demonstrate
an effective and affordable lethal suppression of enemy air
defenses (SEAD) capability against mobile, relocatable, or
fixed air defense threats in the presence of potential emitter
shutdown or other anti-radiation missile countermeasures.
The ARRGM technology demonstration program is an outgrowth
of a Phase I and Phase II competitive SBIR program, which
successfully demonstrated the feasibility of a dual-mode seeker
to address radar ``shut-down'' anti-radiation missile
countermeasures. The dual-mode technology being developed in
the AARGM program has demonstrated very high potential to solve
the problem of ``shut-down'' not only in the HARM, the primary
SEAD weapon, but has also demonstrated the potential for
integration with other missile airframes.
The committee recommends $33.6 million in PE 25601N, an
increase of $10.0 million to continue risk reduction, test, and
other field activities to prepare for a potential fiscal year
2001 Milestone II decision to enter engineering and
manufacturing development.
Advanced waterjet propulsor demonstration program
The budget request contained $75.6 million in PE 63792N for
Navy advanced technology demonstrations, but included no funds
for demonstration of an advanced waterjet propulsor for future
naval applications.
The committee notes that a number of propulsion
technologies are being considered for use in the DD-21 land
attack destroyer and other future naval ships, with the goal of
increased operational performance and reduced acquisition and
life-cycle costs.
The committee notes the development under an extension of
the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency's maritime
technology program of an advanced waterjet propulsor which
could meet operational performance, signature and cost
reduction requirements for the DD-21 and other naval ships. The
committee notes proposals for \1/4\-scale at-sea demonstration
and cavitation tunnel testing of the waterjet propulsor to
validate critical performance criteria and potential
application of the propulsor to the DD-21 or other naval ships.
The committee urges that the Secretary of the Navy assess
the requirement for further development, demonstration, and
evaluation of advanced waterjet propulsor technology and
provide to the Congressional defense committees by December 1,
1999, a report which includes the Secretary's recommendations
regarding the demonstration, a program execution plan, and Navy
funding for the program.
Affordable advanced acoustical arrays
The budget request contained $115.8 million in PE 63561N
for advanced submarine systems development, including $71.6
million for advanced submarine combat systems development.
The committee notes the Navy's continued development of
advanced sonar arrays for surface, submarine, and distributed
surveillance systems, including single and multi-line towed
arrays, conformal-hull mounted arrays, and advanced arrays for
use in the fixed-distributed and advanced-deployable systems.
The committee strongly supports the development and
demonstration of all-optical array and other key enabling
technologies for advanced acoustical arrays that could
significantly improve array performance and dramatically reduce
the cost of future acoustical array systems.
The committee recommends an increase of $10.0 million in PE
63561N to accelerate the development and transition of all-
optical array and other key enabling technologies to advanced
towed, hull-mounted, and distributed acoustical array systems.
Analysis of alternatives for follow-on support jammer
The budget request contained $87.3 million in PE 64270N for
engineering and manufacturing development of the EA-6B
electronic countermeasures aircraft system. The budget request
states that a requirement exists to begin planning and analysis
of alternatives for a command and control warfare (C2W)
replacement for the EA-6B aircraft, however, no funds were
requested for this purpose.
The committee notes the high demands that are being placed
on the EA-6B aircraft as an electronic countermeasures weapons
system, projections that there will not be enough EA-6B
aircraft to meet mission requirements beyond 2015, and
considerations to retire the EA-6B in 2015. The committee notes
further that a mission needs statement for a C2W platform that
would replace the EA-6B and achieve initial operational
capability in 2012 is being reviewed by the Navy. The committee
understands that a C2W follow-on platform would incorporate air
vehicle enhancements that would reduce operational and
maintenance costs, improve reliability, and significantly
increase command, control, and operational effectiveness. The
committee believes that the Navy should initiate an analysis of
alternatives for a C2W follow-on platform which will determine
the most cost-effective approach for replacing the EA-6B in the
radar support jamming mission.
The committee recommends an increase of $5.0 million in PE
63XXXN to initiate the analysis of alternatives for a C2W
replacement for the EA-6B aircraft, and directs the
establishment of a separate concept exploration/product
definition and risk reduction program element for the program.
Aquifer vulnerability/contamination assessment
The budget request contained $8.2 million in PE 65873M for
Marine Corps program-wide support, but included no funding for
acquifer vulnerability/contamination assessment.
The committee recognizes the potential for groundwater
contamination at military bases due to fuel spills, hazardous
chemical handling, and waste disposal. The committee recommends
$9.7 million in PE 65873M, an increase of $1.5 million to
conduct an analysis and acquifer mapping of a candidate
military site to establish contamination identification.
Aviation depot maintenance technology
The budget request contained $70.8 million in PE 63721N for
environmental protection.
The committee notes that new environmentally friendly
repair processes are being developed that offer significant
productivity improvements and potential cost savings. To this
end, the Congress provided $2.0 million in fiscal year 1999 for
the development and demonstration of aviation depot maintenance
technologies that will significantly reduce maintenance and
repair costs and reduce or eliminate hazardous waste and
pollution products.
The committee recommends $73.8 million in PE 63721N, an
increase of $3.0 million to complete the program for
demonstration of advanced maintenance technologies for removal
of coatings from large aircraft, cleaning and stripping of
metal surfaces, and application of tungsten carbide coatings to
aircraft landing gear and hydraulic components.
Beartrap nonlinear dynamics and environmental characterization
The budget request contained $17.8 million in PE 63254N for
anti-submarine warfare (ASW) system developments, including
$5.3 million for Project Beartrap.
The committee notes that the budget request for Beartrap
supports hardware and software developments for advanced
capability acoustic and non-acoustic sensors, as well as data
collection and analysis for threat assessment and environmental
characterization. The committee understands that basic research
in nonlinear dynamic stochastic resonance (NDSR), supported by
the Office of Naval Research, has advanced to the point that it
offers explanations for many observed physical phenomena, and
it offers the potential to develop significantly improved
acoustic and non-acoustic AWS sensor systems. The committee
believes that NDSR technology offers a significant opportunity
to enhance the capabilities of Beartrap at a time when evolving
ASW requirements indicate the critical need to integrate these
latest relevant technologies. Specific areas include
characterization of the ocean nonlinear dynamics environment,
application of NDSR technology in advanced Beartrap sensors,
and validation of NDSR ASW performance.
The committee also notes that the Navy requires extensive
environmental data to achieve effective performance from the
extended echo ranging (EER) devices used in shallow littoral
waters. These active acoustic devices are key to naval airborne
ASW performance. The Beartrap program is well suited to collect
this environmental data.
The committee recommends $23.8 million in PE 63254N for ASW
systems development, an increase of $6.0 million for Project
Beartrap for the purposes outlined above.
C-2 eight-blade composite propeller system
The budget request contained $53.3 million in PE 25633N for
improvements in operational Navy aviation and aviation support
systems.
The committee is aware that the Navy is seeking a solution
to operational limitations encountered with the propeller
system used on E-2C and C-2A aircraft. The current propeller
system incorporates technology developed in the 1950's and the
1960's, is difficult and expensive to maintain, and is no
longer in production. Following committee recommendations in
its report on H.R. 1119 (H. Rept. 105-132) for initiation of a
development and demonstration of an eight-blade composite
propeller for E-2C and C-2A aircraft, the Navy began a program
for design, development, test, and production of the propeller
system. The committee notes that the program includes flight
and ground test of the new propeller system for the E-2
aircraft, but includes only ground tests for the new propeller
on the C-2 aircraft.
The committee recommends $58.3 million in PE 25633N, an
increase of $5.0 million to support flight testing the new
propeller system on the C-2 aircraft sequentially with the E-2
flight test program.
Claymore marine
The budget request contained $75.6 million in PE 63792N for
the Navy's advanced technology demonstration program, including
$3.9 million for the Claymore Marine advanced technology
demonstration.
The committee recommends an increase of $2.7 million in PE
63792N for risk reduction and to maintain the schedule for the
Claymore Marine advanced technology demonstration.
Cooperative engagement capability
The budget request contained $114.9 million in PE 63658N to
continue hardware and software engineering, integration, test
and evaluation of the Navy's cooperative engagement capability
(CEC).
The statement of managers accompanying the conference
report on H.R. 3616 (H. Rept. 105-736) directed the Secretary
of the Navy to report to the Congressional defense committees
at least quarterly on the interoperability problems between
CEC, ship self-defense, and the Aegis combat direction system
that were first encountered in 1997 during fleet operational
test and evaluation of the systems and the Navy's plan for and
progress in resolving these problems.
The committee has reviewed the Secretary's first quarterly
report and notes that the Navy has made significant progress in
developing a plan that focuses on interoperability to support
carrier battle group deployments in the near term, and on
force-level systems engineering to coordinate requirements,
capital investments, development, and installation of new
system capabilities for the fleet in the far term. The Program
Executive Office for Theater Surface Combatants has been
created to provide a common management structure for all
surface ship combat direction systems and interfacing systems,
including systems integration and interoperability of CEC,
Aegis, the advanced combat direction system, and related joint
command and control systems. The committee also notes that the
Navy has significantly increased land-based system engineering
analysis and testing capabilities for combat systems and is
establishing a shore-based, distributed engineering test
capability that provides the ability to address battle group
level combat system interoperability issues and to validate
operational tactics, techniques and procedures prior to
shipboard installation of the systems. The committee recognizes
the potential provided by the Distributed Engineering Plant for
reducing the cost of system, acquisition, testing, and training
and encourages the Navy to continue to develop and support its
shore-based, distributed engineering test capability. The
committee notes further that the Navy has realigned and
reprogrammed the funds necessary to address these issues.
The committee understands that recent land-based and at-sea
testing has demonstrated continuing progress in resolving
combat systems interoperability issues. However, the committee
believes that resolution of the interoperability issues will
require a stable program plan and funding and a coordinated
effort on the part of the Navy and the supporting system
contractors.
The committee recommends $114.9 million in PE 63658N to
continue CEC development, systems integration, and test and
evaluation.
Cruiser conversion
The budget request contained $28.5 million in PE 64307N and
$11.5 million in PE 64567N for cruiser conversion program
design and engineering studies but did not include any
procurement funds.
Aegis class cruisers are the Navy's premier air defense and
strike warfare platforms. The first ships of this class have
now been in service over 15 years and some of their systems are
approaching technical obsolescence. The committee understands
that, in order to protect its investment in these highly
capable ships, the Navy is planning to extensively upgrade the
Aegis cruisers' combat systems and engineering equipment
beginning in fiscal year 2002. These upgrades include new
computer systems, cooperative engagement and theater ballistic
missile defense capabilities, land attack and area air defense
commander functions, and other hull and mechanical
improvements.
The committee supports upgrading these cruisers and
recommends $37.5 million in PE 64307N and $17.5 million in PE
64567N, a total increase of $15.0 million, including $9.0
million in PE 64307N and $6.0 million in PE 64567N for
engineering studies associated with expansion of the conversion
program to include all Aegis cruisers.
Distributed surveillance system
The budget request contained $14.9 million in PE 64784N for
continued development of the distributed surveillance system.
The Integrated Undersea Surveillance System (IUSS) program
includes both fixed and relocatable acoustic sensor systems to
detect and track diesel and nuclear powered submarines. The
Fixed Distributed System (FDS) is a series of permanently
installed acoustic arrays and the Advanced Deployable System
(ADS), currently under development, will comprise sensors that
can be rapidly deployed in littoral environments.
The committee understands that the incorporation of fiber
optic sensor technologies in acoustic arrays can greatly reduce
maintenance requirements for these systems. Littoral anti-
submarine warfare (ASW) operations pose complex challenges in
the evaluation and analysis of acoustic sensor data due to the
high volume of traffic and diverse environmental conditions.
The committee is concerned that the ADS program does not
adequately address automation of detection and tracking
functions, connectivity to the Global Command and Control
System (GCCS) and web-based network centric warfare systems.
Accordingly, the committee recommends $33.9 million, an
increase of $19.0 million in PE 64784N for the distributed
surveillance system including $8.0 million for the continued
application of remote-powered fiber optic sensor technologies
for FDS acoustic arrays; and $11.0 million for the development
of improved detection and tracking algorithms to provide
increased automation for the ADS and an interface among it, the
GCCS, and other network centric warfare systems.
DP-2 thrust vectoring system proof-of-concept demonstration
The budget request contained $42.0 million in PE 63217N for
development of air systems and weapons advanced technology. No
funds were requested for continuation of the DP-2 thrust
vectoring system proof-of-concept demonstration.
DP-2 is a proof of concept program to demonstrate thrust
vector control to achieve vertical takeoff and conventional
takeoff capabilities in a one-half scale flight test vehicle.
This technology offers the potential for a low cost, medium
range aircraft of advanced composite construction.
The committee recommends $47.0 million in PE 63217N, an
increase of $5.0 million to complete the proof-of-concept
flight test demonstration and provide the basis for a potential
Department of the Navy decision to proceed with a full-scale
aircraft development program.
E-2C radar modernization
The budget request contained $16.1 million in PE 24152N for
the E-2C maritime surveillance aircraft, including $12.1
million for the E-2C radar modernization program.
The committee notes that the radar modernization program is
an advanced technology transition demonstration of a new E-2C
radar system that will provide improved airborne surveillance
capabilities for carrier battle groups engaged in littoral
operations. However, funding for the radar modernization
program was sharply reduced in this year's budget request. The
committee understands that restoration of the funds would
accelerate the development and integration of the new radar
system and enable participation in the Navy's early operational
assessment of the cooperative engagement capability (CEC) with
the E-2C. The committee also understands that this would
accelerate the E-2C CEC demonstration by one year, reduce risk,
and provide the opportunity to forward-fit the capability into
new production E-2C aircraft. The committee notes that in
addition to demonstrating the potential for significant
improvements in airborne surveillance support for littoral
operations, the radar improvement program also addresses major
obsolescence and reliability issues associated with the current
E-2C radar system.
The committee recommends $31.1 million in PE 24152N,
including an increase of $15.0 million for the E-2C radar
modernization program.
Electric drive propulsion for Navy ships
The budget request contained $108.3 million in PE 63513N
for shipboard system component development, including $25.7
million for integrated power systems (IPS) development.
The committee notes the Navy's increased interest in the
development of electric drive propulsion technology and the
potential use of electric drive propulsion in future surface
combatants and submarines, including insertion of an electric
drive propulsion system in the DD-21 land attack destroyer and
in the New Attack Submarine (NSSN) programs. A common
integrated electric drive system appears to offer significant
advantages, however, implementation of such a system has been
limited by the technology needed for reliable electric motors
of the power (approximately 30,000 to 50,000 shaft horse power
(shp)) required. The committee is aware that several
alternative electric propulsion motor concepts have been
proposed that are of varying degrees of technical maturity.
The statement of managers accompanying the conference
report on H.R. 4103 (H. Rept. 105-746) directed the Secretary
of the Navy to provide a report to the Congress which evaluates
the installation of a common integrated electric drive system
for DD-21, a NSSN variant, and the next-generation CV(X)
aircraft carrier with both a common integrated electric drive
system and a conventional mechanical drive system. The
Secretary's report, dated March 1, 1999, states that the Navy
has concluded that the radial-gap PM motor possesses the power
density, acoustic performance, and maturity of technology to be
a viable propulsion motor common to the broadest ranges of
ships and that the Navy is currently considering expanding its
IPS development to a corporate Navy program that will include
state-of-the-art permanent magnet motor technology.
The committee recommends $108.3 million in PE 63513N,
including $25.7 million for integrated power systems
development. The committee will consider recommendations by the
Secretary for further development and demonstration of electric
drive propulsion technology for Navy ships which identify
necessary funding and provide a program plan for the
development.
Electro-optical framing technologies
The budget request contained $5.0 million in PE 35206N for
airborne reconnaissance systems, including $2.0 million for
electro-optic (EO) framing technologies.
The committee continues to support development of the
revolutionary digital EO framing technologies with on-chip
forward motion compensation (FMC). The committee notes the Navy
F-14 Tactical Air Reconnaissance Podded System--Completely
Digital (TARPS CD) demonstration system using this technology
has recently been successfully employed at sea. Based on this
success, the committee believes there is a need for additional
TARPS CD risk-reduction pods and that the Navy should expand
this effort. Further, the committee believes that the EO
framing with on-chip FMC should be fully developed and improved
to satisfy current and future applications on aircraft such as
tactical unmanned aerial vehicles and other tactical fighter
aircraft.
Therefore, the committee recommends $10.0 million in PE
35206N, an increase of $5.0 million for continued development
of EO framing with on-chip FMC technologies. These efforts
shall include development of the high quantum efficiency infra-
red framing chip, precision strike improvements, and step-
framing technologies.
Environmentally safe energetic materials
The budget request contained $34.3 million in PE 63609N for
development and demonstration of improvements in Navy
conventional munitions. No funds were requested to continue the
program for development of environmentally safe energetic
materials.
The Congress has supported the accelerated development and
demonstration of energetic materials and processes for
explosives, propellants and pyrotechnics for use in undersea,
surface, and other weapons systems, which minimize or eliminate
any adverse environmental impact normally associated with these
materials in production and demilitarization. These new
environmentally safe materials are expected to meet insensitive
munitions and system performance requirements while lowering
the total ownership costs of the weapons systems.
The committee recommends an increase of $2.0 million in PE
63609N to continue the development of environmentally safe
energetic materials.
Extended range guided munition and projectile common guidance
The budget request contained $101.5 million in PE 63795N
for gun weapons system technology demonstration and validation,
including $37.7 million for continued development of the EX-171
extended range guided munition (ERGM).
The committee notes that the ERGM projectile, the modified
5-inch, 62 caliber gun, and a land attack missile comprise the
Navy's near-term program for improving the Navy's surface fire
support capability.
The committee is aware that technical problems in
development of the ERGM projectile have caused schedule delays
and potential increases in program costs, and that the system
contractor's decision to relocate the ERGM development program
to a new site has only exacerbated these delays and increased
costs. The committee believes that while the technology issues
facing the ERGM program are low to medium risk, additional
effort will be required to control potential cost growth and to
minimize any further delay in fielding ERGM to the fleet.
The committee notes that both the Navy and the Army are
pursuing the development of projectile guidance and control
that will use the global positioning system (GPS) and rugged
inertial navigation systems (INS). The current guidance and
control system for the Navy's ERGM uses mid-1990's technology
that typically accounts for at least 50 percent of the total
projectile cost. The committee is aware that the Navy and the
Army have been modestly investing in the development of micro
electro-mechanical sensor (MEMS) technologies that can
significantly reduce the cost of navigation systems that use
GPS/INS guidance. Use of MEMS to upgrade the baseline (non-
MEMS) guidance section would save at least 10 percent of the
total cost of each ERGM. If the MEMS system were packaged to
fit within the NATO standard fuze, the resulting guidance
integrated fuze that could be used by the Army, Navy, Marines,
and NATO allies in a variety of current and future projectiles
would reduce the cost of the ERGM up to 40 percent. The
potential production base for MEMS GPS/INS guidance and control
and make low-cost, precision-guided munitions a reality for all
services and NATO allies.
The committee recommends that the Navy and the Army
capitalize on the development of MEMS GPS/INS technology by
incorporating the technology in the ERGM projectile, and
establishing a joint program for the development of common
guidance and control for cannon-fired projectiles. Such a
program could leverage technologies developed by the Competent
Munitions Advanced Technology Demonstration, Multifunction
Fuze, and ERGM programs.
The committee recommends an increase of $10.0 million in PE
63795N for ERGM baseline development and to accelerate
integration of MEMS-based GPS/INS into the ERGM, and an
increase $4.0 million to initiate the joint Projectile Common
Guidance program. The committee directs the Secretary of the
Navy and the Secretary of the Army to report to the
Congressional defense committees with the submission of the
fiscal year 2001 budget request, the program plan, schedule,
and funding for the joint Projectile Common Guidance program.
F/A-18C/D BOL chaff countermeasure
The budget request contained $315.7 million in PE 24136N
for F/A-18 aircraft operational systems development, including
$169.1 million for the development of improvements to fielded
F/A-18 aircraft. No funds were requested to continue the
certification of BOL chaff countermeasures for the F/A-18C/D.
The committee notes that the LAU-138A/A Guided Missile
Launcher Set and its associated chaff countermeasures (RR184
and RR189), commonly referred to as BOL chaff, have been
qualified and deployed on the F-14 aircraft. The launcher
significantly increases aircrew/aircraft survivability and
mission effectiveness by dispensing increased quantities of
countermeasures against radar homing and infra-red missiles
that are dispensed from the rear of the aircraft launcher rail
without displacing other aircraft weapons from the launcher
rail. The committee further notes that Phase I integration
testing of the LAU138A/A on the F/A-18C/D aircraft will be
completed in fiscal year 1999. However, the committee
understands that funding for completion of Phase 2 of the F/A-
18C/D qualification program, which would lead to a production
decision is insufficiently funded.
The committee recommends $318.2 million in PE 24136N, an
increase of $2.5 million to complete Phase 2 testing and
qualification of the LAU 138A/A BOL chaff countermeasure on the
F/A-18C/D strike fighter.
Free electron laser
The budget request contained $37.6 million in PE 62111N for
applied research in surface/aerospace surveillance and weapons
technology, and $14.2 million in PE 65605A for the high energy
laser system test facility (HELSTF).
The committee understands that the Department of Energy is
considering a technology program for development and
demonstration of a free electron laser that operates in the
infrared spectrum and desires to evaluate the technology for
potential ship self-defense applications. A program has been
proposed for upgrade of the free electron laser demonstration
facility for applied research in the potential use of tunable
free electron lasers as countermeasures against anti-ship and
anti-aircraft missile infrared seekers.
The committee recommends an increase of $3.0 million in PE
62111N to initiate the demonstration facility upgrade program,
and an increase of $4.0 million in PE 65605A for evaluation of
this technology by the DOD HELSTF to determine suitability to
address Navy requirements. The committee directs the Secretary
of the Navy to report to the Congressional defense committees
with the fiscal year 2001 budget request, a Navy supported
program plan and DOD funding required to complete the project.
The committee further directs the Commander, U.S. Army Space
and Missile Defense Command, as DOD executive agent for high
power solid-state laser technology, to provide a report
containing the results of the HELSTF evaluation of the proposed
free electron laser technology program prior to a Navy request
for funding for the demonstration facility upgrade program.
Hybrid fiberoptic/wireless communications system technology
The budget request contained $68.8 million in PE 62232N for
applied research in command, control, and communications
technology.
The Congress provided $1.0 million in fiscal year 1999 for
development and demonstration of the technology for hybrid
fiberoptic/wireless communications systems. The committee
understands that the application of this technology to
shipboard communications systems would combine the
characteristic flexibility and mobility of wireless base
stations with the security of point-to-point fiberoptic
communications to achieve increased mobility and security while
reducing the effects of frequency interference.
The committee recommends an increase of $2.5 million in PE
62232N to continue the development of hybrid fiberoptic/
wireless communication system technology.
Hyper-spectral analysis
The budget request contained $12.1 million in PE 65867N,
including $10.5 million for the Navy Force Tactical
Exploitation of National Capabilities (TENCAP), $10.1 million
in PE 27247F for Air Force TENCAP, and $7.8 million in PE
63232D8 for automatic target recognition.
The committee understands that hyperspectral sensor systems
could provide the capability to detect and identify targets
that are not discernible with conventional sensors by
exploiting the spectral signature of both the target and the
environment. The committee also understands that the Navy and
the Department of Defense now believe that recent design and
component technology innovations have reached a level of
maturity where hyperspectral technology can be used to provide
enhanced capabilities to existing and planned airborne
reconnaissance sensors. The committee notes hyperspectral
technology has been successfully tested on a limited scale
onboard Navy intelligence collection aircraft. The technology
provides real-time, automated, hyper-spectral, wide-area search
functionality. By searching for spectral anomalies, it provides
users with automated target nominations without prior detailed
information. This could dramatically cut imagery analyst
workloads, while greatly improving real-time targeting and
threat warning. The committee believes such a capability is
needed to exploit the vast amount of imagery data that the
intelligence community is able to provide.
Therefore, the committee recommends $10.8 million in PE
63232D8, an increase of $3.0 million for advanced development
of hyperspectral technology for automatic target recognition,
and $16.1 million in PE 65867N and $14.1 million in PE 27247F,
an increase of $4.0 million respectively for the services to
procure and test hyper-spectral sensors and exploitation tools.
Improved software production management
The budget request contained no funding for improved
software development and production management. The committee
notes that the Office of the Secretary of Defense recently
acknowledged that Department of Defense software expenditures
had risen to $42 billion annually by 1994, and that 40 to 50
percent of this amount was attributed to software rework and
correction of problems.
The committee also notes that industry has demonstrated the
ability to significantly reduce required rework by more than a
factor of four by implementing an initiative known as best
software practices. It further notes that even a far more
conservative percentage of cost avoidance would result in
annual savings of billions of dollars that could be invested
elsewhere by the Department of Defense.
Another serious problem addressed by this industry
initiative is an increasing shortage of qualified programmers.
Industry has determined that the number of highly qualified
software programmers is declining and that acheiving
significant reductions in software re-work enables more
efficient use of best qualified software programmers, enabling
the focus on new development efforts.
The implementation of best software practices by industry
has proven that more efficient software development offers a
dramatic potential for acquisition cost savings, and the
committee believes that this potential must be pursued by the
Department for defense programs. The Tri-Service Software
Program Managers Network has been established to identify best
industry practices for software development and management and
to convey these best to the services. The committee is
concerned that although the savings possible through use of
industry best practices have been documented and an associated
implementation plan developed by the Tri-Service Software
Program Managers Network, the Department has failed to
implement this plan. While a significant number of industry
segments are aggressively pursuing best software practices to
cut their costs, the annual $42.0 billion cost to the
Department of Defense is so large that even a fraction of
possible savings, if realized, would have a dramatic impact on
force modernization.
The committee directs the Secretary of Defense to mandate
the use of identified best practices for software development
and management for all acquisition programs and recommends $4.5
million in PE 63XXXN for the Tri Service Software Program
Managers Network.
Intercooled recuperated gas turbine engine
The budget request contained $17.7 million in PE 63573N to
continue development and full scale system testing of the
intercooled recuperated (ICR) gas turbine engine.
The committee supports the development of the ICR gas
turbine as the next-generation marine propulsion gas turbine
and potential power plant for surface combatants and other
ships based on the significantly reduced life cycle fuel costs
and improved capabilities that have been demonstrated during
the development program. The engine is being developed in
accordance with cooperative agreements between the United
States and the United Kingdom and the United States and France.
The committee notes that in 1998 the Navy significantly
restructured the ICR program in accordance with program
guidance contained in the statement of managers accompanying
the conference report on H.R. 4103 (H. Rept. 105-746). The ICR
Essential Program has been structured to meet development
milestones for the United Kingdom and France's common new
generation frigate and to provide industry with a qualified
marine gas turbine for consideration as the prime mover for the
DD-21 next-generation surface combatant. Under the program the
Navy will complete sufficient development testing to
characterize technical attributes and risks, complete the
second 500 hour development test, and identify a pre-production
engine configuration that will then undergo qualification
testing by the United Kingdom and France. During the
qualification test phase of the program, U.S. Navy
participation will include technical review, witnessing tests,
and accepting test results.
The committee recommends the budget request in PE 63573N.
The committee directs the Secretary of the Navy to report to
the Congressional defense committees with the fiscal year 2001
budget request those measures necessary to ensure completion of
the ICR Essential Program.
Joint experimentation program
The budget request contained $41.8 million in PE 63727N for
the Joint Warfighting Experimentation program.
The program funds the field experiments and supporting
simulation to evaluate potential systems and concepts and their
contribution toward achieving the objective of enhanced
effectiveness and dominance of U.S. armed forces in future
military operations. The committee notes that the Chairman of
the Joint Chiefs of Staff's ``Joint Vision 2010'' and
supporting conceptual doctrine statements by the military
services stress the critical role that technology will play in
achieving new levels of effectiveness across the range of
future military operations. The committee also notes that the
program will initially focus on experiments relative to the
contribution of advanced information technology to joint
warfighting capabilities. The committee supports a coordinated
joint program that will explore and experiment with new
operational concepts, doctrine, organizations, training, and
system technologies to understand the new capabilities needed
to achieve the next century's military requirements.
The committee recommends $49.8 million in PE 63727N, an
increase of $8.0 million for Joint Warfighting Experimentation
program.
Joint non-lethal weapons programs
The budget request included $23.3 million in PE 63851M for
non-lethal weapons.
The committee understands that the XM 303 Under-Barrel
Tactical Payload System (UBTPS) is being examined for use in
internal security and rear area security activities by the
military services, Special Operations Command, and the National
Guard.
Accordingly, the committee considers the continued
development and evaluation of the UBTPS in fiscal year 2000 to
be a matter of Congressional interest. Further, the committee
expects the military services, Special Operations Command, and
the National Guard to consider the XM 303 UBTPS for the purpose
of determining their requirements for non-lethal systems.
Joint tactical combat training system
The budget request contained $26.3 million in PE 24571N for
Consolidated Training Systems Development, including $8.0
million for continued development of the Joint Tactical Combat
Training System (JTCTS).
The JTCTS is a Navy-led, joint Air Force/Navy program for
the development of fixed, transportable, and mobile range
instrumentation for shore-based tactical air crew training and
for deployable, at-sea naval expeditionary force training. The
committee report on H.R. 3616 (H. Rept. 105-532) directed the
Secretary of the Navy, in coordination with the Secretary of
the Air Force, to conduct an assessment of the feasibility and
desirability of a transition strategy from the existing Navy
large area tracking ranges (LATR) and the Air Force's AN/ASQ-34
Kadena Interim Training System (KITS) to the objective JTCTS
capability. The committee expressed the belief that such a
strategy should include potential improvements in the legacy
systems, requirements for interoperability with the JTCTS, and
ultimate replacement of the legacy systems by JTCTS. The
statement of managers accompanying the conference report on
H.R. 4103 (H. Rept. 105-746) directed the Department of Defense
to conduct a technical evaluation to compare the capabilities,
performance, and costs of an integrated LATR/KITS system to
JTCTS.
The committee notes that the report of the Navy's JTCTS
transition strategy assessment, dated February 1999, concluded
that programmatic, technical, and operational use factors
indicate a marginal return on investment for improvements to
existing legacy systems. The assessment concludes that neither
of the legacy systems (LATR or KITS) possesses the capabilities
needed to meet the key operational requirements for JTCTS. The
committee also notes that the Department intends to complete
the technical evaluation required by the statement of managers
accompanying the conference report on H.R. 4103 (H. Rept. 105-
746) by August 1999.
The committee recommends the budget request for continued
development of JTCTS.
Lightweight 155MM howitzer
The budget request contained $42.7 million in PE 63635M for
Marine Corps ground combat supporting arms systems and included
$23.2 million for the XM 777 lightweight 155mm towed howitzer.
The XM 777 howitzer was developed as the replacement for
the aging and operationally deficient M198 towed howitzer for
the Marine Corps and the Army. The XM 777 will retain the range
of the M198 while reducing the weight from 16,000 pounds to
9,000 pounds. The weight reduction significantly improves
transportability by sea, air, and land platforms while
providing increased rate of fire.
The committee supports this urgently needed replacement and
recommends $46.9 million in PE 63635M, an increase of $4.2
million for the XM 777.
Littoral warfare fast patrol craft
The budget request contained $75.6 million in PE 63792N for
the Navy's advanced technology demonstration program.
The committee notes that the Office of Naval Research is
evaluating initial results of concept evaluation of a littoral
warfare fast patrol craft including preliminary design of the
ship and fire support weapons module, development of a
communications module, and at-sea demonstration of the concept.
The committee believes that the concept could provide an
enhanced in-shore surveillance, communications, and fire
support capability in support of Navy and Marine littoral
operations, and that the Navy should continue the evaluation
and determine the validity of an operational requirement for
such a capability. The committee directs the Secretary of the
Navy to report to the Congressional defense committees with the
fiscal year 2001 budget request, the program plan, schedule,
and funding for the concept development and evaluation program.
The committee recommends an increase of $5.0 million in PE
63792N to continue the concept development and evaluation
program for the littoral warfare fast patrol craft.
Location of global positioning systems jammers
The budget request contained $163.1 million in PE 64270N
for development of electronic warfare systems. No funds were
requested to continue development and demonstration of a state-
of-the art precision surveillance and targeting system for
location of global positioning systems jammers (LOCO GPSI).
The Congress provided $3.5 million in fiscal year 1997 and
$2.8 million in fiscal year 1998 to develop and demonstrate a
prototype system for locating and targeting global positioning
system jammers. The committee understands that the laboratory,
field, and initial flight tests of the LOCO GPSI prototype have
demonstrated the ability of the prototype to target such
jammers.
The committee recommends $169.1 million in PE 64270N, an
increase of $6.0 million to continue the development and
evaluation of the LOCO GPSI system. The committee directs the
Secretary of the Navy to assess the operational requirement for
an electronic countermeasures system for precision targeting
global positioning system jammers and the program plan for
development of such systems, and to report the results of the
assessment to the Congressional defense committees with the
submission of the fiscal year 2001 budget request.
Marine Corps H-1 helicopter upgrade
The budget request contained $157.7 million in PE 64245N to
continue engineering and manufacturing development for upgrade
of the Marine Corps fleet of light/attack helicopters.
Under the upgrade, the existing fleet of 201 AH-1W attack
and 104 UH-1N utility helicopters will be remanufactured into
180 AH-1Z and 100 UH-1Y helicopters. The program was initiated
in 1995 to provide increased performance, reliability,
maintainability, and commonality at an ``affordable'' cost,
reduce maintenance and spare parts cost and overhead, and
extend the life of the existing Marine light/attack helicopter
fleet until an advanced rotor craft common to all services
would become available around 2020. Known as ``4BN/4BW,'' the
program replaces the current two-bladed rotor system in both
helicopters with a new, identical, four-bladed, all composite
rotor system, a common engine and power train, and a fully
integrated state-of-the-art cockpit.
The committee notes that the Commandant of the Marine Corps
has included an increase of $26.6 million for this program as
his number one unfunded priority for aviation research and
development in fiscal year 2000. Consequently, the committee
recommends $184.3 million in PE 64245N, an increase of $26.6
million. The committee is concerned, however, by the continuing
cost growth for a weapons system the Marine Corps regards as
critical to its future warfighting capability and expects the
Secretary of the Navy to review the program, establish a
revised program baseline, and take measures necessary to manage
the program within the revised baseline.
Marine mammal research
The budget request contained $361.1 million in PE 61153N
for the Navy's defense research sciences program.
Of the funds provided in PE 61153N, the committee
recommends $500,000 for continuation of the Navy's cooperative
marine mammal research program.
Multi-function self-aligned gate technology
The budget request contained $69.7 million in PE 35204N for
tactical unmanned aerial vehicles (UAV) and $9.4 million in
35207F for manned reconnaissance systems. No funding was
provided in either program element for the multi-function self-
aligned gate (MSAG) active aperture antenna (AAA) technology.
The Congress has supported this AAA technology for several
years, and the committee is pleased with the successful MSAG
antenna demonstration completed in August 1998. During this
unprecedented demonstration, the MSAG provided wide-band,
duplex communications links simultaneously to a ground vehicle,
an aircraft, and a satellite surrogate.
The committee believes that a single, electronically-
steered antenna array that can provide multiple wide-band
communications links would be a cost-effective solution to
numerous Department of Defense communications requirements.
However, the committee is concerned to note that the Department
has failed to provide even minimal funding for this technology.
The committee understands that the Office of the Assistant
Secretary of Defense (Command, Control, Communications and
Intelligence) is considering initiation of an advanced concept
technology demonstration of the MSAG technology and that the
Air Force is supportive of testing this antenna technology on
reconnaissance aircraft.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $3.0
million in PE 35204N for operational evaluation of the MSAG AAA
on the tactical control station and the Predator UAV. The
committee also recommends an increase of $3.0 million in PE
35207F for evaluation of the MSAG AAA onboard the RC-135 Rivet
Joint aircraft.
Multipurpose processor
The budget request contained $40.0 million in PE 64503N for
the submarine sonar improvement program, including $22.5
million to continue development of the Acoustic Rapid
Commercial-Off-the-Shelf Insertion (A-RCI) program.
The committee notes the significant improvement in sonar
system capabilities that has resulted from the application of
multipurpose processor (MPP) acoustics signal processing
technology to Navy submarine sonar systems. The committee has
strongly supported the Navy's selection of the MPP as the
cornerstone for sonar upgrades for existing submarines in the
A-RCI program. The committee has also supported the development
of advanced MPP signal processing capabilities in the A-RCI
program, in the Navy science and technology base, and in the
integration of those capabilities in submarine, airborne,
surface sonar, and undersea surveillance systems.
The committee recommends the budget request for the
submarine sonar improvement program and continued funding
support for the development of advanced MPP acoustics signal
processing technologies as an integral part of the Navy's sonar
improvement research and development program.
National oceanographic partnership program
The budget request contained $60.3 million in PE 62435N for
applied research in oceanographic and atmospheric technology,
including $10.0 million for Department of the Navy support to
the National Oceanographic Partnership Program.
Sec. 282 of the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 1997 (Public Law 104-201) established the National
Oceanographic Partnership Program to promote U.S. national
goals of assuring national security, advancing economic
development, protecting quality of life, and strengthening
science education and communication through improved knowledge
of the ocean and to coordinate and strengthen oceanographic
efforts in support of those goals.
The committee has reviewed the National Ocean Research
Leadership Council's fiscal year 1999 report to the Congress on
the National Oceanographic Partnership Program and notes the
steadily increasing activity in pursuit of the program goals
and increased funding for the program from the participating
federal agencies. The committee notes that the Ocean Research
Advisory Panel believes the program has fostered a culture of
partnership among participating government agencies, academia,
and industry which has resulted in unique new approaches to
ocean research. The committee also notes the panel's finding
that one of the most pressing concerns in oceanography is the
need for integrated ocean observation systems.
The committee understands that the Department of the Navy
is declassifying and will make available for use by the public
and by private institutions and agencies previously classified
acoustical data from the Navy's underwater Sound Surveillance
System (SOSUS) and data on ocean temperature and salinity
levels under the Arctic ice cap. The statement of managers
accompanying the conference report on H.R. 3616 (H. Rept. 105-
736) requested that the Chairman of the National Oceanographic
Research Council conduct an assessment of the value of data
from the Navy's underwater Sound Surveillance System (SOSUS) in
public and private ocean research. The committee understands
that the council will consider support for a SOSUS pilot
project to determine the feasibility of providing routine
access to declassified SOSUS data.
The committee recommends $60.3 million in PE 62435N,
including $10.0 million for the National Oceanographic
Partnership Program.
Navy aviation survivability
The budget request contained $7.3 million in PE 63216N for
aviation survivability.
The committee understands that the Department of Defense
has conducted an extremely successful Foreign Comparative Test
(FCT) of the K-36D Russian ejector seat and that this seat
demonstrated crew survivable ejection capability which
surpassed that of current U.S. ejection seats. The committee
notes that the Air Force has continued evaluation of the K-36D
and has developed a new version, the K-36/3.5A in order to meet
U.S. requirements and yet provide equivalent capabilities in a
lighter weight version.
While the Air Force is actively pursuing enhanced crew
safety capability offered by the K-36/3.5A, the committee is
concerned that the Navy has not seriously considered this
opportunity to afford Navy and Marine Corps aviators the same
increased safe ejection capability. The Navy has proposed to
enter into a multi-year procurement F/A-18 E/F Super Hornet
aircraft that do not offer the same level of crew safety as the
K-36/3.5A. Additionally, the Marine Corps is engaged in re-
manufacture of its fleet of AV-8B Harrier jets to correct
serious safety and sustainability problems.
The committee believes that both of these Navy aircraft
represent the backbone of Navy aviation force projection
capability and should be required to seriously evaluate the
enhanced crew safety offered by the K-36/3.5A ejection seat.
The committee recommends that the Secretary of the Navy provide
a report to the Congressional defense committees with the
submission of the fiscal year 2001 budget request including the
details of that evaluation.
Navy land attack missile program
The budget request contained $101.5 million in PE 63795N
for systems integration and testing, including $21.8 million
for the Navy's land attack missile program.
The committee notes the operational requirement for a land
attack missile system in the Navy's near-term and far-term fire
support systems. The committee continues to support the
development, risk reduction, and analytical activities leading
to a defense acquisition milestone decision for a missile
system program that will satisfy the operational requirements
for a Navy land attack missile system
The statement of managers accompanying the conference
report on H.R. 3616 (H. Rept. 105-736) directed the Secretary
of Defense to ensure the conduct of an analysis of alternatives
(AOA) to support the acquisition of a Navy land attack missile,
and further directed that the Navy should not proceed to a
Milestone I decision until the AOA and other requirements
appropriate to a major acquisition milestone decision have been
satisfied. The committee notes that the analyses and studies to
satisfy this guidance are currently underway. The March 1999
letter report from the Director of Defense Operational Test and
Evaluation, which was submitted in response to the direction
contained in the Appropriations committee report on H.R. 4103
(H. Rept. 105-591), states that the results of the studies will
be examined as part of a 1999 Defense Acquisition Board review
of the land attack missile program and that the Department of
Defense intends to conduct operational testing to verify the
issues on any land attack missile option that is pursued. The
committee expects that these actions should result in the
selection from among the competing alternatives of the most
cost- and operationally effective near-term solution to the
operational requirement.
The committee also notes that the far-term naval surface
fire support program will require an advanced land attack
missile system for the DD-21 land attack destroyer when that
ship joins the fleet in 2009, and that the Navy has yet to
establish a development program for such a missile. The
committee believes that a competitive development program
should be established beginning in fiscal year 2001to ensure
the availability of an advanced land attack missile for the
first DD-21.
The committee recommends $21.8 million in PE 63795N to
continue development and systems integration for the Navy's
near-term land attack missile. The committee directs the
Secretary of the Navy to report to the Congressional defense
committees the program plan and funding requirements for
development of an advanced land attack missile system for the
DD-21 and other naval combatants with the submission of the
fiscal year 2001 budget request.
Navy theater missile defense and fleet defense radar upgrades
The budget request contained $329.8 million in PE 63868C
for the Navy theater wide (NTW) theater ballistic missile
defense (TMD) system and $5.7 million in PE63755N for ship self
defense.
The committee notes the benefits of leveraging the large
investment in the Aegis weapon system as the technical basis
for the development of an effective sea-based theater missile
defense system. The committee understands, however, that the
current SPY-1 radar does not meet TMD mission requirements and
that significant radar upgrades are required to reach the
objective capabilities for the NTW system. At the same time,
the committee recognizes that radar upgrades required by the
TMD mission need to be thoroughly integrated with continuing
radar improvements required for fleet defense to meet aircraft
and cruise missile threats, development of the cooperative
engagement capability (CEC), and continued development of next
generation Navy destroyers and cruisers.
The committee is aware that the Navy has two radar
alternatives under consideration to meet its immediate TMD
requirements, an adjunct X-band radar and a S/C band SPY-1
upgrade. The committee also understands that the Navy is
conducting a competitive development of a multi-function radar/
volume search radar (MFR/VSR) suite for the DD-21 and CVN-77
programs. The committee is concerned that the Navy is
simultaneously conducting three different surface ship radar
development programs and that two major competitors are
participating in all three efforts. All three of these radar
programs support similar area search and tracking requirements
for current and future surface ships, and the committee
believes that all three alternatives should be carefully
evaluated to determine the most cost effective and technically
feasible approach for supporting NTW and fleet defense radar
requirements.
The committee notes that the Navy has unique expertise in
developing radar and command and control capabilities required
for fleet defense, and that these requirements overlap those
derived from the TMD mission. However, the committee believes
that the Navy needs to lay out a clearly defined roadmap of
radar requirements and technology approaches to enable
identification of the best approach for various programs.
The committee also notes that the Ballistic Missile Defense
Organization shares TMD development costs for a number of
programs, including the Space Based Laser, Navy Area Defense,
and Patriot Advanced Capability-3 Configuration 3 (PAC-3)
programs, while retaining program oversight over the executing
service. The committee believes that this is a sound management
and funding structure for NTW as well.
Therefore, the committee recommends $55.7 million in PE
63755N, an increase of $50.0 million for continued development
of an adjunct X-band radar, a SPY-1 upgrade, and the MFR/VSR
suite to meet fleet defense and TMD requirements. The committee
further directs that the Secretary of the Navy provide the
Congressional defense committees a comprehensive TMD and fleet
defense radar roadmap with submission of the fiscal year 2000
budget request.
NSSN advanced submarine systems technology development and insertion
The budget request contained $241.5 million in PE 64558N
for continued engineering and manufacturing development (EMD)
of the VIRGINIA Class New Attack Submarine (NSSN) and $115.8
million in PE 63561N for advanced submarine systems
development.
The committee continues to strongly support the development
of advanced submarine technologies for the NSSN, and is pleased
with the manner in which the Navy has adopted and is executing
a strategy for increasing the capabilities of the NSSN
submarine. Incremental insertion of advanced technologies in
the follow-on ships of the class will lead to the production of
a more capable, less expensive nuclear attack submarine.
The committee has reviewed the February 1999 report from
the Under Secretary of Defense (Acquisition and Technology) on
the updated technology insertion plan and notes that the
program has been extended through the first seven ships of the
class. The committee notes that, overall, the budget request
contains approximately $292.0 million in EMD and Ship
Construction, Navy funding to support the VIRGINIA Class
technology insertion program. The committee also notes
shortfalls in the advanced submarine technology program that
have been identified by the Chief of Naval Operations.
The committee recommends the following increases for the
NSSN advanced submarine systems technology development and
insertion program that have been recommended by the Navy to
accelerate and enhance critical warfighting capabilities in the
VIRGINIA Class NSSN: $6.5 million in PE 63561N, $18.5 million
in PE 64558N, and $5.0 million in Ship Construction, Navy.
Optical correlation technology for automatic target recognition
The budget request contained $7.8 million in PE 63232D8Z
for the development and demonstration of automatic target
recognition technology and $34.3 million in PE 63609N for the
Navy's conventional munitions program.
The committee report on H.R. 3616 (H. Rept. 105-532)
directed the Undersecretary of Defense (Acquisition and
Technology) to provide to the Congressional defense committees
the Department's overall plan and program for the development
and demonstration of optical correlator technology for
automatic target recognition. The committee has reviewed the
plan and notes that the Director, Defense Research and
Engineering supports the development and demonstration of the
technology as a priority of the ATR technology assessment
program. The committee also notes that additional funding
support to the program has resulted in key technology advances
and increased the potential for near term transition of the
technology and its applications to weapon systems.
The committee recommends an increase of $8.7 million in PE
63609N to continue the program for development and
demonstration of a miniature, rugged optical correlator for
automatic target recognition and improved aim point selection
for the Navy's Standard Missile.
Optically fed and controlled phased array antenna
The budget request contained $68.8 million in PE 62232N for
applied research in communications, command and control,
intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance, including $22.2
million for radar technology.
The committee notes the potential for the development of
monolithic circuits that combine photonic, optic, and microwave
technologies in highly integrated, multi-level photonic
modules. The use of such modules could provide increased
bandwidth, advanced beamforming capabilities, and improved
performance in advanced military radar and communication
systems that are lower in cost, smaller in size and weight, and
require less power than those systems that employ current
phased-array radar technology.
The committee recommends an increase of $2.5 million in PE
62232N for applied research in the development and application
of multi-level photonic module technology to optically fed and
controlled phased array radar and communications systems.
Optically multiplexed wideband radar beamformer
The budget request contained $68.8 million in PE 62232N for
applied research in communications, command, control,
intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance technology,
including $22.2 million for radar technology.
The committee understands that high instantaneous bandwidth
is needed in shipboard radar surveillance systems to achieve
the necessary resolution for theater ballistic missile defense,
ship self-defense, and non-cooperative target identification.
The committee notes that the use of optical wavelength-division
multiplexing (WDM) technology, now being developed in the
commercial sector, may provide the capability for wideband
beamforming that could result in the demonstration of a
wideband electronically-steered active radar antenna with high
instantaneous bandwidth and the resolution necessary for
theater ballistic missile defense and non-cooperative target
identification. Use of optical WDM technology to reduce
hardware complexity would permit reductions in system cost and
achieve performance levels that are needed for ship self
defense in a littoral environment.
The committee recommends an increase of $3.0 million in PE
62232N to initiate a cooperative program for research,
development, and demonstration of a prototype optically
multiplexed, wideband, radar beam-forming array using optical
WDM technology.
P-3 maritime patrol aircraft combat systems research and development
The budget request contained $3.0 million in PE 64221N for
engineering and manufacturing development in support of the P-3
maritime patrol aircraft.
The program provides upgrades to P-3C aircraft systems to
enhance surface and subsurface tracking, classification, and
attack capabilities, specific emitter identification, and
improved radar tracking, and develops the software necessary to
integrate advanced sensors into embedded P-3C Update III
computer systems.
The committee notes that major theater combatant commanders
continue to give high priority to the use of P-3C aircraft for
reconnaissance and surveillance missions in both maritime and
littoral operations. The Navy's recently-published Integrated
Submarine Warfare Roadmap, which responded to direction
contained in the statement of managers accompanying the
conference report on H.R. 3616 (H. Rept. 105-736), cites
improvements in P-3 system capabilities as either essential or
critical to near-term anti-submarine warfare operational
capabilities. The committee also notes that there is, as yet,
no program for development of a new multi-mission maritime
aircraft. The committee strongly believes that increased
priority must be given to the maintenance of a robust,
continuing research and development program to support
sustainment of existing P-3C aircraft anti-submarine warfare
and anti-surface warfare capabilities and introduction of new
capabilities.
The committee recommends the budget request, and strongly
recommends that the Secretary of the Navy carefully review the
fiscal year 2001 budget request for the P-3 maritime patrol
aircraft program to ensure that it is in accordance with the
program priorities established in the Integrated Submarine
Warfare Roadmap.
Parametric airborne dipping sonar
The budget request contained $58.0 million in PE 63747N for
undersea warfare advanced technology development and $118.7
million in PE 64216N for the multi-mission helicopter upgrade
program. No funds were requested for the parametric airborne
dipping sonar (PADS).
The committee notes that the Block II Upgrade to the LAMPS
Mark III Weapons System will make significant improvements in
both the anti-submarine warfare (ASW) and anti-surface warfare
mission areas. The Airborne Low Frequency Sonar (ALFS) will
provide the principle improvement in the LAMPS Mark III ASW
mission capability.
The committee also notes that, in addition to the ALFS
program, the Navy's advanced technology demonstration of a
prototype PADS has indicated the significant potential of
parametric sonar technology against both mine-like and
submarine targets in littoral waters. The results of the Navy's
recent at-sea test of PADS indicate that the essential goals of
the PADS demonstration have been met and suggest its potential
for mine detection. However, the PADS ASW performance has not
yet been demonstrated against a submarine target. The Secretary
of the Navy's evaluation report, dated January 1999, states
that the PADS technology merits further pursuit and that the
Navy intends to continue demonstrations of parametric sonar
technology using increases provided by the Congress. The
committee believes that demonstrations of the PADS prototype
technology against a submarine target must be completed before
any decision is made to continue with a development program for
PADS.
The committee recommends the budget request in PE 63747N
and PE 64216N and awaits recommendations from the Secretary of
the Navy to continue further demonstrations and development of
PADS.
Phased array weather radar
The budget request contained $37.6 million in PE 62111N for
applied research in surface/aerospace surveillance and weapons
technology.
The committee notes ongoing Navy tests of the capability of
the AN/SPY-1 phased array radar for the measurement of detailed
local atmospheric conditions over water and in clear air. The
committee is aware of proposals that have been made for the use
of the SPY-1 radar at the National Oceanographic and
Atmospheric Agency's (NOAA) National Severe Storms Laboratory
to evaluate the radar's capability for the collection of
weather data and to test the technology for upgrading the WSR-
88D weather radar with phased array radar capabilities. The
committee believes that such an evaluation could result in
advanced radar capabilities for severe weather warning, and
could also result in enhanced capabilities for the SPY-1 radar
for over-land surveillance and missile engagement guidance and
control during littoral operations.
The committee encourages the Navy, NOAA, and the National
Science Foundation (NSF) to enter into a cooperative agreement
for loan of a SPY-1 radar to the National Severe Storms
Laboratory and evaluation of the potential use of the radar
system for weather prediction, observation, and warning.
The committee recommends an increase of $10.0 million in PE
62111N, to be used as matching funds to support a joint Navy-
NOAA-NSF evaluation of the SPY-1 radar's capability for the
collection of weather data and the technology for upgrading
weather radar with phased array radar capabilities.
Power electronic building blocks and power node control centers
The budget request contained $41.5 million in PE 63508N for
surface ship and submarine hull, mechanical, and electrical
advanced technology, including $18.0 million for development of
advanced shipboard electrical systems.
The committee notes that the budget request supports the
continued development and demonstration of power electronic
building block technology, however, no funds were requested to
continue the development of power node control centers. The
committee continues to believe that power node control centers
offer potential for significant improvements in efficiency and
effectiveness for advanced electrical distribution system fault
detection, switching, reconfiguration, and control of shipboard
electrical power systems.
The committee recommends an increase of $1.5 million in PE
63508N to continue the program for development and
demonstration of power node control centers.
Project ``M''
The budget request contained $41.5 million in PE 63508N for
submarine and surface ship handling, machinery, and engineering
systems, including $2.4 million to complete the development,
demonstration, and transition of advanced vibration control and
quieting technology for naval machinery support structures.
The committee has closely followed the progress of Project
M, a mounting system for active control of noise and vibration
cancellation on ship machinery support systems, from its
inception as a Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency
advanced submarine technology program to the transition and
continued development of the technology by the Navy. The
results of the program have shown that the active machinery
raft may provide unprecedented quieting for submarines and
other ships. The committee notes the Navy's plan to conduct in-
water tests of the Project M technology installed in a large
scale test vehicle at the Navy's underwater acoustic test range
and believes that these tests must be completed in order to
fully characterize the overall performance of the technology.
The statement of managers which accompanied the conference
report on H.R. 3616 (H.Rept 105-736) requested that the
Secretary of the Navy assess the potential of the application
of the Project M technology in surface ships. The Secretary's
assessment, dated April 1999, concluded that, although Project
M offered potential benefits in low frequency vibration
control, the impact on surface ship design make it unlikely
that such technologies would be used in existing or future
surface combatants. Consequently, the Secretary stated that a
full-scale prototype development and demonstration of Project M
technology should not be pursued. However, the assessment also
stated that these conclusions should not confine or limit
continued science and technology investments in active control
vibration reduction technologies for other applications.
Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $5.0
million in PE 63508N for completion of the in-water evaluation
of Project M quieting technology in the \1/4\-scale submarine
vehicle and transition of the technology to the Naval Sea
Systems Command.
S-3B surveillance system upgrade program
The budget request contained $2.1 million in PE 64217N for
the weapon system improvement program for the S-3B maritime
patrol aircraft.
The committee notes that the objective of the S-3B
surveillance system upgrade program is the integration of off-
the-shelf radar, electro-optic and infrared sensors, electronic
support measures, and tactical data links to demonstrate an
enhanced stand-off surveillance capability in support of Navy
battle group operations that could be achieved with low risk
and at relatively low cost. For fiscal year 1997, Congress
added funds to demonstrate the APS-137V(V)5 synthetic aperture
radar on the S-3B in phase I of the program. The committee
notes Navy proposals for phase II of the program which would
demonstrate an integrated surveillance system mission package
on the S-3B aircraft. The committee believes that the phase II
program is a logical follow-on to phase I system demonstrations
to be conducted later this year.
The committee recommends $9.1 million in PE 64217N, an
increase of $7.0 million for the S-3B surveillance system
upgrade program.
Ship survivability and personnel protection
The budget request contained $108.3 million in PE 63513N,
including $6.6 million for development and demonstration of
survivability and protection technologies.
The committee notes that requirements for increased mission
capabilities and reduced manning in future naval ships will
place a premium on protection of ships personnel and the
ability to monitor personnel status under all conditions. The
committee has followed closely the Navy's efforts to develop
and introduce to the fleet a computer-based, total ship damage
control information management system that would enable rapid,
coordinated response to wartime and peacetime casualties,
reduce crew manpower requirements, and improve manpower
utilization. The committee notes that the Navy is evaluating a
personal status monitor that could provide the capability for
detecting man overboard incidents. The committee continues to
support the evaluation of commercial off-the-shelf, non-
developmental items (COTS NDI) that could improve operational
safety and combat survivability and have a high potential for
contributing to safety of flight, fire fighting, damage
control, emergency preparedness ashore, and survival at sea.
The committee recommends $112.3 million in PE 63513N, an
increase of $4.0 million for development, demonstration, and
evaluation of ship survivability and protection technologies.
Silicon carbide semiconductor substrates
The budget request contained $78.0 million in PE 62234N for
applied research in materials, electronics, and computer
technology.
The committee is aware that silicon carbide is a wide band-
gap semiconductor material with unique physical and electrical
properties that will make possible the fabrication of the next-
generation of microelectronic devices. These devices will be
capable of operation in radiation environments and at high
temperatures, high voltages, high power levels, and high
frequencies in the microwave regime. These capabilities will
enable a wide range of applications in military and commercial
systems, such as high voltage/high power systems, advanced
radar, nuclear instruments, satellite communications, and
advanced sensors. The committee supports the progress that has
been made in the development of silicon carbide materials and
encourages partnerships with industry for early
commercialization of the technology.
The committee recommends an increase of $3.0 million in PE
62234N for the continued development of silicon carbide
semiconductor materials and to advance high electrical power
control and other applications for next generation military
platforms.
Smart propulsor product model
The budget request included $5.3 million in PE 63563N for
development and validation of design tools and methods for ship
concept studies.
The Congress provided an increase of $3.0 million in fiscal
year 1999 for the smart propulsor product model (SPPM), a joint
Navy/industry effort to develop software design and analysis
tools that bring together design, manufacturing, cost and
capabilities modeling for ship propulsion devices. The
committee notes that successful completion of the development
program for the SPPM should enable the Navy to consider
innovative propulsion concepts for future ships while
considering life-cycle cost, manufacturing techniques, and
their overall impact on ship system performance and cost.
The committee recommends $8.3 million in PE 63563N, an
increase of $3.0 million to continue development of the SPPM.
SSGN conversion from Trident-class SSBN submarines
The budget request contained no funds for conversion of
Trident-class ballistic missile submarines (SSBN) to a
conventional cruise missile (SSGN) configuration.
The committee believes that sustaining a robust nuclear
deterrent ought to be of the highest priority for future use of
Trident class SSBN's. The committee notes Section 1032 of the
National Defense Authorization Act for 1998 (Public Law 105-85,
111 Stat. 1948), as amended, limits the expenditure of funds
for the retirement of any of the 18 Trident SSBNs and other
strategic nuclear systems unless START II enters into the force
and the Secretary of Defense exercises a waiver to implement
START II.
The committee further notes that the statement of managers
accompanying the conference report on H.R. 3616 (H. Rept. 105-
736) directed the Secretary of Defense to report to the
Congressional defense committees by March 1, 1999 on an
analysis of Trident SSBN conversion to the SSGN configuration.
This analysis is intended to address a range of conversion
issues, including costs and schedule, major problem areas
requiring additional analysis, implications for arms control
treaty compliance, and possible benefits. The committee notes
that the Secretary's report has not been received.
If the decision is made to retire SSBN submarines as a
result of arms control agreements, the committee believes that
the Department of Defense should consider the one time, near
term opportunity Trident SSBN conversion to SSGN presents to
the United States military. As a result, upon such a decision
and the release of the Secretary of Defense's report, the
committee directs the Navy to consider submitting a
reprogramming request to the Congressional defense committees
to reprogram funds required to support concept validation and
cost and operational effectiveness analysis leading to a
defense acquisition milestone decision on conversion of the
Trident SSBN to SSGN conversion. The reprogramming
authorization to initiate concept evaluation and validation for
the SSGN conversion should not alter the nation's policy of
remaining at START I force levels until START II enters into
force, nor shall it detract in any way from the overall U.S.
deterrent posture or policy.
The committee re-emphasizes the importance it places on the
requested report and directs the Secretary to provide it to the
Congressional defense committees at the earliest possible date.
Superconducting waveform generator
The budget request contained $78.0 million in PE 62234N for
applied research in materials, electronics, and computer
technology, including $9.8 million for radio frequency solid
state device and control components.
The committee notes that the Defense Advanced Research
Projects Agency and the Office of Naval Research demonstrated
notable performance gains through the use of cryogenic
electronics and high temperature superconductivity technology
in analog and digital electronic components. The Congress
provided $1.0 million in fiscal year 1999 to continue the
development of super conducting waveform generator and analog-
to-digital converter technology that could lead to the
demonstration of an advanced ``cryo-radar'' with increased
performance and clutter rejection and reduced size, power, and
weight. The committee has since learned that the program cannot
be executed at the funding level provided.
The committee recommends an increase of $2.0 million in PE
62234N to continue the program for development of
superconducting waveform generator and analog-to-digital
converter technology, and to fulfill the intent expressed by
the conferees in the statement of managers accompanying the
conference report on H.R. 3616 (H. Rept. 105-736).
SWATH ship mine counter-measures demonstrator
The budget request contained $75.6 million in PE 63792N for
Navy advanced technology demonstrations. No funds were
requested for demonstration of a high-speed mine counter-
measures (MCM) ship.
The committee notes that the Navy's existing force of
dedicated mine warfare ships are proven and capable of
sustained mine hunting and clearance operations, but their slow
speed and limited operational radius limits the effectiveness
of their deployment with Navy surface combatant forces. The
committee also notes that Navy studies indicate continued
requirements for a dedicated MCM force for the foreseeable
future.
The committee is aware of proposals that have been made for
evaluation of advanced, high-speed hull designs as MCM ships.
These proposals include the adaptation of existing Navy small
water area, twin hull (SWATH) craft, equipped with air and
surface MCM systems, as a system demonstrator for evaluation in
fleet battle experiments of the effectiveness of such craft in
MCM operations.
The committee urges the Secretary of the Navy to assess the
requirement for a high-speed MCM ship demonstration program and
provide to the Congressional defense committees by October 1,
1999, a report which includes the Secretary's recommendations
regarding the demonstration, a program execution plan, and Navy
funding for the program.
Tactical control system
The budget request contained $69.7 million in PE 35204N for
tactical unmanned aerial vehicles (UAV), and included $24.6
million for the tactical control system (TCS). No funding was
provided for the operation of the UAV systems integration
laboratory (SIL) or to continue its development of the multiple
UAV simulation environment (MUSE).
The committee continues to be supportive of the TCS and
notes that TCS software is the key to interoperability for
future medium-altitude and tactical UAVs and their payloads.
Further, the committee is supportive of the TCS objective to
interface with high-altitude UAVs.
The committee notes that the Naval Surface Warfare Center
program office continues to develop most of the TCS software
and expend most of the TCS developmental funding in-house. The
committee believes that the TCS program could be more
efficiently managed if the TCS developments, including software
engineering and maintenance, were to be outsourced in whole to
the prime system integration contractor. Further, the committee
believes such outsourcing would allow for a smaller and more
efficient government program office. The committee believes
that holding a prime contractor responsible for total system
performance has demonstrated success with many other programs.
Finally, the committee notes that the U.S. Atlantic Command
(USACOM) has been without a TCS capability for its UAV testing,
and that additional funding is required to provide such a
capability.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $3.0
million for procuring a TCS ground station for USACOM. Further,
the committee directs a reallocation of $4.5 million within PE
35204N specifically to realize the program office efficiencies
discussed above and to move software development and
maintenance responsibility to the prime contractor. This
funding is to be reapplied within the TCS program to fund the
SIL MUSE efforts.
Tactical Tomahawk
The budget request contained $147.2 million in PE 24229N
for Tomahawk and Theater Mission Planning Center operational
systems development, including $145.3 million for the Tactical
Tomahawk program.
The committee has supported the Navy's initiation of the
Tactical Tomahawk program. However, the committee report on
H.R. 3116 (H. Rept. 105-532) expressed particular concern about
the Navy's ability to establish a competitive environment for
future Tactical Tomahawk procurement and directed the Secretary
of the Navy to report to the Congressional defense committees
the Navy's plan for ensuring competitiveness in the production
phase of the program.
The Secretary's letter report, dated September 25, 1998,
noted the Navy's decision to continue with the current Tomahawk
manufacturer for both the Tactical Tomahawk development
contract and the full rate production program that would
commence in fiscal year 2003. The report also asserted that the
cost to the Navy associated with acquisition of a comprehensive
technical data package for the missile and facilitating a
second source would be prohibitive and that the delay in
bringing on a second source would not support the required
schedule for the delivery of missiles to the fleet.
The committee notes that the justification and approval
(J&A) on which the sole-source decision for the Tactical
Tomahawk program was based stated that the engineering and
manufacturing development (EMD) contract would require the
contractor to develop and maintain a complete technical data
package to support EMD and future missile production. The
committee also notes that since the approval of the J&A and
award of the EMD contract for Tactical Tomahawk, the Navy has
determined that it does not have the ability to provide a
technical data package to firms that would wish to compete in
related warhead programs because the ``EMD contract does not
include a requirement for a technical data package.''
The committee believes that the Navy's decision not to
acquire a technical data package for the Tactical Tomahawk
denies the ability to establish a second production source for
the missile, should that be required in the future, and the
ability of the Navy to compete any future procurement of the
missile. In view of the operational expenditures of the
Tomahawk missile as a weapon of choice in current operations
and the imminent need to replace those expenditures, the
committee considers such a policy short-sighted.
The committee also notes that the estimated cost of the
Tactical Tomahawk program dictate that any procurement decision
should be made only after a formal defense acquisition program
milestone decision review at an appropriate time in the
development program. The committee believes that such a
milestone decision review should consider measures for
establishing competitiveness in the production phase of the
program.
The committee recommends the budget request of $147.2
million for continuation of the Tomahawk development program.
The committee directs the Undersecretary of Defense
(Acquisition and Technology) to review the Tactical Tomahawk
program and the decision not to acquire a technical data
package for the missile. The Secretary shall report to the
Congressional defense committees by December 31, 1999, on
measures that will be taken to insure competition in future
Tactical Tomahawk procurement and related programs.
Trajectory correctable munitions development
The National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1999
(Public Law 105-261) provided $5.0 million in PE 63635M for the
joint Army-Marine Corps Trajectory Correctable Munitions (TCM)
development.
The committee notes that the various agreements required
for a joint international program have been agreed to by all
parties and are to be signed in the near future. The committee
continues to support TCM development and directs the Secretary
of Defense to release the previously authorized funding to the
Marine Corps promptly after the agreements are signed.
Ultra-high thermal conductivity fibers
The budget request contained $78.0 million in PE 62234N for
applied research in materials, electronics, and computer
technology.
The committee notes that over the last four years the Navy
has engaged in a program to advance the use of ultra-high
thermal conductivity fibers in high-performance, high-density
electronic modules. Success in this area could permit the
expanded use of commercial-off-the-shelf (COTS) electronic
components in military aircraft and avionics (where the high
thermal output of such components has constrained their use),
and in substantial savings in system procurement costs.
The committee recommends an increase of $2.5 million in PE
62234N to continue the development of applications for ultra-
high thermal conductivity fibers technology.
Undersea warfare advanced technology
The budget request contained $34.1 million in PE 62633N for
applied research in undersea warfare weapons technology.
The committee recommends $36.1 million, an increase of $2.0
million to continue the development and application of
microelectromechanical systems (MEMS) technology to Navy
undersea weapons systems.
Unmanned aerial vehicles
The committee notes that the Congress directed the
establishment of the office of Director for Expeditionary
Warfare (N85) within the Chief of Naval Operations as a
provision of Public Law 102-484, the National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1993. This action was taken
to address Congressional concerns about the adequacy of Navy
resources dedicated to expeditionary warfare areas such as
amphibious lift, mine warfare, and naval surface fire support.
The Navy subsequently established responsibility for
requirements generation and resource sponsorship for unmanned
aerial vehicles (UAVs), and assigned the new responsibilities
to the expeditionary warfare directorate based on the vital
role these systems play in reconnaissance and targeting support
to expeditionary operations.
The committee understands that the Navy is considering
transferring responsibility for naval UAVs from N85 to the
office of the Director of Air Warfare (N88). The committee is
concerned that the migration of responsibility for naval UAVs
may lead to decreased emphasis on the vital role these systems
perform in expeditionary operations. The committee urges the
Navy to consult the Congressional defense committees on any
planned transfer of responsibility for naval UAVs and provide
sufficient rationale prior to executing such a transfer.
Upgrading fleet systems
The budget request contained $46.7 million in PE 63582N for
combat systems integration demonstration and validation.
The committee understands that the recently created Systems
Engineer of the Navy (NAVSEA 007) provides a focal point for
interoperability and configuration control with the authority
to direct overall upgrade of obsolete equipment across Navy
systems. The office has developed a methodology for reducing
the logistics costs associated with maintaining legacy
equipment: identifying and analyzing legacy systems in the
fleet, then replacing aging and obsolete equipment with state-
of-the-art, commercial-off-the-shelf (COTS) equipment. Results
of the program should significantly reduce ownership costs to
the Navy and realize cost reductions estimated to be in the
hundreds of millions of dollars. The committee supports the
initiative and encourages its implementation by the Navy as
soon as possible.
The committee recommends $49.7 million in PE 63582N, an
increase of $3.0 million to support implementation of the COTS
insertion initiative for upgrading fleet systems.
Vacuum electronics
The budget request contained $78.0 million in PE 62234N for
applied research in advanced materials, electronics, and
computer technology, including $10.0 million for vacuum
electronics technology.
The committee supports continuation of a robust vacuum
electronics research and development program and expects the
Navy as the Department of Defense (DOD) executive agent for the
program to insure a coordinated vacuum electronics research and
development program among the military services and defense
agencies, and with other federal agencies, that will meet DOD
requirements for advanced vacuum electronics technology.
The committee recommends $10.0 million in PE 62234N for
applied research in vacuum electronics technology. The
committee directs the Secretary of the Navy to assess the
Department's requirements for advanced vacuum electronics
technology and to report the results of that assessment and the
long-term funding plan for the Department's vacuum electronics
technology program to the Congressional defense committees with
the submission of the fiscal year 2001 budget request.
Vectored thrust ducted propeller compound helicopter demonstration
The budget request contained $75.6 million in PE 63792N,
including $5.0 million to begin an advanced technology
demonstration of the Vectored Thrust Ducted Propeller (VTDP)
Compound Helicopter, and $48.8 million in PE 64212N, including
$34.9 million for development and evaluation of the CH-60S
Fleet Combat Support helicopter.
The committee notes that the request for CH-60S helicopter
development includes completion of a three-phase demonstration
of its suitability for airborne mine countermeasures (MCM)
towing missions. The Navy has placed a high priority on the
development of an organic airborne mine countermeasures
capability and the demonstration of a variant of the CH-60
helicopter for the towed airborne MCM mission that will begin
in fiscal year 1999. As a back-up technology, the Navy plans an
advanced technology demonstration of the VTDP helicopter to
demonstrate and assess the helicopter's towed airborne MCM
capability, other multi-mission capabilities, and life cycle
cost effectiveness. The committee also notes that the Navy
plans to address the requirements, content, schedule, and cost
of the plan for the VTDP advanced technology demonstration.
The committee recommends the budget requests for PE 63792N
and PE 64212N and further recommends that the Navy complete the
assessment of requirements, schedule, and cost of conducting an
ATD for VDTP and provide the assessment and recommendations to
the Congressional defense committees in conjunction with
submission of the budget request for fiscal year 2001.
Virtual test bed for advanced electrical ship systems
The budget request contained $41.5 million in PE 63508N for
development of surface ship and submarine hull, mechanical, and
electrical advanced technology.
The committee has supported the development of technologies
that will lead to lower cost designs for future naval ships.
The Congress provided funds in fiscal year 1999 to accelerate
the development and use of virtual prototyping and a virtual
test bed to demonstrate and evaluate advanced shipboard
electrical power system concepts. The test bed provides the
capability to dynamically test hull, mechanical, and electrical
system designs in an interactive, distributed simulation. The
committee believes that the test bed can be further developed
through the integration of actual hardware and advanced
electrical control device simulations to provide a distributed
hardware-in-the-loop simulation that will permit realistic
evaluations of ship hull, mechanical, and electrical systems
performance.
The committee recommends an increase of $3.0 million in PE
63508N to continue the development and application of the
virtual test bed.
Air Force RDT&E
Overview
The budget request contained $13,077.8 million for Air
Force RDT&E. The committee recommends authorization of
$13,212.7 million, an increase of $134.8 million.
The committee recommendations for the fiscal year 2000 Air
Force RDT&E program are identified in the table below. Major
changes to the Air Force request are discussed following the
table and in the classified annex to this report.
Items Of Special Interest
Airborne laser
The budget request contained $308.6 million in PE 63319F
for the airborne laser (ABL) program.
The National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1999
(Public Law 105-261) required an independent assessment of the
ABL program, including the need for any additional testing, the
adequacy of criteria for entry into engineering and
manufacturing development, and the adequacy of ABL operational
concepts.
The committee notes that the independent assessment team
(IAT) stated that ``the nation is on the threshold of being
able to acquire a long-sought military HEL [high energy laser]
capability'' and that such a capability would ``represent a
truly revolutionary weapon in the nation's arsenal.'' While
acknowledging that technical uncertainties remain, the IAT also
stated that ``subsystem development and analyses have matured
to the point where the remaining questions relate to system
issues which can only be answered by a complete HEL flying
system, gathering data and demonstrating effectiveness in an
operational environment.''
The committee notes that the ABL program has been
restructured to accommodate a $25.0 million congressional
reduction. The restructured program will increase efforts to
characterize atmospheric turbulence that could degrade ABL
performance, demonstrate the effectiveness of ABL's atmospheric
compensation, and examine both the lethality of the laser and
potential countermeasures. The committee notes that the program
has consistently met its budget, technical, and schedule
milestones, and that the initiatives in the program
restructuring address all relevant congressional concerns. The
committee further notes that the ABL program offers the
potential for significant contributions to advancing laser
technology generally, including a better understanding of laser
lethality, laser optics, acquisition, aiming, pointing,
tracking, and command and control.
The committee recommends $308.6 million, the amount
requested for the airborne laser.
Aircrew laser eye protection
The budget request contained $14.8 million in PE 63231F for
crew systems and personnel protection technology, including
$1.3 million for aircrew laser eye protection.
The committee has consistently supported the Department of
Defense's efforts to enhance aircraft crew member protection
systems. The committee is aware of the ongoing efforts to
develop both laser eye protection technologies and an overall
laser threat analysis system. The committee urges continued
development of these initiatives and encourages them to be
viewed as a high priority.
The committee recommends $19.3 million in PE 63231F, an
increase of $4.5 million to be used for the development of
helmet-mounted sensory and laser protection technologies as
well as the laser threat analysis system.
Air Force/National Reconnaissance Office partnership
The budget request contained $2.9 million in PE 63856F for
the Air Force/National Reconnaissance Office (NRO) partnership
program.
The Air Force/NRO partnership program funds studies and
analyses of opportunities to better integrate the activities of
the two organizations. The committee believes that the
leadership structure of the two organizations is appropriate to
foster such integration, and that each organization should be
highly motivated to leverage the investments of the other as a
means of conserving scarce resources. The committee believes
that the activities funded in this program should be part of
the regular order of business for both the NRO and the Air
Force.
The committee recommends no funding in PE 63856F.
Air Force science and technology funding
The budget request contained $209.5 million for Air Force
6.1 basic research and $507.6 million for 6.2 applied research
for a total Air Force science and technology (S&T) request of
$717.1 million.
The committee notes with concern that the Air Force S&T
budget request reflects a disturbing decline in basic and
applied research investments from the fiscal year 1999
appropriated level of $802.0 million. This reduced amount is
also less than either the Army or Navy S&T request and gives
rise to serious concern for the health of future Air Force
modernization capabilities. The committee is extremely
disappointed that the service with the vision to first employ
such leading edge technologies as stealth, precision guided
weapons, and space-based information systems could sacrifice
the very tools that delivered these powerful leap-ahead
technologies and prioritize instead a series of near-term
upgrades to existing legacy systems. While the committee
recognizes the importance of sustaining the existing capability
inherent in todays weapon systems, it views sacrificing the
research essential to open the door to future modernization
without full acknowledgment at the highest levels of leadership
as irresponsible and unacceptable.
The committee notes that the Air Force Chief of Staff has
identified a collection of non-space related S&T programs
totaling $94.0 and included them among the Air Force unfunded
priorities. While the committee understands the extreme
pressures experienced by the services as they attempt to
preserve their most critical modernization programs, the
importance of these omitted S&T programs is difficult to
understand. The committee disagrees with the lower priority
placed on these programs and believes that several fielded
systems development programs offering only incremental
improvements to existing equipment, while necessary, should
still be considered lower in importance to critically needed
S&T investments.
Therefore, the committee recommends the following program
decreases explained in detail elsewhere in this report: $12.1
million in PE 11113F, a decrease of $15.0 million for B-52
squadrons; and $65.1 million in PE 63434F, a decrease of $15.0
million for the national polar-orbiting operational
environmental surveillance system. While the committee has
expressed great concern over the serious decline in overall
RDT&E funding and does not consider RDT&E program decreases
lightly, it does believe that these programs are far lower
priorities than the S&T program reductions proposed by the Air
Force.
In conjunction with the above decreases, the committee
recommends restoration of the following critical non-space S&T
programs:
Automatic target recognition
The budget request contained $65.0 million in PE 62204F for
aerospace sensors, but included no funding for automatic target
recognition (ATR).
The committee notes the importance of accurate target
recognition capability and the high sensitivity to collateral
damage displayed during recent regional conflicts. Technologies
such as ATR should be thoroughly evaluated for potential
improvements to all applicable weapon systems.
The committee recommends $68.6 million in PE 62204F, an
increase of $3.6 million for continued evaluation of ATR
technology.
Crew technology
The budget request contained $51.5 million in PE 62202F for
human effectiveness applied research, but included no funding
for crew technology.
The committee believes that the Air Force should place high
priority on research devoted to crew safety, altitude
protection, and the ability to effectively operate aircraft
during long periods of sustained operations, and that this area
of research should be viewed as a fundamental tenet for the Air
Force.
The committee recommends $62.3 million in PE 62202F, an
increase of $10.8 million for continuation of crew technology
research.
Friction stir welding
The budget request contained $63.3 million in PE 62102F for
materials research, but included no funding for the
continuation of friction stir welding.
The committee notes that the Air Force has been evaluating
a unique materials technology known as friction stir welding.
This program has demonstrated a materials joining approach that
does not require consumables and exhibits the capability to
join dissimilar materials. The committee believes this
technology holds significant potential for a number of
aerospace applications and recommends $66.3 million, an
increase of $3.0 million in PE 62102F for continued evaluation
of friction stir welding.
Hyperspectral imaging
The budget request contained $115.3 million in PE 62601F
for Phillips laboratory exploratory development, but included
no funds for hyperspectral imaging technology.
The committee recommends increases in funding for
hyperspectral imaging technology for Navy and Defense-wide
programs described elsewhere in this report and notes that
hyperspectral imaging and sensing technology is one of the many
science and technology efforts that were listed as unfunded
priorities by the Chief of Staff of the Air Force. This
technology offers significant improvements to airborne and
other reconnaissance sensors and targeting data collection
systems by providing enhanced wide-area search and targeting
and threat warning capability.
The committee recommends an increase of $7.3 million in PE
62601F for hyperspectral imaging technology.
Tactical missile propulsion
The budget request contained $115.3 million in PE 62601F
for Phillips laboratory exploratory development, but included
no funds for tactical missile propulsion or Integrated High
Payoff Rocket Propulsion Technology (IHPRPT).
The committee notes that continued research in this
technology offers significant improvements and enhanced safety
of operations for air-to-air and air-to-ground tactical missile
programs, as well as improved propulsion technologies for
orbital transfer, space maneuvering, and satellite propulsion
technology offered by the IHPRPT program.
The committee recommends an increase of $5.3 million in PE
62601F to continue research in tactical missile propulsion and
IHPRPT.
Ballistic missile technology
The budget request contained no funding in PE 63311F for
ballistic missile technology (BMT).
The committee understands that the BMT program is
developing and demonstrating technologies that will permit a
conventionally armed ballistic missile to successfully attack
hardened and deeply buried targets that are now immune from
attack by everything except nuclear weapons. The committee
notes this effort should continue in light of the importance of
this potential target set, which includes command and control
bunkers and chemical weapons storage sites. The committee
believes that the next logical step in this effort is a missile
technology demonstration of a new penetrating hard target fuse
and simulated high explosive against a hardened and deeply
buried tunnel. The committee also notes that the program will
demonstrate progress in several enabling technologies,
including global positioning system (GPS) guidance and
navigation and radiation hardened circuit technology and
fabrication techniques.
Therefore, the committee recommends $8.0 million in PE
63311F for continued technology development and demonstration.
B-2 upgrades
The budget request contained $201.8 million in PE 64240F
for B-2 engineering and manufacturing development and $106.9
million in post production support.
The committee notes that the Long Range Air Power
Commission concluded last year that, in order to reach the full
potential of the bomber force, additional investments should be
fully supported. Commission members testified that upgrades to
the B-2 identified by the Air Force would enhance low
observable maintainability, further improve the B-2's
stealthiness, and significantly increase situational awareness
for its aircrews. The committee is concerned that the budget
request does not support an integrated low-observable
maintainability/upgrade effort or other modernization
initiatives recommended last year by the commission and the
committee. The committee believes that continued enhancement of
B-2 capabilities is critical in light of their limited number
and the leverage they provide on the battlefield.
Therefore, the committee recommends $353.8 million in PE
64204F, an increase of $152.0 million for the integration of
Link 16 on the B-2, a new mission display system, and a stealth
enhancement initiative. Link 16 will provide the B-2 with a new
data link terminal, antennas, and aircrew interfaces that will
increase responsiveness, enhance survivability, and enable real
time targeting. The committee notes that the Chief of Staff of
the Air Force identified B-2 Link 16 as a high unfunded
priority for fiscal year 2000. The mission display system would
increase aircrew situational awareness by more effectively
displaying threat and targeting information provided through
Link 16. The stealth enhancement program would reduce the
aircraft's radar cross section.
The committee also recommends $141.9 million for post
production support, an increase of $35.0 million to procure an
inflight planner capable of real time flight planning and
generating the most survivable route to target.
Of the amount authorized for the B-2, the committee directs
that $2.0 million shall be available for a conceptual study of
a next generation bomber described elsewhere in this report.
B-52 squadrons
The budget request contained $32.1 million in PE 11113F for
B-52 bomber fleet support.
The committee notes that the B-52 fleet support program has
increased by $29.6 million from last year's projected level for
fiscal year 2000 in order to accelerate an avionics mid-life
upgrade initiative which will replace aging computers and
inertial navigational systems (INS) with non-developmental
items. This initiative, while justified, was previously planned
to start in fiscal year 2003 and the scheduled completion dates
for both the new computer and the INS are well beyond the
current five year defense program. The committee does not
support the proposed three years of acceleration for the B-52
avionics mid-life upgrade program at the expense of other
higher priorities.
The committee recommends $17.1 million in PE 11113F, a
decrease of $15.0 million for B-52 fleet support.
Combat training ranges
The budget request contained $6.2 million in PE 64735F and
$17.5 million in procurement for combat training range
upgrades. The budget request also contained $339.6 million for
miscellaneous production charges.
The committee notes that aircrews at the Nellis and Tyndall
combat training ranges are unable to train with their primary
air-to-air weapon, the Advanced Medium Range Air-to-Air Missile
(AMRAAM), because information regarding its simulated
performance must be encrypted for classification reasons before
being transmitted to ground instrumentation sites. The
committee understands that the requirement for an encryption
device, the Advanced Data Oriented Security Module (ADOSM), has
existed for some time but that ADOSM units were not available
to be integrated into the Nellis Air Combat Training System
(NACTS) or the Tyndall Range Expansion (TRE) upgrades.
Since ADOSM is now qualified and in production, the
committee believes it should be incorporated into both the
NACTS and TRE in order to take full advantage of AMRAAM in
exercises conducted at these ranges. Accordingly, the committee
recommends $12.2 million in PE 64735F, an increase of $6.0
million; $19.5 million in combat training ranges, an increase
of $2.0 million; and $340.6 million in miscellaneous production
charges, an increase of $2.0 million for this purpose. The
committee expects these additional funds to be expeditiously
obligated in order to achieve ADOSM operational capability at
the earliest possible date.
Commercial standardized cockpit and crew seats
The budget request contained $6.1 million in PE 64706F for
life support systems, but included no funds for commercial
standardized cockpit and crew seats.
Commercial standardized cockpit and crew seats are designed
to protect crew members and passengers during aircraft crash
loads up to 16 times the force of gravity. However, older
military transport aircraft, such as the C-130, C-135, C-141,
and C-5, were designed with crew and passenger seats that can
withstand crash loads up to nine times the force of gravity.
The committee understands that a commercial standardized
cockpit and crew seat has been developed for the RC-135, but it
requires safety and functionality improvements for its
application to other military transport aircraft.
Therefore, the committee recommends $10.1 million, an
increase of $4.0 million to develop safety and functionality
improvements to the RC-135 commercial standardized cockpit and
crew seat for its application as a common seat for other
military transport aircraft.
Common imagery processor
The budget request included $4.9 million in PE 35208F for
the common imagery processor (CIP).
The committee understands that the CIP has been
manufactured with a known design input/output limitation that
precludes it from processing real-time imagery from current and
future digital cameras. The committee is concerned that the
Department of Defense pursued a common government solution to
digital imagery processing without ensuring a capability to
process the high data rates from current and future digital
cameras. Further, the committee is aware that the Naval
Research Laboratory (NRL) has integrated commercial imagery
processing technologies into a system that can process these
high data-rates in real-time. These commercial solutions are
not only less expensive, but provide a viable upgrade path for
future requirements.
The committee notes the partnering relationships now being
fostered between the government contractor and the NRL to
provide a CIP that is more commercially-based and capable of
processing modern digital imagery. The committee strongly
supports this relationship, and it expects the Air Force and
Navy to work more closely together to ensure that modern
digital camera systems can be fully exploited in real-time by
the CIP.
The committee recommends the budget request.
Evolved expendable launch vehicle
The budget request contained $324.8 million in PE 64853F
for the evolved expendable launch vehicle.
The committee notes unjustified growth in funding for the
system program office and recommends $322.8 million, a decrease
of $2.0 million.
Global combat support system
The budget request contained $19.4 million in PE 33141F for
the Global Combat Support System--Air Force (GCSS-AF).
The committee notes that the GCSS-AF program will
modernize, and integrate Air Force and other Department of
Defense legacy combat support information systems into a system
that will be compliant with the Defense Information
Infrastructure common operating environment. The centerpiece of
the GCSS-AF program will be a shared data environment that will
ensure the availability of critical decision making information
required by Air Force operational commanders. GCSS-AF will
emphasize commercial off-the-shelf products and reusable
software to reduce program development costs.
The committee recommends $22.4 million in PE 33141F, an
increase of $3.0 million to accelerate the development of GCSS-
AF.
Global Hawk high altitude endurance unmanned aerial vehicle
The budget request contained $70.8 million in PE 35205F for
endurance unmanned aerial vehicles (UAV), including funding for
Global Hawk and DarkStar air vehicles.
Since the budget request was developed, the Air Force has
terminated the DarkStar aircraft, leaving Global Hawk as the
only endurance UAV program. While some residual funding may
result, termination costs for DarkStar are yet to be
determined. However, the committee understands the Air Force
plans to use any residual funds for Global Hawk testing and
evaluation.
Recently, a Global Hawk test air vehicle crashed,
destroying with it the only integrated reconnaissance sensor
package. The committee notes the importance of resuming the
user evaluation and testing of Global Hawk, and of sustaining
the industrial base until completion of the user evaluation.
The committee recommends $95.8 million in PE 35205F, an
increase of $25.0 million for Global Hawk.
Integrated satellite communications control
The budget request contained $361.3 million in PE 64479F
for Milstar satellite communications, including $12.1 million
for development of the Automated Communications Management
System (ACMS).
The committee is concerned that military satellite
communication (SATCOM) resources continue to be allocated
inefficiently among forward-deployed units. The committee
understands that utilization of a web-based technology which
incorporates the ACMS has the potential to significantly lower
communications costs and promote the efficient utilization of
SATCOM assets. Consequently, the committee believes that
continued development of ACMS software is key to this approach
by enabling the use of common standards that will allow
efficient use of legacy hardware systems.
Therefore, the committee recommends $364.3 million in PE
64479F, an increase of $3.0 million to accelerate ACMS
development.
Joint airborne SIGINT program
The budget request contained $124.6 million in PE 35206F,
including $81.6 million for joint signals intelligence (SIGINT)
avionics family (JSAF).
The committee notes that JSAF funding provides resources
for developing both high and low wave length components of the
future airborne SIGINT collection system, which is expected to
become operational in FY 2007.
The committee recommends $131.6 million in PE 35206F
including $88.6 million for JSAF, an increase of $7.0 million.
Joint air-to-surface standoff missile
The budget request contained $166.4 million in PE 27325F
and $2.0 million in PE 64312N for continued development of the
joint air-to-surface standoff missile (JASSM).
The committee understands that the JASSM program plan
reflects funding for integration of the missile only on the
``threshold'' aircraft (B-52H and F-16) through the end of the
Future Years Defense Program (FYDP) and that neither the Air
Force nor the Navy has programmed funding for integration of
JASSM on the ``objective'' aircraft (B-2, B-1B, F-16, F-15E, F-
117, and F/A-18E/F). Initial operational capability for JASSM
is scheduled for fiscal year 2003. In view of the services'
recent operational experience that has placed a priority on the
use of precision-guided weapons systems, the committee believes
that additional priority should be given to integrating JASSM
on the objective aircraft.
The committee directs the Secretary of the Air Force and
the Secretary of the Navy to report jointly to the
Congressional defense committees with the submission of the
fiscal year 2001 budget request regarding the plan and program
for the integration of JASSM on the objective aircraft systems
of each service.
Joint strike fighter
The budget request contained $241.2 million in PE 63800N
and $235.4 million in PE 63800F for Joint Strike Fighter (JSF)
development and $160.2 million in PE 27268F for the aircraft
engine component improvement program (CIP).
The committee continues its strong support for the
development of an alternate engine to ensure sustainment of
critical industrial base capabilities, control of engine cost
growth, and reduction of risk to the reliability and
maintainability of the planned fleet of 3,000 JSF aircraft. The
committee is concerned that while the Department now states a
commitment to development of an alternative engine for JSF, the
planned funding levels outlined to support that commitment do
not enable cost-efficient and timely completion of the effort.
Meanwhile, the Department is also conducting other jet
engine development efforts in PE 27268F as part of the aircraft
engine CIP. The committee notes that requested funding for this
level of effort program has increased by $66.6 million, over 40
percent, from the level projected for fiscal year 2000 just
last year. The justification for the requested increase is to
reduce backlog of proposed engineering tasks for currently
fielded engines. While supportive of the CIP, the committee
does not consider the proposed increase to this program to be
of higher priority than development of a new state-of-the-art
alternative engine for JSF. The committee notes that full
development of a flight qualified jet engine also provides
opportunities to migrate proven new technologies to existing
engines.
Therefore, the committee recommends $130.2 million in PE
27268F, a decrease of $30.0 million, and $265.4 million in PE
63800F, an increase of $30.0 million, and directs that this
increase in JSF funding be used only for acceleration of
alternate engine development.
Kinetic energy anti-satellite
The budget request contained $9.8 million in PE 63438F for
space control, but included no funding for the kinetic energy
anti-satellite (KE ASAT) system.
The committee believes space control will be increasingly
important to U.S. national security as the threats posed to
U.S. military forces from foreign space assets grow and
satellite surveillance and targeting technology spread. The
committee is encouraged that the Department of Defense is
making progress in both developing a coherent space control
policy and recognizing the importance of space control
capabilities. The committee is concerned, however, that the
failure to resource KE ASAT will limit the range of options
open to the Department to deploy effective space control
systems in the near term. The committee notes that KE ASAT has
been in development for 10 years, and that additional
investment could provide the ability to deploy an effective
ASAT capability in a short period of time.
Therefore, the committee recommends $19.8 million in PE
63438F, an increase of $10.0 million for further development of
KE ASAT integrated command and control system and ground based
hardware-in-the-loop tests.
Microsatellite technology
The committee notes significant progress in preparation for
the XSS-10 flight test of microsatellite technologies. However,
the committee is concerned that this demonstration may be
delayed because the National Aeronautics and Space
Administration (NASA) is withdrawing from an agreement to
launch the XSS-10 on a space shuttle flight in fiscal year
2000. The committee understands that NASA is now offering a
shuttle flight for XSS-10 in late fiscal year 2001. The
committee believes that such a delay in the flight test will
disrupt the program, defer the development of microsatellite
technology that will benefit both military and civil space
programs, and threaten to waste both NASA and Air Force
investments in this effort. The committee strongly urges NASA
to uphold its commitment to make a shuttle flight available for
the XSS-10 in fiscal year 2000.
Military spaceplane
The budget request contained $76.2 million in PE 63401F for
advanced spacecraft technology, but included no funding for the
military spaceplane.
The committee notes: (1) that U.S. military forces are
increasingly reliant on space-based capabilities, (2) that the
U.S. Space Command and the Air Force have identified
requirements that are best met by a military spaceplane and its
associated family of vehicles, and (3) that Air Force Space
Command has drafted a ``requirements to acquisition'' strategy
for a spaceplane. The committee believes that a family of
reusable space vehicles for orbital insertion, space maneuver,
and payload delivery to meet military unique requirements would
substantially enhance military access to space and the ability
to conduct rapid global military operations.
The committee recommends an increase of $5.0 million in PE
63401F to continue development of military unique spaceplane
technologies and concepts of operations.
Miniature satellite threat reporting system
The budget request contained $76.2 million in PE 63401F for
advanced spacecraft technology, but included no funding for the
miniature satellite threat reporting system (MSTRS).
The MSTRS will allow detection of interference, intrusion,
jamming, and unauthorized use of satellite communications
uplink receivers and determine the source location of the
disruptive transmissions. The committee believes that this
technology is important in light of increasing military and
commercial reliance on satellite communications and the
vulnerability of these satellites. The committee notes that
$5.0 million was appropriated for MSTRS in fiscal year 1999,
but understands that the Secretary of Defense continues to
withhold this funding.
The committee directs the Secretary to release the fiscal
year 1999 funds, and recommends an increase of $2.0 million in
PE 63401F to continue preparation of MSTRS for orbital testing.
Miniaturized munitions capability
The budget request contained $8.9 million in PE 64602F for
Air Force Armament Development, but included no specific
funding for Miniaturized Munitions Capability (MMC).
The committee is aware that the Air Force is currently
conducting an Analysis of Alternatives (AoA) to determine which
emerging technologies can be harnessed to yield the best MMC
weapon and notes that the Navy has recently joined the
development effort. At least two emerging MMC technologies
offer considerable promise for addressing future fixed and
mobile targeting capability. The Small Smart Bombs (SSB)
program, utilizes a small diameter, GPS/INS-guided munition to
attack fixed targets with increased accuracy, enhanced
effectiveness, and reduced collateral damage. The Low Cost
Autonomous Attack System (LOCAAS) provides an alternative
approach by combining a laser radar seeker, shoot down warhead,
onboard guidance and navigation system, and miniature turbojet,
all packaged as an autonomous flying munition for use against
relocatable targets.
The current AoA effort, which prioritizes MMC capability
for all types of strike aircraft, is anticipated to lead to a
program start in fiscal year 2002 and an initial operating
capability (IOC) in fiscal year 2007. The committee is
concerned that such a schedule does not adequately satisfy
potential warfighting requirements and urges a concerted effort
to accelerate this concept.
Therefore, the committee recommends $46.9 million in PE
64602F, an increase of $38.0 million, to accelerate development
of the MMC with particular attention given to the Small Smart
Bomb and Low Cost Autonomous Attack System initiatives.
Furthermore, the committee directs both the Secretary of the
Air Force and the Secretary of the Navy to conduct a
comprehensive joint study regarding the potential acceleration
of MMC IOC, and to report the results of the study to the
Congressional defense committees with the submission of the
fiscal year 2001 budget request. The report shall include total
estimated costs including integration and test funding
requirements associated with acceleration, an assessment of the
technical feasibility of such acceleration, and an assessment
of the anticipated warfighting applicability of such
technology.
National polar-orbiting operational environmental surveillance system
The budget request contained $80.1 million in PE 63434F for
the national polar-orbiting operational environmental
surveillance system (NPOESS).
The NPOESS program is developing the next generation
weather satellite to meet the meteorological needs of both the
military and civil communities. The committee supports the
structure of the NPOESS program, with cost and program
management authority shared between the Air Force, the Commerce
Department, and the National Aeronautics and Space
Administration. The committee notes, however, that the current
generation of weather satellites, developed in the Defense
Meteorological Satellite program (DMSP), will continue to be
launched through fiscal year 2005, and the first launch of
NPOESS is not scheduled until fiscal year 2008.
The committee recommends $65.1 million in PE 63434F, a
decrease of $15.0 million to bring the pace of development in
more appropriate alignment with the fiscal year 2008 first
launch date.
Precision location and identification (PLAID) technology
The budget request contained $90.3 million in PE 64270F for
electronic warfare development, but included no funding for the
PLAID technology program.
The PLAID technology program will enhance aircrew
situational awareness by providing precise, on-board location
and specific identification of threat radars. The improved
situational awareness resulting from this technology will allow
combat pilots to effectively avoid radar-guided surface-to-air
missiles. While the PLAID technology may be applied to improve
the radar warning receivers of most present day fighter
aircraft and has been identified as critical technology for the
joint strike fighter, its present development is focused on the
ALR-69 radar warning receiver.
To continue PLAID technology development, the committee
recommends $104.0 million in PE 64270F, an increase of $13.7
million for the ALR-69 radar warning receiver.
Satellite control network
The budget request contained $61.9 million in PE 35110F for
the satellite control network.
The satellite control network is a global system of control
centers, remote tracking stations, and communications required
to control satellites in orbit. The committee understands that
telemetry and commanding data rates need to be improved and
supports the modernization of the current inefficient and
manpower-intensive system. The committee believes that
commercially available technologies offer the Air Force
opportunities to leverage its own research and development
effort and to explore outsourcing alternatives.
The committee recommends the requested amount for PE 35110F
and directs that, of the funds authorized, $2.5 million shall
be available for the examination and testing of commercial
technologies that have the potential to meet Air Force
satellite control requirements.
Simulation based forecasting decision support system (SBFDSS)
The budget request contained $22.4 million in PE 78611F for
support systems development.
The committee is concerned with Air Force equipment
maintenance backlog levels as well as the service's processing
and accounting capabilities for addressing this problem. The
committee notes a particular service inability to accurately
forecast serviceable spare engines over a relatively short
period of time (e.g., 6 to 12 months), and recognizes the need
to implement a system of spare parts support for depot-level
engine repair in conjunction with manpower, shop flow time, and
equipment availability requirements. The committee understands
that without the proper accounting for these constraints,
forecasts of serviceable spare engines will remain insufficient
and therefore urges the Air Force to take appropriate measures.
The committee recommends $25.4 million in PE 78611F, an
increase of $3.0 million to provide for the existing standard
maintenance information system initiatives and to pursue the
development and implementation of the Simulation Based
Forecasting Decision Support System (SBFDSS).
Space-based infrared system-high
The budget request contained $328.7 million in PE 64441F
for the space-based infrared system-high (SBIRS High).
The committee notes that the budget request for SBIRS High
reflects a reduction of $235.5 million dollars when compared to
the projections in the fiscal year 1999 budget request. The Air
Force also delayed the first launch of SBIRS High from fiscal
year 2002 to fiscal year 2004, and justified this delay in part
because deployment of a National Missile Defense (NMD), which
SBIRS High will support, was shifted from fiscal year 2003 to
fiscal year 2005. Also referenced was the fact that the Defense
Satellite Program (DSP) satellites, which SBIRS High will
replace, are lasting longer than planned. This delay will
increase SBIRS High program costs by $500 million to $1 billion
in the outyears.
Further, although the NMD deployment date now proposed by
the Administration is two years later than last year, the
committee understands that the deployment date could be
accelerated if the NMD test program proceeds well. SBIRS High
will also support theater missile defenses, particularly in
meeting the growing threat posed by longer range missiles,
against which the United States has only very limited defensive
capabilities. Finally, with first launch in fiscal year 2004,
the full constellation of SBIRS High would not be available to
support a 2005 NMD deployment. The committee strongly supports
the SBIRS High mission and concludes that the restructuring and
delay of this program is unjustified.
The committee further notes that the Secretary of the Air
Force concedes that the requested funding for SBIRS High falls
short by $92.0 million of supporting the planned first launch
in fiscal year 2004, and that the Adminstration has not come
forward with an amended budget request to correct this
deficiency.
The committee also strongly objects to the manner in which
the Air Force implemented a work slowdown in anticipation of
approval of its proposed fiscal year 2000 program reduction.
The committee was not informed of this decision until after the
contractor had been ordered to restructure the program spending
rates to accommodate the proposed schedule change. This
procedure precluded any realistic opportunity for congressional
review of the Air Force decision and preempted congressional
oversight prerogatives. The committee recognizes that restoring
SBIRS High to a first launch date of fiscal year 2002 is now
impossible, and to restore the date to fiscal year 2003 would
require approximately $400 million in additional funding in
fiscal year 2000. The committee strongly objects to these
management failures by the Air Force and the Department of
Defense, especially concerning a high priority program such as
SBIRS High.
The committee believes that, because of the delay in the
program and the substantial cost growth that results, the
Department will have the opportunity to examine competitive
alternatives that may be available to achieve comparable or
superior capabilities at comparable or lower costs. Therefore,
of the funds authorized for SBIRS High, the committee directs
that $10.0 million may be used only for airborne and space
experiments of a sensor technology described in the classified
annex.
To sustain the SBIRS High program in the most effective
manner and assure that it is accorded a high priority in the
future, the committee recommends $328.7 million for SBIRS High.
The committee believes that this increase will maintain the
currently planned SBIRS High schedule. The committee recommends
that the SBIRS High funding be allocated as follows: $168.7
million in a new SBIRS High program element in the Ballistic
Missile Defense Organization, 64XXXC, and $160.0 million in PE
64441F. The committee believes that an alternate management and
funding structure in which BMDO provides management oversight,
the Air Force serves as executive agent, and BMDO and the Air
Force share funding responsibility, would provide the most
thorough assessments of SBIRS High importance in the future.
Space-based infrared system-low
The budget request contained $151.4 million in PE 63441F
and $77.7 million in PE 64442F for the space based infrared
system-low (SBIRS Low).
The committee notes that the Air Force substantially
restructured the SBIRS Low program, terminating two planned
demonstration projects and delaying the first launch of SBIRS
Low from 2004 to 2006. The Air Force argues that the
cancellations were justified because much had been learned from
the effort to develop the demonstrators, that proof of
principle had already been established in earlier experiments,
and that schedule delays and cost growth in the demonstration
projects had increased program risk and cost.
The committee believes that deployment of SBIRS Low is
critical to meeting the growing long range ballistic missile
threats, and that the delay is very damaging to the U.S. effort
to field capable systems in response to these threats in a
timely manner. The committee is also informed that the Navy
Theater Wide (NTW) missile defense system will rely on SBIRS
Low for discrimination and external cueing. The SBIRS Low delay
could seriously degrade the capabilities of the currently
planned interim NTW system known as Block I and could slow
progress toward the NTW objective system.
The committee strongly objects to the manner in which the
Air Force carried out the SBIRS Low program restructuring. The
Air Force informed the Congressional defense committees the day
prior to notifying the contractors of the cancellation of the
demonstration projects, effectively precluding review of an
important decision in a program of high congressional interest.
Further, the committee believes that the Ballistic Missile
Defense Organization (BMDO) was not adequately consulted
concerning the decision. To ensure that SBIRS Low is accorded
the high priority the committee believes is warranted by wider
military requirements and to ensure that other service and DOD
equities in the program are protected, the committee recommends
$110.0 million in a new BMDO program element, 63XXXC, $41.4
million in PE 63441F, and $77.7 million in PE 64442F for SBIRS
Low. The committee believes that an arrangement, in which BMDO
provides management oversight, the Air Force serves as
executive agent, and BMDO and the Air Force share funding
responsibility, provides the best chance of success in the
future.
Space launch and spacelift ranges
The budget request contained $43.2 million in PE 35182F for
research and development for the spacelift range system, $83.4
million for spacelift range procurement, and $223.0 million for
operations and maintenance of the eastern and western launch
ranges.
The committee believes that reliable access to space is
both vital to U.S. national security and, increasingly, the
economic well being of the nation. Thus, the committee is
concerned that the nation's space launch infrastructure appears
to be in deep disarray. The committee believes that a series of
space launch failures, the lack of efficient operation and
modernization of the spacelift ranges by the Air Force, and
setbacks in the development of the next generation of U.S.
launch vehicles could jeopardize this access.
The committee notes that the launch industry has suffered
six catastrophic launch failures since August 1998, including
three consecutive failures of the Titan IV launch vehicle and
failure of the first two launches of the Delta III launch
vehicle. These have resulted in the loss of commercial and
important national security payloads worth in excess of $2.0
billion.
The committee understands that to support future launch
requirements, the Air Force is funding the development of two
variants of the evolved expendable launch vehicle (EELV), with
the intent of purchasing commercial launch services from two
launch vendors starting in 2003. However, the Delta III is a
technical stepping stone to one of the EELV variants. The other
is based on Russian engine technologies. To date, the
contractor has been unable to acquire the necessary licenses to
allow for co-production of the engine in the United States and
Russia. The long delay in the licensing process has left the
ability of the contractor to meet launch schedule requirements
in serious doubt.
The committee believes that the spacelift ranges at Cape
Canaveral, Florida, and Vandenberg Air Force Base, California
are in equal disarray. The committee notes that commercial
space launches now far outnumber military launches and that
commercial launch demand is expected to continue to grow. The
Air Force has done an inadequate job of modernizing the ranges,
funding for operations and modernization has been insufficient,
and range equipment is aging. As a result, the ranges are
unable to meet commercial demands for greater range
efficiencies. At the same time, the rationale for continued Air
Force funding for the operation, management, and modernization
of the ranges is unclear in light of the fact that by 2003,
when the Air Force expects to contract with commercial vendors
for launch services, the only major operational users of the
ranges will be commercial launch vendors. The committee notes
that continued Air Force funding and management of the ranges
would constitute a substantial subsidy to the commercial launch
industry, while extending control by an organization that has
managed and funded range operations and modernization
inadequately to meet commercial and national security needs.
The committee is aware that the Secretary of the Air Force
has directed a broad area review of space launch to analyze the
causes of recent launch failures, recommend changes in
practices, procedures and operations that might prevent such
failures, and assure continued access to space for the
Department of Defense. The committee is also aware of ongoing
efforts to determine appropriate steps pertaining to range
modernization and operations. The committee believes that these
analyses must result in alternative funding, management,
operations, and modernization arrangements that will result in
a more efficient and effective launch infrastructure.
Consistent with this perspective, the committee recommends
$46.2 million in PE 35182F, an increase of $3.0 million for
feasibility studies, planning, and design of a universal space
port at Vandenberg Air Force Base, California.
The committee also directs the Department to include a
separate budget line for initial spares for spacelift range
procurement in its fiscal year 2001 budget request, consistent
with the discussion elsewhere in this report regarding the Air
Force's proposed implementation of the Reengineered Supply
Support Process.
Spacetrack
The budget request contained $54.8 million in PE 35910F for
space tracking capabilities.
The committee notes that the budget request for this
program is nearly double the amount forecasted in the fiscal
year 1999 budget plan. The committee recognizes the importance
of further development of the ground-based electro-optical deep
space surveillance (GEODSS) system now planned in fiscal year
2000. However, the committee notes that other planned projects
can be more moderately paced without impacting the
effectiveness of the spacetrack effort.
The committee recommends $42.5 million in PE 35910F, a
decrease of $12.3 million.
Synthetic theater operations research model
The budget request contained $19.3 million in PE 27601F for
modeling and simulation, including $2.5 million for the
synthetic theater operations research model (STORM).
The committee notes that the STORM model is the only Air
Force campaign analysis program directed for use by the defense
modeling and simulation office common technical framework. The
program is currently underfunded, resulting in limitations to
planned utilization by Air Force and other service units during
joint exercises.
The committee recommends $21.8 million in PE 27601F, an
increase of $2.5 million, including $5.0 million for STORM
simulation efforts.
Defense Agencies RDT&E
Overview
The budget request contained $ 8,887.2 million for Defense
Agencies RDT&E. The committee recommends authorization of
$9,556.3 million, an increase of $669.1 million.
The committee recommendations for the fiscal year 2000
Defense Agencies RDT&E program are identified in the table
below. Major changes to the Defense Agencies request are
discussed following the table.
Items of Special Interest
Advanced concept technology demonstrations
The budget request contained $118.0 million in PE 63750D8Z
for advanced concept technology demonstrations (ACTD).
The committee notes that while the budget request proposes
to once again reduce the overall Department of Defense research
and development budget, funding for ACTDs is proposed to
increase by almost $30.0 million.
To maintain fiscal year 1999 funding, the committee
recommends $88.6 million in PE 63750D8Z for ACTDs, a decrease
of $29.4 million, to hold ACTDs to fiscal year 1999 levels.
Advanced moving target indicator radar
The committee has received the results of a Congressionally
mandated study on moving target indicator (MTI) radar
developments. This study indicates that MTI radar technology,
supported by Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency and
commercial investments, is rapidly and decisively eclipsing
that of U.S. government-funded efforts such as the U-2's
advanced synthetic aperture radar system improvement program.
These advances promise to provide vastly improved, multi-mode
radars at greatly reduced costs. The committee believes this
new-generation MTI technology should be pursued as quickly as
possible.
The committee urges the Secretary of Defense to pursue
modular, scaleable MTI/SAR radars that have the ability to
identify and image moving targets. This technology should be
included in the Joint Surveillance, Targeting and
Reconnaissance System radar technology improvement program with
application for platforms such as the U-2 and Global Hawk.
Aeronautical test facilities
In 1995, the President's National Science and Technology
Council issued a report, ``Goals for a National Partnership in
Aeronautics Research and Technology,'' which indicated that,
``newer European wind tunnels focused on aircraft development
testing are generally superior to comparable U.S. facilities in
overall capability'' and that, as a consequence, there has been
increasing utilization of European facilities for U.S.
commercial and military aircraft development. In early 1998,
the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) and
the Department of Defense (DOD) established a National Wind
Tunnel Alliance and an Air Breathing Propulsion Test Facilities
Alliance (under the auspices of the Aeronautics and
Astronautics Coordinating Board (AACB)), to identify, study,
and implement measures to strengthen the national
infrastructure of aerodynamic and air breathing propulsion test
facilities that support NASA and DOD missions and the domestic
aeronautics industry.
The committee believes that the United States needs to
retain world leadership in aeronautics. To do so means that the
United States must optimize the utilization and care of its
existing aerospace ground test resources among the Department,
NASA, and industry in such a way that properly balances the
support of the nation's research and development programs with
an efficient and effective aeronautical test facility
infrastructure. The committee believes that sufficient
resources must be collectively invested to support existing
capabilities, productivity enhancements, and a robust test
technology program.
The committee notes that a draft interagency agreement
between the Department and NASA is under consideration which
would establish a National Aeronautical Test Alliance and an
integrated national strategy for management of U.S.
aeronautical test facilities. The committee believes that the
Department and NASA should establish such a mechanism for the
strategic management of government-owned aerodynamic,
aerothermodynamic, and aeropropulsion facilities in the United
States that would consider military, civilian, and commercial
aerospace interests in making decisions and recommendations
affecting such facilities. The committee also believes that
this mechanism could be used to manage from a national
perspective the investment of test infrastructure and
technology funding for core national facilities and associated
computational capabilities, including the maintenance and
modernization of key commercial aeronautical test facilities.
The committee believes further that it is desirable that
industrial organizations participate with federal agencies in
considering such investments.
The committee directs the Secretary of Defense, in
coordination with the Director, NASA, to report to the
Congressional defense committees with the submission of the
fiscal year 2001 budget request the status of the interagency
agreement for establishing a National Aeronautical Test
Alliance and plans for its implementation. The committee
recommends that among the first priorities for the Alliance
should be the development of a report which, building upon the
1997 DOD Core Aeronautical Test Facilities assessment, outlines
national requirements for aeronautical testing capabilities.
The committee expects that from such a report would come
funding recommendations for support and modernization of U.S.
aeronautical test facilities in the fiscal year 2002 budget
requests for the Department and for NASA.
Airborne common sensor
The budget request contained $109.5 million for tactical
cryptologic activities in PE 35885G, including $14.7 million
for the Army's aerial common sensor (ACS).
The committee notes that it has received insufficient
information on the specific plan, concept of operation, and
programmatics for the ACS. Further, the Army has not yet
decided on the aircraft it will use for ACS. Since this
decision will directly affect the costs of procurement, sensors
and their integration, and operations and maintenance, the
committee cannot determine the overall value of the program.
Therefore, the committee recommends $106.8 million in PE
35885G, a decrease of $2.7 million for ACS. However, the
committee directs that no funds provided for ACS are to be
obligated or expended until 30 days after the Congressional
defense and intelligence committees have been provided a report
that includes the following:
(1) The specific aircraft selected for the ACS;
(2) The specific ACS concept of operations and program
plan. The program plan must include the projected funding over
the five year defense plan and expected total cost;
(3) Identification of the generic sensor suites and
development/acquisition plan to provide these sensors; and
(4) Certification from the Director, National Security
Agency, that ACS conforms to the requirements of the 2010
Unified Cryptologic Architecture.
Ballistic missile defense
The budget request contained $3.3 billion for the Ballistic
Missile Defense Organization (BMDO).
The committee notes that the Future Years Defense Program
(FYDP) includes substantial funding increases over what was
planned last year for BMDO. However, the committee also notes
that the military has no effective defenses to current and
rapidly emerging missile threats. The committee believes that
ballistic missile defense (BMD) is a critical mission area
which continues to suffer from inadequate funds. The committee
urges the Department of Defense to allocate more funds for
ballistic missile defense in subsequent budget submissions to
ensure that critically needed missile defense development and
acquisition programs can be completed as expeditiously as
possible.
To address this shortfall in the near term, the Congress
appropriated an additional $1.0 billion in H.R. 4328, the
Omnibus Consolidated and Emergency Supplemental Appropriations
Act for Fiscal Year 1999 (Public Law 105-277), for BMD research
and development. The committee notes that the President has
sought to divert $230.0 million of these funds to implement the
Wye River Middle East peace accord. While the committee
recognizes the importance of this accord, it opposes such a
diversion and continues to support the use of the funds for BMD
research and development.
The committee recommends $3.7 billion for BMDO, an increase
of $417.2 million.
Advanced technology development
The budget request contained $173.7 million in PE 63173C
for ballistic missile defense advanced technology development.
The committee notes that funding for advanced ballistic
missile technology has been in steady decline since fiscal year
1992. A robust advanced technology effort is important to meet
future threats both by providing the technical basis for next
generation systems as well as technologies to improve the
capabilities of systems now under development. The committee
notes that the technology development budget requested is far
short of the goal of 10 to 12 percent of the Ballistic Missile
Defense Organization (BMDO) budget set by BMDO director.
The committee understands that BMDO has identified funding
shortfalls in exoatmospheric interceptor technology (EIT)
development. The EIT effort is focused on integration of active
and passive sensors to provide greater interceptor accuracy and
reliability, optics, propulsion, advanced focal plane arrays,
and other risk mitigation activities, and is key to greater
capability in the national missile defense system, the Navy
theater wide system, and the theater high altitude area defense
(THAAD) system. The committee further notes that BMDO has
identified near term technology infusion programs that show the
promise of reducing the cost of TMD systems now under
development.
To improve the technology base for current and future BMD
systems, the committee recommends an increase of $25.0 million
in PE 63173C for EIT and near term technology infusion
development efforts.
Applied research
The budget request contained $65.3 million in PE 62173C for
ballistic missile defense applied research.
The committee remains concerned that funding for innovative
ballistic missile technology projects is insufficient to
support Ballistic Missile Defense Organization's (BMDO) future
needs. Funding for innovative science and technology (IS&T,
project 1651) has declined from $52.8 million appropriated in
fiscal year 1998 to $7.9 million requested in fiscal year 2000.
The committee understands that BMDO has identified a number of
high priority technologies for which no funding was available
because of the constrained IS&T budget. These include high
performance, lightweight, affordable optical correlators; high
data rate signal processing using conventional and neural
networks; novel focal plane array technologies; coherent laser
radar miniaturization; and miniature interceptors with
innovative guidance and control enhancements. The committee
believes that future BMD technologies must be more adequately
funded if BMD systems are to meet future threats.
The committee also understands that BMDO has identified
wideband gap electronic materials for high speed and high
temperature device operation as a high priority that is
insufficiently funded. The committee notes that significant
progress has been made in the development of these materials
and believes that additional research offers the opportunity
for further progress.
The committee also believes that innovative science and
technology is an area in which cooperation with the national
security laboratories of the Department of Energy may be
fruitful for both BMDO and the Department of Energy. The
committee encourages the Secretaries of Defense and Energy to
pursue opportunities for such cooperation and the merits of a
jointly funded innovative science and technology program.
Therefore, the committee recommends $95.3 million in PE
62173C for innovative science and technology efforts, project
1651, an increase of $20.0 million. The committee also
recommends an increase of $10.0 million to be available for the
continuation of wide-band gap materials research.
The committee recommends a total of $95.3 million in PE
62173C, an increase of $30.0 million.
Atmospheric interceptor technology
The budget request contained $173.7 million in PE 63173C
for ballistic missile defense technologies. Of this amount,
$21.1 million was requested in project 1281 for the atmospheric
interceptor technology (AIT) program.
The AIT program develops advanced interceptor technologies
to support the theater high-altitude area defense, Navy theater
wide, and Patriot advanced capability-3 configuration 3 (PAC-3)
missile defense systems. The committee understands that
additional funding would support a more robust technology
effort that could include a continued design of a composite
shroud, ground testing of a full scale divert and attitude
control system, ground testing of an advanced low cost two-
color infrared seeker, and completion of the development of a
master frequency generator (MFG) for PAC-3. The committee
believes that the MFG will contribute significantly to the
effort to control PAC-3 missile costs.
The committee recommends an increase of $10.0 million in PE
63173C for project 1281 to complete the development and
integration of the MFG and other AIT projects that show promise
of improving the performance of theater missile defense
systems.
Ballistic missile defense test targets
The committee recognizes the rapidly emerging threat posed
by the proliferation of more sophisticated ballistic missile
systems and their associated technologies. The committee also
recognizes the need to flight test ballistic missile defense
systems against affordable, threat-representative targets.
Therefore, the committee directs that the development and
procurement of ballistic missile targets be managed by the
Ballistic Missile Defense Organization (BMDO), Department of
Defense's Reliance Lead for ballistic missile targets. As such,
the committee notes that BMDO shall be responsible for
centrally managing and budgeting the full spectrum of ballistic
missile targets, from low-fidelity targets used in training to
high fidelity, threat-representative targets used to verify
system performance during operational test and evaluation.
International cooperative programs
The budget request contained $36.7 million in PE 63875C for
international cooperative ballistic missile defense programs.
The committee notes with concern that no funding for the
Russian American Observational Satellites (RAMOS) program was
requested. RAMOS is a joint Russian-American project to observe
various phenomena from multiple platforms with technologies
relevant to early warning and ballistic missile defense
applications.
The committee believes that joint missile defense projects
are essential to provide Russia with a better understanding of
U.S. ballistic missile defense efforts. In light of legislation
passed by the House and Senate mandating the deployment of a
national missile defense, the committee believes that
cooperative missile defense programs with Russia would be an
important confidence building measure that could enhance early
warning and shared mutual protection benefits for both sides.
Therefore, the committee recommends $61.7 million in PE
63875C, an increase of $25.0 million for RAMOS.
Low cost launch technology
The budget request contained no funding in PE 63401F or PE
63173C for low cost launch technology.
The committee is aware of a number of technologies and
concepts that offer the potential to reduce launch costs
dramatically. One of these, Scorpius, utilizes simplified
launch processes and technologies to achieve streamlined, low
cost launch. The committee believes that continued research in
this area is important to the long term viability of the U.S.
launch industry. The committee is also aware that the Ballistic
Missile Defense Organization (BMDO) needs a liquid fueled
target vehicle to mimic the characteristics of liquid fueled
threat missiles during theater ballistic missile defense
testing.
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $8.0
million in PE 63401F and an increase of $5.0 million in PE
63173C for low cost launch technologies, including Scorpius.
The committee directs the Secretary of Defense to review the
suitability of such launch vehicles to meet BMDO requirements
for a liquid surrogate target.
Medium extended air defense system
The budget request contained $48.6 million in PE 63869C for
the medium extended air defense system (MEADS).
The committee notes the restructuring of the MEADS program
to leverage technology developments in other programs,
including PAC-3 and THAAD. This restructuring addresses two of
the committee's concerns related to the MEADS program as it was
configured in the past. First, it includes a three year
commitment by the Department to include funding for the MEADS
program. The committee has been critical of the Department's
failure to identify outyear funds for MEADS, and believes that
such a commitment is a necessary first step toward a serious
program. Second, the approach adopted by the Department holds
the promise of reducing the overall cost of the MEADS program
by leveraging current technology investments. The General
Accounting Office, in its recent review of the program,
indicated a probable total program cost of $12 to 14 billion, a
figure not supportable by the already constrained Ballistic
Missile Defense Organization (BMDO) budget.
The committee understands that the MEADS program, as now
planned, envisions the development of prototype hardware to be
tested in fiscal year 2003, using the PAC-3 missile, and
modifications of THAAD battle management software and the PAC-3
launcher. According to program officials, the development of a
360 degree, mobile radar remains a significant technical
challenge. The committee notes that several U.S. weapon systems
are currently developing electronically steered radars. The
committee encourages the Department to explore means of
adapting such radars for use with MEADS, or alternatively, to
examine a system architecture that would rely on a set of
netted missile defense sensors rather than a system specific
radar.
The committee recommends the budget request.
National missile defense
The budget request contained $836.6 million in PE 63871C
for national missile defense (NMD).
The committee is encouraged that the Department of Defense
has added outyear funding to the NMD program to support
deployment. However, the committee is concerned that the
Administration refuses to commit to such a deployment and notes
that both the House of Representatives and Senate have passed
legislation establishing NMD deployment as national policy. The
committee believes that such a commitment is important to
provide the ability to effectively focus the funds identified
in the Future Years Defense Program (FYDP) for completion of
development and deployment of an effective NMD capability.
The committee understands that the NMD program still
entails schedule risk and is aware that past target vehicle
failures have caused a number of significant delays in the NMD
and other ballistic missile defense programs. The committee
notes that the NMD program is supported by only one target
launch facility and believes that operation of a second launch
facility and contemporaneous preparation of two target launch
vehicles is a reasonable and appropriate approach to avoiding
costly delays that result from target vehicle failures. The
committee recommends an increase of $15.0 million in PE 63871C
for this purpose.
The committee notes that the NMD lead system integrator
(LSI) is contractually obligated to conduct a competitive bid
process for the radars that will support an NMD system capable
of defeating a larger, more sophisticated ballistic missile
attack than the initially deployed system. The committee
understands that the LSI is reviewing the radar industrial base
and cost and schedule implications to determine whether such a
competition is necessary. The committee believes that
competition frequently can provide the military better
technology at lower cost and that the Ballistic Missile Defense
Organization (BMDO) must assure that the LSI follows
appropriate competitive procedures prior to the award of the
NMD radar contract.
Consistent with a request from BMDO, the committee also
approves a transfer of $15.7 million in 63871C to military
construction for the purpose of supporting early NMD
deployment.
The committee recommends $835.9 million in PE 63871C for
continued NMD development.
Navy area defense
The budget request included $268.4 million in PE 64867C for
the Navy area defense theater missile defense system and $55.0
million for Navy area defense procurement.
The committee understands that the combined technical
complexities of upgrading the Aegis weapon system (AWS)
computers, integrating multiple platforms through the
cooperative engagement capability (CEC), and developing the
Standard Missile-2 Block IVA (SM-2 IVA) have led to schedule
delays and cost increases in the Navy area defense program. The
Navy now indicates that the first unit equipped has been
delayed from fiscal year 2001 to fiscal year 2003, and that an
additional $537.0 million over five years will be needed to
keep the program on this delayed schedule.
The committee recognizes that the Navy area defense program
is the Navy's primary capability to defend against rapidly
evolving theater ballistic missile threats and that further
delay to the program will increase risks for deployed U.S.
military personnel. At the same time, the committee is
concerned about the dramatic program cost increases the program
is experiencing. The Navy and the Ballistic Missile Defense
Organization (BMDO) maintain that authorization of low rate
initial production is needed in fiscal year 2000 to assure that
TMD-configured Aegis destroyers can be equipped with an early
Navy area defense capability. However, the committee believes
that the revised schedule provides inadequate initial
operational test and evaluation of the SM-2 IVA prior to low
rate initial production. The committee also understands that
deferring authority for low rate initial production to fiscal
year 2001 will delay Navy area defense deployment by only one
to three months. The committee believes that the program as now
laid out is not executable, based on both the technical
complications and the annual increases that the Navy and BMDO
agree must be provided to keep the program on the fiscal year
2003 schedule.
Therefore, the committee recommends no funding in Navy area
defense procurement, a decrease of $55.0 million, and $323.4
million in PE 64867C for Navy area defense development, an
increase of $55.0 million. The committee believes that this
reapportionment will provide the best opportunity for the Navy
and BMDO to overcome Navy area defense development challenges
and allow a more appropriate alignment of low rate initial
production, continued development activities, and initial
operational test and evaluation. The committee expects the
Department of Defense to come forward in its fiscal year 2001
budget request with a more affordable funding profile for the
Navy area defense program.
Patriot advanced capability-3 (PAC-3)
The budget request contained $300.9 million for PAC-3
procurement and $29.1 million in PE 64865C for PAC-3
engineering and manufacturing development (EMD).
The committee believes that progress in the PAC-3, while
slow to evolve, has been substantial over the past year. This
progress culminated in a successful ballistic missile intercept
test of the PAC-3 system in March 1999.
However, the committee is concerned about the substantial
growth in the unit procurement cost of the PAC-3 missile and
understands that much of the cost growth is attributable to the
transfer of procurement funds to offset a cost overrun in the
EMD phase of the program and the major reduction in the number
of missiles to be procured from 1,200 to 560. The committee
believes that the PAC-3 capability will be of major importance
and that the number now planned for procurement is insufficient
to meet identified requirements. The committee directs the
Secretary of Defense to provide details of plans to the
Congressional defense committees by February 1, 2000, to reduce
the cost of the PAC-3 missile.
The committee is also concerned that the PAC-3 funding
profile identified by the Department of Defense is inadequate
to sustain continued procurement at a rate that will keep pace
with the rapidly evolving short- and medium-range ballistic
missile threat. The committee believes that the demonstrated
technical success and importance of the program provide more
than adequate justification to increase annual procurement
funding to correct shortfalls caused by program cost growth.
Therefore, the committee recommends $300.9 million for PAC-
3 procurement, the requested amount, and $77.6 million in PE
64865C for PAC-3 engineering and manufacturing development, an
increase of $48.5 million.
Space-based laser
The budget request contained $75.0 million in PE 63173C and
$63.8 million in PE 63876F for the space based laser (SBL).
The committee understands that the SBL program has been
restructured, merging competing contractors into a national
team working toward an in-flight experiment in 2012. The
committee believes that this restructuring responds to concerns
expressed in the committee report on H.R. 3616 (H. Rept. 105-
532) that the SBL program, as then planned with a launch of a
readiness demonstrator in 2005, was not executable at
sustainable funding levels and would unnecessarily restrict
technical options. The committee believes that the
restructuring will mitigate technical risk, allow for the
development and incorporation of advanced technologies, is
executable at sustainable funding levels, and provides a
potentially effective management structure.
However, the committee is concerned that the program as
currently structured does not provide sufficient emphasis on
the development and fabrication of laser optics. The committee
understands that the current program schedule is driven to a
substantial degree by the development of segmented and/or
deployable mirrors. The committee believes that the schedule
risk can be mitigated by redirecting program funds to
development of prototype actively controlled lightweight optics
and through a management structure which provides appropriate
emphasis on the optical payload element.
The committee notes that the SBL restructuring has resulted
in a modest delay in the initiation of program activities.
Therefore, the committee recommends a decrease of $15.0 million
in PE 63173C without prejudice, and the budget request in PE
63876F for SBL.
Technical operations
The budget request contained $190.7 million in PE 63874C
for ballistic missile defense (BMD) technical operations.
The committee understands that the Ballistic Missile
Defense Organization is leveraging commercial internet
technologies to improve the utilization of data that is now
dispersed among several data centers. The committee believes
that upgrading these centers and establishing a seamless, wide
bandwidth information infrastructure between the centers would
allow access by the entire BMD community, resulting in
significant efficiencies. The committee believes that such a
network would allow distributed BMD modeling and simulation,
including hardware-in-the-loop simulations, and would enhance
flexibility to meet evolving threats more rapidly.
Therefore, the committee recommends $200.7 million in PE
63874C, an increase of $10.0 million for development of a wide
bandwidth information infrastructure to link current data
centers as well as specific applications to take full advantage
of such an infrastructure.
Theater high altitude area defense
The budget request contained $577.5 million in PE 64861C
for the theater high altitude area defense (THAAD) system.
The committee notes with concern that the THAAD system
failed its sixth consecutive attempt to intercept a ballistic
missile target. The committee is encouraged that the last test
demonstrated success in missile flight, divert and attitude
control system function, seeker function, and end game
maneuver, and supports continuation of that THAAD testing
through the next four intercept tests.
The committee understands that the cost-sharing arrangement
negotiated between the THAAD contractor and the Ballistic
Missile Defense Organization last year requires the contractor
to reimburse the government $15.0 million as a consequence of
the failure of flight test nine. The committee is also aware
that the recent test failure indicates a continuing need to
dedicate budget resources in programs that demonstrate success.
The committee recommends that PE 64861C be decreased $15.0
million and that another $90.0 million, the estimated cost for
three ballistic missile intercept tests, be transferred to the
upper tier program, PE 64218C described elsewhere in this
report.
The committee recommends $472.5 million in PE 64861C, a
decrease of $105.0 million, and $90.0 million in PE 64218C for
Upper Tier intercept testing.
Upper tier
The budget request contained no funding in PE 64218C for a
new upper tier program.
The committee notes that the Department intends to provide
funds to this program element starting in fiscal year 2002,
after evaluating the performance of the Navy Theater Wide
System (NTW) and the Theater High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD)
system in December 2000. The system that achieves greater
success in its intercept test program will be funded to achieve
a first unit equipped in fiscal year 2007.
The committee supports the premise that success should be
rewarded and that upper tier ballistic missile defense should
be deployed as soon as possible. Nevertheless, the committee
has serious concerns ab