42 408
1997
105 th Congress 1st Session
F
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Report
105 206
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE APPROPRIATIONS BILL, 1998
R E P O R T
of the
COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS
Together with
DISSENTING VIEWS
[To accompany H.R. 2266]
[Graphic Image Not Available]
July 25, 1997.--Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the
State of the Union and ordered to be printed
C O N T E N T S
Bill Totals 1
Committee Budget Review Process 4
Introduction 4
Quadrennial Defense Review 5
Rationale for the Committee Bill 6
Major Committee Recommendations 6
Addressing High Priority Unfunded Shortfalls 6
Ensuring a Quality, Ready Force 7
Modernization Programs 8
Reforms/Program Reductions 9
U.S. Forces in Bosnia 11
NATO Expansion 12
Budget Formulation Issues 13
Abuse of Traditional Acquisition and Appropriations Practices 14
Ship Self-Defense 16
Chemical and Biological Defense Programs 17
Committee Recommendations by Major Category 19
Active Military Personnel 19
Guard and Reserve 19
Operation and Maintenance 19
Procurement 20
Research, Development, Test and Evaluation 20
Forces to be Supported 21
Department of the Army 21
Department of the Navy 21
Department of the Air Force 22
Special Interest Items 23
Government Performance and Results Act 23
Title I. Military Personnel 25
Programs and Activities Funded by Military Personnel Appropria25
Summary of Military Personnel Recommendations for Fiscal Year 25
Overall Active End Strength
26
Overall Selected Reserve End Strength
26
Adjustments to Military Personnel Account
27
Overview
27
Special Pays and Allowances
27
End Strength Adjustments
27
Temporary Early Retirement Authority
27
Foreign Currency
27
Contingency Operations Funding
27
Military Personnel Compensation
28
Personal Financial Management Training
28
``Aim High'' Program
28
Full-Time Support Strengths
28
Military Leave for Reservists
29
Military Personnel, Army
29
Military Personnel, Navy
30
Military Personnel, Marine Corps
30
Military Personnel, Air Force
30
Reserve Personnel, Army
31
Reserve Personnel, Navy
31
Magic Lantern
31
Navy Reserve Forces
32
Reserve Personnel, Marine Corps
32
Reserve Personnel, Air Force
32
National Guard Personnel, Army
33
National Guard Personnel, Air Force
33
Title II. Operation and Maintenance
35
Operation and Maintenance Overview
35
Real Property Maintenance
38
Flying Hour Shortfall
38
Readiness Training
38
Depot Maintenance
39
Quadrennial Defense Review Reductions
39
Headquarters and Administrative Costs
39
Industrial Preparedness
39
Contingency Operations Funding
40
Reprogramming in Operation and Maintenance Accounts
40
Reporting on the Execution of Real Property Maintenance Funding
41
Budget Justification and Execution Data
41
Purchases of Foreign Made Goods
41
Environmentally Safe Fuel Storage Tanks
41
Federal Firefighting Pay
42
Recruiting and Advertising
42
Classified Programs
42
Operation and Maintenance, Army
42
Low Rate Initial Production (LRIP) for Abrams XXI
42
Depot Maintenance
43
National Training Center Rotations
43
Army Logistics Automation
43
High Risk Automation Systems
43
Program Recommended
43
Operation and Maintenance, Navy
46
CNET Distance Learning
46
National Oceanography Partnership Act
47
Software Program Managers Network
47
High Risk Automation Systems
47
Asbestos Eradication
47
Electrotechnologies
47
Program Recommended
47
Operation and Maintenance, Marine Corps
50
Program Recommended
50
Operation and Maintenance, Air Force
52
Instrument Routes 102 and 141
52
Air Force Manufacturing Technology Assistance Pilot Program
52
Misawa Antennas
52
Children's Association for Maximum Potential
53
REMIS
53
High Risk Automation Systems
53
Air Force Institute of Technology
53
Malmstrom Air Force Base
53
Program Recommended
53
Operation and Maintenance, Defense-Wide
56
JCS Exercises
56
Special Operations Command
57
Within-Grade Increases
57
Defense Finance and Accounting Service
57
Defense Human Resources Field Activity
58
White House Communications Agency
58
Automated Document Conversion
58
Improved Cargo Methods and Technologies
58
DLA DWCF Transfer
59
Security Locks
59
Federal Energy Management Program
59
Military Personnel Information System
59
Environmental Restoration
59
OSD Commissions and Studies
60
Travel Reengineering
60
High Risk Automation Systems
60
Quadrennial Defense Review--Defense Agency Reduction
60
QDR Restructuring Reserve
60
Use of Re-Refined Oil
61
Nutrition
61
Vint Hill Farms
61
Department of Defense Dependents Schools
61
Adjustments
61
Family Counseling and Crisis Services
61
Social Work Fellowship Program
62
Program Recommended
62
Operation and Maintenance, Army Reserve
64
Program Recommended
64
Commercial Construction and Material Handling Equipment
66
Reserve Units in Central Florida
66
Operation and Maintenance, Navy Reserve
66
Program Recommended
66
NSIPS
68
Navy Reserve Center in Mansfield, Ohio
68
Operation and Maintenance, Marine Corps Reserve
68
Program Recommended
68
Operation and Maintenance, Air Force Reserve
70
Program Recommended
70
WC 130 Weather Reconnaissance Mission
72
March Air Reserve Base
72
Operation and Maintenance, Army National Guard
73
Program Recommended
73
Domestic Chemical/Biological Counter Terrorism Mission Planning
75
Software Acquisition and Security Training
76
Operation and Maintenance, Air National Guard
77
Program Recommended
77
159th Air National Guard Fighter Group
79
Overseas Contingency Operations Transfer Fund
79
United States Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces
79
Environmental Restoration, Army
79
Rocky Mountain Arsenal
79
Environmental Restoration, Navy
80
Naval Air Station Bermuda
80
Environmental Restoration, Air Force
80
Environmental Restoration, Defense-Wide
80
Environmental Restoration, Formerly Used Defense Sites
80
Newmark
81
Overseas Humanitarian, Disaster, and Civic Aid
81
Humanitarian Demining
81
Former Soviet Union Threat Reduction
81
Quality of Life Enhancements, Defense
82
Title III. Procurement
83
Estimates and Appropriation Summary
83
Reduced Use of Solvent Adhesives
85
Alternative Fueled Vehicles
85
Commander's Tactical Terminal/Joint Tactical Terminal
85
Classified Programs
85
Aircraft Procurement, Army
85
Committee Recommendations
86
Authorization Changes
86
Fixed Wing Aircraft
86
Guardrail Common Sensor
86
Rotary Wing Aircraft
86
UH 60 Blackhawk
86
Kiowa Warrior
87
EH 60 Quickfix Modifications
87
ASE Modifications
87
Other Support Equipment
87
Training Devices
87
Common Ground Equipment
87
Program Recommended
87
Missile Procurement, Army
89
Committee Recommendations
89
Authorization Changes
89
Other Missiles
89
Patriot
89
Hellfire
89
MLRS Rocket
90
MLRS Launcher Systems
90
BAT
90
Modification of Missiles
90
Patriot Mods
90
Program Recommended
90
Procurement of Weapons and Tracked Combat Vehicles, Army
92
Committee Recommendations
92
Authorization Changes
92
Tracked Combat Vehicles
92
Bradley Base Sustainment
92
Field Artillery Ammunition Support Vehicle
92
Modification of Tracked Combat Vehicles
92
Carrier Modifications
92
Howitzer, 155MM M109A6 (Mod)
92
Program Recommended
92
Procurement of Ammunition, Army
94
Committee Recommendations
94
Authorization Changes
94
Ammunition Shortfalls
94
Mortar Ammunition
94
120mm Full Range Practice (M931)
94
Tank Ammunition
95
120MM Heat MP T M830A1
95
Artillery Ammunition
95
105MM DPICM XM915
95
Rockets
95
Bunker Defeating Munition
95
Ammunition Production Base Support
95
Provision for Industrial Facilities
95
Program Recommended
95
Other Procurement, Army
97
Committee Recommendations
97
Authorization Changes
97
Tactical and Support Vehicles
97
Semi-Trailer, Container Transporter
97
Semi-Trailer, Tank, 5000 Gallon
97
Semi-Trailer, Tank 7500 Gallon
98
Family of Medium Tactical Vehicles
98
Family of Heavy Tactical Vehicles
98
Armored Security Vehicles
98
Truck, Tractor, Line Haul
98
Self-Loading/Off-Loading Trailer
98
Communications--Satellite Communications
99
Defense Satellite Communications System
99
Satellite Terminals, EMUT
99
NAVSTAR Global Positioning System
99
SCAMP
99
Global Broadcast Service
99
Communications--Combat Communications
99
Army Data Distribution System
99
SINCGARS Family
100
Combat Survivor Evader Locator
100
Electronic Equipment, TIARA
100
All Source Analysis System
100
IEW--Ground Base Common Sensors
100
Electronic Equipment--Electronic Warfare
100
Shortshop
100
Sentinel
100
Night Vision Devices
100
Electronic Equipment--Tactical C2 Systems
101
Maneuver Control System
101
Standard Integrated Command Post System
101
Electronic Equipment--Automation
101
Automated Data Processing Equipment
101
Reserve Component Automation System
101
Electronic Equipment--Test Measurement Equipment
101
Integrated Family of Test Equipment
101
Maintenance Equipment
101
Items Less Than $2.0 Million
101
Rail Float Containerization Equipment
102
Railway Car, Flat, 100 Ton
102
Training Equipment
102
SIMNET/Close Combat Tactical Trainer
102
Tactical Facsimile System
102
Gun Laying Positioning System
102
Radio Frequency Technology
102
Lightweight Laser Designator/Range Finder
102
Combat Synthetic Training Assessment Range
103
Airborne Command and Control System
103
Avenger Slew to Cue
103
Palletized Loading System Enhanced
103
Program Recommended
103
Aircraft Procurement, Navy
106
Committee Recommendations
106
Authorization Changes
106
Combat Aircraft
106
F/A 18E/F Hornet
106
Modification of Aircraft
107
EA 6 Series
107
H 1 Series
107
P 3 Series
107
2 Series
107
Common Avionics Changes
107
Aircraft Support Equipment and Facilities
107
Common Ground Equipment
107
Program Recommended
108
Weapons Procurement, Navy
110
Committee Recommendations
110
Authorization Changes
110
Ballistic Missiles
110
Trident Advance Procurement
110
Other Missiles
110
ESSM
110
Standard Missile
111
Aerial Targets
111
Spares and Repair Parts
111
Program Recommended
111
Procurement of Ammunition, Navy and Marine Corps
113
Committee Recommendations
113
Authorization Changes
113
Ammunition Shortfalls
113
Navy Ammunition
113
Practice Bombs
113
5 Inch/ 54 Gun Ammunition
113
20MM PGU 28
114
Program Recommended
114
Shipbuilding and Conversion, Navy
116
Committee Recommendations
116
Authorization Changes
116
Other Warships
116
CVN Refueling Overhauls
116
CVN Refueling Overhauls--Advance Procurement
117
DDG 51
117
Cruiser Overhauls
117
Auxiliaries, Craft, and Prior Year Program Costs
117
LCAC Landing Craft
117
ADC(X)
118
Program Recommended
118
Other Procurement, Navy
120
Committee Recommendations
120
Authorization Changes
120
Ships Support Equipment
120
LM 2500 Gas Turbine
120
Navigation Equipment
120
Other Navigation Equipment
120
Other Shipboard Equipment
120
Firefighting Equipment
120
Pollution Control Equipment
121
Submarine Batteries
121
Strategic Platform Support Equipment
121
Communications and Electronic Equipment
121
Radar Support
121
Ship Sonars
121
AN/SQQ 89 Surface ASW Combat System
121
SSN Acoustics
121
Carrier ASW Module
121
Electronic Warfare Equipment
122
C3 Countermeasures
122
Reconnaissance Equipment
122
Combat Direction Finding Equipment
122
Battle Group Passive Horizon Extension (BGPHES)
122
Other Ship Electronic Equipment
122
Navy Tactical Data System
122
Advanced Tactical Data Link Systems
122
Aviation Electronic Equipment
122
Automatic Carrier Landing System
122
ID Systems
122
Other Shore Electronic Equipment
122
JMCIS Tactical/Mobile
122
Submarine Communications
123
Submarine Communication Equipment
123
Shore Communications
123
NSIPS
123
JEDMICS
123
Aviation Support Equipment
123
Sonobouys
123
AN/SQQ 53 (DIFAR)
123
AN/SQQ 62 (DICASS)
123
Aircraft Support Equipment
123
Aviation Life Support
123
LAMPS MK III Shipboard Equipment
123
Ship Missile Systems Equipment
124
NATO Seasparrow
124
Ship Self-Defense System
124
AEGIS Support Equipment
124
Surface Tomahawk Support Equipment
124
Fleet Ballistic Missile Support Equipment
124
Strategic Missile Systems Equipment
124
Other Ordnance Support Equipment
124
Unmanned Seaborne Target
124
Other Expendable Ordnance
124
Surface Training Device Modifications
124
Civil Engineering Support Equipment
125
Construction and Maintenance Equipment
125
Amphibious Equipment
125
Pollution Control Equipment
125
Command Support Equipment
125
Other
125
Spares and Repair Parts
125
Program Recommended
125
Procurement, Marine Corps
129
Committee Recommendations
129
Authorization Changes
129
Weapons and Combat Vehicles
129
Items Under $2 Million (Tracked Vehicles)
129
Other Communications and Electronics Equipment
129
Intelligence Support Equipment
129
Tactical Vehicles
129
High Mobility Multi-Purpose Wheeled Vehicles
129
General Property
129
Field Medical Equipment
129
Program Recommended
130
Aircraft Procurement, Air Force
132
Committee Recommendations
132
Authorization Changes
132
Combat Aircraft
132
Advanced Tactical Fighter (F 22) Advance Procurement
132
16
133
Airlift Aircraft
133
C 17
133
C 17 Advance Procurement
133
Civil Air Patrol
133
Other Aircraft
134
8C
134
Modification of Inservice Aircraft
134
B 52 Modifications
134
15 Modifications
134
16 Modifications
135
C 130 Modifications
135
Aircraft Support Equipment and Facilities
135
15 Post Production Support
135
War Consumables
135
Miscellaneous Production Charges
135
Program Recommended
136
Missile Procurement, Air Force
139
Committee Recommendations
139
Authorization Changes
139
Other Missiles
139
AMRAAM
139
Modification of Inservice Missiles
139
Conventional ALCM
139
Space Programs
139
Global Positioning System (GPS) Space Segment
139
Medium Launch Vehicles
140
Defense Support Program
140
Special Programs
140
Program Recommended
140
Procurement of Ammunition, Air Force
142
Committee Recommendations
142
Authorization Changes
142
Wind Corrected Munitions Dispenser
142
Cartridges
142
20MM PGU 28
142
Program Recommended
142
Other Procurement, Air Force
144
Committee Recommendations
144
Authorization Changes
144
Cargo and Utility Vehicles
144
Items Less than $2 Million
144
Special Purpose Vehicles
144
HMMWV, Armored
144
Items Less Than $2 Million
144
Materials Handling Equipment
145
60K A/C Loader
145
Intelligence Programs
145
Intelligence Data Handling System
145
Electronic Programs
145
Strategic Command and Control
145
Special Communications-Electronics Projects
145
C 3 Countermeasures
145
Air Force Communications
145
Base Information Infrastructure
145
Air Force Satellite Control Network
146
Organization and Base
146
Items Less Than $2 Million
146
Personnel Safety and Rescue Equipment
146
Night Vision Goggles
146
Electrical Equipment
146
Floodlights Set Type NF2D
146
Base Support Equipment
146
Medical/Dental Equipment
146
Program Recommended
146
Procurement, Defense-Wide
149
Committee Recommendations
149
Authorization Changes
149
Major Equipment
149
Automated Document Conversion
149
Ballistic Missile Defense Organization (BMDO)
149
Special Operations Command
149
PC, CYCLONE Class
149
SOF Intelligence Systems
149
Chemical and Biological Defense Program
150
Individual Protection
150
Collective Protection
150
Program Recommended
150
National Guard and Reserve Equipment
152
Committee Recommendations
152
MELIOS AN/PVS 6
152
T 39 Replacement Aircraft
152
Program Recommended
152
Miscellaneous Equipment
154
Information Resources Management
154
REMIS
155
JEDMICS
155
Sustaining Base Information Services
155
Army Logistics Automation
155
Automated Document Conversion
155
Military Personnel Information Systems
156
Software Program Managers Network
157
High Risk Automation Systems
157
Title IV. Research, Development, Test and Evaluation
159
Estimates and Appropriation Summary
159
Federally Funded Research and Development Centers (FFRDCs)
161
Basic Research
161
NATO Research and Development
162
Tactical Radios
162
Special Access Programs
162
Combat Survivor Evader Locator (CSEL) Survival Radio
163
Institute for Defense Analyses
163
Classified Programs
163
Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, Army
163
Committee Recommendations
164
Authorization Changes
164
Basic Research
164
In-House Laboratory Research
164
Defense Research Sciences
164
University and Industry Research Centers
164
Army Research Institute for Behavioral and Social Sciences
164
Exploratory Development
164
Sensors and Electronic Survivability
164
Aviation Advanced Technology
165
Combat Vehicle and Automotive Technology
165
Chemical, Smoke and Equipment Defeating Technology
165
Joint Service Small Arms Program
165
Weapons and Munitions Technology
165
Electronics and Electronic Devices
165
Countermine System
166
Human Factors Engineering Technology
166
Environmental Quality Technology
166
Military Engineering Technology
166
Medical Technology
166
Neurofibromatosis
166
Prostate Disease
167
Advanced Development
167
Medical Advanced Technology
167
Aviation Advanced Technology
167
Weapons and Munitions Advanced Technology
168
Missile and Rocket Advanced Technology
168
Landmine Warfare and Barrier Advanced Technology
169
Line-of-Sight Technology Demonstration
169
Demonstration and Validation
169
Army Missile Defense Systems Integration
169
Aviation Advanced Development
170
Artillery Systems Development
170
Engineering and Manufacturing Development
170
EW Development
170
Family of Heavy Tactical Vehicles
170
Air Traffic Control
170
Light Tactical Wheeled Vehicle
171
Combat Feeding, Clothing and Equipment
171
Automatic Test Equipment Development
171
Combined Arms Tactical Trainer
171
Landmine Warfare/Barrier Engineering Development
171
Sense and Destroy Armament Missile
172
RDT&E Management Support
172
DoD High Energy Laser Test Facility
172
Materiel Systems Analysis
172
Support of Operational Testing
173
Program Wide Activities
173
Munitions Standardization, Effectiveness and Safety
173
Environmental Compliance
173
Aerostat Joint Project Office
174
Combat Vehicle Improvement Program
174
Digitization
174
Missile/Air Defense Product Improvement Program
175
Joint Tactical Ground System
175
End Item Industrial Preparedness Activities
175
Force XXI Initiative
175
Striker
176
Mortar Fire Control
176
Theater Precision Strike Operations
177
Program Recommended
177
Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, Navy
181
Committee Recommendations
181
Authorization Changes
181
Basic Research
181
In-House Independent Laboratory Research
181
Defense Research Sciences
181
Exploratory Development
181
Surface/Aerospace Surveillance and Weapons Technology
181
Surface Ship Technology
182
Aircraft Technology
182
Command, Control and Communications Technology
182
Readiness, Training and Environmental Quality Technology
182
Materials, Electronics and Computer Technology
182
Electronic Warfare Technology
183
Undersea Surveillance Weapon Technology
183
Oceanographic and Atmospheric Technology
183
Undersea Warfare Weaponry Technology
183
Advanced Development
183
Air Systems and Weapons Advanced Technology
183
Precision Strike and Air Defense
183
Advanced Electronic Warfare Technology
184
Ship Propulsion System
184
Marine Corps Advanced Technology Demonstration
184
Medical Technology
184
Manpower, Personnel and Training
184
Environmental Quality and Logistics
184
Undersea Warfare Advanced Technology
185
Shallow Water MCM Demonstrations
185
Advanced Technology Transition
185
C3 Advanced Technology
185
Demonstration and Validation
185
Aviation Survivability
185
Surface and Shallow Water Mine Countermeasures
185
Advanced Submarine System Development
185
Advanced Surface Machinery Systems
186
Conventional Munitions
186
Advanced Warhead Development
186
Cooperative Engagement
186
Environmental Protection
187
Facilities Improvement
187
Land Attack Technology
187
Joint Strike Fighter
187
Engineering and Manufacturing Development
187
Other Helo Development
187
Aircrew Systems Development
188
Electronic Warfare
188
Surface Combatant Combat System Engineering
188
Arsenal Ship
188
LPD 17 Class Systems Integration
189
TSSAM
189
VLA Upgrade
189
Airborne Mine Countermeasures
189
SSN 688 and Trident Modernization
189
Submarine Combat System
189
New Design SSN
189
SSN 21 Developments
189
Ship Contract Design/Live Fire Testing
190
Navy Tactical Computer Resources
190
Lightweight Torpedo Development
190
Ship Self-Defense
190
Medical Development
190
Distributed Surveillance System
190
RDT&E Management Support
191
Target Systems Development
191
Major T&E Investment
191
Technical Information Services
191
Studies and Analysis Support
191
Management, Technical and International Support
191
Science and Technology Management
191
Test and Evaluation Support
192
Marine Corps Program Wide Support
192
Operational Systems Development
192
HARM Improvement
192
Aviation Improvements
192
Marine Corps Communications Systems
192
Marine Corps Ground Combat/Support Arms
192
Defense Meteorological Satellite Program (Space)
192
Manufacturing Technology
193
Program Recommended
193
Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, Air Force
197
Committee Recommendations
197
Authorization Changes
197
Air Force and Army Laboratory Restructuring
197
Basic Research
197
Defense Research Sciences
197
Exploratory Development
198
Materials
198
Aerospace Avionics
198
Phillips Lab Exploratory Development
198
Advanced Technology Development
198
Advanced Materials for Weapons Systems
198
Aerospace Propulsion Subsystems Integration
198
Aerospace Structures
198
Crew Systems and Personnel Protection Technology
198
Flight Vehicle Technology Integration
198
Electronic Combat Technology
199
Space and Missile Rocket Propulsion
199
Ballistic Missile Technology
199
Advanced Spacecraft Technology
199
Conventional Weapons Technology
199
Advanced Weapons Technology
199
Airborne Laser
199
Demonstration and Validation
200
Advanced MILSATCOM
200
Polar Adjunct
200
National Polar-Orbiting Operational Environmental Satellite System
(NPOESS)
200
Space Based Infrared Architecture--DEM/VAL
200
Warfighter-1
201
Evolved Expendable Launch Vehicle Program (EELV)
202
Global Broadcast Service
202
Engineering and Manufacturing Development
203
Integrated Avionics Planning and Development
203
B 1B
203
Specialized Undergraduate Pilot Training
203
22
203
EW Development
203
Munitions Dispenser Development
203
Joint Direct Attack Munition (JDAM)
204
Life Support System
204
Computer Resource Technology Transition
204
Joint Air-to-Surface Standoff Missile (JASSM)
205
JSLAM
206
RDT&E Management Support
206
Theater Simulator Development
206
Major T&E Investment
206
Test and Evaluation Support
206
Operational Systems Development
206
Advanced Medium Range Air-to-Air Missile (AMRAAM)
206
Aircraft Engine Component Improvement Program
206
AGM 86C Conventional Air Launched Cruise Missile System
207
Airborne Warning and Control System (AWACS)
207
Joint Surveillance and Target Attack Radar System (JSTARS)
207
World-Wide Military Command and Control System
207
Security and Investigative Services
207
Air Cargo Material Handling
207
Industrial Preparedness
207
Productivity, Reliability, Availability, Maintainability Program (PRAM)
208
NATO Joint Stars
208
Program Recommended
208
Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, Defense-Wide
212
Committee Recommendations
212
Authorization Changes
212
Basic Research
212
In-House Independent Research
212
Defense Research Sciences
212
University Research Sciences
212
Government and Industry Cosponsorship of University Research
213
Chemical and Biological Defense Program
213
Exploratory Development
213
Next Generation Internet
213
Support Technologies--Applied Research
214
Lincoln Laboratory Research Program
214
Computing Systems and Communications Technology
214
Chemical and Biological Defense Program
214
Tactical Technology
215
Integrated Command and Control Technology
215
Materials and Electronics Technology
215
Defense Special Weapons Agency
215
Advanced Development
215
Explosives Demilitarization Technology
215
Counterproliferation Support
215
Automatic Target Recognition
215
Chemical and Biological Defense Program
216
Special Technical Support
216
Verification Technology Demonstration
216
Nuclear Monitoring Technologies
216
Seismic Monitoring
217
Generic Logistics R&D Technology Demonstrations
217
Strategic Environmental Research Program
217
Advanced Electronics Technologies
218
Maritime Technology
218
Electric Vehicles
218
Advanced Concept Technology Demonstrations
218
Commercial Technology Insertion Program
218
Electronic Commerce Resource Centers
218
High Performance Computing Modernization Program
218
Sensor and Guidance Technology
219
Marine Technology
219
Land Warfare Technology
220
Dual-Use Programs
220
Joint Wargaming Simulation Management Office
220
Demonstration and Validation
220
Physical Security Equipment
220
Joint Robotics Program
220
CALS Initiative
220
Ballistic Missile Defense Organization
220
Theater High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD)
221
Navy Lower Tier
221
Navy Upper Tier
221
Medium Extended Air Defense System (MEADS) and Boost Phase Intercept
(BPI)
222
National Missile Defense
222
Engineering and Manufacturing Development
222
Chemical and Biological Defense Program
222
Technical Studies
223
Defense Support Activities
223
Management Headquarters
223
Tactical UAVs
223
Endurance UAVs
223
Airborne Reconnaissance Systems
224
Special Operations Advanced Technology Development
224
Special Operations Intelligence Systems Development
224
SOF Operational Enhancements
224
Casting Emission Reduction Program
224
Program Recommended
225
Developmental Test and Evaluation, Defense
228
Committee Recommendations
228
Program Recommended
228
Operational Test and Evaluation, Defense
230
Committee Recommendations
230
Program Recommended
230
Live Fire Testing
232
Title V. Revolving and Management Funds
233
Defense Working Capital Funds
233
Transition to the Working Capital Funds
233
Military Commissary Fund, Defense
234
National Defense Sealift Fund
234
Large Medium Speed Roll-On/Roll-Off (LMSR) Ships
234
Lighterage
234
Title VI. Other Department of Defense Programs
235
Defense Health Program
235
Medical Research
235
Breast Cancer
236
Gulf War Illness
236
TRICARE
237
Bone Marrow Research
237
Smoking Cessation
237
Diabetes
237
Minimally Invasive Research
237
Air Force Neuroscience
238
Central Nervous System Injury Research
238
Walter Reed Army Institute of Research
238
Mobile Breast Care Center
238
Peer Review Panels
238
Chemical Agents and Munitions Destruction, Defense
239
Committee Recommendations
239
Program Reductions
239
Storage Facilities
239
Program Recommended
239
Drug Interdiction and Counter-Drug Activities, Defense
241
Committee Recommendations
241
National Guard Counter-Drug Program
241
LEA Support
241
Gulf States Initiative
241
HIDTA Crack House Demolition
242
Civil Air Patrol
242
C 26 Aircraft Photo Reconnaissance Upgrades
242
Multijurisdictional Task Force Training
242
Program Recommended
242
Office of the Inspector General
243
Title VII. Related Agencies
245
National Foreign Intelligence Program
245
Introduction
245
Classified Annex
245
Central Intelligence Agency Retirement and
Disability System Fund
245
Intelligence Community Management Account
246
Committee Recommendation
246
National Security Education Trust Fund
246
Payment to Kaho'olawe Island Conveyance and
Environmental Restoration Fund
246
Title VIII. General Provisions
247
Definition of Program, Project and Activity
247
Military Personnel Budget Justification
247
Limitation on Headquarters Activities
248
Warranties
248
National Imagery and Mapping Agency
248
Navigation and Safety Equipment
249
TACWAR
249
House of Representatives Reporting Requirements
251
Changes in Application of Existing Law
251
Appropriations Language
251
General Provisions
253
Appropriations Not Authorized by Law
256
Transfer of Funds
257
Rescissions
258
Constitutional Authority
258
Comparison With Budget Resolution
258
Five-Year Projection of Outlays
259
Financial Assistance to State and Local Governments
259
105 th Congress
Report
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
1st Session
105 206
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE APPROPRIATIONS BILL, 1998
July 25, 1997.--Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the
State of the Union and ordered to be printed
Mr. Young of Florida, from the Committee on Appropriations, submitted
the following
REPORT
[To accompany H.R. 2266]
The Committee on Appropriations submits the following report in
explanation of the accompanying bill making appropriations for the
Department of Defense, and for other purposes, for the fiscal year
ending September 30, 1998.
BILL TOTALS
Appropriations for most military functions of the Department of
Defense are provided for in the accompanying bill for the fiscal year
1998. This bill does not provide appropriations for military
construction, military family housing, civil defense, or nuclear
warheads, for which requirements are considered in connection with other
appropriations bills.
The President's fiscal year 1998 budget request for activities funded
in the Department of Defense Appropriations Bill totals $243,923,541,000
in new budget (obligational) authority. The amounts recommended by the
Committee in the accompanying bill total $248,335,303,000 in new budget
authority. This is $4,411,762,000 above the budget estimate and
$3,868,897,000\1\
above the sums made available for the same purposes for fiscal year
1997.
\1\This amount includes $1,846,200,000 in emergency supplemental
appropriations for the Department of Defense enacted into law in Public
Law 105 18.
In terms of overall defense spending for fiscal year 1998, when the
amounts in this bill are combined with proposed defense funding in other
annual appropriations bills the Committee's recommendations are
approximately equal to the $269 billion in discretionary appropriations
for the National Defense Function (050) agreed to by the Congress and
the President in April 1997, and subsequently approved by Congress in
the Concurrent Resolution on the Budget for Fiscal Years 1998 2002.
Despite the proposed increase over the President's request, however, the
Committee notes that with this recommendation funding in the Department
of Defense Appropriations Act for fiscal year 1998 will still fail to
keep pace with inflation. Total funding in the bill is 0.6 percent, or
$1.5 billion, less than what would be required to freeze funding at the
fiscal year 1997 level, adjusted for inflation. As a consequence, if
enacted into law, the Committee's recommendations would result in the
thirteenth straight year of real, inflation-adjusted reductions in
defense spending.
The new budget authority enacted for the fiscal year 1997, the
President's budget estimates, and amounts recommended by the Committee
for fiscal year 1998 appear in summary form in the following table:
Offset Folios 018 Insert here
COMMITTEE BUDGET REVIEW PROCESS
During its review of the fiscal year 1998 budget, the Subcommittee on
National Security held a total of 19 hearings during the time period of
February 26, 1997 to June 11, 1997. Testimony received by the
Subcommittee totaled 1,625 pages of transcript. Approximately half of
the hearings were held in open session. Executive or closed sessions
were held only when the security classification of the material to be
discussed presented no alternative.
Introduction
The bill reported by the Committee reflects its obligation to provide
adequate resources for the nation's defense while attempting to strike a
balance between the many competing challenges confronting the armed
forces of the United States.
The international environment remains uncertain and potentially
explosive. Political instability remains on the rise, as does the threat
posed by the proliferation of technology, giving even small nations or
groups the ability to threaten entire populations. Transnational issues
such as ethnic conflicts, terrorism, the international drug trade, and
``information age'' threats continue to loom while more traditional
regional threats, such as those posed by North Korea, Iraq, and Iran
still must factor prominently in U.S. military planning.
Despite having been drawn down to the lowest force levels since the
end of World War II, U.S. armed forces remain forward deployed and
continue to sustain high rates of operation, a condition exacerbated by
the deployment of U.S. forces on non-traditional peacekeeping missions,
such as the Bosnia deployment. These frequent deployments have led to a
host of problems including hardships for service members and their
families, disruptions in standard rotation and training schedules, and
the need to finance the substantial costs of such operations.
The President's fiscal year 1998 budget proposal for the Department
of Defense clearly reflects the tensions inherent in trying to cope with
such existing, ongoing demands while living within the fiscal
constraints dictated by the Administration's overall budget priorities.
The combination of self-imposed defense spending limits, the spiraling
cost of overseas contingency operations, and the need to maintain forces
subject to deployment at high rates of readiness, has resulted once
again in major funding shortfalls throughout other portions of the
defense budget proposed by the President.
The Committee notes that subsequent to transmittal of the President's
budget, the Military Services identified high priority, unfunded
shortfalls for fiscal year 1998 totaling nearly $11 billion. In
addition, the Secretary of Defense has called to the Committee's
attention nearly $1.5 billion in additional unbudgeted fiscal year 1998
requirements involving defense health care, missile defense and
chemical/biological defenses, and a sizable shortage in funding for
flying hour support and related spare parts. Running the gamut from
quality of life programs, medical care, training and operating budgets,
and weapons modernization and research programs, the fiscal year 1998
defense budget submission demonstrably falls short of meeting both the
immediate and long-term requirements of the U.S. armed forces.
Quadrennial Defense Review
These problems are not new, and were the driving force behind
Congress' mandate last year for an in-depth review of U.S. military
strategy, force structure and deployments, and competing budget
priorities. The result was the Quadrennial Defense Review (QDR), which
combined with the appointment of a new Secretary of Defense resulted in
a fresh look at the many competing and difficult demands confronting
U.S. military planners.
The Committee is aware of, and in some instances sympathetic to, the
criticisms levied at the QDR since its results were announced in May
1997. For example, the QDR has been criticized for not being daring
enough, particularly with respect to its rejection of force structure
cuts well beyond the roughly one-third reduction already levied since
the fall of the Berlin Wall. However, the Committee does not find such
critiques persuasive in the face of continued regional threats on both
the Korean Peninsula and in the Persian Gulf region which, of necessity,
drive near-term manpower and forward deployment requirements. The
Committee does find more substance in the claim that the QDR was a
fiscally-constrained exercise. Yet, the announcement of the QDR's
findings occurred almost simultaneously with the agreement reached
between the President and the Congressional leadership on a balanced
budget agreement. This resulted in a long-term budget plan for defense
which, from fiscal years 2000 2002, approximates that used as the basis
for QDR planning (namely, the President's proposed defense program).
While there is merit to the charge that the Secretary of Defense should
have conducted solely a strategy and requirements driven review, in
hindsight the Secretary's decision that the QDR should reflect current
fiscal realities as well as strategic considerations must be viewed as
being both pragmatic and practical.
Nonetheless, despite giving the Department relatively high marks on
the broad aspects of its QDR recommendations, the Committee is troubled
by the many optimistic assumptions embedded in its recommendations. The
Committee is highly skeptical, for example, about whether the military
services can successfully draw down planned force structure by an
additional 60,000 active duty and 55,000 Reserve personnel, while
maintaining forward presence deployments and high OPTEMPO rates, without
sacrificing the quality of the force and adversely affecting the combat
capability of front-line units.
Of more proximate concern to the Committee in its budgetary role is
the degree to which the Department is relying on QDR recommendations
which forecast sizable budget savings. These savings are intended to
finance the Department's many unfunded outyear requirements, especially
those involving the development and eventual production of the new
generation of major weapons systems. The Committee's concern has already
been substantiated by the admission by senior Department of Defense
officials that most of the non-personnel savings assumed in the QDR
(amounting to approximately $7 8 billion per year by the year 2002) are
premised on yet-to-be determined reductions in headquarters, duplicative
organizations, and improved business practices.
These fiscal concerns are central in that, if not dealt with
successfully as the QDR recommendations are implemented, they threaten
to undermine one of the core objectives of the QDR itself: Freeing up
resources to enable the overdue modernization of many components of the
military's existing weaponry and equipment.
Rationale for the Committee Bill
When considering its fiscal year 1998 recommendations, the Committee
was therefore confronted with two overriding concerns. First, the fiscal
year 1998 budget request (prepared before the QDR), while including many
noteworthy aspects, still proposed funding levels for many activities
and programs which the Secretary of Defense has himself conceded are
inadequate, particularly in light of subsequent QDR decisions. Second,
the QDR itself has now become the basis for outyear defense planning,
and therefore presents both a guide and an opportunity for the Committee
in making its recommendations for fiscal year 1998.
In fashioning this bill, the Committee took both these factors into
account while remaining committed to several key objectives:
(1) Ensuring an adequate level of readiness, training and quality of
life for all service members, both in the Active and Reserve components;
(2) Providing for a modernization program which both meets today's
requirements and the security needs of the future;
(3) Giving special priority to redressing shortfalls in less
visible, yet mission-essential programs and equipment; and finally,
(4) Cutting, reforming, or eliminating programs or activities with
little military utility, or which have not shown demonstrable success or
have encountered delays in development or production, or are
duplicative, excessive or unnecessary.
In particular, given the Committee's deep concern that many of the
QDR's cost-saving assumptions may prove to be highly optimistic, the
Committee believes it cannot wait until the fiscal year 1999 budget
cycle to begin to implement QDR-sanctioned reforms or cost-cutting. The
Committee has made a concerted effort to reduce and in some instances
cancel funding for programs or functions which, while meritorious, are
simply of lower priority, can be performed at a lower cost, are as
``nice to have'' rather than essential.
The following section of the report details major Committee
recommendations in support of these objectives.
MAJOR COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS
Addressing High Priority Unfunded Shortfalls
The Committee bill fully funds the unbudgeted shortfalls identified
by the Secretary of Defense with respect to defense medical programs,
National Missile Defense, and Navy and Air Force flying hours. The
Committee also recommends increases over the budget request of
$107,650,000 for improved chemical and biological defensive
technologies, equipment and training. Finally, the Committee also
recommends additions over the budget request which address more than
one-third (by dollar amount) of the unbudgeted shortfalls identified by
the military Service Chiefs. Specific details are cited throughout this
report.
ENSURING A QUALITY, READY FORCE
Personnel Issues: The Committee has recommended fully funding the
2.8 percent military pay raise as requested by the Department, and has
added $60,000,000 above the budget request for housing and family
separation allowances in conformance with House authorization action.
For the Reserve components, the Committee recommends restoral of
$85,000,000 deleted in the budget request in order to fully fund the
Reserves' pay accounts. The Committee has fully funded all child care
and family support programs. Finally, the Committee has added
$22,900,000 over the budget request for military recruiting, to ensure
new accessions are of the highest possible quality.
Military Medical Programs: The Committee has included $274,000,000
above the amounts originally requested by the President to fully fund
unbudgeted shortfalls in the Defense Health Program. The Committee has
added $125,000,000 over the request to continue the Army's highly
successful peer-reviewed breast cancer research program as well as the
Committee's ongoing efforts to specifically improve breast cancer
detection and treatment for both service personnel and dependents.
Training/OPTEMPO: The Committee has fully funded the requested
amounts for all the Services' training and OPTEMPO accounts and has
added $99,013,000 over the request in those areas where the services
identified shortfalls.
Emergent flying hour/spare parts shortfall: Following submission of
the budget, the Secretary of Defense notified the Committee of
significant unfunded shortfalls which had emerged in the flying hour and
associated maintenance programs of the Navy and Air Force. The Committee
recognizes the immediate impact these shortfalls will have on readiness
and therefore recommends an increase of $622,000,000 over the budget
request to fully fund Navy and Air Force requirements.
Equipment repair/maintenance: The Committee is distressed over the
continuing existence of substantial unfunded backlogs in the Services'
depot maintenance accounts and has added $473,300,000 over the budget
request to meet the most urgent unfunded equipment maintenance
requirements.
Real property maintenance: For years the Committee has expressed its
concern over the growing backlog in real property maintenance accounts
used to support the Department's base infrastructure, including barracks
and mission-essential facilities. The Committee recommends an increase
of $924,840,000 over the budget request for real property maintenance,
including an additional $360,000,000 for barracks and living facilities,
continuing the Committee's commitment to revitalizing the Department's
base infrastructure.
Defense Drug Interdiction: The Committee recommends an increase over
the budget request of $60,500,000 for Department of Defense counter-drug
and drug interdiction programs, nearly a 10 percent increase over the
Department's proposed fiscal year 1998 levels.
``Contingency'' operations: The fiscal year 1997 Department of
Defense Appropriations Act created a separate appropriations account for
operation and maintenance costs resulting from major contingency
deployments. The Committee recommends similar action this year and
consolidates all requested operation and maintenance funding for the
Bosnia operation, as well as continued sanctions enforcement around
Iraq, into one single account. The Committee has also provided military
personnel funding associated with these operations, but has funded these
requirements in the regular appropriations accounts. In all, the
Committee recommends total funding of $2,145,100,000 for these
operations ($1,467,500,000 for Bosnia, as requested by the President;
and $677,600,000 for Southwest Asia).
Modernization Programs
Department of Defense officials freely admit that the most serious
shortcoming in the budget proposal is in those accounts providing for
procurement and research and development of new equipment and
technologies. Based on extensive testimony and a concerted effort to
identify critical shortfalls in existing requirements, the Committee is
recommending increases to the budget request specifically targeted at
meeting existing equipment/capability shortfalls as well as providing
for the projected military requirements of the future. In all, the bill
recommends increases over the budget request of $4.7 billion for
modernization programs, including net increases of over $3.9 billion for
procurement and $770 million for research and development.
The most significant recommendations include:
Missile defense: The Committee recommends total funding of
$3,673,659,000, a net increase of $707,115,000, for the Ballistic
Missile Defense Organization. The Committee bill includes a total of
$978,090,000 ($474,000,000 over the budget request) for national missile
defense and $2,695,568,000 (a net increase of $233,115,000 over the
budget request) for theater systems. The Committee has fully funded the
budget request for the joint U.S.-Israel ARROW missile defense program,
and has added $41,500,000 over the budget request for the joint
U.S.-Israel ``Nautilus'' Tactical High-Energy Laser program. The
Committee has also fully funded the Air Force's Airborne Laser program
at the requested amount ($157,136,000).
Ship Self-Defense/Cooperative Engagement: Mindful of the growing
threat to U.S. forces posed by both theater ballistic and cruise
missiles, the Committee has continued its long-standing emphasis on ship
self-defense and ``cooperative engagement'' (the sharing of tracking and
targeting information among many different platforms), and has added
$401,800,000 over the budget for these efforts.
Major weapons programs: The Committee recommends fully funding the
budget request for: The Army's Comanche helicopter, Crusader
next-generation artillery system, and Force XXI/digitization initiatives
(although the Committee has realigned requested funding to more
appropriate accounts); the Navy's production of 20 new F/A 18 E/F
fighters, three DDG 51 destroyers, one New Attack Submarine, the
overhaul of the U.S.S. Nimitz aircraft carrier, and the procurement of
two LMSR sealift ships; and the Air Force's F 15 fighter and F 22
fighter programs. The Committee has also funded the requested number of
Air Force C 17 transport aircraft; provided an additional nine C 130J
variants over the budget request for the Marine Corps, Air Force, and
Air National Guard, pursuant to House authorization action; and the
budget request for the Joint Strike Fighter.
The Committee has added funds over the request for: Army Blackhawk
helicopters (a total of $309,231,000 for 30 helicopters, $126,000,000
and 12 helicopters more than requested) and Kiowa Warrior helicopters
($151,700,000); the Navy E 2C airborne early warning aircraft (a total
of $304,474,000 for four aircraft, $68,000,000 and one aircraft over the
budget request); the Marine Corps V 22 tactical transport (a total of
$661,307,000 for seven aircraft, $189,300,000 and two aircraft more than
in the budget request), and advance procurement for the second LPD 17
amphibious ship (an increase of $185,000,000 over the budget request);
and the Air Force B 2 bomber (a total of $505,286,000, an increase over
the budget request of $331,200,000, consistent with House authorization
action), and F 16 fighter programs ($82,500,000 and three aircraft more
than the budget request).
Mission-essential shortfalls: The Committee has always emphasized
less-glamorous, yet mission-essential items which are critical to the
troops in the field. The Committee bill recommends increases over the
budget request for such items as: Additional combat communications
systems ($32,000,000), night vision devices ($14,400,000), and Bradley
fighting vehicle upgrades ($115,000,000) for the Army; new and
remanufactured trucks and HMMWV's for the Army and Marine Corps
($156,700,000); Army, Navy and Marine Corps ammunition (a net increase
of $258,900,000); modifications and upgrades for EA 6B ($83,000,000) and
P 3 aircraft ($129,000,000) for the Navy; initial issue gear
($40,700,000) and base telecommunications for the Marine Corps
($42,600,000); and additional aging aircraft and engine reliability
enhancements ($33,000,000), force protection measures ($27,800,000) and
base information systems protection ($51,000,000) for the Air Force. The
Committee also provided $31 million for development and procurement of
lighterage systems to support joint service strategic sealift
operations.
Guard and Reserve Components: The Committee bill for fiscal year
1998 continues its support of the Guard and Reserve, with a recommended
increase of $274,189,000 over the budget request for the personnel and
operation and maintenance accounts. With respect to modernization
programs, the Committee has fully funded those programs requested in the
budget for Guard and Reserve equipment ($968,500,000, requested in the
active services' accounts) and has provided an additional $1,651,800,000
throughout the bill for additional aircraft, tactical vehicles, and
various miscellaneous equipment and upgrades to existing equipment for
the Guard and Reserve components.
Reforms/Program Reductions
As mentioned earlier in this report, the Committee has always sought
to reduce excess or unnecessary funding when possible. The Department of
Defense is no more sacrosanct than any other portion of the Federal
government in terms of its need to be constantly reviewed, assessed, and
improved.
This year the Committee's efforts to reduce unnecessary spending in
the Department of Defense are even more important. This is due to the
need to address critical unfunded shortfalls in the fiscal year 1998
budget submission, many directly affecting readiness and quality of life
programs, as well as the Committee's broader concerns about whether the
savings forecast from implementation of the Quadrennial Defense Review
can realistically be expected to materialize.
Accordingly, a major priority throughout the Committee's budget
oversight process has been the identification of lower priority programs
which, although they contribute to the military mission, can be cut or
eliminated in order to fund higher priority programs and activities. The
Committee has also recommended many budget reductions intended to reform
and streamline existing Department of Defense structure or operations,
and in so doing the Committee intends to accelerate already-planned QDR
initiatives. Finally, the Committee has identified budget savings
stemming from audits by the General Accounting Office, the Department's
audit and inspector general functions, and the Committee's Surveys and
Investigations staff, as well as changes in program status identified by
the military departments.
Budget execution/lower-priority programs: The following table shows
selected programs in the budget request which the Committee has
eliminated or reduced funding based on its having a relatively low
priority or where the requested funding was considered excessive.
Program
Reduction
Civilian personnel overbudgeting -$245,500,000
Consultants and advisory services -$210,000,000
Defense dual use and commercialization programs -187,602,000
Growth in automated data processing programs -110,000,000
Excess inventory -100,000,000
Inappropriate budgeting/working capital funds -127,654,000
Joint Aerostat Program -93,193,000
Environmental fund recoupment -73,000,000
Growth in FFRDC's -55,000,000
NATO RDT&E -53,479,000
Growth in civilian employee travel -51,990,000
JCS Exercises -50,000,000
OSD administrative savings -20,000,000
Reform/restructuring: The Committee notes that DoD, with a decade of
reduced budgets and downsizing behind it, has already implemented or is
well into implementing a series of management and organizational
reforms. Among other things, these initiatives have already resulted in
the defense civilian workforce being reduced by nearly 30 percent with
significant additional reductions projected in the near future. While
DoD is to be commended for such moves, and although it intends to make
even additional reductions associated with implementation of the QDR,
the Committee believes more must and can be done. Accordingly, it has
recommended a number of budget reductions intended to further streamline
and rationalize operations.
QDR-related civilian personnel reductions -$253,273,000
Other headquarters reductions -149,443,000
Joint standoff missile program consolidation -140,321,000
Defense Agencies (QDR Task Force) -72,000,000
Using RDT&E funding for production -70,875,000
Acquisition reform (warranties) -50,000,000
Overseas disaster aid -24,573,000
Program/budget execution: In addition to the reductions cited above,
the Committee proposes more than 150 other reductions to budgeted items
based on delays in program execution, contract savings, or other events
resulting in the requested amount being clearly excessive to program
needs. These reductions have resulted in over $2.5 billion in savings in
this legislation.
U.S. Forces in Bosnia
The fiscal year 1998 budget request includes, and the Committee
recommends in this bill, a total of $1,467,500,000 in order to finance
the additional incremental military personnel and operation and
maintenance costs resulting from the continued U.S. participation in the
NATO-led Stabilization Force in Bosnia, through June 1998. With this
appropriation, the Committee notes it will have provided roughly $6.5
billion in either supplemental appropriations acts, approved
reprogramming actions or annual Department of Defense Appropriations
Acts for the additional costs associated with U.S. military operations
in and around the former Yugoslavia since October 1995. The Committee
has on numerous occasions expressed its commendation for the
professional and expert manner in which U.S. forces involved in the
Bosnia operation have carried out their missions, and does so once
again. These forces and their commanders have performed in an exemplary
manner, as have all coalition military participants, in an uncertain and
dangerous environment.
Even before a decision was made to deploy U.S. forces to Bosnia, the
Committee had expressed its concern and disappointment over the failure
of the Administration to adequately consult with the Congress regarding
peacekeeping operations. The mission change in Somalia, and Presidential
commitments to deploy forces to Rwanda, Haiti and Bosnia all were
undertaken after little, if any, advance consultation with the Congress.
While having repeatedly admonished the Administration for failing to
adequately seek Congressional advice and consent, the Committee has also
consistently expressed its willingness to work constructively with the
Administration to try and find consensus over how best to carry out
these missions while addressing the Nation's overall foreign policy
objectives. And despite the political controversy surrounding the Bosnia
deployment--beginning with the initial decision to deploy American
forces, to the mission extension announced by the President last
November, and now, concerns over a possible second mission extension as
well as possible expanded roles for U.S. forces on the ground--the
Committee observes that it has in each and every instance provided the
funds deemed necessary by the Department of Defense to support this
mission. The Committee's record of ``supporting the troops'' cannot be
questioned.
Regrettably, the Administration has yet to adequately address the key
issues initially raised by the Committee and others nearly two years ago
with respect to the Bosnia deployment. These include questions about the
exact mission of U.S. forces and other Stabilization Force participants;
what, if any exit strategy or criteria have been established for the
withdrawal of American forces; and the ultimate duration of the U.S.
deployment, the make-up of any international force in Bosnia after June
1998, and the overall long-term commitment which the U.S. intends to
make to the region (both in terms of military support and deployments as
well as other U.S. aid and assistance programs).
The Committee recognizes these are difficult issues, made more
complex due to the international involvement in the region and the
fragile peace within the former Yugoslavia. Yet it is precisely because
these issues are difficult that the Administration's continued refusal
to engage the Congress in efforts to seek a consensus for future policy
decisions cannot be understood. The Committee believes it is imperative
for the Administration to address these policy questions, both through
consultation with Congress and openly with the American people.
The Committee recognizes that the course of future Bosnia policy
carries with it significant implications for NATO as well as European
security in general. In addition, the Committee understands that using
the legislative ``power of the purse'' to prohibit or limit prospective
military operations has been and will no doubt continue to be one of the
supreme tests between the executive and legislative branches. The
Committee does not take lightly any use of this prerogative. The
Committee still expresses its willingness to work with the
Administration on seeking solutions to the immediate and longer term
issues involving policy towards Bosnia. However, in the absence of any
declared post-June 1998 plan for the NATO-led peacekeeping and peace
enforcement operation in the former Yugoslavia, the Committee recommends
for inclusion in this bill the provision passed by the House on June 23,
1997 during consideration of the Defense Authorization bill (H.R. 1119),
providing that no funds available to the Department of Defense may be
used to support the deployment of U.S. ground forces in the Republic of
Bosnia and Herzogovina after June 30, 1998 (the current mission limit
set by the President), unless specifically prescribed by law.
NATO Expansion
With the recent Madrid Summit and through other policy
pronouncements, the Administration has clearly expressed its intent to
expand the number of nations in the North Atlantic Treaty Organization
(NATO). Unfortunately, the financial impact of this expansion on the
Department of Defense budget is not yet clear as no funds have been
requested in the fiscal year 1998 budget request. The Committee is
dubious regarding current estimates of the cost of NATO expansion, which
according to the Administration will be approximately $200 million per
year. The estimate is significantly lower than that of most observers,
and the Committee notes it is premised on only three new member nations.
In order to gain better insight into the financial requirements for
an expanded NATO, the Committee recommends a new general provision
(Section 8101) requiring that, in future budget requests, DoD establish
a new budget subactivity in the Operation and maintenance request that
isolates incremental costs associated with NATO expansion. The Committee
directs that this new budget entry shall display all future costs funded
through annual Department of Defense Appropriations Acts relating to
NATO expansion. To the degree such costs may be more properly carried in
other titles of the Act, such as Military personnel or Procurement, the
Committee directs that these costs be displayed in their entirety in a
separate budget subactivity in the appropriate appropriations account,
as needed. The Committee further directs that detailed justification
materials be included in future budget requests to support any cost
estimates.
Budget Formulation Issues
The Committee is increasingly concerned about a number of practices
which have become more prevalent in both the Department of Defense's
annual budget submissions as well as the execution of funding once it
has been provided by the Congress.
The first issue involves the underbudgeting of many critical programs
and activities, particularly those which are known to enjoy support in
Congress, in an evident attempt to elicit the required funding through
the annual defense authorization and appropriations process. Examples
include the now routine underbudgeting of real property and depot
maintenance accounts, as well as conventional ammunition, tactical
vehicle and missile programs, equipment needs of the Guard and Reserve
components, and of particular concern to the Committee, funding for
defense medical programs. Over the past three years, as it became
apparent that Congress was inclined to add substantial sums to the
President's programmed defense budgets, this practice has become more
rampant with the Office of the Secretary of Defense (OSD) and the
Military Departments appearing to willfully delete or refuse to commit
funding for other high priority programs such as national and theater
missile defense programs, Navy ship self-defense initiatives, and
aircraft navigational and safety upgrades.
The Committee believes these actions are clearly unconscionable given
the direct threat to the lives of service personnel should such programs
not be adequately funded or ultimately fielded. They are even less
supportable when viewed in the context of the Department's overall
fiscal year 1998 budget request. This budget proposes that the Congress
ignore these high priority programs and, instead, approve sizable budget
increases for efforts less relevant to immediate military requirements,
such as consultants, basic research, and generic technology
demonstrations. (One such effort, the Joint Aerostat Program discussed
later in this report, is estimated to require over $600,000,000 over the
next few years yet has no validated mission nor user requirement.) The
Department has in place processes and organizations, such as the Joint
Requirements Oversight Council (JROC), which were expressly created to
ensure that warfighting requirements are rationalized and given due
regard in budget deliberations. Given this, the Committee is puzzled why
it is being asked to approve a budget which fails to adequately fund
programs needed by deployed forces, and which still falls short when it
comes to choosing among competing service programs and initiatives.
A related issue is the Department's budget proposal in each of the
past two years to transfer proceeds from asset sales from the National
Defense Stockpile to fund either operation and maintenance or
procurement programs. Under the Budget Act such practices are not
allowed unless the sales in question are consistent with historical
levels. Despite knowing this both DoD and the Office of Management and
Budget have persisted in forwarding requests to the Congress which rely
on generating sales revenue from the National Defense Stockpile in
excess of Budget Act limits. As a consequence, over the past two years
the President's defense budgets have actually contained $800,000,000
more in proposed spending that could actually be made available in
appropriations bills without running afoul of Budget Act scorekeeping
conventions.
The Committee wishes to serve notice to OSD, the Military
Departments, and OMB the obvious fact that such misallocation of
resources and budget gamesmanship will simply be self defeating in the
future. As a result of the recently approved budget agreement, beginning
in fiscal year 1999 the Congress has agreed to the same defense budget
topline as has the President, and therefore deliberations over the
content of future defense bills will by definition be a zero-sum game.
This problem will only become more intense should anticipated savings
from the QDR and other reforms fall short of expectations. Should OSD
and the Services, with the knowledge of OMB, persist in underfunding
critical programs or resorting to budget gimmicks in anticipation that
the Committee and Congress will ``fix the problem'', they should do so
knowing full well that these problems will be corrected only through
reductions to other budgeted programs.
Abuse of Traditional Acquisition and Appropriations Practices
The Committee is similarly concerned about what, from its
perspective, is a breakdown of existing and longstanding procedures
regarding the institution of multiyear contracting for major weapons
systems, as well as a fundamental breach of appropriations discipline
whereby the Department is using funds provided for research,
development, test and evaluation of weapons programs to instead initiate
production contracts, in many instances without the knowledge of OSD or
the Congress.
With respect to multiyear contracting, the Committee remains
convinced that when used appropriately, multiyear contracts offer
substantial benefits in terms of both cost savings and program
stability. However, another aspect of multiyear contracting is that once
initiated for a particular program, funding for that program is
basically committed for several years, and unlikely to be reduced
because of the termination liability costs associated with failure to
adequately fund the multiyear program. The Committee is aware of
instances where the military services have sought multiyear contracting
authority from the Congress even though the current defense program does
not contain enough funding to actually execute the contract, evidently
in an effort to leverage increased budget allocations from OSD.
Over the past two years the Committee has witnessed a significant
increase in efforts by the military services to importune the Congress
to grant their favored programs multiyear contracting authority. Given
the major restructuring of Departmental spending priorities associated
with implementation of the QDR, as well as the need of OSD to maintain
at least some degree of management control over future defense spending
decisions, the Committee believes it appropriate to require that the
Secretary of Defense, approve all major multiyear contract initiatives
and therefore has recommended amending an existing general provision
(Section 8008) to require that no multiyear contracts over a certain
threshold may be requested unless that program is specifically
identified in official budget documents transmitted to the Congress by
the President, or through written communication from the Secretary. This
should not be perceived as the Committee losing favor with multiyear
contracting as a means to achieve cost savings; rather, the Committee's
intent is to give the Secretary of Defense as well as the Congress
greater opportunities to carefully review any proposed multiyear program
acquisition.
With respect to the abuse of RDT&E appropriations, the Committee is
concerned about what appears to be an increasing lack of discipline
within the Department of Defense in budgeting programs in the proper
appropriations, especially among acquisition programs. The Committee is
aware of desires within the DOD acquisition community to merge
development and procurement funding into a single appropriation as a
convenience to program managers. Such a change to fundamental budget
practices would severely impede oversight by both senior managers in the
Department as well as Congress. The Department has declined to make any
such formal recommendations to the Congress; however, the Committee has
become convinced the Department has instead placated its acquisition
community by allowing program managers, under the guise of acquisition
reform, to blur distinctions between appropriations. The Committee has
identified a number of instances in this report in which the Department
has requested funding in the research and development accounts to
initiate production, and production funding to initiate development.
Most notable are the cases of EFOG M, LOSAT, WCMD, WRAP initiatives, and
F 22 discussed at length elsewhere in this report. The Committee is
particularly disturbed over a trend in missile programs to initiate
production to provide an ``interim warfighting capability'' using
research and development funding, contrary to Committee direction and
DOD policy on the use of such funding.
The Committee takes its oversight responsibilities seriously and will
not tolerate lax observance of the long-standing policies on the proper
use of appropriations. Accordingly, the Committee has included a general
provision (Section 8100) which prohibits the Department from using funds
provided in Title IV of the bill (funding for research, development,
test, and evaluation) to procure end-items of any DoD system unless said
items are physically utilized in test and evaluation activities which
lead to a production decision for the system. This provision exempts
programs funded in this bill under the National Foreign Intelligence
Program, and also includes limited waiver authority should the Secretary
of Defense determine it is in the national security interest.
Ship Self Defense
In fiscal year 1992, the Committee discovered that the Navy's ship
self-defense programs were in disarray and it began an initiative to fix
the problem. In every fiscal year since 1992, the Committee has
recommended significant funding increases for ship self-defense
programs. The Committee was vindicated when former Secretary of Defense
William Perry witnessed at sea tests of the cooperative engagement
capability, a main target of the Committee's interest. He called
cooperative engagement ``the most significant technological development
since stealth'' and directed that the program be accelerated. In the
most recent tests using cooperative engagement, 17 of 19 missile shots
were direct hits, at much farther distances than can be achieved by
Aegis ships today, and in one case the ship firing its missiles in
self-defense could not even see the target due to radar jamming. In
hearings during the past few years, the Committee has commended Navy
officials for their attention to committee direction on ship self
defense programs.
In the fiscal year 1998 budget, something went awry. The Assistant
Secretary of the Navy for Research, Development and Acquisition
testified to the Committee this year that the Navy's budget continues
``an all out effort to protect our Sailors and Marines serving aboard
ships against missile attack''. Yet, the Navy's budget is a considerable
step backward in terms of achieving this objective. Many ship defense
programs that have longstanding yet unfulfilled warfighting requirements
and which have successfully completed R&D have no funds requested in the
fiscal year 1998 budget ostensibly due to lack of funds. Among those are
installation of cooperative engagement capability on two surface battle
groups, ship self defense upgrades on two amphibious assault ships, and
CIWS surface mode gun upgrades on 8 combatant ships to protect them
against the terrorist patrol boat threat identified in the early 1990s.
The Committee wonders how the Navy can rationalize no production funds
for a system declared to be ``the most significant technological
development since stealth'', after the system successfully reached
initial operating capability and whose fielding was directed by the
Secretary of Defense to be accelerated. The Navy also proposes to
overhaul the U.S.S. Nimitz aircraft carrier without including
$120,000,000 of necessary equipment that directly contributes to the
ability of the ship to perform its mission and to defend thousands of
her sailors against cruise missile attack, ostensibly due to lack of
funds. The Navy also proposes a multiyear contract for 12 new DDG 51
destroyers which would be delivered to the fleet as late as 2006 without
either cooperative engagement or theater ballistic missile defense
capability, again ostensibly due to lack of funds.
It is apparent to the Committee that ship self-defense and theater
ballistic missile defense programs were given short shrift in the Navy's
fiscal year 1998 budget due to the propensity of the Navy to request
budget growth in (1) lower priority programs such as basic research,
NATO R&D, studies, and (2) R&D for new platforms for every Naval
community. The Committee's bill rectifies this misallocation of
resources by providing an increase of $401,800,000 in R&D and
procurement appropriations for ship self-defense and DDG 51 theater
ballistic missile defense related programs, with attendant reductions to
lower priority programs requested by the Navy.
CHEMICAL AND BIOLOGICAL DEFENSE PROGRAMS
The Committee has expressed its concern for several years about the
Department's slow response to organize more effectively and to provide
adequate resources to combat the growing threat posed by the potential
use of chemical and biological agents--both at home and abroad. The
serious nature of this threat was well stated in the discussion of
biological weapons contained in the 1997 Strategic Assessment report
issued by the National Defense University:
Biological Weapons--the New Weapon of Choice?
Although often treated as less threatening than
nuclear weapons, increased attention is now being given to the
biological threat. Many of the Cold War assumptions about the
strategic and tactical utility of biological weapons (BW) no
longer appear valid. In fact, given the diffusion of the
dual-use technologies involved, the pursuit of BW is now
recognized as a relatively cheap and easily available path to
acquire a weapon of mass destruction--the poor man's atomic
bomb. * * * It is possible for BW agents to inflict massive
casualties against soft targets such as cities to an extent
that rivals megaton nuclear weapons. Further, because only
small quantities of these highly lethal agents are needed to
achieve significant effects, an aggressor can choose between
multiple delivery modes and attack options. Moreover, as the
number of states engaged in BW research has grown, the
sophistication of their work has also grown, leading to
technical advances (e.g., microencapsulation to produce more
stable agents for use over longer periods) that may permit
biological agents and toxins to be used in more controlled
fashion to advance military goals.
The threat from chemical weapons, employed by organized militaries or
by terrorist groups is also significant and growing. According to the
same 1997 Strategic Assessment report:
Chemical weapons are currently possessed by more
states than either biological or nuclear weapons, and are the
only one of the three to be used in the post-World War II era.
* * * some experts tend to minimize the potential consequences
of CW use, arguing that CW does not merit consideration as a
weapon of mass destruction. In fact, analysis suggests that CW
use against U.S. and allied forces and critical infrastructure
facilities can have a major impact on the outcome of a major
regional conflict.
The danger that a terrorist group could acquire the capability to
launch a CW or BW attack continues to exist. According to the May 1997
Report to Congress on the Activities and Programs for Countering
Proliferation and NBC Terrorism, by the multiagency Counterproliferation
Program Review Committee:
U.S. Intelligence continues to assess and analyze
the threat of terrorist CW and BW attack, a threat that
remains ever present. The Aum Shinrikyo attacks in June 1994,
in Matsumoto, Japan which killed seven and injured 500, and on
the Tokyo subway in March 1995, which killed 12 and injured
5,500, were the first instances of large scale terrorist use
of CW agents, but a variety of incidents and reports over the
last two years indicate continuing terrorist interest in these
weapons. * * * The fact that only 12 Japanese died in the
Tokyo subway attack has tended to mask the significance of the
5,500 people who were treated or examined at medical
facilities. Such a massive influx of injured--many
critically--has the potential to overwhelm emergency medical
facilities, even in a large metropolitan area.
The Committee realizes that providing an effective
chemical/biological defense program to combat both the military threat
and the domestic terrorist threat is highly challenging. Effective
action requires a multipronged approach that coordinates disparate
activities within the Department and within other federal, state and
local agencies in such areas as foreign and domestic intelligence;
enforcement of counterproliferation policies and programs; medical
research into vaccines, antidotes, and treatments; development and
deployment of detection, warning and decontamination equipment;
development of individual protection suits and collective shelters;
training of military personnel and of federal, state and local ``first
responders''; and systems to find and destroy CW and BW delivery
systems.
For the last several years, the Committee has added funding above the
budget and mandated special studies to advance this effort. While
progress has been slower than the Committee would have liked, the
Committee is encouraged by the new emphasis being given to countering
the threat of chemical and biological weapons in the Quadrennial Defense
Review. The Secretary of Defense has committed in the QDR to spending an
extra $1 billion over the Future Years Defense Plan for nuclear,
biological, and chemical weapons counterproliferation programs and to
task the National Guard with a new mission for chemical/biological
defense in the United States. Just as important as these initiatives is
the stated goal in the QDR of ``institutionalizing counterproliferation
as an organizing principle in every facet of military activity''. This
is a key element of improving our CBW defenses. The Committee is pleased
with the direction outlined in the QDR and will continue to press the
Department to follow through with these commitments.
In addition to fully funding the budget request on high priority
chemical/biological defense programs, the Committee recommends
increasing the budget request by $107,650,000 for various high priority
research and development, procurement, and study requirements. This
includes:
$10,000,000 for procurement of chemical/biological detection and
treatment equipment for the Marine Corps Chemical/Biological Incident
Response Force;
$1,300,000 for training and assistance to ``first responders'', bring
the total recommended in the bill for this purpose to $50,000,000;
$8,000,000 to develop new biological defense vaccines and antisera
against botulinum toxins;
$10,000,000 to develop advanced technologies for wide area
decontamination and other decontamination priorities;
$12,850,000 to purchase additional JSLIST individual protection suits
and perform related research;
$2,000,000 for research into novel nerve agents leading to antidotes
and pretreatments.
$20,000,000 for various types of special equipment for
decontamination, collective protection, and treatment;
$10,000,000 for detailed planning and concept studies to support a
comprehensive effort to expand the National Guard mission into the area
of chemical/biological domestic defense;
$10,000,000 for high priority equipment needs identified by the Air
Force Pacific Command;
$17,700,000 for Air Force medical research into vaccines and
antidotes; and
$5,800,000 for the SAFEGUARD chemical warfare detection and
monitoring system.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS BY MAJOR CATEGORY
ACTIVE MILITARY PERSONNEL
The Committee recommends a total of $60,136,801,000 for active
military personnel, a reduction of $158,729,000 below the budget
request. The Committee agrees with the authorized end strength as
requested in the President's budget, and has also fully funded the
proposed pay raise of 2.8 percent. In keeping with the emphasis on the
quality of life initiatives started in fiscal year 1996, the Committee
recommends an increase of approximately $56,000,000 for certain Pays and
Allowances for active personnel, such as the Basic Allowance for
Quarters and Family Separation Allowance.
GUARD AND RESERVE
The Committee recommends a total of $9,206,393,000, an increase of
$90,161,000 above the budget request for Guard and Reserve personnel.
The Committee agrees with the authorized end strength as requested in
the President's budget for Selected Reserve, and has also fully funded
the proposed pay raise of 2.8 percent. The Committee recommends an
increase of approximately $4,000,000 for Basic Allowance for Quarters
for Reserve personnel. In addition, the Committee restores $85,000,000
in the Reserve accounts for pay of reservists who are also Federal
civilian employees.
OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE
The Operation and Maintenance appropriation provides for the
readiness of U.S. forces as well as the maintenance of facilities and
equipment, the infrastructure that supports the combat forces and the
quality of life of Service members and their families.
The Committee recommends $82,925,753,000, an increase of $644,813,000
above the fiscal year 1998 budget request. As described elsewhere in
this report, this increase is driven primarily by the need to address
shortfalls in: readiness training, Navy and Air Force flying hours,
facility and infrastructure maintenance and repairs, and equipment
maintenance. The Committee has also recommended budget reductions that
can be taken by the Department as a result of the Quadrennial Defense
Review and in such areas as headquarters and administrative operating
costs and by taking advantage of fact of life changes since preparation
of the budget request.
PROCUREMENT
The Committee recommends $45,515,962,000 in new obligational
authority for Procurement, an increase of $3,930,784,000 over the fiscal
year 1998 budget request. Major programs funded in the bill include:
$309,231,000 for 30 UH 60 Blackhawk helicopters
$474,832,000 for upgrades and modifications to Apache helicopters
$228,287,000 for 1,056 Hellfire missiles
$143,112,000 for 1,080 Javelin missiles
$240,591,000 for Bradley vehicle industrial base sustainment
$594,856,000 for upgrades to Abrams tanks
$209,446,000 for medium tactical vehicles
$302,164,000 for SINCGARS radios
$2,101,100,000 for 20 F/A 18 E/F fighter aircraft
$661,307,000 for 7 V 22 (Osprey) aircraft
$304,474,000 for 4 E 2C early warning aircraft
$243,960,000 for 12 T 45 trainer aircraft
$1,632,544,000 for the modification of naval aircraft
$181,092,000 for 127 Standard missiles
$2,314,903,000 for 1 new SSN attack submarine
$1,628,403,000 for 1 carrier refueling overhaul
$2,695,367,000 for 3 DDG 51 destroyers
$505,286,000 for B 2 aircraft
$159,000,000 for 3 F 15 fighter aircraft
$1,914,211,000 for 9 C 17 airlift aircraft
$1,464,861,000 for modification of Air Force aircraft
$107,168,000 for 173 AMRAAM missiles
$384,600,000 for Ballistic Missile Defense
research, development, test and evaluation
The Committee recommends $36,704,924,000 in new obligational
authority for Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, an increase of
$770,433,000 from the fiscal year 1998 budget request. Major programs
funded in the bill include the following:
$324,380,000 for artillery system development
$282,009,000 for the Comanche helicopter
$202,302,000 for the Brilliant Anti-Armor Submunition
$930,807,000 for the Joint Strike Fighter
$396,500,000 for the New Attack Submarine
$2,077,234,000 for the F 22 tactical aircraft
$676,690,000 for the MILSTAR communications satellite
$3,289,059,000 for Ballistic Missile Defense
FORCES TO BE SUPPORTED
DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
The fiscal year 1998 budget is designed to support active Army forces
of 10 divisions, 3 armored cavalry regiments, and reserve forces of 8
divisions, 3 separate brigades, and 15 enhanced National Guard brigades.
These forces provide the minimum force necessary to meet enduring
defense needs and execute the National Military Strategy.
A summary of the major active forces follows:
Fiscal year--
1996 1997 1998
Divisions: 1 1 1
------- ------- -------
Total 10 10 10
------- ------- -------
Non-divisional Combat units: 3 3 3
------- ------- -------
Total 3 3 3
------- ------- -------
Active duty military personnel, end strength (thousands) 495 495 495
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
The fiscal year 1998 budget supports battle forces totaling 346 ships
at the end of fiscal year 1998, a decrease from fiscal year 1997. Forces
in fiscal year 1998 include 18 strategic ships, 11 aircraft carriers;
262 other battle force ships, 324 support ships, reserve force ships,
1,746 Navy/Marine Corps tactical/ASW aircraft, 673 Undergraduate
Training aircraft, 443 Fleet Air Support aircraft, 480 Fleet Air
Training aircraft, 443 Reserve aircraft, 177 RDT&E aircraft and 470
aircraft in the pipeline.
A summary of the major forces follows:
Fiscal year
1996 1997 1998
Strategic Forces 17 18 18
---------- ---------- ---------
========== ========== =========
SLBM Launchers (MIR) 408 432 432
========== ========== =========
General Purpose 301 297 297
========== ========== =========
Support Forces 29 24 24
---------- ---------- ---------
========== ========== =========
Mobilization Category A 18 18 18
---------- ---------- ---------
========== ========== =========
Total Ships, Battle Force 365 357 346
========== ========== =========
Total Local Defense/Misc. Forces 159 165 167
---------- ---------- ---------
Auxiliaries/Sealift Forces 135 143 144
Surface Combatant Ships 5 3 2
Coastal Defense 13 13 13
Mobilization Category B 3 6 8
========== ========== =========
Naval Aircraft: 4,130 4,072 4,104
---------- ---------- ---------
========== ========== =========
Naval Personnel: 602,000 580,900 564,082
---------- ---------- ---------
Navy 428,000 406,900 390,082
Marine Corps 174,000 174,000 174,000
========== ========== =========
Reserve: 96,608 95,941 94,294
---------- ---------- ---------
SELRES 80,920 79,285 78,158
Sea/Air Mariners 198 150
TARS 17,490 16,506 16,506
DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE
The fiscal year 1998 Air Force budget was designed to support a total
active inventory force structure of 51 fighter and attack squadrons, 10
Air National Guard air defense interceptor squadrons and 9 bomber
squadrons, including B 2s, B 52s, and B 1s. The Minuteman and
Peacekeeper ICBM forces will consist of 700 active launchers.
A summary of the major forces follows:
FISCAL YEAR 1998 MAJOR FORCES
[Includes only Combat Coded Squadrons]
1996 1997 1998
USAF fighter and attack (Active) 51 52 51
USAF fighter and attack (ANG and AFRC) 36 36 36
Air defense interceptor (ANG) 10 10 10
Strategic bomber (Active) 8 9 9
Strategic bomber (ANG and AFRC) 3 3 3
ICBM launchers/silos 700 700 700
ICBM missile boosters 580 580 580
USAF airlift squadrons (Active): 15 13 13
-------- -------- -------
Total airlift 26 24 22
-------- -------- -------
Total Active Inventory\1\ 6,369 6,337 6,242
\1\Includes Primary, Backup, and Attrition Reserve Aircraft for all Purpose Identifiers for Active, Air National Guard, and Air Force Reserve.
End strength 1997 1998
Active Duty 381,087 371,577
Reserve Component 182,489 180,786
Air National Guard 109,178 107,355
Air Force Reserve 73,311 73,431
SPECIAL INTEREST ITEMS
Items for which funds have specifically been provided in any
appropriation in this report using the phrases ``only for'' or ``only
to'' are congressional interest items for the purpose of the Base for
Reprogramming (DD Form 1414). Each of these items must be carried on the
DD Form 1414 at the stated amount, or a revised amount if changed during
conference action on this bill, unless the item is denied in conference
or if otherwise specifically addressed in the conference report.
GOVERNMENT PERFORMANCE AND RESULTS ACT
The Committee considers the full and effective implementation of the
Government Performance and Results Act, P.L. 103 62, to be a priority
for all agencies of government.
Starting with fiscal year 1999, the Results Act requires each agency
to ``prepare an annual performance plan covering each program activity
set forth in the budget of such agency''. Specifically, for each program
activity the agency is required to ``establish performance goals to
define the level of performance to be achieved by a program activity''
and ``performance indicators to be used in assessing the relevant
outputs, service levels, and outcomes of each program activity''.
The Committee takes this requirement of the Results Act very
seriously and plans to carefully examine agency performance goals and
measures during the appropriations process. As a result, starting with
the fiscal year 1999 appropriations cycle, the Committee will consider
agencies progress in articulating clear, definitive, and
results-oriented (outcome) goals and measures as it reviews requests for
appropriations.
The Committee suggests agencies examine their program activities in
light of their strategic goals to determine whether any changes or
realignments would facilitate a more accurate and informed presentation
of budgetary information. Agencies are encouraged to consult with the
Committee as they consider such revisions prior to finalizing any
requests pursuant to 31 U.S.C. 1104. The Committee will consider any
requests with a view toward ensuring that fiscal year 1999 and
subsequent budget submissions display amounts requested against program
activity structures for which annual performance goals and measures have
been established.
TITLE I
MILITARY PERSONNEL
PROGRAMS AND ACTIVITIES FUNDED BY MILITARY PERSONNEL APPROPRIATIONS
The President's budget request reflects a continuation in the
drawdown of military personnel and force structure. The budget proposes
a decrease of 21,000 active duty personnel, and 10,000 Reserve and Guard
personnel from fiscal year 1997 levels. The Department's reductions in
active end strength is about 98.8 percent complete at the end of fiscal
year 1998. The Committee recommends to fully fund the proposed 2.8
percent pay increase, and includes an increase of approximately
$60,000,000 over the budget request for Basic Allowance for Quarters and
Family Separation Allowance.
SUMMARY OF MILITARY PERSONNEL RECOMMENDATIONS FOR FISCAL YEAR 1998
Fiscal year 1997 $70,016,500,000
Fiscal year 1998 budget request 69,411,762,000
Fiscal year 1998 recommendation 69,343,194,000
Change from budget request -68,568,000
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $69,343,194,000 for the
Military Personnel accounts. The recommendation is a decrease of
$673,306,000 below the $70,016,500,000 appropriated in fiscal year 1997.
These military personnel budget total comparisons include appropriations
for the active, reserve, and National Guard accounts. The following
tables include a summary of the recommendations by appropriation
account. Explanations of changes from the budget request appear later in
this section.
SUMMARY OF APPROPRIATION ACCOUNT OF THE FISCAL YEAR 1998 MILITARY PERSONNEL RECOMMENDATION
[In thousands of dollars}
Account Budget Recommendation Change from budget
Military Personnel: $20,492,257 $20,445,381 -$46,876
-------------- ---------------- --------------------
Subtotal, Active 60,295,530 60,136,801 -158,729
Reserve Personnel: 2,024,446 2,045,615 +21,169
National Guard Personnel: 3,200,667 3,245,387 +44,720
-------------- ---------------- --------------------
Subtotal, Guard and Reserve 9,116,232 9,206,223 +90,161
============== ================ ====================
Total, Title I 69,411,762 69,343,194 -68,568
The fiscal year 1998 budget request included a decrease of 20,721 end
strength for the active forces and a decrease of 10,781 end strength for
the selected reserve over fiscal year 1997 authorized levels.
The Committee recommends the following levels highlighted in the
tables below.
Overall Active End Strength
Fiscal year 1997 estimate 1,452,100
Fiscal year 1998 budget request 1,431,379
Fiscal year 1998 House authorization 1,445,000
Fiscal year 1998 recommendation 1,431,379
Compared with Fiscal year 1997 -20,721
Compared with Fiscal year 1998 budget request
Overall Selected Reserve End Strength
Fiscal year 1997 estimate 902,399
Fiscal year 1998 budget request 891,618
Fiscal year 1998 House authorization 891,618
Fiscal year 1998 recommendation 891,685
Compared with Fiscal year 1997 -10,781
Compared with Fiscal year 1998 budget request +67
Fiscal year 1997 estimate Fiscal year 1998
Budget request House authorization Recommendation Change from request
Active Forces (end strength): 495,000 495,000 495,000 495,000
-------------------------- ---------------- --------------------- ---------------- ---------------------
Total, Active Force 1,452,100 1,431,379 1,445,000 1,431,379
========================== ================ ===================== ================ =====================
Guard and Reserve (end strength): 215,254 208,000 208,000 208,000
-------------------------- ---------------- --------------------- ---------------- ---------------------
Total, Guard and Reserve 902,399 891,618 891,618 891,685 +67
ADJUSTMENTS TO MILITARY PERSONNEL ACCOUNT
OVERVIEW
SPECIAL PAYS AND ALLOWANCES
The Committee recommends a total increase of $35,000,000 for Basic
Allowance for Quarters, a housing allowance, to help offset the
``out-of-pocket'' costs to service members when they change duty
stations, and for living in high-cost geographical areas. In addition,
the Committee recommends an increase of $25,000,000 for Family
Separation Allowances, an allowance paid to members on temporary duty
(TDY) status. The House-passed Defense Authorization bill approved an
increase in the monthly rate of this allowance from $75 to $100 per
month.
END STRENGTH ADJUSTMENTS
The Committee agrees with the fiscal year 1998 budget request on
active and Reserve end strength levels, a reduction of approximately
31,000 over fiscal year 1997 authorized personnel levels. In addition,
based on the latest end strength levels provided by the Department, the
Services, primarily the Army and Navy, will begin fiscal year 1998 with
approximately 12,000 fewer military personnel on-board than budgeted,
which means the 1998 pay and allowances requirements are overstated.
Therefore, the Committee recommends an understrength reduction of
$214,700,000 to the budget request.
TEMPORARY EARLY RETIREMENT AUTHORITY
The Committee recommends a total reduction of $184,738,000 to the
Army and Air Force budget requests as a result of the suspension of the
15-year Temporary Early Retirement Authority during fiscal year 1998, as
proposed in the House-passed Defense Authorization bill.
FOREIGN CURRENCY
The President recently submitted a fiscal year 1998 budget amendment,
which reduced the active duty military personnel accounts by a total of
$62,000,000 for foreign currency savings. This amendment to the budget
was proposed in order to cover a shortfall in the Defense Health
Program. The Committee agrees there are more savings due to favorable
fluctuations in overseas exchange rates and recommends a total reduction
of $68,000,000 for foreign currency, an additional reduction of
$6,000,000 to the Services' personnel accounts.
CONTINGENCY OPERATIONS FUNDING
The budget request recommends $213,600,000 for pay and allowances of
military personnel in the ``Overseas Contingency Operations Transfer
Fund'', for cost of operations in Bosnia during fiscal year 1998. The
Committee does not agree to the realignment of these funds, and has
increased the Services military personnel accounts by this amount.
MILITARY PERSONNEL COMPENSATION
The House-passed Defense Authorization bill has included numerous
recommendations that would affect military personnel compensation and
benefits for fiscal year 1998. The Committee supports the intent of the
House National Security Committee's recommendations which raises rates
for current allowances; however Committee's practice has been not to
appropriate funds for pending changes to entitlements. Implementation of
these changes is usually left to the discretion of the Department, and
the precise costs during the initial year of implementation are not
known as a result. The Committee will entertain a prior-approval
reprogramming action if the Department decides to implement any
recommendations which are enacted into law.
PERSONAL FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT TRAINING
The Committee believes that an increasing number of young men and
women joining the Services have inadequate knowledge and understanding
of the skills required for personal financial management and fiscal
responsibility. Many recruits lack the basic skills required for
checkbook or credit card management resulting in growing levels of
bankruptcy and indebtedness. This lack of knowledge can have a
significant impact on the readiness of the force when individuals leave
the military or suffer family troubles due to financial problems. The
Committee believes that the Department should develop and implement a
standardized course curriculum for all new officers and enlisted
personnel in all Services covering the basic skills of personal
financial management. The Committee directs the Department to report by
December 15, 1997 on actions taken to correct this problem.
``aim high'' program
The ``Aim High'' program in eastern Washington state promotes
citizenship and scholarship while reducing drug use among youths through
interaction with military facilities. The Committee believes that the
military services can provide an excellent model of self-discipline and
responsibility for students, and opportunities to visit military
installations can be an effective recruiting tool, as well as a powerful
incentive for students to refrain from illegal drug use. The Committee
urges the Department to continue to support similar initiatives within
the constraints of available resources.
full-time support strengths
There are four categories of full-time support in the Guard and
Reserve components: civilian technicians, active Guard and Reserve
(AGR), non-technician civilians, and active component personnel.
Full-time support personnel organize, recruit, train, maintain and
administer the Reserve components. Civilian (Military) technicians
directly support units, and are very important to help units maintain
readiness and meet the wartime mission of the Army and Air Force.
Full-time support end strength in all categories totalled 152,950 in
fiscal year 1997. The fiscal year 1998 budget request is 150,484. The
following table summarizes Guard and Reserve full-time support end
strengths:
GUARD AND RESERVE FULL-TIME END STRENGTHS
FY 1997 estimate Budget request House authorization Recommendation Change from request
Army Reserve: 11,804 11,500 11,500 11,500
Navy Reserve TAR 16,626 16,136 16,136 16,168 +32
Marine Corps Reserve 2,559 2,559 2,559 2,559
Air Force Reserve: 655 963 748 963
Army National Guard: 22,798 22,310 22,310 22,310
Air National Guard: 10,403 10,616 10,616 10,616
-------------------- ------------------ ----------------------- ------------------ -----------------------
Total 64,845 64,084 63,869 64,116 +32
MILITARY LEAVE FOR RESERVISTS
The budget request recommended a reduction to the Reserve personnel
accounts pursuant to a legislative proposal placing a limitation on
military basic pay of Federal civilian employees who are Reservists. The
House-passed Defense Authorization bill did not contain this proposal,
and therefore, the Committee recommends restoring $85,000,000 to the
Reserve personnel accounts to fully fund their basic pay.
MILITARY PERSONNEL, ARMY
Fiscal year 1997 appropriation $20,633,998,000
Fiscal year 1998 budget request 20,492,257,000
Committee recommendation 20,445,381,000
Change from budget request -46,876,000
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $20,445,381,000 for
Military Personnel, Army. The recommendation is a decrease of
$188,617,000 below the $20,633,998,000 appropriated for fiscal year
1997. The adjustments to the fiscal year 1998 budget request are as
follows:
[In thousands of dollars]
Basic Allowance for Quarters +10,326
Foreign Currency Savings -4,000
Temporary Early Retirement Authority -36,902
Service Academies Foreign Students -1,000
Personnel Understrength Savings -183,100
Family Separation Allowance +9,600
Contingency Operations Transfer--Bosnia +158,200
------------
Total -46,876
MILITARY PERSONNEL, NAVY
Fiscal year 1997 appropriation $16,986,976,000
Fiscal year 1998 budget request 16,501,118,000
Committee recommendation 16,504,911,000
Change from budget request +3,793,000
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $16,504,911,000 for
Military Personnel, Navy. The recommendation is a decrease of
$482,065,000 below the $16,986,976,000 appropriated for fiscal year
1997. The adjustments to the fiscal year 1998 budget request are as
follows:
[In thousands of dollars]
Basic Allowance for Quarters +9,393
Foreign Currency Savings -1,000
Service Academies Foreign Students -1,000
Personnel Understrength Savings -10,000
Unemployment Compensation Savings -10,000
Family Separation Allowance +9,300
Contingency Operations Transfer--Bosnia +7,100
---------
Total +3,793
MILITARY PERSONNEL, MARINE CORPS
Fiscal year 1997 appropriation $6,111,728,000
Fiscal year 1998 budget request 6,147,599,000
Committee recommendation 6,141,635,000
Change from budget request -5,964,000
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $6,141,635,000 for
Military Personnel, Marine Corps. The recommendation is an increase of
$29,907,000 above the $6,111,728,000 appropriated for fiscal year 1997.
The adjustments to the fiscal year 1998 budget request are as follows:
[In thousands of dollars]
Basic Allowance for Quarters +2,736
Personnel Understrength Savings -3,600
Unemployment Compensation Savings -10,000
Family Separation Allowance +3,600
Contingency Operations Transfer--Bosnia +1,300
---------
Total -5,964
MILITARY PERSONNEL, AIR FORCE
Fiscal year 1997 appropriation $17,069,490,000
Fiscal year 1998 budget request 17,154,556,000
Committee recommendation 17,044,874,000
Change from budget request -109,682,000
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $17,044,874,000 for
Military Personnel, Air Force. The recommendation is a decrease of
$24,616,000 below the $17,069,490,000 appropriated for fiscal year 1997.
The adjustments to the fiscal year 1998 budget request are as follows:
[In thousands of dollars]
Basic Allowance for Quarters +8,654
Foreign Currency Savings -1,000
Temporary Early Retirement Authority -147,836
Service Academies Foreign Students -1,000
Personnel Understrength Savings -18,000
Family Separation Allowance +2,500
Contingency Operations Transfer--Bosnia +47,000
----------
Total -109,682
RESERVE PERSONNEL, ARMY
Fiscal year 1997 appropriation $2,073,479,000
Fiscal year 1998 budget request 2,024,446,000
Committee recommendation 2,045,615,000
Change from budget request +21,169,000
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $2,045,615,000 for
Reserve Personnel, Army. The recommendation is a decrease of $27,864,000
below the $2,073,479,000 appropriated for fiscal year 1997. The
adjustments to the fiscal year 1998 budget request are as follows:
[In thousands of dollars]
Unit Readiness/Training +8,000
Basic Allowance for Quarters +569
Reserve Duty Drill Pay +20,400
Health Scholarship Stipend -7,800
---------
Total +21,169
RESERVE PERSONNEL, NAVY
Fiscal year 1997 appropriation $1,405,606,000
Fiscal year 1998 budget request 1,375,401,000
Committee recommendation 1,377,249,000
Change from budget request +1,848,000
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $1,377,249,000 for
Reserve Personnel, Navy. The recommendation is a decrease of $28,357,000
below the $1,405,606,000 appropriated for fiscal year 1997. The
adjustments to the fiscal year 1998 budget request are as follows:
[In thousands of dollars]
Basic Allowance for Quarters +648
Reserve Duty Drill Pay +8,500
Magic Lantern Aircraft +1,700
Health Scholarship Stipend -9,000
--------
Total +1,848
MAGIC LANTERN
The Committee recommends an increase of $1,700,000 over the request
in ``Reserve Personnel, Navy'', and $1,300,000 in ``Operation and
Maintenance, Navy'' to provide additional personnel, and operational and
training costs in support of the Magic Lantern airborne mine detection
system.
NAVY RESERVE FORCES
The Committee is very concerned about possible Navy Program Review 99
(PR 99) recommendations that would make major reductions in Navy Reserve
hardware and combat/warfare missions. The Committee would find such
recommendations unacceptable and continues to believe the Navy Reserve
and other Reserve components should remain a viable component of the
Total Force. The Navy Reserve and other Reserve components are able to
retain force structure and equipment at lower cost than their active
counterparts. The Navy Reserve consumes only three percent of the
``total Navy's'' budget, yet comprises nearly 20 percent of the force
structure. Elimination of or serious reductions in the remaining Navy
Reserve Air Wing, or the reliance on ``augment'' crews with no hardware
for Navy Reserve Air Wing, or the reliance on ``augment'' crews with no
hardware for Navy Reserve P 3 squadrons, would result in detrimental
problems for active and reserve Navy forces, seriously increase active
PERSTEMPO, and result in the loss of an experienced cadre of Reserve
personnel. Reductions in the Navy Reserve surface fleet, or denying new
surface fleet missions to the Navy Reserve, would adversely impact
active fleet manning and surface warfare capabilities.
The Committee is aware that the Navy Reserve continues to right-size
its forces in lean budget years, and urges the Secretary of the Navy not
to further reduce Navy Reserve forces. The Navy Reserve has already
downsized more and faster than any active or Reserve component, having
reduced force structure well over 30 percent since 1990. The Committee
strongly supports the current Navy Reserve missions, and fully expects
the Secretary of the Navy to consult with Congress prior to any final
recommendations that may further reduce Navy Reserve forces.
RESERVE PERSONNEL, MARINE CORPS
Fiscal year 1997 appropriation $388,643,000
Fiscal year 1998 budget request 381,070,000
Committee recommendation 391,953,000
Change from budget request +10,883,000
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $391,953,000 for Reserve
Personnel, Marine Corps. The recommendation is an increase of $3,310,000
above the $388,643,000 appropriated for fiscal year 1997. The
adjustments to the fiscal year 1998 budget request are as follows:
[In thousands of dollars]
Annual Training/School Tours +7,000
Basic Allowance for Quarters +183
Reserve Duty Drill Pay +3,700
---------
Total +10,883
RESERVE PERSONNEL, AIR FORCE
Fiscal year 1997 appropriation $783,697,000
Fiscal year 1998 budget request 814,936,000
Committee recommendation 814,772,000
Change from budget request -164,000
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $814,772,000 for Reserve
Personnel, Air Force. The recommendation is an increase of $31,075,000
above the $783,697,000 appropriated for fiscal year 1997. The
adjustments to the fiscal year 1998 budget request are as follows:
[In thousands of dollars]
Basic Allowance for Quarters +266
Reserve Duty Drill Pay +8,200
Health Scholarship Stipend -8,800
WC 130 Weather Reconn +170
--------
Total -164
NATIONAL GUARD PERSONNEL, ARMY
Fiscal year 1997 appropriation $3,266,393,000
Fiscal year 1998 budget request 3,200,667,000
Committee recommendation 3,245,387,000
Change from budget request +44,720,000
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $3,245,387,000 for
National Guard Personnel, Army. The recommendation is a decrease of
$21,006,000 below the $3,266,393,000 appropriated for fiscal year 1997.
The adjustments to the fiscal year 1998 budget request are as follows:
[In thousands of dollars]
School/Special Training +10,000
Basic Allowance for Quarters +1,520
Reserve Duty Drill Pay +33,200
---------
Total +44,720
NATIONAL GUARD PERSONNEL, AIR FORCE
Fiscal year 1997 appropriation $1,296,490,000
Fiscal year 1998 budget request 1,319,712,000
Committee recommendation 1,331,417,000
Change from budget request +11,705,000
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $1,331,417,000 for
National Guard Personnel, Air Force. The recommendation is an increase
of $34,927,000 above the $1,296,490,000 appropriated for fiscal year
1997. The adjustments to the fiscal year 1998 budget request are as
follows:
[In thousands of dollars]
Basic Allowance for Quarters +705
Reserve Duty Drill Pay +11,000
---------
Total +11,705
TITLE II
OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE
The fiscal year 1998 budget request for Operation and maintenance is
$82,280,940,000 in new budget authority, which is an increase of
$3,117,718,000 above the amount appropriated in fiscal year 1997. The
request also includes a $150,000,000 cash transfer from the National
Defense Stockpile Transaction Fund.
The accompanying bill recommends $82,925,753,000 for fiscal year
1998, which is an increase of $644,813,000 from the budget request. In
addition, the Committee recommends that $150,000,000 be transferred from
the National Defense Stockpile Transaction Fund.
These appropriations finance the costs of operating and maintaining
the Armed Forces, including the reserve components and related support
activities of the Department of Defense (DoD), except military personnel
costs. Included are pay for civilians, services for maintenance of
equipment and facilities, fuel, supplies and spare parts for weapons and
equipment. Financial requirements are influenced by many factors,
including force levels such as the number of aircraft squadrons, Army
and Marine Corps divisions, installations, military personnel strength
and deployments, rates of operational activity, and the quantity and
complexity of equipment such as aircraft, ships, missiles and tanks in
operation.
OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE OVERVIEW
While the Department has provided robust funding in the Operation and
maintenance accounts to maintain the combat readiness of U.S. forces,
the Committee notes that there are critical funding shortfalls in the
fiscal year 1998 budget request. Further, the Committee is concerned
that these shortfalls may pose a serious near term risk to the
capabilities of U.S. forces. These shortfalls are evident in a number of
functions financed by the Operation and maintenance accounts including
readiness related training, operating tempo programs, weapons system
maintenance, and real property maintenance. To correct these
deficiencies, the Committee recommends increased funding over the budget
request in a number of areas including: Navy and Air Force flying hours,
depot maintenance, real property maintenance, training rotations, force
protection, and inclement weather gear and other initial issue
equipment.
The Committee also notes that there are areas in the Operation and
maintenance accounts where substantial savings are achievable. Given the
widely recognized need to modernize the equipment available to U.S.
forces by increasing funding in the procurement, and research and
development accounts, the Committee believes it is imperative that the
Department use its Operation and maintenance funding as efficiently as
possible. Therefore, the Committee recommends certain reductions based
on recent DoD policy changes, particularly those emphasized in the
Quadrennial Defense Review, and fact of life changes that have occurred
since preparation of the budget request.
The table summarizes the Committee's recommendations:
Offet Folios 051 to 052 Insert here
REAL PROPERTY MAINTENANCE
The Committee has continuing concerns about the state of the
facilities in DoD, and the effect that such facilities have on the
quality of life of U.S. service personnel. The overview of the DoD
Operation and maintenance accounts indicates that in fiscal year 1998,
the backlog of real property maintenance and minor construction will
total over $16,000,000,000. The overview also shows the backlog growing
by over $1,600,000,000 from fiscal year 1997 to 1998. In order to arrest
the growth in the backlog of RPM and address the shortfalls identified
by the Services and the Reserve components, the Committee recommends an
increase over the budget request of $924,840,000. Of this amount, the
Committee directs that the Department obligate not less than
$360,000,000 for the maintenance and repair of barracks, dormitories,
and related facilities.
FLYING HOUR SHORTFALL
In the letter transmitting the Quadrennial Defense Review, the
Secretary of Defense highlighted a significant shortfall in the budget
request associated with Navy and Air Force flying hours. The Committee
understands that this shortfall stems primarily from significantly
higher than anticipated failure rates for a number of critical parts. To
ensure that an adequate supply of parts is available to support the
operational and readiness training requirements of the Navy and Air
Force, the Committee recommends an increase over the budget request
totaling $622,000,000. The Committee also directs that the Secretary of
the Navy and the Secretary of the Air Force each provide a report to the
congressional defense committees not later that December 1, 1997. In
addition to providing the data provided pursuant to the issues raised in
the report accompanying the fiscal year 1998 Defense Authorization bill,
this report should identify the specific causes of this shortfall, the
method used to estimate the cost of flying hours, the measures that will
be taken to correct this situation in the fiscal year 1999 budget
request and over the Future Years Defense Program (FYDP), and any
proposed measures that may be needed to improve the models used to
estimate spare and repair parts usage and flying hour costs.
READINESS TRAINING
The budget request for readiness related training in both the Army
and the Marine Corps has significant shortfalls addressed by the
Committee's recommendations. The Army budget request calls for units
that are scheduled to conduct rotations at the National Training Center
(NTC) to absorb the cost of such rotations. In the Committee's view this
is a significant policy change that has the effect of reducing funding
to maintain the readiness of the Army's combat units. To address this
situation as well as shortfalls identified by the Marine Corps, the
Committee recommends an increase totaling $99,013,000 above the budget
request. In addition, the Committee directs that the Army fully fund
rotations to the NTC in the fiscal year 1999 and subsequent years budget
requests.
DEPOT MAINTENANCE
The Committee continues to have concerns about DoD practices for the
funding of depot maintenance. For example, in the fiscal year 1998
budget request, the financial backlog of depot maintenance totals nearly
$1,500,000,000, and grows by $180,000,000 from fiscal year 1997 to 1998.
Further, the Services continue to routinely fund significantly less than
the minimum amounts needed to meet depot maintenance requirements; for
example, the Army budget request for fiscal year 1998 funds only 58
percent of required depot maintenance. To address these shortfalls, the
Committee recommends an increase of $473,300,000 above the budget
request.
QUADRENNIAL DEFENSE REVIEW REDUCTIONS
The Committee notes that the Quadrennial Defense Review (QDR)
proposes reducing the civilian workforce by 80,000 personnel from fiscal
year 1998 through 2003. The Committee also recognizes that, due to the
timing of the completion and release of this study, the Department did
not have an opportunity to incorporate the results into the fiscal year
1998 budget request. The Committee commends the Department for embarking
on a serious effort to reduce the size of the DoD support infrastructure
and accordingly recommends a net reduction of $307,273,000 from the
budget request for the Services and Defense-Wide activities in
anticipation of several QDR-related savings initiatives described in
detail in subsequent portions of this report. The Committee also
recommends a restructuring reserve, discussed elsewhere in this report,
to ease the burden of reducing the size of the civilian workforce.
HEADQUARTERS AND ADMINISTRATIVE COSTS
In addition to the QDR initiatives discussed elsewhere in this
report, the Committee notes that the Department of Defense continues to
maintain an excessive administrative and headquarters infrastructure.
Based on fiscal year 1998 budget justification materials, the Department
reports that it maintains a headquarters and administrative staff
totaling over 42,000 personnel and costing nearly $3 billion per year.
The Committee also observes that the number of personnel assigned to
administrative and headquarters activities is relatively constant
compared to the overall 3.5 percent reduction proposed for DoD civilian
personnel from fiscal year 1997 to 1998. To equalize the rate of
reduction in the headquarters and administrative activities as compared
to other activities in the Department, the Committee recommends a
reduction of $149,443,000 from the budget request.
INDUSTRIAL PREPAREDNESS
The Committee observes significant growth in the industrial
preparedness subactivity in the Operation and maintenance accounts of
the Army, Navy and Air Force. Based on the recommendations of the
Quadrennial Defense Review to significantly reduce the infrastructure
maintained by the Department of Defense, the growth in these
subactivities appears to be out of step with the DoD strategy.
Therefore, the Committee recommends a reduction of $52,602,000 from the
budget request.
CONTINGENCY OPERATIONS FUNDING
The Committee notes the Department's decision to exclude operations
in Southwest Asia from the ``Overseas Contingency Operations Transfer
Fund''. The Department realigned funding for these operations on the
grounds that they have become part of the recurring base of DoD
activity. While the Committee recognizes that U.S. operations in
Southwest Asia do not have a definitive end date, the Committee believes
that separately identifying the cost of such operations provides
valuable insight into the amount budgeted to meet U.S. commitments.
Therefore, the Committee has realigned the Operation and maintenance
budget authority requested to support Southwest Asia, and placed these
funds in the ``Overseas Contingency Operations Transfer Fund''. The
Committee directs that DoD budget for all future operations costs for
Southwest Asia, and all other contingency operations in the ``Overseas
Contingency Operations Transfer Fund''. Further, the Committee directs
that in all future budget requests, DoD shall support the request for
all contingency operations by detailing the amount required in each
appropriation account for each operation within each theater of
operations. In addition, the Committee directs that in all future
supplemental requests the Department provide detailed data on the
incremental funding required for each appropriation account for each
operation within each theater of operations.
REPROGRAMMING IN OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE ACCOUNTS
The Committee supports the concerns on the reprogramming of Operation
and maintenance funds as expressed in the report accompanying the
House-passed Defense Authorization bill for fiscal year 1998 (House
Report 105 132). In particular, the Committee is concerned by the
mounting volume of audit materials prepared by the General Accounting
Office and other audit organizations which highlights the annual
migration of Operation and maintenance funds from those budget
activities and subactivities that have the most direct relationship to
the readiness of U.S. forces to other accounts that are required to fund
the support infrastructure. The Committee is also disturbed by the
Department's inability to provide prior notification to the Committee,
as required by the House report accompanying the Department of Defense
Appropriations bill for fiscal year 1997 (House Report 104 208), on the
movement of funds from the readiness related activity and subactivity
groups. Therefore, the Committee supports the provision included in the
House-passed Defense Authorization bill for fiscal year 1998 requiring
DoD to follow customary reprogramming procedures for all Operation and
maintenance subactivity groups, and directs that the Department comply
with this provision.
REPORTING ON THE EXECUTION OF REAL PROPERTY MAINTENANCE FUNDING
The Committee reiterates the recommendations contained in the report
accompanying the Military Construction Appropriations bill for fiscal
year 1998 on the need to develop better information on DoD expenditures
for major real property maintenance, and the relationship of these
expenditures to major military construction projects. Therefore, the
Committee directs that the Undersecretary of Defense (Comptroller)
provide a report to the Committee not later than April 30, 1998,
detailing all proposed major RPM projects expected to exceed $10,000,000
to complete.
BUDGET JUSTIFICATION AND EXECUTION DATA
The Committee continues to require detailed data in support of the
Department's proposed Operation and maintenance budget such as the O 1
presentation of the Operation and maintenance budget, including the
revisions to Budget Activity 1, Operating Forces, as reflected in the
fiscal year 1998 budget request for the Army. However, the Committee
also agrees with the observations of the House National Security
Committee in the report accompanying the House-passed Defense
Authorization bill that there are certain inconsistencies that should be
remedied in upcoming budget submissions. In addition, the Committee
directs the Department to continue the submission of O 1 budget
execution data for each O 1 subactivity group. The Department shall
provide such data to the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations
within 60 days of the end of each quarter of the fiscal year.
PURCHASES OF FOREIGN MADE GOODS
The Committee has become aware of an apparent increase in the amount
of foreign made goods acquired by the Department of Defense through
small purchase procedures at bases throughout the U.S. Because the
Department does not have in place a system to track such small
purchases, the Committee directs the DoD Inspector General to conduct
random audits of small-purchases at U.S. military bases to determine how
often foreign made products are acquired through the use of
small-purchase, local purchase, or micro-purchase procedures. The DoD
Inspector General should report to the House and Senate Committees on
Appropriations with its findings not later than April 30, 1998.
ENVIRONMENTALLY SAFE FUEL STORAGE TANKS
The Committee is aware of the continuing problem of underground fuel
storage tank leakage. Therefore, the Committee recommends that the
Department of Defense proceed with the program for above-ground,
environmentally-safe fuel storage tanks as described in the
recommendations of the report accompanying the House-passed Defense
Authorization bill for fiscal year 1998, and directs that $2,000,000 be
made available for this purpose within funds available for both the
Marine Corps and the Air Force.
FEDERAL FIRE FIGHTER PAY
The Committee is disturbed about the continuing lack of progress to
resolve the question of pay inequities between the fire fighters
employed by the federal government and their counterparts employed by
states and localities. The large majority of the approximately 10,000
full-time federal fire fighters work for the Department of Defense
protecting military installations. According to information supplied to
the Committee, a typical municipal fire fighter earns 89 percent more
per hour than a comparable federal fire fighter. The Committee
understands that the Office of Personnel Management has undertaken staff
studies of this issue substantiating the claim that there are inequities
in the pay calculation and supporting the proposition that pay
adjustments are warranted. Proposals to rectify this situation have not
moved forward due, in part, to past opposition from the Department of
Defense. The Committee believes these inequities hinder the federal
government's ability to recruit and retain qualified fire fighters
putting the safety of our service members and billions of dollars of
investment at risk. The Department is directed to reevaluate its
position on this issue with the primary goal of ensuring pay equity for
these employees and preserving a high quality fire fighting force. The
Department shall report to Congress no later than December 31, 1997 on
the results of this evaluation which shall include recommended
legislation to correct this situation.
RECRUITING AND ADVERTISING
The Committee recognizes that the military's recruiting mission is
becoming increasingly difficult and recommends an increase of
$22,900,000 over the budget request to support the Department's efforts
in recruiting and advertising.
CLASSIFIED PROGRAMS
Adjustments to classified operation and maintenance programs are
addressed in a classified annex accompanying this report.
OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, ARMY
Fiscal year 1997 appropriation $17,519,340,000
Fiscal year 1998 budget request 17,049,484,000
Committee recommendation 17,078,218,000
Change from budget request 28,734,000
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $17,078,218,000 for
Operation and maintenance, Army. The recommendation is a decrease of
$441,122,000 below the amount appropriated for fiscal year 1997.
LOW RATE INITIAL PRODUCTION (LRIP) FOR ABRAMS XXI
The Committee supports the action taken by the House National
Security Committee on this program in its recommendations for the fiscal
year 1998 Defense Authorization bill. The Committee urges the Department
to consider a plan for the refurbishment of M1A1 tanks under the
Department of the Army's Abrams Integrated Management XXI (AIM XXI)
program if the Secretary of Defense determines that the program is cost
effective. In addition, if this program is successfully validated, the
Committee expects the Army to include adequate funding in the fiscal
year 1999 budget request.
DEPOT MAINTENANCE
The Committee recommends increasing Army depot maintenance funding by
$169,700,000 above the budget request. The Committee remains concerned
about backlogs in the repair and maintenance of communications and
electronic equipment. Accordingly, $53,000,000 of the total depot
maintenance increase is allocated to the U.S. Army
Communications-Electronics Command Battlefield Communications Review
program, for performance at Army depots, of the following workloads:
$25,000,000 for repair/maintenance of Mobile Subscriber Equipment
shelters, prime movers, and accessories or support equipment;
$20,000,000 for the repair/maintenance of Non-Integrated Communications
Secure and Integrated Communications Secure SINCGARS radios and
accessories or support equipment; and $8,000,000 for the repair,
maintenance or modification of the AN/TS 85 and AN/TSC 93 Tactical
Satellite Communications Terminals, associated antenna systems,
accessories or support equipment.
NATIONAL TRAINING CENTER ROTATIONS
As expressed elsewhere in this report, the Committee is troubled by
the reduced level of funding requested by the Army in fiscal year 1998
for rotations at the National Training Center (NTC). In addition, the
Committee is concerned that the Army's decision to reduce the number of
annual troop rotations at the National Training Center from 12 to 10
could adversely affect readiness. The Committee will be closely
monitoring this change for any adverse effects on the readiness of Army
units.
ARMY LOGISTICS AUTOMATION
Information on this project can be found in the Information Resources
Management section of this report.
HIGH RISK AUTOMATION SYSTEMS
Information on this project can be found in the Information Resources
Management section of this report.
PROGRAM RECOMMENDED
The total amount recommended in the bill will provide the following
program in fiscal year 1998:
Offset Folios 059 to 060 Insert here
The adjustments to the budget activities for Operation and
maintenance, Army are shown below:
[In thousands of dollars]
Budget Activity 1: Operating Forces:
250 Readiness Training--NTC Rotation Shortfall 60,213
250 Parachute Maintenance and Repair 2,000
250 Flying Hour Efficiencies -17,000
650 Depot Maintenance--Other 111,000
650 Depot Maintenance--Communications and Electronics 53,000
650 Depot Maintenance--Aviation Depot Maintenance Plan Equipment 5,700
750 Organizational Clothing and Equipment (Increment I) 20,000
750 Range Safe System 2,700
750 Ft. Irwin, George AFB Airhead 1,300
950 Fort Gordon Center for Total Access (Telemedicine) 5,400
Budget Activity 2: Mobilization:
1300 Industrial Preparedness--Nominal Growth -19,004
Budget Activity 3: Training and Recruiting:
1500 Service Academies--Foreign Students -1,400
2200 Recruiting and Advertising 7,000
2350 Civilian Education and Training -2,852
2400 Indian University Northwest JROTC Mentoring Program 750
Budget Activity 4: Administration and Servicewide Activities:
2850 Central Logistics--SSTS, Depot Maintenance, SDT 22,000
2850 Army Logistics Automation 11,200
3000 Headquarters and Administrative Activity Reduction -48,001
3200 Eisenhower Center 2,000
3350 Laser Leveling 1,500
3350 FEMP -45,000
Other Adjustments:
3710 Classified Undistributed -6,895
3715 Civilian Personnel Understrength -33,300
3730 Foreign Currency Fluctuation -19,000
3770 High Risk Automation Systems -25,000
3785 Real Property Maintenance 232,000
3790 TDY Expenses -19,930
3795 QDR--Civilian Personnel Reductions -140,347
3800 Contingency Operations Transfer--Southwest Asia -80,300
3815 Non-BRAC Caretaker Status -51,000
OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, NAVY
Fiscal year 1997 appropriation $20,061,961,000
Fiscal year 1998 budget request 21,508,130,000
Committee recommendation 21,779,365,000
Change from budget request 271,235,000
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $21,779,365,000 for
Operation and maintenance, Navy. The recommendation is an increase of
$1,717,404,000 above the amount appropriated for fiscal year 1997.
CNET DISTANCE LEARNING
The Committee directs that the Chief of Naval Education and Training
(CNET), as the Navy's organization responsible for training technology,
continue efforts that will lead to maximizing returns on technology
investment in distance learning and computer mediated learning. This
would include developing more efficient use of the Internet for training
requirements, developing models for appropriate applications of training
technologies and developing models to assess leadership training
effectiveness. The Committee recommends adding $2,000,000 above the
budget request for this effort.
NATIONAL OCEANOGRAPHY PARTNERSHIP ACT
The Committee encourages DoD efforts to implement the goals of the
National Oceanography Act by addressing the backlog of military
hydrographic survey requirements. Accordingly, the Committee directs
that within available funds, the Navy apply $7,500,000 for additional
ship-years as directed by the House report accompanying the House-passed
Defense Authorization bill for fiscal year 1998.
SOFTWARE PROGRAM MANAGERS NETWORK
Information on this project can be found in the Information Resources
Management section of this report.
HIGH RISK AUTOMATION SYSTEMS
Information on this project can be found in the Information Resources
Management section of this report.
ASBESTOS ERADICATION
The Committee is concerned about the environmental challenge
associated with the disposal of large volumes of asbestos from the
Navy's surface fleet and submarine inactivation programs. The Committee
is aware of an asbestos disposal process that offers great potential for
solving this current problem, a mineral conversion process that changes
the asbestos to a stable non-hazardous mineral. This thermochemical
conversion process has been tested on a variety of asbestos-containing
materials from actual abatement sites with great success. A commercially
viable transportable production system, capable of processing
substantial amounts of asbestos per day has been demonstrated with the
Department of Energy and approved by the Environmental Protection
Agency. Accordingly, the Committee provides $2,000,000 only for the
development of an asbestos thermochemical conversion pilot plant, to be
used in conjunction with the ongoing submarine inactivation program at
Puget Sound Naval Shipyard.
ELECTROTECHNOLOGIES
The Committee recommends an increase of $5,500,000 in Environmental
Compliance only for evaluating and demonstrating electrotechnologies and
other environmental technologies at Naval Station Mayport as the East
Coast demonstration base for the Navy Environmental Leadership Program.
PROGRAM RECOMMENDED
The total amount recommended in the bill will provide the following
program in fiscal year 1998:
Offset Folios 063 to 064 Insert here
The adjustments to the budget activities for Operation and
maintenance, Navy are shown below:
[In thousands of dollars]
Budget Activity 1: Operating Forces:
4400 Flying Hour Program Shortfalls 322,000
4600 Depot Maintenance--Aviation Backlog 149,000
5000 Depot Maintenance--Unfunded Ship Availabilities 75,000
5550 Reverse Osmosis Desalinators--Refurbishment 500
5950 Gun Weapon Overhaul and Support, Louisville 15,900
5950 Ship Self Defense System (SSDS) Equipment--Wallops Island 6,000
Budget Activity 2: Mobilization:
6650 Industrial Preparedness--Nominal Growth -28,493
Budget Activity 3: Training and Recruiting:
6900 Service Academies--Foreign Students -1,400
7100 Bancroft Hall Renovation Program -31,500
7300 Naval Postgraduate School--Laboratory Improvements 2,000
7300 Professional Development Education--Nominal Growth -5,973
7350 CNET--Distance Learning 2,000
7550 Recruiting and Advertising 7,000
7650 Civilian Education and Training -1,022
Budget Activity 4: Administration and Servicewide Activities:
8000 Defense Computer Investigations Training Program/Computer Forensics Lab 8,500
8000 Headquarters and Administrative Activity Reduction -47,580
8300 FEMP -25,000
8600 ATIS 4,000
Other Adjustments:
9360 Classified Undistributed 1,902
9365 Software Program Managers Network 6,000
9365 High Risk Automation Systems -25,000
9390 Civilian Personnel Understrength -108,300
9415 Electrotechnologies 5,500
9420 Other Contracts--Program Growth -29,719
9425 Real Property Maintenance 98,540
9430 TDY Expenses -12,060
9435 QDR--Civilian Personnel Reductions -34,960
9440 Asbestos Eradication 2,000
9445 Contingency Operations Transfer--Southwest Asia -84,900
9450 Magic Lantern 1,300
OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, MARINE CORPS
Fiscal year 1997 appropriation $2,254,119,000
Fiscal year 1998 budget request 2,301,345,000
Committee recommendation 2,598,032,000
Change from budget request 296,687,000
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $2,598,032,000 for
Operation and maintenance, Marine Corps. The recommendation is an
increase of $343,913,000 above the amount appropriated for fiscal year
1997.
PROGRAM RECOMMENDED
The total amount recommended in the bill will provide the following
program in fiscal year 1998:
Offset Folios 066 Insert here
The adjustments to the budget activities for Operation and
maintenance, Marine Corps are shown below:
[In thousands of dollars]
Budget Activity 1: Operating Forces:
10050 Readiness Training--Operating Forces Training Support 38,800
10050 Initial Issue (Clothing/Body Armor/Bivouac gear) 20,700
10150 Depot Maintenance Backlog Reduction 25,000
10200 Personnel Support Equipment 25,400
10200 Base Support 10,000
Budget Activity 3: Training and Recruiting:
10700 Base Support 10,000
11050 Base Support 10,000
11200 Recruiting and Advertising 4,400
Budget Activity 4: Administration and Servicewide Activities:
11800 Base Support 10,000
11800 FEMP -10,000
Other Adjustments:
11935 Real Property Maintenance 154,100
11940 QDR--Civilian Personnel Reductions -1,713
Environmentally Safe Fuel Storage Tanks
(2,000)
OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, AIR FORCE
Fiscal year 1997 appropriation $17,263,193,000
Fiscal year 1998 budget request 18,817,785,000
Committee recommendation 18,740,167,000
Change from budget request -77,618,000
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $18,740,167,000 for
Operation and maintenance, Air Force. The recommendation is an increase
of $1,476,974,000 above the amount appropriated for fiscal year 1997.
INSTRUMENT ROUTES 102 AND 141
The Committee recognizes the need for Air Force low altitude training
and strongly supports this requirement. The Committee urges the Air
Force to give every consideration to public comments and community
concerns in the impacted areas when utilizing Instrument Routes 102 and
141 for such training. The Air Force should report to the congressional
defense committees by March 31, 1998 on possible alternative routes.
AIR FORCE MANUFACTURING TECHNOLOGY ASSISTANCE PILOT PROGRAM
The Air Force Manufacturing Technology Assistant Pilot Program
(MTAPP) will strengthen and expand the service's manufacturing supplier
base by improving the manufacturing skills and business practices of
small to medium sized businesses, particularly those with an established
non-defense background. Accordingly, the Committee supports the Air
Force MTAPP program and recommends that the service allocate $2,000,000
of available funds for this program.
MISAWA ANTENNAS
The Committee directs the Air Force to allocate $300,000 of the
additional infrastructure funding provided in this bill to the repair
and maintenance of the antennas at the Misawa Cryptologic Operations
Center.
children's association for maximum potential
The Committee recommends an increase of $500,000 above the budget
request to support completion of the CAMP facility at Lackland Air Force
Base, Texas, and directs that this increase in funding be used only for
the purpose of supporting this program.
REMIS
Information on this project can be found in the Information Resources
Management section of this report.
HIGH RISK AUTOMATION SYSTEMS
Information on this project can be found in the Information Resources
Management section of this report.
AIR FORCE INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY
The Air Force proposes eliminating new student starts at the
in-residence programs of the Air Force Institute of Technology (AFIT) in
fiscal year 1998. Although the Air Force proposal is explained for
budgetary reasons, no comprehensive cost-benefit study has been
undertaken recently. Therefore, the Committee includes a general
provision (Section 8086) prohibiting the Air Force from sending to
civilian institutions graduate students who would otherwise attend AFIT.
The Committee further directs that the National Academy of Sciences do a
complete cost-benefit analysis including the value of research done by
faculty and graduate students, to be provided to the Committee not later
than April 1, 1998.
MALMSTROM AIR FORCE BASE
The Committee believes that the Air Force should maintain the
airfield at Malmstrom AFB, Montana including the runways at the
airfield. The existing runway and facilities at Malmstrom are in
excellent condition and, for that reason, the National Aeronautics and
Space Administration has identified this site as a possible facility for
future testing and program development.
PROGRAM RECOMMENDED
The total amount recommended in the bill will provide the following
program in fiscal year 1998:
Offset Folios 070 to 071 Insert here
The adjustments to the budget activities for Operation and
maintenance, Air Force are shown below:
[In thousands of dollars]
Budget Activity 1: Operating Forces:
12600 Flying Hour Program Shortfalls 300,000
12600 Battle Labs 1,000
12850 Force Protection--Base Physical Security 12,100
12850 Force Protection--Air Base Ground Defense 5,800
12850 Force Protection--Antiterrorism 5,300
12850 Force Protection--NBC Defense Program 3,100
12850 Force Protection--Contingency Operations 1,500
13100 SIMVAL 2,800
13250 JFACC Situational Awareness System (JSAS) 3,000
Budget Activity 2: Mobilization:
13850 Depot Maintenance--KC 135 DPEM 54,600
13950 Industrial Preparedness--Nominal Growth -5,105
Budget Activity 3: Training and Recruiting:
14300 Service Academies--Foreign Students -1,400
14700 Professional Development Education--Nominal Growth -20,466
14950 Recruiting and Advertising 4,500
15100 Civilian Education and Training -2,351
Budget Activity 4: Administration and Servicewide Activities:
15350 Supply Asset Tracking System (SATS at ACC Installations) 5,000
15500 FEMP -33,000
15650 Defense Computer Investigations Training Program/Computer Forensics Lab 2,700
15650 Headquarters and Administrative Activity Reduction -53,862
15950 CAMP 500
16050 Civil Air Patrol 800
Other Adjustments:
16410 Classified Undistributed 8,500
16415 Civilian Personnel Understrength -70,000
16430 Foreign Currency Fluctuation -10,000
16475 REMIS 8,900
16475 High Risk Automation Systems -25,000
16490 Other Contracts--Program Growth -93,981
16495 Chemical/Biological Defense--PACOM 10,000
16500 Contingency Operations Transfer--Southwest Asia -459,900
16505 Real Property Maintenance 358,200
16510 TDY Expenses -20,000
16515 QDR--Civilian Personnel Reductions -76,253
Environmentally Safe Fuel Storage Tanks
(2,000)
OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, DEFENSE-WIDE
Fiscal year 1997 appropriation $10,044,200,000
Fiscal year 1998 budget request 10,390,938,000
Committee recommendation 10,066,956,000
Change from budget request -323,982,000
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $10,066,956,000 for
Operation and Maintenance, Defense-Wide. The recommendation is an
increase of $22,756,000 from the amount appropriated in fiscal year
1997.
JCS EXERCISES
In the Quadrennial Defense Review, DoD announced its plans to
decrease the number of man-days required for joint exercises in fiscal
year 1998 to 15 percent below the level of fiscal year 1996. Given the
high demands of ongoing operations, this reduction is a prudent step to
avoid overstressing the military forces required to perform these
operations. The Committee supports this measure and recommends a
reduction of $50,000,000 to the budget request, consistent with the
House-passed Defense Authorization bill.
SPECIAL OPERATIONS COMMAND
The Committee recommends an increase of $43,100,000 above the budget
request for the United States Special Operations Command. These
additional funds will meet the unfunded requirements for
counterproliferation, readiness and OPTEMPO. The Committee also
recommends $3,300,000 within this amount only to outfit Special
Operations Forces aircrews with Goretex-Nomex flight suits.
within-grade increases
In the budget request, the Defense Contract Audit Agency requested an
increase to cover ``within-grade increases''. While individual employees
are entitled to within-grade or ``step'' increases, for an agency those
increases are usually offset by employees who are promoted and go back
to step one, or retire at a high step and are replaced by new employees
at step one. Thus the average ``step'' within an agency, like the
average grade, should not be gradually increasing over time. The DCAA
request is therefore unique among all DoD activities. The Committee
denies this increase and reduces the DCAA budget request by $2,500,000
accordingly.
DEFENSE FINANCE AND ACCOUNTING SERVICE
The Defense Finance and Accounting Service (DFAS) is financed through
the Defense Working Capital Fund (DWCF). The fund is designed to capture
all the relevant costs to run DFAS and to reflect those costs in the
prices that DFAS charges its customers. The Committee is concerned that
the budget request proposes to shift out of the DWCF costs that are part
of DFAS operating costs.
DFAS developed, designed and fielded its Property Accountability
System using resources from the DWCF. The Committee believes that any
upgrade to this system should also be paid for out of the DWCF and
reduces the request accordingly by $16,500,000.
The Executive and Professional Training program primarily pays for
the training of employees who are paid from the DWCF. While the
Committee supports having a highly trained workforce, it believes that
training is an inherent part of any organization's operating costs and
thus should be paid for from within the DWCF. The Committee therefore
reduces the request by $30,154,000.
Finally, the budget requests $45,000,000 as the first increment of a
$117,000,000 renovation project. The Committee notes that DoD and the
General Services Administration have not yet reached the agreement that
is necessary to begin this project. In addition, the budget proposes to
pay for the renovation using appropriated funds even though the payback
on this renovation will be directly to the DWCF. The Committee also
notes the concern expressed in the House-passed Defense Authorization
bill, which denied authorization for this request and noted that a
renovation of this size is likely to be outside the scope of a standard
maintenance and repair project and may need to be funded as a military
construction project. As a result, the budget request is reduced by
$45,000,000.
DEFENSE HUMAN RESOURCES FIELD ACTIVITY
To improve operating efficiency and reduce costs, DoD combined the
former Defense Civilian Personnel Management Service with the Defense
Manpower Data Center to form the Defense Human Resources Field Activity
(DHRFA). The budget request for the new DHRFA is $138,935,000, the sum
of the two activities' individual budgets. The Committee believes that
the budget for the new organization should reflect at least some of the
savings expected to result from the reorganization and thus recommends a
reduction of $2,000,000.
WHITE HOUSE COMMUNICATIONS AGENCY
The budget requested $63,945,000 for the White House Communications
Agency (WHCA), which is managed by the Defense Information Systems
Agency (DISA). The Committee agrees to the realignment of $7,200,000
from Operation and Maintenance, Defense-Wide to Procurement,
Defense-Wide as requested by the Director, DISA. After accounting for
inflation, the shift of funds to procurement, and other program
realignments, the requested funding for this activity still shows net
growth of $4,910,000, only a portion of which WHCA has been able to
adequately justify. The Committee therefore recommends a reduction of
$8,200,000 in Operation and Maintenance, Defense-Wide and an increase of
$7,200,000 in Procurement, Defense-Wide.
AUTOMATED DOCUMENT CONVERSION
Information on this project can be found in the Information Resources
Management section of this report.
IMPROVED CARGO METHODS AND TECHNOLOGIES
The Committee believes cost saving opportunities exist to integrate
the latest private sector logistics research, transport technology, and
security developments into the practices and procedures for moving
military cargo around the United States and around the world. The bill
includes $3,000,000 only to continue work initiated in fiscal year 1997
in conjunction with a not-for-profit foundation operating exclusively as
a trucking research institute to: (1) continue the examination of
private sector practices as they may relate to the transport of
containerized ammunition, to include the development of multi-modal
standards, and ammunition configuration requirements; (2) evaluate U.S.
commercial third-party logistics providers to determine the most
efficient public-private partnership structures to meet readiness
requirements and to identify ways to streamline the third-party
selection process by the Department; and (3) study the current cargo
security environment in the context of national defense and assess the
feasibility of implementing an efficient information partnership between
motor carriers, the Department, and the law enforcement community to
include development of a nation-wide cargo theft reporting system
modeled after the real time database, Cargo Tips.
dla--dwcf transfer
Within the Defense Logistics Agency, the budget requests $42,900,000
to cover the cost of transferring certain programs from the Defense
Working Capital Fund (DWCF) to Operation and Maintenance, Defense-Wide.
A review of these programs indicates, however, that only those items
related to hazardous waste handling are appropriate to transfer out of
the DWCF. The Committee therefore recommends a reduction of $36,000,000.
SECURITY LOCKS
The Committee recommends an addition to the budget request of
$25,000,000 only for the Security Lock Retrofit program. The Committee
understands that these funds are sufficient for DoD to meet all
validated requirements for this upgrade.
FEDERAL ENERGY MANAGEMENT PROGRAM
The Committee is concerned that the Federal Energy Management Program
(FEMP) within the Department of Defense has been seriously eroded.
Estimates show that only a fraction of the funds provided for this
function were actually used to reduce energy use and costs.
The Department of Defense is central to the government's efforts to
reduce energy costs. Over 70 percent of the energy consumed by the
Federal Government is used to heat, light, cool and operate Department
of Defense facilities at a cost of nearly $3 billion a year. Energy
efficiency improvements can save DoD almost $2 billion per year in
utility bills and energy system maintenance operations. The Committee
believes that the focus on energy efficiency should not be limited to
FEMP projects, but should be a consideration in every maintenance and
repair project.
The Committee therefore provides $15,000,000 to the central FEMP
account to assist DoD in reducing its energy costs.
MILITARY PERSONNEL INFORMATION SYSTEM
Information on this project can be found in the Information Resources
Management section of this report.
ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION
The United States government has recently completed an exchange of
letters with the Canadian government regarding the return of several
U.S. military facilities in Canada. Consistent with this agreement, the
budget requests $10,200,000 in Operation and Maintenance, Defense-Wide
for the first in a series of payments to cover the cost of environmental
restoration at those sites. Since this expense deals with environmental
restoration at what were mostly Air Force sites, the Committee believes
that it is more appropriate to pay for it out of the Environmental
Restoration, Air Force account. The Committee therefore recommends a
reduction of $10,200,000 to Operation and Maintenance, Defense-Wide and
has adjusted the general provision proposed in the budget request
accordingly.
OSD COMMISSIONS AND STUDIES
The Committee is very disappointed to learn that special studies and
commissions initiated by the Office of the Secretary of Defense are not
subject to the same level of fiscal review as normal funding requests.
Although this problem pre-dates the current DoD leadership, the
Committee is concerned that this problem will continue absent senior
management attention. The Committee therefore directs the Department to
report no later than November 30, 1997 on the steps it is taking to
correct this deficiency.
TRAVEL REENGINEERING
The Travel Project Management Office (TPMO) was created in fiscal
year 1997 to reengineer the DoD's temporary duty (TDY) travel process.
Under the proposed reengineering concept all temporary duty travel
functions are to be processed through a highly integrated management
information system. While the Committee supports the reengineering
effort, it is concerned that this project is moving ahead without taking
the necessary steps, such as a formal cost effectiveness study. The
Committee therefore recommends a reduction of $14,300,000 to the budget
request to continue this effort, but at its fiscal year 1997 level.
HIGH RISK AUTOMATION SYSTEMS
Information on this project can be found in the Information Resources
Management section of this report.
QUADRENNIAL DEFENSE REVIEW--DEFENSE AGENCY REDUCTIONS
In the Quadrennial Defense Review, the Department proposed reducing
all defense agencies ``by 6 percent, as a down payment until a detailed
follow-up review is completed by November 30, 1997''. The Committee
supports this effort, currently being carried out by the Task Force on
Defense Reform and includes a reduction to the budget request of
$72,000,000 or two percent in fiscal year 1998 as an initial increment.
The Committee recommendation specifically excludes the National Foreign
Intelligence Program, Special Operations Command and the Department of
Defense Dependents Schools from its calculation and directs the
Department not to apply any of the $72,000,000 reduction to those
activities. This does not prohibit the Task Force from including those
organizations in its study.
QDR RESTRUCTURING RESERVE
The Committee recognizes that there is an up-front cost to any major
restructuring effort and therefore recommends an increase of $18,000,000
to the budget request to be used only for facilitating the downsizing of
defense agencies and headquarters' activities pursuant to the findings
of the Task Force on Defense Reform cited above. The Committee further
directs that the Department provide 30 days prior notification to the
Committee on any proposed use of these funds.
USE OF RE-REFINED OIL
The Committee notes that the statistics compiled by the Federal
Environmental Executive, established by Executive Order 12873, shows
that during fiscal years 1994 and 1995, the Department of Defense's
re-refined oil purchases were only 1.5 percent of its total oil
purchases for those years. The Committee notes that using re-refined oil
conserves valuable natural resources, protects the environment and
reduces U.S. dependence on imported fuels. The Committee therefore
encourages the Department of Defense to increase its use of re-refined
fuels to the maximum extent practical.
NUTRITION
The Committee believes that proper diet and nutrition play an
important role in providing for a high quality of life in the military.
In order to enhance our military's diet, the Committee requests the
Department report on the potential benefits of increasing the quantity
of beef, lamb and chevon meats in meals provided servicemembers.
VINT HILL FARMS
The Committee is concerned about the costs associated with building
demolition and asbestos removal at Vint Hill Farms in Fauquier County,
Virginia, an Army facility closing as a result of the 1993 Base
Realignment and Closure Commission. It is estimated that 49 percent of
the existing structures at Vint Hill Farms do not meet current standards
and require remediation estimated at $30,000,000. The Committee urges in
the strongest possible terms that the Department of Defense assist the
community with said demolition and asbestos removal.
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE DEPENDENTS SCHOOLS
ADJUSTMENTS
The Committee recommends a net increase of $4,000,000 over the budget
request for the Department of Defense Dependents Schools (DoDDS). The
Committee agreed to several adjustments based on the Committee's Survey
and Investigative (S&I) staff's survey of the fiscal year 1998 budget
request. The Committee recommends a reduction of $11,000,000 from the
budget request for an error to the fiscal year 1997 baseline, which had
the effect of increasing the fiscal year 1998 request by this amount. In
addition, the Committee recommends a reduction of $10,000,000 for
unliquidated balances. The S&I staff reported that there has been a
trend in the increase of unused obligations from fiscal year 1994
through fiscal year 1997, even though the DoDDS school program has been
relatively stable over the years. Finally, the Committee recommends an
increase of $20,000,000 to be applied to the backlog of Real Property
Maintenance.
FAMILY COUNSELING AND CRISIS SERVICES
In addition to the adjustments above, the Committee recommends an
increase of $5,000,000 to the budget request in the Department of
Defense Dependents Schools (DoDDS) account only for enhancements to
Family Advocacy programs. The Committee directs the Department to use
these additional funds for expansion of counseling and crisis services,
treatment options and solutions for children of active duty members
between the ages of 7 18 years who have emotional and behavioral
problems. The Committee recommends that these services be provided by
organizations accredited with commendation from the Joint Commission on
Accreditation Health Care Organizations, and that have associated
research centers and offer a full continuum of care.
Social Work Fellowship Program
The Committee urges the Department to fund predoctoral or
postdoctoral fellowships for social work researchers to examine the
process, outcome, and cost-effectiveness of military family advocacy
programs, with particular attention to issues of family violence and
child maltreatment. The Department of the Air Force's current
postdoctoral initiative with the Department of Agriculture and the
Institute for the Advancement of Social Work Research is a model for
this type of cooperative sponsorship program.
PROGRAM RECOMMENDED
The total amount recommended in the bill will provide the following
program in fiscal year 1998:
Offset Folios 079 Insert here
The adjustments to the budget activities for Operation and
Maintenance, Defense-Wide are shown below:
[In thousands of dollars]
Budget Activity 1: Operating Forces:
17050 JCS Exercises -50,000
17100 SOCOM 43,100
Budget Activity 3: Training and Recruiting:
17400 DAU--Continuing Acquisition Education -3,900
Budget Activity 4: Administration and Servicewide Activities:
17800 Classified and Intelligence -98,261
17900 DCAA--Within Grade Increases -2,500
17950 DFAS--Property Accountability System -16,500
17950 DFAS--Executive and Professional Training -30,154
17950 DFAS--Facility Renovation -45,000
18000 DHRFA--Operations -2,000
18050 DISA--White House Communications Agency -8,200
18200 DLA--Automated Document Conversion 30,000
18200 DLA--Security Locks 25,000
18200 DLA--Procurement Technical Assistance Program 17,000
18200 DLA--DPSC Demolition 15,000
18200 DLA--Cargo Methods and Technologies 3,000
18200 DLA--Blankets -2,400
18200 DLA--DWCF transfer -36,000
18500 DoDDS--Real Property Maintenance 20,000
18500 DoDDS--Family Counseling and Crisis Services 5,000
18500 DoDDS--Unobligated Balances -10,000
18500 DoDDS--Baseline Adjustment -11,000
18550 Federal Energy Management Program 15,000
18600 JCS--Travel and Administrative Costs -2,000
18650 Monterey Institute Counter-Proliferation Analysis 9,000
18700 OSD--Military Personnel Information System 5,000
18700 OSD--First Responder Training 1,300
18700 OSD--C3I Mission and Analysis Fund -10,000
18700 OSD--Environmental Restoration -10,200
18700 OSD--Administrative Savings -20,000
18700 OSD--Civil/Military Programs -31,867
18800 OSIA--Treaty Requirements -11,200
18900 WHS--Travel Reengineering -14,300
Other Adjustments:
18970 Civilian Personnel Understrength -33,900
18980 Impact Aid 35,000
19010 High Risk Automation Systems -15,000
19030 Pentagon Renovation Fund--Swing Space Costs -9,500
19045 Defense Automated Printing Service -15,000
19065 Center for the Study of the Chinese Military 5,000
19085 Contingency Operations Transfer--Southwest Asia -9,500
19090 QDR Defense Agency Reductions -72,000
19095 QDR Restructuring Reserve 18,000
OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, ARMY RESERVE
Fiscal year 1997 appropriation $1,119,436,000
Fiscal year 1998 budget request 1,192,891,000
Committee recommendation 1,207,891,000
Change from budget request +15,000,000
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $1,207,891,000 for
Operation and maintenance, Army Reserve. The recommendation is an
increase of $88,455,000 above the $1,119,436,000 appropriated for fiscal
year 1997.
PROGRAM RECOMMENDED
The total amount recommended in the bill will provide the following
program in fiscal year 1998:
Offset Folio 081 Insert here
The adjustments to the budget activities for Operation and
maintenance, Army Reserve are shown below:
[In thousands of dollars]
xlBudget Activity 1: Operating Forces:
19700 Maintenance of Real Property +5,000
19850 Training Operations, Ground OPTEMPO +10,000
COMMERCIAL CONSTRUCTION AND MATERIAL HANDLING EQUIPMENT
The Committee understands that a large amount of the Commercial
Construction and Material Handling Equipment inventory, such as motor
graders and scrapers, for the Army Reserve is approaching the fifteen
year service life threshold. The Committee is aware of the significant
cost savings and readiness improvements that can be gained with the
Extended Service Program of older items of equipment in the inventory,
and urges the Army Reserve to continue the rebuild program.
RESERVE UNITS IN CENTRAL FLORIDA
The Committee understands that once the Orlando Naval Training Center
is closed that several Army, Navy and Marine Corps Reserve units
residing on this base will have to be moved to other locations in
Central Florida. The Committee directs the Department to report to the
Committee, by March 1, 1998, detailing the individual Reserve units
involved, and the possibility of constructing a joint complex. In
addition, the report should provide details on the resulting cost
savings to be achieved by co-locating units.
OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, NAVY RESERVE
Fiscal year 1997 appropriation $886,027,000
Fiscal year 1998 budget request 834,711,000
Committee recommendation 924,711,000
Change from budget request +90,000,000
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $924,711,000 for
Operation and maintenance, Navy Reserve. The recommendation is an
increase of $38,684,000 above the $886,027,000 appropriated for fiscal
year 1997.
PROGRAM RECOMMENDED
The total amount recommended in the bill will provide the following
program in fiscal year 1998:
Offset Folio 083 Insert here
The adjustments to the budget activities for Operation and
maintenance, Navy Reserve are shown below:
[In thousands of dollars]
xlBudget Activity 1: Operating Forces:
21200 Aircraft Depot Maintenance +10,000
xlOther Adjustments:
22760 NSIPS +43,500
22765 Contingency Operations Transfer--SWA -500
22770 Maintenance of Real Property +37,000
NSIPS
Information on this project can be found in the Information Resources
Management section of this report.
NAVY RESERVE CENTER IN MANSFIELD, OHIO
The Committee understands that the Navy Reserve has included funds in
the fiscal year 1998 budget request for remediation activities at the
former Naval Reserve Center in Mansfield, Ohio. The Committee directs
the Navy to proceed with the site-cleanup of these vacant buildings
during fiscal year 1998.
OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, MARINE CORPS RESERVE
Fiscal year 1997 appropriation $109,667,000
Fiscal year 1998 budget request 110,366,000
Committee recommendation 119,266,000
Change from budget request +8,900,000
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $119,266,000 for
Operation and maintenance, Marine Corps Reserve. The recommendation is
an increase of $9,599,000 above the $109,667,000 appropriated for fiscal
year 1997.
PROGRAM RECOMMENDED
The total amount recommended in the bill will provide the following
program in fiscal year 1998:
Offset Folio 085 Insert here
The adjustments to the budget activities for Operation and
maintenance, Marine Corps Reserve are shown below:
[In thousands of dollars]
xlBudget Activity 1: Operating Forces:
23450 Training, M1A1 tank +3,900
23500 Operating Forces, Initial Issue +5,000
OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, AIR FORCE RESERVE
Fiscal year 1997 appropriation $1,496,553,000
Fiscal year 1998 budget request 1,624,420,000
Committee recommendation 1,635,250,000
Change from budget request +10,830,000
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $1,635,250,000 for
Operation and maintenance, Air Force Reserve. The recommendation is an
increase of $138,697,000 above the $1,496,553,000 appropriated for
fiscal year 1997.
PROGRAM RECOMMENDED
The total amount recommended in the bill will provide the following
program in fiscal year 1998:
Offset Folio 087 Insert here
The adjustments to the budget activities for Operation and
maintenance, Air Force Reserve are shown below:
[In thousands of dollars]
xlBudget Activity 1: Operating Forces:
25050 Maintenance of Real Property +10,000
xlBudget Activity 4: Administration and Servicewide Activities:
25510 WC 130 Weather Reconnaissance +830
wc-130 weather reconnaissance mission
The Committee continues to strongly believe that the weather
reconnaissance mission is critical to the protection of Defense
installations and the entire population living along the east and Gulf
coasts of the United States. Section 8026 has been included which
prohibits funds to reduce or disestablish the operation of the 53rd
Weather Reconnaissance Squadron (Hurricane Hunters) of the Air Force
Reserve if such action would reduce the Weather Reconnaissance mission
below the levels funded in this Act. The level specifically funded in
this Act is to support a stand alone squadron with dedicated 10 PAA
aircraft, 20 line assigned aircrews, evenly divided between Air Reserve
Technician (ART) and Reserve aircrews. The Committee directs the Air
Force to provide a minimum of 3,000 flying hours to perform tropical
cyclone and winter storm reconnaissance missions, aircrew training,
counterdrug support, and airland missions in support of contingency
operations during the non-hurricane season or slow periods during the
season. The Committee insists that this important mission and flying
hours be provided and funded in accordance with this direction. The
Committee has also provided an additional $1,000,000 in the personnel
and operation and maintenance accounts, and directs that these funds be
used for additional manning for this squadron to meet maintenance
shortfalls. The Committee directs the Air Force to submit future budget
requests reflecting this year's direction.
The Committee is aware that advancements in two pilot cockpit
technology do not provide an adequate margin of safety in the unique and
dangerous hurricane reconnaissance missions that range from tropical
storms to category 5 hurricanes which have winds in excess of 200 miles
per hour. The Committee is pleased that the Air Force agrees with user
recommendations to include a fully equipped augmented crew station to be
manned by a navigator in all WC 130J aircraft and directs that the final
operational requirements document reflect this decision.
MARCH AIR RESERVE BASE
The Committee understands that an agreement was recently signed
between the Department of the Air Force and the March Joint Powers
Authority to form a joint use airport. In addition, the community is
discussing with the Air Force the possibility of making improvements to
the existing navigational aids and construction of a commercial jet fuel
project at this airport. The Committee directs the Air Force to report
to the Committee by December 15, 1997, on the need and military
necessity for the improved navigational aids and construction of a
commercial jet fuel capability to March Air Reserve Base, the funding
required, and whether these improvements are warranted in order to
accommodate commercial aircraft at this airport.
OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, ARMY NATIONAL GUARD
Fiscal year 1997 appropriation $2,254,477,000
Fiscal year 1998 budget request 2,258,932,000
Committee recommendation 2,313,632,000
Change from budget request +54,700,000
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $2,313,632,000 for
Operation and maintenance, Army National Guard. The recommendation is an
increase of $59,155,000 above the $2,254,477,000 appropriated for fiscal
year 1997.
PROGRAM RECOMMENDED
The total amount recommended in the bill will provide the following
program in fiscal year 1998:
Offset Folio 090 Insert here
The adjustments to the budget activities for Operation and
maintenance, Army National Guard are shown below:
[In thousands of dollars]
xlBudget Activity 1: Operating Forces:
26250 Training Operations, Ground OPTEMPO +20,000
26250 Training Operations, Angel Gate Academy +4,200
26250 Training Operations, Laser Leveling +500
26400 Depot Maintenance +5,000
26500 Maintenance of Real Property +10,000
xlBudget Activity 4: Administration and Servicewide Activities:
26910 Chemical/Biological Mission Studies +10,000
26915 Software Acquisition and Security Training +5,000
DOMESTIC CHEMICAL/BIOLOGICAL COUNTER TERRORISM MISSION PLANNING
The Committee strongly supports the recommendations of the Secretary
of Defense in the May 1997 Quadrennial Defense Review to assign the
National Guard with the new role of countering chemical and biological
terrorism in the United States. The Committee believes this mission is a
natural complement to other current National Guard missions such as
disaster assistance and counter-drugs which have given the Guard the
ability to develop effective working relationships with state and local
officials in the law enforcement, firefighting, and emergency medical
communities. The National Guard is the ideal organization to transfer
specialized military knowledge and expertise to the local domestic level
according to long standing norms and practices in this country.
The Committee expects this mission to be comprehensively and
aggressively pursued. This will require a detailed planning effort to
develop a comprehensive program that is fully coordinated and integrated
with other relevant organizations within the Department of Defense, with
other federal agencies, and with state and local authorities. In this
respect, the Committee believes it is important that each state be given
the opportunity and resources to develop detailed components of this
plan relating to their own special circumstances under the overall
guidance the National Guard Bureau.
The Committee recommends $10,000,000 for detailed planning and
concept studies that will assist the National Guard to:
(1) define and clarify the National Guard mission compared to the
roles of other federal/state and local authorities with similar
responsibilities;
(2) develop a capability to understand the threat;
(3) train Guard personnel and state/local first responders;
(4) evaluate and acquire new chemical/biological defense technology;
and
(5) develop appropriate response plans.
Mission Definition. Currently, many federal, state, and local
agencies have fragmented and sometimes overlapping responsibilities for
different aspects of domestic emergency preparedness. Federal agencies
with significant responsibilities range from FEMA, to HHS, to DOE, to
the FBI. There are, of course, literally thousands of state and local
law enforcement agencies, emergency medical departments, and fire
departments with different levels of expertise and responsibility that
play the primary role in responding to emergencies. A first critical
stage for the National Guard will be to sort out its roles and
responsibilities compared to all other relevant organizations in
accordance with applicable law.
Threat Assessment. Funds should be used to develop detailed plans to
determine what information is routinely required to understand the
threat posed by different terrorist groups that may operate in the U.S.,
the capabilities of different chemical and biological weapons they may
come to possess, what vulnerability assessments on key local facilities
such as subways should be conducted, and other key data. This effort
should also catalog and identify who can provide key information on a
routine and ongoing basis, how such information is to be collected and
disseminated, and what new capabilities are required.
Training. Funds should be used to devise a comprehensive, long term
training regimen for appropriate Guard personnel, law enforcement
personnel, firefighters, emergency medical personnel and other federal,
state and local officials on all aspect of chemical/biological defense,
including field training exercises. Rather than creating an entirely new
training establishment for this mission, the Committee believes the
existing National Guard training structure for the counter-drug mission
in conjunction with enhanced use of the distance learning network would
be cost effective and should be used to the maximum extent possible.
This effort must also be fully coordinated with the plans and programs
of the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Special Operations and Low
Intensity Conflict, the DoD Office of Emergency Preparedness, the Army
Chemical and Biological Defense Command, and the Marine Corps' Chemical
Biological Incident Response Force.
Technology. Funds should be used to structure a continuing National
Guard program for testing and evaluating chemical/biological defense
equipment that is available to the National Guard and to state and local
authorities as well as to determine specific requirements for new
technology.
Response Plans. Funds should be used to assess the quality of
existing chemical/biological incident response plans around the country,
and devise a plan for identifying shortfalls and taking corrective
action. This effort should include significant input from individual
state authorities.
The Committee expects this comprehensive effort to leverage existing
federal assets, programs, and contract activities to the maximum extent
feasible. The Committee believes there is a rich source of existing
intelligence, research capability, facilities, and technology at the
federal level that can be focused to meet this new mission requirement.
The Army National Guard shall submit a report to the congressional
defense committees no later than February 1, 1998 explaining in detail
how these funds will be used, and setting detailed milestones for future
planning and implementation of this mission.
SOFTWARE ACQUISITION AND SECURITY TRAINING
The Committee recommends an increase of $5,000,000 above the budget
request only to use the Distance Learning Network to deliver
standardized courseware to train and certify National Guard and
Department of Defense personnel in the areas of software acquisition
management and information security.
OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, AIR NATIONAL GUARD
Fiscal year 1997 appropriation $2,716,379,000
Fiscal year 1998 budget request 2,991,219,000
Committee recommendation 2,995,719,000
Change from budget request +4,500,000
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $2,995,719,000 for
Operation and maintenance, Air National Guard. The recommendation is an
increase of $279,340,000 above the $2,716,379,000 appropriated for
fiscal year 1997.
PROGRAM RECOMMENDED
The total amount recommended in the bill will provide the following
program in fiscal year 1998:
Offset Folio 094 Insert here
The adjustments to the budget activities for Operation and
maintenance, Air National Guard are shown below:
[In thousands of dollars]
Budget Activity 1: Operating Forces:
27650 Aircraft Operations, 159th Fighter Group +1,500
27850 Depot Maintenance +3,000
159th air national guard fighter group
The Committee recommends an increase of $1,500,000 over the budget
request in Operation and Maintenance, Air National Guard, and directs
that these funds be used for the operation of C 130H operational support
aircraft of the 159th ANG Fighter Group.
OVERSEAS CONTINGENCY OPERATIONS TRANSFER FUND
Fiscal year 1997 appropriation $1,140,157,000
Fiscal year 1998 budget request 1,467,500,000
Committee recommendation 1,855,400,000
Change from budget request +387,900,000
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $1,855,400,000 for the
Overseas Contingency Operations Transfer Fund. The recommendation is an
increase of $715,243,000 from the amount appropriated in fiscal year
1997.
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ARMED FORCES
Fiscal year 1997 appropriation $6,797,000
Fiscal year 1998 budget request 6,952,000
Committee recommendation 6,952,000
Change from budget request
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $6,952,000 for the
United States Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces. The recommendation
is an increase of $155,000 from the amount appropriated in fiscal year
1997.
ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION, ARMY
Fiscal year 1997 appropriation $339,109,000
Fiscal year 1998 budget request 377,337,000
Committee recommendation 377,337,000
Change from budget request
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $377,377,000 for
Environmental Restoration, Army. The recommendation is an increase of
$38,228,000 from the amount appropriated in fiscal year 1997.
ROCKY MOUNTAIN ARSENAL
The Committee believes that priority should continue to be given to
the implementation of the ten-year cleanup plan for the Rocky Mountain
Arsenal property that has been agreed to by the Army, the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service, the Environmental Protection Agency, the State of
Colorado and the Shell Oil Company.
ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION, NAVY
Fiscal year 1997 appropriation $287,788,000
Fiscal year 1998 budget request 277,500,000
Committee recommendation 277,500,000
Change from budget request
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $277,500,000 for
Environmental Restoration, Navy. The recommendation is a decrease of
$10,288,000 from the amount appropriated in fiscal year 1997.
NAVAL AIR STATION BERMUDA
In 1995, the U.S. Navy closed its air station on the island of
Bermuda. A study commissioned by the Government of Bermuda conducted a
comprehensive environmental assessment that found evidence of
underground storage tanks that were leaking oil, a cave filled with
abandoned industrial waste, lead and solvents in excessive of
permissible levels and asbestos. The Committee notes that DoD policy
directs DoD Components to take ``prompt action to remedy known imminent
and substantial danger to human health and safety'' that is due to
environmental contamination caused by DoD operations, even when dealing
with DoD installations that have already been returned to a host nation.
The Committee therefore directs the Secretary of the Navy to review the
environmental study provided by the Government of Bermuda to determine
any potential responsibilities and obligations and to provide to the
Committee a report on this review not later than October 31, 1997.
ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION, AIR FORCE
Fiscal year 1997 appropriation $394,010,000
Fiscal year 1998 budget request 378,900,000
Committee recommendation 378,900,000
Change from budget request
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $378,900,000 for
Environmental Restoration, Air Force. The recommendation is a decrease
of $15,110,000 from the amount appropriated in fiscal year 1997.
ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION, DEFENSE-WIDE
Fiscal year 1997 appropriation $36,722,000
Fiscal year 1998 budget request 27,900,000
Committee recommendation 27,900,000
Change from budget request
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $27,900,000 for
Environmental Restoration, Defense-wide. The recommendation is a
decrease of $8,822,000 from the amount appropriated in fiscal year 1997.
ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION, FORMERLY USED DEFENSE SITES
Fiscal year 1997 appropriation $256,387,000
Fiscal year 1998 budget request 202,300,000
Committee recommendation 202,300,000
Change from budget request
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $202,300,000 for
Environmental Restoration, Formerly Used Defense Sites. The
recommendation is a decrease of $54,087,000 from the amount appropriated
in fiscal year 1997.
NEWMARK
The Committee understands that both the Environmental Protection
Agency and the City of San Bernardino believe that the Newmark and
Muscoy plume contamination in San Bernardino, California is a direct
result of industrial waste from a World War II depot and maintenance
facility (Camp Ono). Report language in the conference report
accompanying the fiscal year 1997 DoD Appropriations Bill highlighted
the urgency of this problem and requested prompt action by the
Department of Defense. Because the Department has not adequately
responded to last year's report language concerning this important
issue, the Committee directs the DoD, within 90 days of enactment of
this Act, to provide a report to the Committee which fully explains the
Department's current and future plans relating to its role in the
cleanup of the Newmark/Muscoy site.
OVERSEAS HUMANITARIAN, DISASTER, AND CIVIC AID
Fiscal year 1997 appropriation $49,000,000
Fiscal year 1998 budget request 80,130,000
Committee recommendation 55,557,000
Change from budget request -24,573,000
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $55,557,000 for Overseas
Humanitarian, Disaster, and Civic Aid. The recommendation is an increase
of $6,557,000 from the amount appropriated in fiscal year 1997.
HUMANITARIAN DEMINING
The budget requests $80,130,000 for Overseas Humanitarian, Disaster,
and Civic Aid. This is an increase of $31,130,000 over the fiscal year
1997 levels. While the Committee believes an across the board increase
of this scope is unwarranted, it does support the Department's increased
efforts in Humanitarian Demining. The Committee therefore recommends a
reduction of only $24,573,000.
FORMER SOVIET UNION THREAT REDUCTION
Fiscal year 1997 appropriation $327,900,000
Fiscal year 1998 budget request 382,200,000
Committee recommendation 284,700,000
Change from budget request -97,500,000
The Department requested $382,200,000 for Cooperative Threat
Reduction (CTR) programs. The Committee recommends $284,700,000, a
reduction of $97,500,000, consistent with the House-passed Defense
Authorization bill. The Committee recommends the following reductions:
Weapons Storage Security -$12,500,000
Reactor Core Conversion -41,000,000
Chemical Weapons Destruction -41,000,000
Defense and Military Contacts (Belarus) -1,000,000
Other Assessments -2,000,000
These reductions are due to: availability of prior year funds
(Weapons Storage, -$12,500,000); lack of an implementing agreement
(Reactor Core Conversion, -$41,000,000); lack of proper costing data,
justification or site (Chemical Weapons Destruction, -$41,000,000); and,
lack of certification (Defense and Military Contacts, -$1,000,000) and
reduced administrative requirements (Other, -$2,000,000).
In addition, the Committee also notes that current unobligated
balances for CTR are in excess of $600,000,000. This slow execution rate
has been a pattern throughout the history of this program. The Committee
believes that the Department should pay closer attention to the
management of these funds and therefore recommends that fiscal year 1998
CTR funds be available for obligation only for 3 years.
QUALITY OF LIFE ENHANCEMENTS, DEFENSE
Fiscal year 1997 appropriation $600,000,000
Fiscal year 1998 budget request 0
Committee recommendation 0
Change from budget request 0
Budget request did not include, and the Committee recommends no
funding for, Quality of Life Enhancements, Defense. The recommendation
is a decrease of $600,000,000 below the amount appropriated in fiscal
year 1997.
As described elsewhere in this report, the Committee continues its
vigorous support for improvements to the quality of life for Service
personnel. The Committee has recommended an increase of $360,000,000
above the budget request (out of a total real property maintenance
increase of $924,840,000 above the budget requet) for improvements to
barracks, dormitories and related facilities. The Committee designates
this increased funding as a special interest item, subject to prior
approval reprogramming procedures discussed elsewhere in this report.
TITLE III
PROCUREMENT
ESTIMATES AND APPROPRIATION SUMMARY
The fiscal year 1998 Department of Defense procurement budget
requests totals $41,585,178,000. The accompanying bill recommends
$45,515,962,000. The total amount recommended is an increase of
$3,930,784,000 above the fiscal year 1998 budget estimate and is
$1,700,478,000 above the total provided in fiscal year 1997. The
Committee recommendation includes $850,000,000 for National Guard and
Reserve Equipment. The table below summarizes the budget estimates and
the Committee's recommendations:
Offset Folio 100 Inserts Here
REDUCED USE OF SOLVENT ADHESIVES
With the enactment of the Pollution Prevention Act, Congress
recognized that there are significant opportunities for industry to
reduce or prevent pollution at the source through cost-effective changes
in manufacturing production, operations, and raw material use. The Act
states that source reduction is more desirable than waste management or
pollution control. The Committee believes that there are many products
procured by the military which can be manufactured with a substantial
reduction of solvents used in the manufacturing process. In particular,
many materials used in products must be joined together in the
manufacturing process with multiple coats of solvent adhesives. The
Committee urges the Defense Department to purchase products which are
manufactured in a manner that minimizes the use of solvent adhesives
during manufacturing because it reduces pollution at its source and is
cost effective.
ALTERNATIVE FUELED VEHICLES
The DoD requested authorization to procure 811 passenger vehicles in
fiscal year 1998. The Committee approves the DoD request for passenger
vehicles.
Public Law 102 486 (Sec. 303) directs that of the total number of
vehicles acquired in fiscal year 1998 by a federal fleet, at least 50
percent must be alternative fueled vehicles. The Committee directs the
Secretary of Defense to procure, within available funds, alternative
fueled vehicles to comply with P.L 102 486 (Sec. 303). The alternative
fueled vehicles are to include, but not be limited to, natural gas and
electric vehicles.
commander's tactical terminal/joint tactical terminal
The Committee is aware that an ongoing contract protest is preventing
the Services from procuring the Joint Tactical Terminal (JTT). The
Committee understands how critical it is for commanders to have the
capability to receive data and supports the Services in the procurement
of the Commander's Tactical Terminal (CTT) to meet their immediate
requirements. The Committee approves the budget request for CTT/JTT
procurement with the understanding that the Services continue to use
these funds and prior year funds to procure CTTs until the JTT contract
is awarded.
CLASSIFIED PROGRAMS
Adjustments to classified procurement programs are addressed in a
classified annex accompanying this report.
AIRCRAFT PROCUREMENT, ARMY
Fiscal year 1997 appropriation $1,348,434,000
Fiscal year 1998 budget request 1,029,459,000
Committee recommendation 1,541,217,000
Change from budget request +511,758,000
This appropriation finances the acquisition of tactical and utility
airplanes and helicopters, including associated electronics, electronic
warfare, and communications equipment and armament, modification of
in-service aircraft; ground support equipment, components and parts such
as spare engines, transmissions, gear boxes, and sensor equipment. It
also funds related training devices such as combat flight simulators and
production base support.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS
AUTHORIZATION CHANGES
The Committee recommends the following changes to the budget request
in accordance with House authorization action:
[In thousands of dollars]
Item Budget request Committee recommended Change from request
Short range UAV 0 20,000 +20,000
C 12 Cargo Mods 613 6,613 +6,000
Aircraft Survivability Equipment 905 15,705 +14,800
FIXED WING
GUARDRAIL COMMON SENSOR
The Army requested $3,388,000 for the Guardrail Common Sensor (GRCS).
The Committee recommends $13,046,000 an increase of $9,658,000. Of this
amount, $3,000,000 is to upgrade the Communication High Accuracy
Airborne Location System (CHAALS) capability to the GRCS system in
Korea; and $6,658,000 is to complete the fielding of the GRCS program
embedded training requirement.
ROTARY WING
UH 60 BLACKHAWK
The Army requested $183,231,000 for UH 60 Blackhawk helicopters. The
Committee recommends $309,231,000, an increase of $126,000,000. Of the
increase, $64,000,000 is only to procure eight additional Blackhawk
helicopters for the Army National Guard (ARNG), $56,000,000 is only to
procure four Blackhawk derivatives (CH 60) for the Naval Reserve, and
$6,000,000 is only for modification kits to configure three of the ARNG
aircraft as enhanced medical evacuation models.
The Army's budget submission to the Secretary of Defense did not
include funding for Blackhawk production. The Office of the Secretary of
Defense added funding to the Army budget for Blackhawks to maintain the
current multi-year contract until the Navy begins procuring a Blackhawk
variant in fiscal year 2000. In testimony to the Committee, the Army
stated that it has satisfied the active Army's warfighting requirement
for Blackhawks and has no plans to procure additional aircraft in the
near future. In contrast, the ARNG has a pressing need to update its
utility helicopter fleet. Therefore, the Committee directs that the 18
helicopters requested in the fiscal year 1998 budget request be provided
only to the National Guard. The Committee notes that the Army has
planned for 18 aircraft in fiscal year 1999 and directs that adequate
funding for the multi-year contract be submitted with the fiscal year
1999 budget request.
In fiscal year 1997, the Committee provided an additional 6 Blackhawk
helicopters to the Army. The Committee directs that one of the 1997
aircraft is to replace the Blackhawk loaned to the Navy for the VERTERP
Demonstration Program.
KIOWA WARRIOR
The Army requested $38,822,000 for Kiowa Warrior helicopters. The
Committee recommends $213,822,000, an increase of $175,000,000. Of the
increase, $151,700,000 is only for Kiowa Warrior production and
$23,300,000 is only for safety enhancements. The Committee notes that
fiscal year 1998 is the second year that the Army has not funded Kiowa
Warrior safety modifications and has identified the item as an unfunded
requirement. Given the importance of the safety modification program,
the Committee directs the Army to provide sufficient funds in the fiscal
year 1999 budget request.
EH 60 QUICKFIX MODIFICATIONS
The Army requested $38,140,000 for the EH 60 Quickfix mods. The
Committee recommends $44,640,000, an increase of $6,500,000 to procure
Ground Based Common Sensor/AQF institutional training devices.
ASE MODIFICATIONS
The Army requested $4,578,000 for ASE modifications. The Committee
recommends $19,078,000, an increase of $14,500,000. Of the additional
funds, $7,000,000 is only to procure and install AN/AVR 2A laser
detecting sets and $7,500,000 is only for the Advanced Threat Infrared
Countermeasures/Common Missile Warning System for the Longbow Apache
helicopter.
OTHER SUPPORT EQUIPMENT
TRAINING DEVICES
The Army requested no funds for training devices. The Committee
recommends $9,300,000 only for improved flight simulators which include
geographic specific data-bases.
COMMON GROUND EQUIPMENT
The Army requested $30,636,000 for common ground equipment. The
Committee recommends $27,636,000, a decrease of $3,000,000 which was
budgeted for the Air Traffic Navigation, Integration and Coordination
System (ATNAVICS). Subsequent to the fiscal year 1998 budget submission,
the Committee learned that the budget did not include funding to
complete ATNAVICS testing. Therefore, the Committee has transferred
funds not required for procurement to research and development.
PROGRAM RECOMMENDED
The total amount recommended in the bill will provide the following
program in fiscal year 1998:
Offset Folio 104 Inserts Here
MISSILE PROCUREMENT, ARMY
Fiscal year 1997 appropriation $1,041,867,000
Fiscal year 1998 budget request 1,178,151,000
Committee recommendation 771,942,000
Change from budget request -406,209,000
This appropriation finances the acquisition of surface-to-air,
surface-to-surface, and anti-tank/assault missile systems. Also included
are major components, modifications, targets, test equipment, and
production base support.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS
AUTHORIZATION CHANGES
The Committee recommends the following changes to the budget request
in accordance with House authorization action.
[In thousands of dollars]
Item Budget request Committee recommendation Change from request
Stinger Mods 12,411 21,711 +9,300
OTHER MISSILES
PATRIOT
The Army requested $349,109,000 for Patriot. The Committee recommends
transferring this amount to the Ballistic Missile Defense Organization
in the ``Procurement, Defense-Wide'' appropriation, as proposed in the
House-passed Defense Authorization bill.
HELLFIRE
The Army requested $279,687,000 for procurement of Hellfire missiles.
The Committee recommends $228,287,000, a decrease of $51,400,000. This
decrease includes a GAO recommended reduction of $5,400,000 for unused
prior year Hellfire II engineering change order (ECO) funding, a GAO
recommended reduction of $38,300,000 to Longbow Hellfire for overstated
missile requirements, and a reduction of $7,700,000 for tooling. With
regard to Longbow missile quantities, a recent GAO audit report states,
``The Army used an outdated helicopter carrying capability of 16
missiles instead of the current 12, double counted missiles when
figuring the residual readiness portion of the requirement, and used an
unsubstantiated mix ratio between Longbow Hellfire and Hellfire II
missiles. Correcting these mistakes would potentially reduce the current
12,722 missile requirement for Longbow Hellfire missiles by 7,145
missiles.'' The report goes on to identify limitations in Apache
carriage that could lead to reductions of another 1,184 missiles. The
DoD response did not dispute any of these GAO observations, but simply
stated it will consider an updated acquisition strategy for the fiscal
year 1999 budget. Given these circumstances, the Committee does not
believe that the 50 percent ramp-up in production in fiscal year 1998
compared to fiscal year 1997 nor procurement of additional tooling in
fiscal year 1998 is prudent until these requirement issues are resolved.
MLRS ROCKET
The Army requested $2,863,000 for MLRS Extended Range (MLRS ER)
rockets. The Committee recommends $14,863,000, an increase of
$12,000,000. While preparing its fiscal year 1998 budget, the Army
shifted funds from the MLRS ER rockets line-item to the launcher
line-item. At the time of submission of the budget, the Army hoped that
foreign military sales (FMS) would be sufficient to maintain the rocket
production line. However, the Army has since learned that FMS has not
materialized as expected and therefore requires an additional
$12,000,000 in the rockets line-item to maintain the production base.
The Committee therefore recommends increasing MLRS rocket funding by
$12,000,000 with an equal reduction to the MLRS launcher program.
MLRS LAUNCHER SYSTEMS
The Army requested $102,649,000 for MLRS Launchers. The Committee
recommends $105,649,000, a net increase of $3,000,000. The recommended
adjustment includes a $12,000,000 decrease to finance MLRS rocket
production as discussed above, and a $15,000,000 increase only for
Vehicular Intercommunication System (VIS) upgrades to MLRS vehicles.
BAT
The Army requested $85,208,000 for production of the BAT submunition.
The Committee recommends $45,208,000, a decrease of $40,000,000 equating
to a reduction of 165 BAT submunitions. The BAT submunition will be
deployed on ATACMS Block II missiles which do not enter production until
fiscal year 1999. The Committee believes that the quantity reduction can
be accommodated with little impact to the fiscal year 1999 ATACMS Block
II production program.
MODIFICATION OF MISSILES
PATRIOT MODS
The budget requests $20,825,000 for modifications to the Patriot
missile. The Committee recommends $30,825,000, an increase of
$10,000,000 only for procurement of additional GEM +/- upgrades.
PROGRAM RECOMMENDED
The total amount recommended in the bill will provide the following
program in fiscal year 1998:
Offset Folio 107 Insert Here
PROCUREMENT OF WEAPONS AND TRACKED COMBAT VEHICLES, ARMY
Fiscal year 1997 appropriation $1,470,286,000
Fiscal year 1998 budget request 1,065,707,000
Committee recommendation 1,332,907,000
Change from budget request +267,200,000
This appropriation finances the acquisition of tanks; personnel and
cargo carriers; fighting vehicles; tracked recovery vehicles;
self-propelled and towed howitzers; machine guns; mortars; modification
of in-service equipment; initial spares; and production base support.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS
AUTHORIZATION CHANGES
The Committee recommends the following changes to the budget request
in accordance with House authorization action:
[In thousands of dollars]
Item Budget request Committee recommended Change from request
Improved Recovery Vehicle 28,601 56,401 +27,800
Armor Machine Gun 0 20,000 +20,000
TRACKED COMBAT VEHICLES
BRADLEY BASE SUSTAINMENT
The Army requested $125,591,000 for Bradley base sustainment. The
Committee recommends $240,591,000, an increase of $115,000,000 only to
modify Bradley AO variants to the ODS variant for the Army National
Guard.
FIELD ARTILLERY AMMUNITION SUPPORT VEHICLE
The Army requested no funds for the Field Artillery Ammunition
Support Vehicle (FAASV). The Committee recommends $40,000,000 only to
procure two battalion sets for the Army National Guard.
MODIFICATION OF TRACKED COMBAT VEHICLES
CARRIER MODIFICATIONS
The Army requested $20,244,000 for carrier modifications. The
Committee recommends $28,644,000, an increase of $8,400,000 only to
procure night vision driver viewers for the M113A3.
howitzer, 155mm m109A6 (mod)
The Army requested $18,706,000 for the modification of M109A6
howitzers. The Committee recommends $74,706,000, an increase of
$56,000,000 only to modify two battalion sets of Paladins for the Army
National Guard.
PROGRAM RECOMMENDED
The total amount recommended in the bill will provide the following
program in fiscal year 1998:
Offset Folio 109 Insert Here
PROCUREMENT OF AMMUNITION, ARMY
Fiscal year 1997 appropriation $1,127,149,000
Fiscal year 1998 budget request 890,902,000
Committee recommendation 1,062,802,000
Change from budget request +171,900,000
This appropriation finances the acquisition of ammunition,
modification of in-service stock, and related production base support
including the maintenance, expansion, and modernization of industrial
facilities and equipment.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS
AUTHORIZATION CHANGES
The Committee recommends the following changes to the budget request
in accordance with House authorization action:
[In thousands of dollars]
Item Budget request Committee recommended Change from request
CTG, 5.56MM, All types 63,588 65,988 +2,400
CTG 7.62MM, All types 1,136 7,136 +6,000
.50 Cal, All types 19,977 20,177 +200
120MM HE Mortar (M934) 29,908 38,908 +9,000
120MM Illum (XM930) 0 3,000 +3,000
120MM TP T M831/831A1 52,226 62,026 +9,800
120MM TPCSDS TM865 111,653 124,453 +12,800
Fuze, Multi-option 0 20,000 +20,000
Simulators (all types) 4,573 5,073 +500
Conventional ammo demil 106,118 96,118 -10,000
AMMUNITION SHORTFALLS
The Committee has recommended an increase of $145,900,000 over the
budget request to satisfy ammunition shortfalls identified by the Army.
The Committee has recommended additional funds for the following items:
[In thousands of dollars]
Item Budget request Committee recommended Change from request
CTG, 5.56MM, All types 63,588 65,988 +2,400
.50 Cal, All types 19,977 20,177 +200
120MM HE Mortar (M934) 29,908 38,908 +9,000
120MM TP T M831/831A1 52,226 62,026 +9,800
120MM TPCSDS T M865 111,653 124,453 +12,800
155MM HE M795 0 55,000 +55,000
Fuze, Multi-option 0 20,000 +20,000
Rocket, Hydra (all types) 12,067 48,267 +36,200
Simulators (all types) 4,573 5,073 +500
MORTAR AMMUNITION
120mm full range practice (m931)
The Army requested $24,432,000 for 120MM full range practice (M931)
mortar ammunition. The Committee recommends $34,432,000, an increase of
$10,000,000 only to procure M931 rounds.
TANK AMMUNITION
120mm heat-mp-t m830a1
The Army requested no funds for CTG 120MM HEAT M830A1 ammunition. The
Committee recommends $10,000,000. Of the increase, $1,800,000 is only
for the modification of the existing M830A1 tank ammunition to the XM908
configuration and $8,200,000 is only to procure new M830A1 tank rounds
to replace the rounds which are modified. The Committee has learned that
the XM908 may satisfy an Army requirement to rapidly demolish concrete
obstacles and structures, especially in Korea. The Committee directs
that none of the funds appropriated for the XM908 may be obligated until
the Army develops a formal requirements document for XM908 ammunition.
ARTILLERY AMMUNITION
105mm dpicm xm915
The Army requested no funds for 105MM DPICM artillery ammunition. The
Committee recommends $20,000,000 only to procure DPICM ammunition.
ROCKETS
BUNKER DEFEATING MUNITION
The Army requested no funds for the Bunker Defeating Munition (BDM).
The Committee recommends $8,000,000 only to continue the procurement of
BDM.
AMMUNITION PRODUCTION BASE SUPPORT
PROVISION OF INDUSTRIAL FACILITIES
The Army requested $45,857,000 for the provision of industrial base
facilities. The Committee recommends $24,857,000, a decrease of
$21,000,000. The Committee continues to believe that maintaining the
unique capabilities of the ammunition industrial base is vital to ensure
that future ammunition requirements are satisfied. However, historical
data indicates slow obligation and execution rates for funds
appropriated in this account. Army accounting records show significant
amounts of fiscal year 1995, 1996, and 1997 unobligated funds.
Therefore, the Committee recommends that the budget request be reduced.
Of the available funds, $3,000,000 is only for the large caliber deep
drawn cartridge case program. The Committee directs that the Army
provide adequate funding for this effort in future budget submissions.
PROGRAM RECOMMENDED
The total amount recommended in the bill will provide the following
program in fiscal year 1998:
Offset Folios 112 Insert here
OTHER PROCUREMENT, ARMY
Fiscal year 1997 appropriation $3,172,485,000
Fiscal year 1998 budget request 2,455,030,000
Committee recommendation 2,502,886,000
Change from budget request +47,856,000
This appropriation finances the acquisition of: (a) tactical and
commercial vehicles, including trucks, semi-trailers, and trailers of
all types to provide mobility and utility support to field forces and
the worldwide logistical system; (b) communications and electronics
equipment of all types to provide fixed, semi-fixed, and mobile
strategic and tactical communications equipment; and (c) other support
equipment, such as chemical defensive equipment, tactical bridging, shop
sets, and construction equipment, floating and rail equipment,
generators and power units, material handling equipment, medical support
equipment, special equipment for user testing, and non-system training
devices. In each of these activities funds are also included for
modifications of in-service equipment, investment spares and repair
parts, and production base support.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS
AUTHORIZATION CHANGES
The Committee recommends the following changes to the budget request
in accordance with House authorization action:
[In thousands of dollars]
Item Budget request Committee recommended Change from request
HMMWV 66,233 104,933 +38,700
Items less than $2.0M (TIARA) 0 2,800 +2,800
Training Devices, Nonsystem 49,688 53,688 +4,000
Depot Maintenance of Other End Items 24,819 0 -24,819
TACTICAL AND SUPPORT VEHICLES
semi-trailer, container transporter
The Army requested $9,361,000 for the procurement of semi-trailer
container transporters. The Committee recommends no funding. Since, the
Army will not complete the testing of the semi-trailers until December
1998 and will not initiate full procurement until fiscal year 1999, the
Committee believes the fiscal year 1998 budget request should be denied.
semi-trailer, tank, 5000 gallon
The Army requested $7,581,000 for the procurement of 5000 gallon tank
semi-trailers. The Committee recommends $3,000,000, a decrease of
$4,581,000. The Committee has learned that the program has been delayed
and testing will not be completed until December 1998. Full scale
production is scheduled for fiscal year 1999. The Committee believes
that the remaining funds are adequate to procure test articles and
associated engineering support services.
semi-trailer, tank 7500 gallon
The Army requested $10,408,000 for the procurement of 7500 gallon
tank semi-trailers. The Committee recommends $2,000,000, a reduction of
$8,408,000. The Committee has learned that the program has been delayed
and full scale production is scheduled for fiscal year 1999. The
Committee believes the remaining funds are sufficient to procure test
articles and engineering support services.
FAMILY OF MEDIUM TACTICAL VEHICLES
The Army requested $209,446,000 for the Family of Medium Tactical
Vehicles (FMTV). The Committee recommends the requested amount.
The Army has approved a dual source strategy for FMTV. The Army
believes that developing a second production source for FMTV's will
yield significant savings and expects to award a competitive contract in
fiscal year 2000. Since the current contract will expire in 1998 and the
competitive contract will not be awarded until 2000, the Committee
understands that the Army may achieve savings in fiscal years 1998 and
1999 through a multi-year contract for FMTV. Therefore, in section 8008
of the General Provisions, the Committee has provided the necessary
authority for a two-year multi-year contract. However, the Army may not
enter into a multi-year contract without prior approval from the
congressional defense committees. The Committee expects that the
multi-year proposal will be supported with the standard multi-year
justification materials. Furthermore, the Committee directs the award of
a multi-year contract is to have no impact on the current FMTV
competition strategy.
FAMILY OF HEAVY TACTICAL VEHICLES
The Army requested $9,071,000 for the Family of Heavy Tactical
Vehicles. The Committee recommends $87,071,000, an increase of
$78,000,000. Of the increase, $45,000,000 is only to procure Heavy
Equipment Transporters and $33,000,000 is only to procure Heavy Expanded
Mobility Tactical Trucks.
ARMORED SECURITY VEHICLES
The Army requested $9,470,000 for armored security vehicles. The
Committee recommends $10,970,000, an increase of $1,500,000 only to
procure Vehicular Intercommunications Systems for the armored security
vehicle fleet.
truck, tractor, line haul
The Army requested $36,079,000 to procure line haul tractor trailers.
The Committee recommends no funds. The line haul trailers will be used
to pull 7500 gallon tank semi-trailers. Since the trailer program has
been delayed until fiscal year 1999, the Committee believes the budget
request should be denied.
self-loading/off-loading trailer
The Committee understands that the Army is finalizing the operational
requirements document for single operator trailer equipment. The
Committee encourages the Army to consider commercially available
technologies to satisfy this tactical trailer requirement.
COMMUNICATIONS--SATELLITE COMMUNICATIONS
DEFENSE SATELLITE COMMUNICATIONS SYSTEM
The Army requested $87,643,000 for defense satellite communications
systems. The Committee recommends $83,143,000, a reduction of
$4,500,000. The budget request includes funds to accelerate the
production of the universal modem system. However, the required testing
for the system will not be completed until late 1999. The recommended
funding will maintain the current rate of production.
SATELLITE TERMINALS, EMUT
The Army requested $7,264,000 for Enhanced Manpack UHF Terminal
programs (EMUT). The Committee recommends $6,064,000, a decrease of
$1,200,000. As a result of a combined Army and Air Force procurement,
contract savings were achieved for the EMUT in fiscal year 1997.
Therefore, the Committee believes the savings in fiscal year 1997 can be
used to offset the fiscal year 1998 budget request.
NAVSTAR GLOBAL POSITIONING SYSTEM
The Army requested $6,796,000 for the NAVSTAR global positioning
system. The Committee recommends $5,596,000, a decrease of $1,200,000.
The Committee understands that both quantity and price budgeted for
miniaturized airborne global positioning system receivers were reduced
in fiscal year 1997. Additionally, reductions in program management have
also resulted in program savings.
SCAMP
The Army requested $4,305,000 to procure Single Channel Anti-jam
manportable (SCAMP) terminals. The Committee recommends $10,405,000, an
increase of $6,100,000 only to procure new SCAMP terminals.
GLOBAL BROADCAST SERVICE
The Army requested $4,967,000 to procure global broadcast service
ground receive terminals. The Committee recommends no funding.
Subsequent to the budget submission, the Army decided not to procure the
terminals, but instead will use Air Force terminals.
COMMUNICATIONS--COMBAT COMMUNICATIONS
ARMY DATA DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM
The Army requested $57,165,000 for the Army Data Distribution System.
The Committee recommends $57,065,000, a decrease of $100,000. This
includes an increase of $20,000,000 only for the Enhanced Position
Locating and Report System and a decrease of $20,100,000 for the Joint
Tactical Information System (JTIDS). The Committee recommends
transfering JTIDS funds to the Ballistic Missile Defense Office under
the Procurement, Defense-wide appropriation.
SINCGARS FAMILY
The Army requested $290,164,000 for the SINCGARS family. The
Committee recommends $302,164,000, an increase of $12,000,000 only for
Frequency Hopping Multiplexers.
COMBAT SURVIVOR EVADER LOCATOR
The Army requested $5,677,000 for the procurement of combat survivor
evader locator systems. The Committee recommends no funding. Since the
combat survivor evader system development program has been delayed until
the end of fiscal year 1998, the procurement funding can be delayed.
ELECTRONIC EQUIPMENT
ALL SOURCE ANALYSIS SYSTEM
The Army requested $7,772,000 for the All Source Analysis System. The
Committee recommends $26,959,000, an increase of $19,187,000. Of this
amount, $13,500,000 is only to procure ASAS Remote Workstation (RWS) and
$5,687,000 is to procure the CI/HUMINT Automated Tool Set (CHATS) for
Echelons Corps and Below units.
iew--ground based common sensors
The Army requested $26,817,000 for IEW-Ground Based Common Sensor.
The Committee denies this request because of the Army's decision to
reschedule the IOT&E for this program.
ELECTRONIC EQUIPMENT--ELECTRONIC WARFARE
SHORTSHOP
The Army requested no funds for Shortstop Electronic Protection
System (SEPS). The Committee recommends $6,000,000 to procure Shortstop
SEPS so that deployed forces have adequate protection for artillery,
mortar and rocket attacks.
SENTINEL
The Army requested $41,014,000 for Sentinel. The Committee recommends
$51,014,000, an increase of $10,000,000 only to procure additional
Sentinel systems.
NIGHT VISION DEVICES
The Army requested $85,312,000 for night vision devices. The
Committee recommends $99,712,000, an increase of $14,400,000. Of the
increase, $3,000,000 is only for light weight video reconnaissance
systems and $11,400,000 to only for AN/PAS 13 thermal weapons sights.
ELECTRONIC EQUIPMENT--TACTICAL C 2 SYSTEMS
MANEUVER CONTROL SYSTEM
The Army requested $15,669,000 for Maneuver Control System (MCS)
hardware. The Committee recommends no funding. The MCS software program
which has been in development since the 1980's, was restructured in
fiscal year 1993. MCS software Initial Operational Test and Evaluation
(IOT&E) initially scheduled for November 1995 has slipped three times
and is currently scheduled for March 1998. According to the GAO, MCS
failed two of four Developmental Operational Test and Evaluation
operational issues. Furthermore, a System Confidence Demonstration
(SCD), a post-SCD, and a post-post SCD, demonstrated that the software
was not ready for IOT&E. The Army requested that it be allowed to
procure training base computers for MCS prior to Milestone III. Since
the MCS system has yet to pass an operational test, the Committee does
not believe that the Army has a critical need to acquire training base
computers prior to a Milestone III decision.
STANDARD INTEGRATED COMMAND POST SYSTEM
The Army requested $26,551,000 for standard integrated command post
systems. The Committee recommends $36,551,000, an increase of
$10,000,000 only to add vehicular intercommunications systems (AN/VIC3)
to standard integrated command post vehicles.
ELECTRONIC EQUIPMENT--AUTOMATION
AUTOMATED DATA PROCESSING EQUIPMENT
Information on this project can be found in the Information Resources
Management section of this report.
RESERVE COMPONENT AUTOMATION SYSTEM
The Army requested $114,323,000 for the Reserve Component Automation
System. The Committee supports this request and recommends the full
$114,323,000 only for this program.
ELECTRONIC EQUIPMENT--TEST MEASUREMENT EQUIPMENT
INTEGRATED FAMILY OF TEST EQUIPMENT
The Army requested no funds for the Integrated Family of Test
Equipment (IFTE). The Committee recommends $29,000,000 only for IFTE
procurement.
MAINTENANCE EQUIPMENT
ITEMS LESS THAN $2.0 MILLION
The Army requested $1,167,000 for items less than $2.0 million
(maintenance equipment). The Committee recommends $5,167,000, an
increase of $4,000,000 only for laser leveling devices.
RAIL FLOAT CONTAINERIZATION EQUIPMENT
RAILWAY CAR, FLAT, 100 TON
The Army requested $17,755,000 for 100 ton, flat railway cars. The
Committee recommends no funding. Subsequent to the budget submission,
the Committee learned that the Army procured 300 used railway cars in
fiscal year 1997. Since the fiscal year 1997 buy satisfies the Army's
plan to procure railway cars in fiscal year 1997 and 1998, the Committee
believes that the fiscal year 1998 request is unnecessary.
TRAINING EQUIPMENT
simnet/close combat tactical trainer
The Army requested $92,968,000 for the Simnet/Close Combat Tactical
Trainer (CCTT). The Committee recommends no funding. Since the
submission of the budget request, the Army has made significant schedule
changes to the CCTT acquisition plan. Software stability problems have
delayed the program by almost one year. CCTT operational testing will
begin in 1998 and a Milestone III decision to proceed to full-scale
production will not be made until fiscal year 1999. The Committee's
Survey's and Investigations staff has learned that the Army needs 48
simulators to conduct required testing. To date, the Army has purchased
110 simulators. Since the Army has sufficient simulators for testing and
full-rate production will not begin until 1999, the Committee denies
procurement funding. However, the Committee recommends additional funds
in research and development for required testing which was not included
in the budget request.
TACTICAL FACSIMILE SYSTEM
The Committee has learned that the Army is replacing aging facsimile
machines. The fielded facsimile machines provide poor image quality and
experience reliability and maintenance problems because of their age.
The Committee encourages the Army to procure TS 21 Blackjack facsimile
systems to meet Army requirements for interoperability, speed of
transmission, and transportability.
GUN LAYING POSITIONING SYSTEM
The Army requested no funds for the Gun Laying Positioning System
(GLPS). The Committee recommends $6,000,000 only for GLPS. Additional
details are provided under the heading ``Force XXI Initiatives.''
RADIO FREQUENCY TECHNOLOGY
The Army requested no funds for the Radio Frequency Technology. The
Committee recommends $2,900,000 only for Radio Frequency Technology.
Additional details are provided under the heading ``Force XXI
Initiatives.''
LIGHTWEIGHT LASER DESIGNATOR/RANGE FINDER
The Army requested no funds for Lightweight Laser Designator/Range
Finder. The Committee recommends $2,800,000 only for the lightweight
laser designator/range finder. Additional details are provided under the
heading ``Force XXI Initiatives.''
COMBAT SYNTHETIC TRAINING ASSESSMENT RANGE
The Army requested no funds for Combat Synthetic Training Assessment
Range. The Committee recommends $5,400,000 only for the Combat Synthetic
Training Assessment Range. Additional details are provided under the
heading ``Force XXI Initiatives.''
AIRBORNE COMMAND AND CONTROL SYSTEM
The Army requested no funds for Airborne Command and Control System.
The Committee recommends $11,100,000 only for the Airborne Command and
Control System. Additional details are provided under the heading
``Force XXI Initiatives.''
AVENGER SLEW TO CUE
The Army requested no funds for Avenger Slew to Cue System. The
Committee recommends $7,400,000 only for Avenger Slew to Cue. Additional
details are provided under the heading ``Force XXI Initiatives.''
PALLETIZED LOADING SYSTEM ENHANCED
The Army requested no funds for Palletized Loading System Enhanced.
The Committee recommends $3,000,000 only for Palletized Loading System
Enhanced. Additional details are provided under the heading ``Force XXI
Initiatives.''
PROGRAM RECOMMENDED
The total amount recommended in the bill will provide the following
programs in fiscal year 1998:
Offset Folios 120 to 121 Insert here
AIRCRAFT PROCUREMENT, NAVY
Fiscal year 1997 appropriation $7,027,010,000
Fiscal year 1998 budget request 6,085,965,000
Committee recommendation 5,951,965,000
Change from budget request +801,500,000
This appropriation provides funds for the procurement of aircraft and
related support equipment and programs; flight simulators; equipment to
modify in-service aircraft to extend their service life, eliminate
safety hazards, and improve their operational effectiveness; and spares
and ground support equipment for all end items procured by this
appropriation.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS
AUTHORIZATION CHANGES
The Committee recommends the following changes in accordance with
House authorization action:
[In thousands of dollars]
Budget request Committee recommendation Change from request
AV 8B 277,648 310,648 +33,000
V 22 472,007 661,307 +189,300
2C 236,474 304,474 +68,000
KC 130J 0 179,700 +179,700
Common ground equipment 287,114 274,114 -13,000
COMBAT AIRCRAFT
F/A 18E/F Hornet
The Navy requested $2,101,100,000 to procure 20 F/A 18E/F Hornet
aircraft. The Committee recommends providing the amount requested. The
Navy has invested $4,982,000,000 in development and $2,408,000,000 to
produce F/A 18E/F aircraft through fiscal year 1997. The F/A 18E/F
offers significant warfighting improvements for Naval aviation which
will be used for decades: the F/A 18E/F can fly 40 percent farther,
remain on station 80 percent longer, carry more weapons, and is more
lethal and survivable than current generation F/A 18C/D aircraft which
have no room for modern avionics upgrades. Aircraft weight remains well
below the specification weight requirement, even with all known
potential increases considered. With funds appropriated by Congress in
prior years, production of the F/A 18E/F is well underway. The program
is considered to be a model acquisition and it was recently endorsed in
the Quadrennial Defense Review. The Secretary of Defense recently
informed the defense committees that the F/A 18E/F Super Hornet program
is a cornerstone of the Defense Department's tactical air modernization
program. Recent General Accounting Office reports on the F/A 18E/F have
raised valid points about potential cost savings from buying older
generation F/A 18C/D model aircraft rather than the new model, but they
have not disclosed a single major significant cost or technical
difficulty. For these many reasons, the Committee endorses the need to
increase F/A 18E/F production in fiscal year 1998 because of the need to
attain lower per unit costs through efficient high-rate production, but
more importantly, to field vital warfighting capability to the fleet as
soon as possible.
MODIFICATION OF AIRCRAFT
ea 6 Series
The Navy requested $86,783,000 for EA 6B modifications. The Committee
recommends $169,783,000, an increase of $83,000,000. Within this amount,
$50,000,000 is for wing center sections, $18,000,000 is for turbine
blade containment upgrades, and $15,000,000 is for USQ 113
communications jammers.
H 1 SERIES
The Navy requested $18,489,000 for H 1 series modifications. The
Committee recommends $16,389,000, a decrease of $2,100,000. This amount
includes an increase of $3,500,000 only for UH 1 internal rescue hoists
and a transfer of $5,600,000 to research and development for UH 1
upgrades (PE 0604245N).
P 3 series
The Navy requested $164,907,000 for P 3 modifications. The Committee
recommends $293,907,000, an increase of $129,000,000. Within this
amount, $56,600,000 is for the anti-surface warfare improvement program,
$35,100,000 is for the sustained readiness program, $18,500,000 is only
to modify AIP processors with specific emitter identification
capability, $12,800,000 is only for the replacement data storage system,
and $6,000,000 is only for the lightweight environmentally sealed
parachute assembly.
E 2 SERIES
The Navy requested $49,073,000 for E 2 modifications. The Committee
recommends $50,673,000, an increase of $1,600,000 only for the oil
debris detection and burnoff system. The increased funds may also be
used for C 2 and P 3 aircraft.
COMMON AVIONICS CHANGES
The Navy requested $131,599,000 for common avionics changes. The
Committee recommends $130,599,000, a decrease of $1,000,000. This
includes a decrease of $10,000,000 recommended in the House-passed
Defense Authorization bill and an increase of $9,000,000 only for the
AN/AWW 13 guided weapon control monitor set.
AIRCRAFT SUPPORT EQUIPMENT AND FACILITIES
COMMON GROUND EQUIPMENT
The Navy requested $287,114,000 for common ground equipment. The
Committee recommends $274,114,000, a decrease of $13,000,000 as
recommended in the House-passed Defense Authorization bill. Within the
total amount provided, $1,000,000 is only to support the establishment
and implementation of computer based training programs for naval air
reserve aircrews.
PROGRAM RECOMMENDED
The total recommended in the bill will provide the following program
in fiscal year 1998:
Offset Folios 125 Insert here
WEAPONS PROCUREMENT, NAVY
Fiscal year 1997 appropriation $1,389,913,000
Fiscal year 1998 budget request 1,136,293,000
Committee recommendation 1,175,393,000
Change from budget request +39,100,000
This appropriation provides funds for the procurement of strategic
and tactical missiles, target drones, torpedoes, guns, associated
support equipment, and modification of in-service missiles, torpedoes,
and guns.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS
AUTHORIZATION CHANGES
The Committee recommends the following changes to the budget request
in accordance with House authorization action.
[In thousands of dollars]
Item Budget request Committee recommendation Change from request
JSOW 58,665 68,665 +10,000
Hellfire 0 37,500 +37,500
Standard missile 35,601 68,601 +33,000
Weapons industrial facilities 34,932 25,932 -9,000
CIWS MODS (surface mode) 9,990 29,990 +20,000
BALLISTIC MISSILES
TRIDENT ADVANCE PROCUREMENT
The Navy requested $47,021,000 for advance procurement of long lead
items for fiscal year 1999 Trident II missiles. The Committee recommends
$32,021,000, a decrease of $15,000,000. The Committee notes that over
$19,000,000 of fiscal year 1996 Trident II long lead funding has not
been obligated based on DOD accounting reports.
In fiscal year 1997, $26,456,000 remains unobligated. Further,
Navy budget documentation indicates that fiscal year 1998 long lead
funding for the airframe and motor will not be obligated until fiscal
year 1999. Since funding is being requested ahead of need, the Committee
recommends a reduction of $15,000,000 to the Trident II advanced
procurement request.
OTHER MISSILES
ESSM
The Navy requested $15,529,000 for the Evolved Seasparrow Missile
(ESSM) program. The Committee recommends $5,529,000, a reduction of
$10,000,000. The ESSM program begins low rate production in fiscal year
1999 with 87 missiles, including foreign military sales. Though the
tooling procured in the research and development program supports
procurement rates of up to 180 missiles per year, the Navy's fiscal year
1998 budget nevertheless requests funding for full rate production
tooling one year prior to approval of low rate production and two years
prior to approval for full rate production. The Committee believes that
such a request is premature, and therefore recommends a reduction of
$10,000,000.
STANDARD MISSILE
The Navy requested $196,492,000 for Standard Missile. The Committee
recommends $181,092,000, a decrease of $15,400,000. The funds for the
Navy Lower Tier program have been transferred to the Ballistic Missile
Defense Organization, in the ``Procurement, Defense-Wide'' appropriation
as proposed in the House-passed Defense Authorization bill.
AERIAL TARGETS
The Navy requested $72,923,000 for aerial targets. The Committee
recommends $65,923,000, a decrease of $7,000,000 due to reduced
requirements.
SPARES AND REPAIR PARTS
The Navy requested $26,943,000 for spares and repair parts. The
Committee recommends $21,943,000, a reduction of $5,000,000 based on
large unobligated balances in fiscal years 1995, 1996, and 1997.
PROGRAM RECOMMENDED
The total amount recommended in the bill will provide the following
program in fiscal year 1998:
Offset Folios 128 Insert here
PROCUREMENT OF AMMUNITION, NAVY AND MARINE CORPS
Fiscal year 1997 appropriation $289,695,000
Fiscal year 1998 budget request 336,797,000
Committee recommendation 423,797,000
Change from budget request +87,000,000
This appropriation finances the acquisition of ammunition, ammunition
modernization and ammunition related materiel for the Navy and Marine
Corps.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS
AUTHORIZATION CHANGES
The Committee recommends the following changes to the budget request
in accordance with House authorization action:
AUTHORIZATION CHANGES
[In thousands of dollars]
Item Budget request Committee recommended Change from request
5.56MM, All types 33,000 36,000 +3,000
CTG 7.62MM, All types 2,900 8,900 +6,000
Fuze, ET, XM762 0 7,000 +7,000
AMMUNITION SHORTFALLS
The Committee has recommended an additional $30,000,000 to satisfy
ammunition shortfalls identified by the Marine Corps. The Committee has
recommended additional funds for the following items:
[In thousands of dollars]
Item Budget request Committee recommended Change from request
5.56MM, All types 33,000 36,000 +3,000
Linear charges, all types 2,290 17,290 +15,000
40MM, All types 5,701 10,701 +5,000
Fuze, ET, XM762 0 7,000 +7,000
NAVY AMMUNITION
PRACTICE BOMBS
The Navy requested $41,766,000 for practice bombs. The Committee
recommends $56,766,000, an increase of $15,000,000 only to procure laser
guided training rounds.
5 inch/54 gun ammunition
The Navy requested $27,669,000 for 5 inch/54 gun ammunition. The
Committee recommends $60,169,000, an increase of $32,500,000 only to
procure DPICM ammunition.
20MM pgu 28
The Navy requested no funds for 20MM PGU 28 ammunition. The Committee
recommends $3,500,000 only to procure 20MM PGU 28 ammunition.
PROGRAM RECOMMENDED
The total recommended in the bill will provide the following program
in fiscal year 1998:
Offset Folios 131 Insert here
SHIPBUILDING AND CONVERSION, NAVY
Fiscal year 1997 appropriation $5,613,665,000
Fiscal year 1998 budget request 7,438,158,000
Committee recommendation 7,628,158,000
Change from budget request +190,000,000
This appropriation provides funds for the construction of new ships
and the purchase and conversion of existing ships, including hull,
mechanical, and electrical equipment, electronics, guns, torpedo and
missile launching systems, and communications systems.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS
AUTHORIZATION CHANGES
The Committee recommends the following changes in accordance with
House authorization action:
[In thousands of dollars]
Budget Request Committee Recommendation Change from Request
LPD 17 0 185,000 +185,000
Outfitting 28,140 21,140 -7,000
Post Delivery 90,177 81,177 -9,000
OTHER WARSHIPS
CVN REFUELING OVERHAULS
The Navy requested $1,615,003,000 for a complex refueling overhaul of
the U.S.S. Nimitz (CVN 68). The Committee is disappointed that the Navy
has elected to overhaul the Nimitz--the first ship of its class--without
cooperative engagement, integrated ship self defense, the advanced
combat direction system, the rolling airframe missile, the SPQ 9
navigation radar, a common high-band data link, the battlegroup passive
horizon extension system, an outboard weapons elevator, conversion of
nuclear magazines, emergency ordnance handling, and improved propellers.
At the same time the Navy proposes to delete these essential warfighting
improvements from a front line combat ship, ostensibly due to lack of
funds, it has proposed a ``business-as-usual'' R&D budget with growth in
basic research, advanced technology demonstrations, and other programs
less relevant to near-term warfighting requirements. The Committee
questions these priorities and whether the Theater CINCs agree with
them. The Committee urges the leadership of the Navy to reconsider these
priorities as it executes the fiscal year 1998 budget, and to request
through the reprogramming process sufficient funds to ensure that the
Nimitz is returned to duty with the best warfighting improvements
available, rather than with holes where modern equipment is supposed to
go. The Committee recommends $1,628,403,000, an increase of $13,400,000.
This includes a decrease of $5,600,000 as recommended in the
House-passed Defense Authorization bill due to cancellation of the
requirement for CIWS guns and an increase of $20,000,000 only for
installation of the ship self defense system.
CVN REFUELING OVERHAULS--ADVANCE PROCUREMENT
The Navy requested $92,855,000 for advance procurement for the
overhaul of CVN 69, a Nimitz class aircraft carrier. Given the
deficiencies on the overhaul of the lead ship of the class, the
Committee is not willing to support a second overhaul until they are
remedied for both ships. The Committee recommends $46,855,000, a
decrease of $46,000,000, as well as proposed bill language to ensure
that funds are not obligated on an aircraft carrier overhaul that
delivers CVN 69 back to the fleet without installations of cooperative
engagement and the ship self defense system.
ddg 51
The Navy requested $2,665,767,000 to procure 3 DDG 51 Aegis ships.
The Committee is dismayed at the Navy's plan to build 12 ships between
1997 and 2001 which are planned to be delivered to the fleet without
cooperative engagement or theater ballistic missile defense capability.
This shipbuilding plan is counter to the theater missile defense goals
of the Administration, the Navy, and the Congress and may unnecessarily
put at risk the lives of U.S. forces deployed in hostile situations. The
Committee recommends $2,695,367,000, an increase of $29,600,000. This
includes an additional $19,400,000 to accelerate baseline 6 hardware and
software needed to incorporate theater ballistic missile defense in
these ships, $14,000,000 only to install cooperative engagement on the
third ship in 1998, and a decrease of $3,800,000 due to savings in the
program resulting from a FMS sale to Spain of Aegis combat systems. The
Committee also proposes bill language to preclude the Navy from awarding
a multiyear contract for construction of twelve DDG 51 ships, unless at
least four of the ships will be delivered to the Navy with cooperative
engagement and theater ballistic missile capability installed.
CRUISER OVERHAULS
The Navy has indicated to the congressional defense committees that
it plans to begin an extensive overhaul program for 27 of its Aegis
cruisers. Since no funds are requested in the budget for this purpose,
the Department of Defense would have to submit a new start reprogramming
request if the Navy planned to begin cruiser conversion prior to fiscal
year 1999. The Committee directs that all the overhauls for these ships
must be competed between U.S. shipyards and that no non-competitive
allocations be made for industrial base reasons. The Committee
understands that this direction is consistent with the Navy's plan.
AUXILIARIES, CRAFT, AND PRIOR YEAR PROGRAMS
LCAC LANDING CRAFT
The Navy requested no funds for LCAC landing craft service life
extension (SLEP). The Committee recommends $24,000,000 and directs the
Navy to accelerate the SLEP, while the production line is still warm,
due to recent disclosure of corrosion and component failures from fleet
LCAC operating units. The Navy has informed the Committee that this
program can be started in fiscal year 1998 using unique existing
facilities and retaining a trained labor force, resulting in a net
savings of $18,300,000.
adc(x)
The Navy requested no funds for ADC(X) construction, but plans to
build such a class of ships in the outyears. The Committee directs that
the construction cost of such ships, if proposed to the Congress by the
Navy, be funded in the Shipbuilding and Conversion appropriation.
PROGRAM RECOMMENDED
The total recommended in the bill will provide the following program
in fiscal year 1998:
Offset Folios 135 Insert here
OTHER PROCUREMENT, NAVY
Fiscal year 1997 appropriation $3,067,944,000
Fiscal year 1998 budget request 2,825,500,000
Committee recommendation 3,084,485,000
Change from budget request +258,985,000
This appropriation provides funds for the procurement of major
equipment and weapons other than ships, aircraft, missiles, and
torpedoes. Such equipment range from the latest electronic sensors for
updating our naval forces to trucks, training equipment, and spare
parts.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS
AUTHORIZATION CHANGES
The Committee recommends the following changes in accordance with
House authorization action:
[In thousands of dollars]
Budget Request Committee Recommendation Change from Request
Reactor components 193,880 180,880 -13,000
Radar Support 1,708 23,708 +22,000
Surface sonar windows/domes 0 6,000 +6,000
Cooperative engagement 0 114,800 +114,800
AN/SSQ 36 sonobouy 1,402 2,902 +1,500
AN/SSQ 57 sonobouy 0 4,500 +4,500
Weapons range support equipment 4,858 14,358 +9,500
Airborne mine counter-measures (SWIMS) 20,192 27,692 +7,500
SHIPS SUPPORT EQUIPMENT
LM 2500 Gas Turbine
The Navy requested $7,548,000 for the LM 2500 gas turbine engine. The
Committee recommends $5,548,000, a decrease of $2,000,000 due to reduced
requirements resulting from ship deactivations.
NAVIGATION EQUIPMENT
Other Navigation Equipment
The Navy requested $31,552,000 for other navigation equipment. The
Committee recommends $39,052,000, an increase of $7,500,000. This
includes an increase of $9,000,000 only for the WSN 7 ring laser gyro
and a decrease of $1,500,000 due to contract savings in this program.
OTHER SHIPBOARD EQUIPMENT
Firefighting Equipment
The Navy requested $14,081,000 for other firefighting equipment. The
Committee recommends $27,081,000, an increase of $13,000,000 only for
self contained breathing apparatus as recommended in the House-passed
Defense Authorization bill.
Pollution control equipment
The Navy requested $156,775,000 for pollution control equipment. The
Committee recommends $147,775,000, a decrease of $9,000,000 due to
reduced requirements and excess prior year funds identified by the
General Accounting Office.
SUBMARINE BATTERIES
The Navy requested $9,043,000 for submarine batteries. The Committee
recommends $8,443,000, a decrease of $600,000 due to contract savings.
STRATEGIC PLATFORM SUPPORT EQUIPMENT
The Navy requested $6,435,000 for strategic platform support
equipment. The Committee recommends $21,435,000, an increase of
$15,000,000 only to install AN/UYQ 70 displays in submarines.
COMMUNICATIONS AND ELECTRONIC EQUIPMENT
RADAR SUPPORT
The Navy requested $1,708,000 for radar support. The Committee
recommends $23,708,000, an increase of $22,000,000 as recommended in the
House-passed Defense Authorization bill of which $13,000,000 is only for
the SPS 73(V) radar and $9,000,000 is only for the AN/BPS 16 submarine
navigation radar.
SHIP SONARS
an/sqq 89 surface asw combat system
The Navy requested $16,628,000 for AN/SQQ 89. The Committee
recommends $16,228,000, a decrease of $400,000 due to contract and
installation savings.
SSN ACOUSTICS
The Navy requested $77,953,000 for SSN Acoustics. The Committee
recommends $46,453,000, a decrease of $31,500,000. This consists of a
decrease of $39,500,000 to the Acoustic Rapid Commercial Off-the-Shelf
Insertion (A RCI) program and an increase of $8,000,000 only for
refurbishment of TB 23 arrays. Concerning the A RCI program, the
Committee believes the program is concurrent since the Navy plans to buy
14 A RCI kits in 1998 even though initial operational test and
evaluation is not planned until the first quarter of 1999. The Committee
recommends that A RCI production funds be deferred one year to reduce
program risk.
CARRIER ASW MODULE
The Navy requested $16,000 for the carrier ASW module. The Committee
recommends $12,016,000, an increase of $12,000,000 only for procurement
and installation of six AN/UQX 5(V) Fast Time Analyzer System
engineering change two acoustic intercept processors, six CV ASW Module
on-board trainers, one CV tactical support center upgrade, and
integration of a real time sensor data link.
ELECTRONIC WARFARE EQUIPMENT
C3 Countermeasures
The Navy requested $6,891,000 for C3 countermeasures. The Committee
recommends $6,591,000, a decrease of $300,000 due to reduced
requirements.
RECONNAISSANCE EQUIPMENT
COMBAT DIRECTION FINDING EQUIPMENT
The Navy requested $10,473,000 for combat direction finding
equipment. The Committee recommends $5,873,000, a decrease of $4,600,000
due to contract savings on automated digital acquisition systems.
battle group passive horizon extension (bgphes)
The Navy requested $50,221,000 for BGPHES. The Committee recommends
$47,421,000, a decrease of $2,800,000 due to contract savings.
OTHER SHIP ELECTRONIC EQUIPMENT
Navy Tactical Data System
The Navy requested $14,335,000 for the Navy Tactical Data System. The
Committee recommends $24,335,000, an increase of $10,000,000 only to
install AN/UYQ 70 displays on Aegis cruisers.
Advanced Tactical Data Link Systems
The Navy requested $16,991,000 for advanced tactical data link
systems. The Committee recommends $15,391,000, a decrease of $1,600,000
due to contract savings in AN/VRC 107(V) terminals.
AVIATION ELECTRONIC EQUIPMENT
Automatic Carrier Landing System
The Navy requested $13,200,000 for the automatic carrier landing
system. The Committee recommends $12,200,000, a decrease of $1,000,000
due to cancellation of the AN/SPN 46(V) landing system.
ID SYSTEMS
The Navy requested $11,293,000 for identification systems. The
Committee recommends $9,193,000, a decrease of $2,100,000 for shipboard
advanced radar target identification systems which have slipped until
1999.
OTHER SHORE ELECTRONIC EQUIPMENT
jmcis tactical/mobile
The Navy requested $2,888,000 for JMCIS Tactical/Mobile. The
Committee recommends $47,888,000, an increase of $45,000,000 only for
procurement of AN/SQR 17A(V)3 underwater systems, including preplanned
product improvement, for Mobile Inshore Undersea Warfare operations.
SUBMARINE COMMUNICATIONS
Submarine communication equipment
The Navy requested $37,239,000 for submarine communication equipment.
The Committee recommends $47,239,000, an increase of $10,000,000 only
for procurement of AN/USC 42(V)V mini-Demand Assigned Multiple Access
(DAMA) UHF Fleet SATCOM communications terminals for submarines, surface
ships, and airborne platforms.
SHORE COMMUNICATIONS
NSIPS
Information on this project can be found in the Information Resources
Management section of this report.
JEDMICS
Information on this project can be found in the Information Resources
Management section of this report.
AVIATION SUPPORT EQUIPMENT
SONOBOUYS
an/sqq 53 (difar)
The Navy requested $28,382,000 for procurement of AN/SQQ 53
sonobouys. The Committee recommends $49,382,000, an increase of
$21,000,000 identified by the Navy as a critical shortfall.
an/sqq 62 (dicass)
The Navy requested $24,291,000 for procurement of AN/SQQ 62
sonobouys. The Committee recommends $32,291,000, an increase of
$8,000,000 identified by the Navy as a critical shortfall.
AIRCRAFT SUPPORT EQUIPMENT
AVIATION LIFE SUPPORT
The Navy requested $15,345,000 for aviation life support equipment.
The Committee recommends $12,645,000, a decrease of $2,700,000 due to
reduced requirements.
LAMPS MK III SHIPBOARD EQUIPMENT
The Navy requested $5,805,000 for LAMPS MK III Shipboard Equipment.
The Committee recommends $4,560,000, a decrease of $1,245,000 due to
excess funds identified by the General Accounting Office.
SHIP MISSILE SYSTEMS EQUIPMENT
NATO SEASPARROW
The Navy requested $6,866,000 for the NATO Seasparrow program. The
Committee recommends $10,866,000, an increase of $4,000,000 only for
low-light, solid state electro-optic cameras.
SHIP SELF-DEFENSE SYSTEM
The Navy requested $5,841,000 for the ship-self defense system. The
Committee recommends $17,841,000, an increase of $12,000,000 only for
installation of the SSDS on two LSD 41 class ships with rolling airframe
missile launchers to be allocated from assets procured in 1998 or
earlier fiscal years.
AEGIS SUPPORT EQUIPMENT
The Navy requested $26,813,000 for Aegis support equipment. The
Committee recommends $21,113,000, a reduction of $5,700,000 due to
reduced requirements because of ship deactivations.
SURFACE TOMAHAWK SUPPORT EQUIPMENT
The Navy requested $65,502,000 for surface Tomahawk support
equipment. The Committee recommends $65,302,000, a decrease of $200,000
due to reduced requirements because of ship deactivations.
FLEET BALLISTIC MISSILE SUPPORT EQUIPMENT
STRATEGIC MISSILE SYSTEMS EQUIPMENT
The Navy requested $231,528,000 for strategic missile systems
equipment. The Committee recommends $228,728,000, a decrease of
$2,800,000 due to excess funds identified by the General Accounting
Office.
OTHER ORDNANCE SUPPORT EQUIPMENT
UNMANNED SEABORNE TARGET
The Navy requested $4,271,000 for unmanned seaborne target
development. The Committee recommends $2,271,000, a decrease of
$2,000,000 due to reduced requirements.
OTHER EXPENDABLE ORDNANCE
SURFACE TRAINING DEVICE MODIFICATIONS
The Navy requested $4,829,000 for surface training device
modifications. The Committee recommends $13,329,000, an increase of
$8,500,000 only for procurement of Carry-on Combat Systems Trainers
(COCST) for the Battle Force Tactical Training (BFTT) system.
CIVIL ENGINEERING SUPPORT EQUIPMENT
CONSTRUCTION AND MAINTENANCE EQUIPMENT
The Navy requested $3,700,000 for construction and maintenance
equipment. The Committee recommends $5,200,000, an increase of
$1,500,000 only for laser leveling devices.
AMPHIBIOUS EQUIPMENT
The Navy requested $6,233,000 for amphibious equipment. The Committee
recommends $11,233,000, an increase of $5,000,000 only for the Elevated
Causeway (Modular).
POLLUTION CONTROL EQUIPMENT
The Navy requested $28,650,000 for pollution control equipment. The
Committee recommends $25,080,000, a decrease of $3,570,000 due to
reduced requirements because of ship deactivations.
COMMAND SUPPORT EQUIPMENT
The Navy requested $15,915,000 for command support equipment. The
Committee recommends $17,915,000, an increase of $2,000,000 only for the
Advanced Technical Information System.
OTHER
SPARES AND REPAIR PARTS
The Navy requested $248,717,000 for spares and repair parts. The
Committee recommends $228,717,000, a decrease of $20,000,000 due to
reduced requirements because of ship deactivations.
PROGRAM RECOMMENDED
The total recommended in the bill will provide the following program
in fiscal year 1998:
Offset Folios 142 to 144 Insert here
PROCUREMENT, MARINE CORPS
Fiscal year 1997 appropriation $569,073,000
Fiscal year 1998 budget request 374,306,000
Committee recommendation 491,198,000
Change from budget request +116,892,000
This appropriation provides the Marine Corps with funds for
procurement, delivery, and modification of missiles, armament,
communication equipment, tracked and wheeled vehicles, and various
support equipment.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS
AUTHORIZATION CHANGES
The Committee recommends the following changes to the budget request
in accordance with House authorization action:
[In thousand of dollars]
Item Budget request Committee recommended Change from request
Javelin 42,146 59,146 +17,000
Communications and Elec Infrastructure Supt. 41,809 84,409 +42,600
WEAPONS AND COMBAT VEHICLES
items under $2 million (tracked vehicles)
The Marine Corps requested $99,000 for items under $2 million
(tracked vehicles). The Committee recommends $1,999,000, an increase of
$1,900,000 only for a supplemental fuel carrying capability.
OTHER COMMUNICATIONS AND ELECTRONICS EQUIPMENT
INTELLIGENCE SUPPORT EQUIPMENT
The Marine Corps requested $16,413,000 for Intelligence Support
Equipment. The Committee recommends an increase of $5,392,000. Of this
amount, $4,600,000 is only to procure CI/HUMINT Program equipment, and
$792,000 is to procure portable satcom radios.
TACTICAL VEHICLES
HIGH MOBILITY MULTI-PURPOSE WHEELED VEHICLES
The Marine Corps requested $696,000 for High Mobility Multi-purpose
Wheeled Vehicles (HMMWV). The Committee recommends $40,696,000, an
increase of $40,000,000 only to begin the production of a HMMWV
service-life extension program.
GENERAL PROPERTY
FIELD MEDICAL EQUIPMENT
The Marine Corps requested $1,081,000 for field medical equipment.
The Committee recommends $11,081,000, an increase of $10,000,000 only to
procure equipment for the Chemical Biological Incident Response Force.
PROGRAM RECOMMENDED
The total amount recommended in the bill will provide the following
program in fiscal year 1998:
Offset Folios 147 Insert here
AIRCRAFT PROCUREMENT, AIR FORCE
Fiscal year 1997 appropriation $6,404,980,000
Fiscal year 1998 budget request 5,684,847,000
Committee recommendation 6,386,479,000
Change from budget request +701,632,000
This appropriation provides for the procurement of aircraft, and for
modification of in-service aircraft to improve safety and enhance
operational effectiveness. It also provides for initial spares and other
support equipment to include aerospace ground equipment and industrial
facilities. In addition, funds are provided for the procurement of
flight training simulators to increase combat readiness and to provide
for more economical training.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS
Authorization Changes
The Committee recommends the following changes in accordance with
House authorization action:
[In thousands of dollars]
Item Budget request Committee recommendation Change from request
B 2 174,086 505,286 +331,200
EC 130J 0 49,900 +49,900
JPATS 65,415 77,615 +12,200
Predator UAV 116,506 146,506 +30,000
B 1B Mods 114,245 138,245 +24,000
H 1 Mods 2,778 3,578 +800
DARP Mods 67,136 139,136 +72,000
DARP 141,493 146,493 +5,000
COMBAT AIRCRAFT
advanced tactical fighter (F 22)
ADVANCE PROCUREMENT
The Air Force requested $80,864,000 for advance procurement for the F
22 aircraft. The Committee recommends $74,864,000, a decrease of
$6,000,000. The Air Force has indicated that these funds will be used
for redesign efforts associated with Out of Production Parts (OPPs).
Since such redesign efforts are properly funded in the research and
development account, the Committee has reduced F 22 procurement by
$6,000,000 and has increased F 22 research and development by a like
amount. The Committee directs the Secretary of the Air Force to budget
for these redesign efforts in the research and development accounts in
future budgets.
In addition to OPP redesign efforts, the Air Force has requested
authority to use procurement funds to purchase OPPs for more than one
aircraft lot. The Committee understands that these parts are defined as
electro/mechanical components or electronic piece parts.
Electro/mechanical components include parts below the Line Replaceable
Units/Line Replaceable Module (LRU/LRM) level, such as actuators, fuel
pumps, or hydraulic pumps; however such components do not include
structural parts such as wings, bulkheads, flaps, ailerons, doors, or
landing gear struts; or subsystems at or above the LRU/LRM level such as
an auxiliary power unit. Electronic piece parts include parts below the
LRU/LRM level such as multi-chip modules, Application Specific
Integrated Circuits (ASICs), microprocessors, integrated circuits,
microcircuits, diodes, and transistors. OPPs are parts that are
currently unavailable or projected to be unavailable from the original
equipment supplier or any alternative source. Often these parts become
unavailable because industry has moved to the next generation of
technology and no longer finds it cost effective to maintain the
capability to produce the older technology, or the supplier elects to
end business with the government, or the supplier goes out of business.
The Committee approves the Air Force request to use procurement funds
to purchase OPPs for multiple aircraft lots based on the following
criteria: (1) the OPPs must meet the definition of parts described
above; (2) the OPPs must meet the definition of ``out of production'' as
described above; (3) OPPs can only be purchased in cases in which a
redesign of the parts cannot be accomplished in time to prevent an
impact to the production schedule; (4) the Air Force shall not procure
more parts than required to bridge the gap between the end of
availability of the parts and the availability of the redesigned part;
and (5) no more than five aircraft lots of parts can be procured. Any
purchases beyond the scope of the criteria above require prior
notification to the congressional defense committees. Finally, the
Committee is aware that the Air Force needs to procure a video tape deck
because of diminishing manufacturing sources. Since such an item would
not otherwise meet the criteria above, the Committee provides separate
and specific approval for this item.
f 16
The Air Force requested no funding for the F 16 program. The
Committee recommends $82,500,000 for 3 additional aircraft.
AIRLIFT AIRCRAFT
C 17
The Air Force requested $1,923,311,000 for the C 17 aircraft. The
Committee recommends $1,914,211,000, a decrease of $9,100,000. This GAO
recommended reduction is based on C 17 program office financial
execution forecasts that show that fiscal year 1996 and fiscal year 1997
funds will not be obligated prior to funds expiration.
C 17 ADVANCE PROCUREMENT
The Air Force requested $278,200,000 for C 17 advance procurement in
support of fiscal year 1999 aircraft. The Committee recommends
$265,600,000, a decrease of $12,600,000. This GAO recommended reduction
is based on contract savings associated with prior year advance
procurement contracts.
CIVIL AIR PATROL
The Air Force requested $2,645,000 for the Civil Air Patrol. The
Committee recommends $4,498,000, an increase of $1,853,000.
OTHER AIRCRAFT
8C
The Air Force requested $313,991,000 for the E 8C (JSTARS) aircraft.
The Committee recommends $317,991,000, a net increase of $4,000,000. The
adjustment includes an additional $16,000,000 to address funding
requirements rephased from fiscal year 1996 and an additional $1,000,000
only for integration of an Improved Data Modem on the JSTARS aircraft.
The adjustment also includes a $13,000,000 reduction based on
unjustified growth in the Engineering Change Order (ECO) line. The
Committee notes that the Air Force is requesting $21,400,000 for ECOs in
fiscal year 1998 to support one aircraft, compared to $3.6 million in
fiscal year 1997 for two aircraft. The Air Force has indicated that the
JSTARS airframe estimates have already been increased in the fiscal year
1998 budget to reflect recent experience of increased costs associated
with refurbishing used airframes. Since these higher costs are already
built into the airframe estimate, the level of growth in ECO funding is
unwarranted.
MODIFICATION OF INSERVICE AIRCRAFT
B 52 modifications
The Air Force requested $28,907,000 for B 52 modifications. The
Committee recommends $31,807,000, an increase of $2,900,000 only for B
52 Electro-optical Viewing System Reliability and Maintainability
upgrade, identified by the Air Force as a high priority unfunded
requirement.
15 modifications
The Air Force requested $169,568,000 for F 15 modifications. The
Committee recommends $157,068,000, a net decrease of $12,500,000. The
adjustment includes an increase of $22,800,000 only for additional PW
220E engine modifications, a decrease of $11,800,000 based on two
recently terminated modifications in fiscal year 1997, a decrease of
$13,500,000 for APG 63 radar upgrade pricing, and a decrease of
$10,000,000 for radar support equipment. The $11,800,000 reduction for
the terminated modifications is based on a $21,200,000 GAO recommended
reduction adjusted for amounts already reprogrammed to support an Air
Traffic Control and Landing System initiative. With regard to the radar
upgrade modification, the Committee notes that the Air Force has not
adequately justified the unusually high cost of the radar in fiscal year
1998 as compared to the budget last year and as compared to other fiscal
years in the current budget. The Committee reduction brings the fiscal
year 1998 program in line with the fiscal year 1997 column of the
current budget. The Air Force has also indicated that funds are no
longer required for radar equipment as displayed in the current budget,
but needed instead for support equipment. No justification for this
latter requirement has been provided to the Committee.
The Committee is concerned with the new cost estimates appearing in
the budget this year; the average unit cost of the radar over the life
of the program has approximately doubled. To date, the Air Force has not
provided a satisfactory explanation of this change. Further, this
$600,000,000 program has been justified as a reliability and
maintainability (R&M) upgrade, not a performance upgrade. Given the
doubling in cost, the original cost/benefit assumptions for the program
may no longer be valid. Accordingly, the Committee directs the Secretary
of the Air Force to submit a report to the congressional defense
committees including an explanation of the average unit cost growth
compared to the budget last year and a revised cost/benefit analysis,
including break even point, justifying continued pursuit of the program.
The Committee directs that this report be provided at least 15 days
prior to award of the first production contract.
16 modifications
The Air Force requested $216,158,000 for F 16 modifications. The
Committee recommends $199,358,000, a decrease of $16,800,000. The
decrease includes a $13,000,000 reduction to GPS and a $3,800,000
reduction to Block 40 CAS Night Vision Imaging System (NVIS). The Air
Force budget requests 330 GPS kits in fiscal year 1998, up from 150 in
fiscal year 1997 and higher than the outyears. The rate of production
resulting from the fiscal year 1998 buy exceeds the rate in which the
kits can be installed, resulting in kits unnecessarily sitting on the
shelf for up to five months. A reduction of 94 kits will bring the
production rate in line with the installation rate. The budget also
includes $3,800,000 for NVIS integration. However, the Air Force has
indicated no further integration is required.
C 130 modifications
The Air Force requested $94,511,000 for C 130 modifications. The
Committee recommends $119,211,000, an increase of $24,700,000 only for
the electronic suite modifications associated with the new production EC
130 funded separately in this account.
AIRCRAFT SUPPORT EQUIPMENT AND FACILITIES
15 post production support
The Air Force requested $8,089,000 for F 15 Post Production Support.
The Committee recommends $6,289,000, a decrease of $1,800,000. This GAO
recommended adjustment is based on prematurely budgeting for F 15
tooling disposition given continued production of F 15 attrition
aircraft.
WAR CONSUMABLES
The Air Force requested $67,565,000 for war consumables. The
Committee recommends $60,165,000, a decrease of $7,400,000. The GAO has
identified excess engineering change order (ECO) funding in the towed
decoy program.
MISCELLANEOUS PRODUCTION CHARGES
The Air Force requested $275,805,000 for miscellaneous production
charges. The Committee denies the budget request of $6,221,000 to
procure podded electro-optical camera systems. The Committee disagrees
with the Air Force's acquisition strategy to sole-source the second
Theater Airborne Reconnaissance System (TARS) sensor and Advanced TARS
Medium Altitude Electro-optical (MAEO) sensor.
PROGRAM RECOMMENDED
The total amount recommended in the bill will provide the following
program in fiscal year 1998:
Offset Folios 153 to 154 Insert here
MISSILE PROCUREMENT, AIR FORCE
Fiscal Year 1997 appropriation $2,297,145,000
Fiscal Year 1998 budget request 2,557,741,000
Committee recommendation 2,320,741,000
Change from budget request -237,000,000
The appropriation provides for the procurement, installation, and
checkout of strategic ballistic and other missiles, modification of
in-service missiles, and initial spares for missile systems. It also
provides for operational space systems, boosters, payloads, drones,
associated ground equipment, non-recurring maintenance of industrial
facilities, machine tool modernization, and special program support.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS
AUTHORIZATION CHANGES
The Committee recommends the following changes to the budget request
in accordance with House authorization action.
[In thousands of dollars]
Item Budget request Committee recommendation Change from request
JSOW 1,139 30,139 +29,000
AGM 130 1,539 42,539 +41,000
MAVERICK 0 11,000 +11,000
Titan Space Boosters 555,304 473,304 -82,000
OTHER MISSILES
AMRAAM
The Air Force requested $117,768,000 for continued production of
AMRAAM. The Committee recommends $107,168,000, a reduction of
$10,600,000. This GAO-recommended reduction is based on unneeded funds
for engineering change orders (ECOs). The Committee also notes that the
AMRAAM program has inappropriately budgeted recurring efforts such as
program management, technical services, production support, and
acceptance testing in its nonrecurring budget line. Such budgeting
practices are misleading and should be corrected in future budget
submissions.
MODIFICATION OF INSERVICE MISSILES
CONVENTIONAL ALCM
The Air Force requested no funding for the Conventional Air Launched
Cruise Missile program. The Committee recommends $15,300,000 to continue
conversions of nuclear Air Launched Cruise Missiles. The Committee notes
that this effort has been identified as a high priority by the Air
Force.
SPACE PROGRAMS
GLOBAL POSITIONING SYSTEM (GPS) SPACE SEGMENT
The Air Force requested $163,837,000 for the acquisition of 3 GPS
Block IIF satellites. The Committee recommends $122,137,000, a decrease
of $41,700,000. The funds provided by the Committee will enable the Air
Force to acquire 2 Block IIF satellites in fiscal year 1998.
In making this recommendation the Committee notes that the present
GPS constellation contains 24 satellites consisting of 21 operational
spacecraft and three on-orbit spares. If present delivery schedules are
maintained one to five spacecraft will be in storage available for
launch within 60 days of an on-orbit failure as called for by present
department policy. The Committee believes that the probability is
extremely low that three GPS satellites will ever fail simultaneously or
in rapid succession. Even in the highly unlikely event that such a
failure should occur, the Air Force does not have enough medium class
launch vehicles available to replenish the constellation as swiftly as
called for by present DoD policy. In essence, by requesting GPS
satellites for acquisition before they are needed or could ever be
launched, the Air Force is attempting to underwrite an ``insurance
policy'' that, in practical terms, it could never implement.
The Committee recognizes the importance of the total GPS system to
the Department of Defense and remains totally supportive of the program.
The Committee also feels that as a cost savings measure and a more
realistic phasing of program funding to requirements, the acquisition of
one GPS Block IIF satellite can be deferred until the next multi-year
block buy. Accordingly, the Committee makes this recommendation without
prejudice.
MEDIUM LAUNCH VEHICLES
The Air Force requested $165,783,000 for the medium launch vehicle
program. The Committee recommends $147,783,000, a decrease of
$18,000,000. According to the General Accounting Office lower than
expected cost growth in fiscal year 1997, and the overstatement of funds
requested for Delta launch failure recovery efforts in fiscal year 1998
makes this reduction possible. The Committee makes this recommendation
without prejudice to the program.
DEFENSE SUPPORT PROGRAM
The Air Force requested $113,708,000 for the Defense Support Program.
The Committee recommends $108,708,000, a decrease of $5,000,000. The
Committee has reduced the budget request due to the availability of
prior year program funds and the Air Force's recent decision not to
pursue research studies to identify modifications needed to launch the
DSP satellite on the Evolved Expendable Launch Vehicle. Funds for these
studies were requested as part of this year's budget.
SPECIAL PROGRAMS
Details of this adjustment are discussed fully in the classified
annex to this report.
PROGRAM RECOMMENDED
The total amount recommended in the bill will provide the following
program in fiscal year 1998:
Offset Folios 157 Insert here
PROCUREMENT OF AMMUNITION, AIR FORCE
Fiscal Year 1997 appropriation $293,153,000
Fiscal Year 1998 budget request 403,984,000
Committee recommendation 414,884,000
Change from budget request +10,900,000
This appropriation finances the acquisition of ammunition,
modifications, spares, weapons, and other ammunition-related items for
the Air Force.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS
AUTHORIZATION CHANGES
The Committee recommends the following changes to the budget request
in accordance with House authorization action:
[In thousands of dollars]
Item Budget request Committee recommendation Change from request
GBU 28 Hard Target Penetrator 0 16,800 +16,800
WIND CORRECTED MUNITIONS DISPENSER
The Air Force requested $19,871,000 for the Wind Corrected Munitions
Dispenser. The Committee recommends $10,471,000, a decrease of
$9,400,000 based on contract savings identified by the GAO.
CARTRIDGES
20mm pgu 28
The Air Force requested no funds for 20MM PGU 28 ammunition. The
Committee recommends $3,500,000 only to procure 20MM PGU 28 ammunition
PROGRAM RECOMMENDED
The total amount recommended in the bill will provide the following
program in fiscal year 1998:
Offset Folios 159 Insert here
OTHER PROCUREMENT, AIR FORCE
Fiscal year 1997 appropriation $5,944,680,000
Fiscal year 1998 budget request 6,561,253,000
Committee recommendation 6,588,939,000
Change from budget request +27,686,000
This appropriation provides for the procurement of weapons systems
and equipment other than aircraft and missiles. Included are vehicles,
electronic and telecommunications systems for command and control of
operational forces, and ground support equipment for weapon systems and
supporting structure.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS
AUTHORIZATION CHANGES
The Committee recommends the following changes in accordance with
House authorization action:
[In thousands of dollars]
Item Budget request Committee recommendation Change from request
Weather observ/forecast 18,013 22,013 +4,000
TAC SIGINT support 4,114 9,114 +5,000
Radio Equipment 12,844 19,344 +6,500
DARP RC 135 12,778 47,778 +35,000
CARGO AND UTILITY VEHICLES
items less than $2,000,000
The Air Force requested $5,025,000 for items less than $2,000,000.
The Committee recommends $3,625,000, a reduction of $1,400,000. The
budget request included $1.4 million for minor replacement items.
However, Air Force officials advised that there are no known
requirements for these items.
SPECIAL PURPOSE VEHICLES
hmmwv, armored
The Air Force requested $24,181,000 for armored HMMWVs. The Committee
recommends $7,781,000, a reduction of $16,400,000. The fiscal year 1998
budget requested additional funds for the Force
Protection/Anti-Terrorism initiative. However, these vehicles are
already budgeted in the Force Protection/Anti-terrorism line of the
budget.
items less than $2,000,000
The Air Force requested $6,738,000 for items less than $2,000,000.
The Committee recommends $6,194,000, a reduction of $544,000 based on
fiscal year 1997 contract savings and unrequired contingency funding.
MATERIALS HANDLING EQUIPMENT
60K A/C loader
The Air Force requested $83,143,000 for the 60K A/C leader program.
The Committee recommends $51,143,000, a reduction of $32,000,000. This
program has been troubled by producibility and reliability problems
which have led to testing delays and a production stop. Independent
Operational Test and Evaluation will now occur in December 1997, with
the first contract award after the production break to follow in April
1998. The Committee notes that the Air Force has budgeted a full rate
lot in fiscal year 1998 of 60 units, and has scheduled delivery of the
first units in just nine months, even though the loader's normal
manufacturing lead-time is 16 months. Given the production problems in
this program, the Committee views this recovery plan to be overly
aggressive. Accordingly, the Committee recommends reducing the fiscal
year 1998 buy from 60 to 45 loaders, the level that had been planned in
fiscal year 1997.
INTELLIGENCE PROGRAMS
INTELLIGENCE DATA HANDLING SYSTEM
The Air Force requested $20,739,000 for intelligence data handling.
The Committee recommends $24,339,000, an increase of $3,600,000 only to
provide JSAS to Air Force battlelabs.
ELECTRONIC PROGRAMS
STRATEGIC COMMAND AND CONTROL
The Air Force requested $20,505,000 for Strategic Command and
Control. The Committee recommends $19,005,000 a net decrease of
$1,500,000. The adjusted amount includes a decrease of $10,000,000 for
the terminated Improved Technical Data System (ITDS) and an increase of
$8,500,000 only for the DIRECT program. The Committee notes that the Air
Force has identified DIRECT as a high priority unfunded requirement.
SPECIAL COMMUNICATIONS-ELECTRONICS PROJECTS
C3 COUNTERMEASURES
The Air Force requested $14,904,000 for Command, Control, and
Communications Countermeasures. The Committee recommends $13,004,000, a
reduction of $1,900,000 based on excess funds available in fiscal year
1997.
AIR FORCE COMMUNICATIONS
BASE INFORMATION INFRASTRUCTURE
The Air Force requested $88,945,000 for Base Information
Infrastructure enhancements. The Committee recommends $136,945,000, an
increase of $48,000,000 only for security enhancements to Air Force base
information systems.
AIR FORCE SATELLITE CONTROL NETWORK
The Air Force requested $32,197,000 for satellite control network
activities. The Committee recommends $23,097,000, a reduction of
$9,100,000 based on cancellation of the fiscal year 1997 Military
Satellite Communications system.
ORGANIZATION AND BASE
items less than $2,000,000
The Air Force requested $8,960,000 for items less than $2,000,000.
The Committee recommends $6,160,000, a reduction of $2,800,000 based on
contract award problems and delayed obligation of funds for the Power
Conditioning and Continuation Interface Equipment (PCCIE) program.
PERSONNEL SAFETY AND RESCUE EQUIPMENT
NIGHT VISION GOGGLES
The Air Force requested $2,371,000 for night vision goggles. The
Committee recommends $13,271,000, an increase of $10,900,000 only for
accelerated procurement of night vision goggles and test sets.
ELECTRICAL EQUIPMENT
floodlights set type nf2d
The Air Force requested $7,696,000 for floodlights. The Committee
recommends $4,696,000, a reduction of $3,000,000 based on production
contract award delays associated with the FL 1D floodlight.
BASE SUPPORT EQUIPMENT
medical/dental equipment
The Air Force requested $13,295,000 for medical and dental equipment.
The Committee recommends $8,095,000, a reduction of $5,200,000 based on
prior year contract savings in several programs.
PROGRAM RECOMMENDED
The total amount recommended in the bill will provide the following
program in fiscal year 1998:
Offset Folios 163 to 164 Insert here
PROCUREMENT, DEFENSE-WIDE
Fiscal year 1997 appropriation $1,978,005,000
Fiscal year 1998 budget request 1,695,085,000
Committee recommendation 2,186,669,000
Change from budget request +491,584,000
This appropriation provides funds for the Procurement activities of
centrally managed programs and the Defense Agencies.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS
AUTHORIZATION CHANGES
The Committee recommends the following changes in accordance with
authorization action:
[In thousands of dollars]
Budget request Committee recommendation Change from request
Major Equipment, DSPO 19,334 14,334 -5,000
MAJOR EQUIPMENT
The Department requested $104,601,000 for Major Equipment. The
Committee recommends $114,601,000, an increase of $10,000,000 only for
the Mentor-Prote AE1ge AE1 program.
AUTOMATED DOCUMENT CONVERSION
Information on this project can be found in the Information Resources
Management section of this report.
ballistic missile defense organization (BMDO)
The Department requested no funds in Procurement, Defense-wide for
Patriot PAC 3, Navy Lower Tier and Battle Management and Control. The
Committee recommends that funds provided for these programs in other
Service accounts be transferred to BMDO, as proposed in the House-passed
Defense Authorization bill.
SPECIAL OPERATIONS COMMAND
pc, cyclone class
The Department requested no funds for Cyclone Class, Patrol Coastal
craft. The Committee recommends $10,700,000 only for the completion of
the fourteenth CYCLONE Patrol Coastal craft.
SOF INTELLIGENCE SYSTEMS
The Department requested $21,175,000 for SOF intelligence systems.
The Committee recommends $25,475,000, an increase of $4,300,000. Of this
amount, $800,000 is to procure additional data collection systems to
support the Integrated Survey Program; $1,500,000 is to purchase eight
B-Multi-Mission Advanced Tactical Terminals; and $2,000,000 is only for
the development of training capabilities for the Joint Threat Warning
System (JTWS). Additional O&M and RDT&E funds are also provided for
JTWS.
CHEMICAL AND BIOLOGICAL DEFENSE PROGRAM
INDIVIDUAL PROTECTION
The Department requested $64,855,000 for Chemical and Biological
Individual Protection. The Committee recommends $74,855,000, an increase
of $10,000,000 only for 5,000 chemical biological (JSLIST) suits.
COLLECTIVE PROTECTION
The Department requested $17,316,000 for Chemical and Biological
Collective Protection. The Committee recommends $37,316,000, an increase
of $20,000,000. Within this increase, $10,000,000 is only for Collective
Protection Equipment shortfalls in Korea, $4,000,000 is only for 300
additional M 17LDS water sprayers for decontamination of airfields, and
$6,000,000 is only for 14 HMVV medical shelters.
PROGRAM RECOMMENDED
The total amount recommended in the bill will provide the following
program in fiscal year 1998:
Offset Folios 167 Insert here
NATIONAL GUARD AND RESERVE EQUIPMENT
Fiscal year 1997 appropriation $780,000,000
Fiscal year 1998 budget request
Committee recommendation 850,000,000
Change from budget request +850,000,000
This appropriation provides funds for the procurement of tactical
aircraft and other equipment for the National Guard and Reserve.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
The Committee recommends $850,000,000 to meet high priority
requirements of the National Guard and Reserve. This is in addition to
$1,770,300,000 provided elsewhere in Title III of the Committee bill for
equipment which the Committee intends to be provided to the National
Guard and the Reserve Components.
melios an/pvs 6
The Committee is aware that the Army National Guard has a requirement
for an improved eye-safe laser range finder that is compatible with the
devices fielded in the Active Army. The Mini-Eye-safe Laser Infrared
Observation Set (MELIOS) provides an improved capability and is being
fielded to the active Army. The Committee recommends $5,000,000 only for
procurement of MELIOS for the Army National Guard.
T 39 REPLACEMENT AIRCRAFT
The Committee recommends $10,000,000 to procure T 39 replacement
aircraft for the Marine Corps Reserve. The Committee directs that these
aircraft should meet the speed, range, payload, and cost per passenger
mile requirements as identified by the Commanding General, Marine Forces
Reserve.
PROGRAM RECOMMENDED
The total amount recommended in the bill will provide the following
program in fiscal year 1998:
Offset Folios 169 Insert here
MISCELLANEOUS EQUIPMENT
The Committee has provided $143,000,000 for miscellaneous equipment
and believes that the Chiefs of the Reserve and National Guard
components should exercise control of funds provided for miscellaneous
equipment. The Committee directs that separate, detailed submissions of
its modernization priorities by each of the Guard and Reserve component
commanders be submitted to the congressional defense committees and
recommends including bill language carried in previous years requiring
this submission. The Committee expects the component commanders to give
priority consideration to the following items: all-terrain cranes,
modular airborne fire fighting system units, CH 47 internal crash worthy
fuel cells, back scatter truck inspection systems, ALR 56M radar warning
receivers, theater deployable communication packages, AN/TQM 41 MMS,
M1A2s, M2A2s, night vision equipment, CH 47 ICH aircraft, litening
target and navigation pods, commercial industrial equipment, high speed
dirt compactors, AH 64 combat mission simulators, heavy equipment
transporter vehicles, MLRS launchers, high mobility trailers for HMMWV,
palletized loading systems, heavy expanded mobility tactical truck
wreckers, avengers, M109A6, automatic building machines, air defense
alerting device systems, interactive simulators, master cranes,
deployable universal combat earth movers, palletized loading systems,
and HEMTT wreckers.
INFORMATION RESOURCES MANAGEMENT
The Defense Department requested $10,273,037,000 for information
resources management. The Committee recommends $10,387,937,000, an
increase of $114,900,000 as explained below:
[In thousands of dollars]
Operation and Maintenance, Army:
High Risk Automation Systems -25,000
Army Logistics Automation 11,200
Operation and Maintenance, Navy:
High Risk Automation Systems -25,000
Software Program Managers Network 6,000
Operation and Maintenance, Air Force:
High Risk Automation Systems -25,000
REMIS 8,900
Operation and Maintenance, Defense-Wide:
High Risk Automation Systems -15,000
Automated Document Conversion 30,000
Military Personnel Information System 5,000
Operation and Maintenance, Navy Reserve:
NSIPS 43,500
Operation and Maintenance, Defense Health Program:
High Risk Automation Systems -20,000
PACMEDNET 10,000
Other Procurement, Army:
Army Logistics Automation 13,800
SBIS 13,000
Other Procurement, Navy:
NSIPS 20,500
JEDMICS 5,000
Other Procurement, Air Force:
Base Information Infrastructure 48,000
Procurement, Defense-Wide:
Automated Document Conversion 10,000
Total
114,900
REMIS
The Air Force requested $32,647,000 for the Reliability and
Maintainability Information System (REMIS). The Committee recommends an
increase of $8,900,000 in Operation and Maintenance, Air Force to be
used only for REMIS projects related to IMDS conversion.
JEDMICS
The Navy requested $35,528,000 for the Joint Engineering Data
Management Information and Control System (JEDMICS). The Committee is
concerned that the unprotected transmittal of sensitive but unclassified
data to remote users via the Internet subjects JEDMICS data to potential
unauthorized access. The Department of Defense has made a substantial
investment in JEDMICS. Without the incorporation of required security
precautions, the system cannot be used with assurance. To maximize the
utility of JEDMICS and to protect the information as required by law and
regulation, the Committee provides $5,000,000 in the Other Procurement,
Navy account to be used only to acquire and integrate an information
security solution.
SUSTAINING BASE INFORMATION SERVICES
The Army requested $18,459,000 to maintain Sustaining Base
Information Services, which consists of 13 applications fielded to 33
installations. To take maximum advantage of the substantial investment
already made in software development, the Committee recommends adding
$13,000,000 to the Other Procurement, Army account only to field these
existing applications to another 15 installations.
ARMY LOGISTICS AUTOMATION
The Army requested $37,521,000 for its Total Distribution Program.
The Committee recommends $62,521,000 an increase of $11,200,000 in
Operation and Maintenance, Army and an increase of $13,800,000 in Other
Procurement, Army. One of the deficiencies the Army identified during
Operation Desert Shield/Desert Storm was an inability to track shipments
and quickly locate particular supplies as they moved through the
distribution system. The Army has begun acquiring technology that will
automatically record when supplies move past each major checkpoint as
well as allowing personnel to electronically query the contents of a
container without having to open it. The Committee strongly supports
this high priority effort.
AUTOMATED DOCUMENT CONVERSION
The Committee supports the Department of Defense goal of digitizing
all weapons engineering drawings by the year 2000 and all other drawings
by the year 2002. The Committee agrees to provide a total of $40,000,000
over the budget request only for this effort, of which $30,000,000 is in
Operation and Maintenance, Defense-Wide for outsourcing bulk conversion
services and $10,000,000 is in Procurement, Defense-Wide for data
conversion products. These funds are to be directly managed by the
Computer Aided Logistics System executive within the Office of the
Secretary of Defense.
MILITARY PERSONNEL INFORMATION SYSTEMS
The Committee continues to strongly support the fiscal year 1997
appropriation conference report direction regarding DoD-wide military
personnel information systems and the Navy Standard Integrated Personnel
System (NSIPS) program management and implementation. The Department of
Defense has officially designated the Navy as the executive agent and
program manager for the DoD-wide or objective military personnel
information system. The Committee commends this action. After an
administrative delay, DoD and the Navy have begun work again and the
Committee directs both to provide the necessary resources to put this
critical program back on schedule and accelerate it if possible. The
Committee directs the Department of the Navy to maintain project and
program management and executive agent responsibilities for the
objective or DoD-wide system under the operational control and command
of the Commander, Naval Reserve Forces.
The Committee has provided $69,000,000 for NSIPS and DoD objective
system shortfalls and related Navy Reserve and Navy personnel
information management system functions and needs. Of this total amount,
the Committee directs that $30,500,000 in Operation and Maintenance,
Navy Reserve and $18,000,000 in Other Procurement, Navy be allocated
only to the Commander, Naval Reserve Forces, to: (1) address NSIPS and
Navy objective system program management funding shortfalls; (2)
continue and escalate Navy central design activity (CDA) consolidations
and the consolidation of all Navy manpower and personnel information
systems with the Naval Reserve Information Systems Office; (3) evaluate
and maintain current personnel/manpower legacy systems for migration to
NSIPS and the DoD objective systems; (4) establish requirements data
bases and development platforms as well as develop pilot projects with
industry and academia to attract, train and retain needed skilled
software personnel for software incentive projects within the Navy and
DoD; and (5) provide initial outfitting equipment, communications, local
area network (LAN) equipment, software, hardware and related
infrastructure support requirements for information system facilities.
Of the total amount, the Committee directs that $13,000,000 in
Operation and Maintenance, Navy Reserve and $2,500,000 in Other
Procurement, Navy be allocated only to the Commander, Naval Reserve
Forces for the Naval Reserve Information Systems Office for Naval
Reserve information management systems and related contractor support,
COTS integration efforts, and continuing electronic medium,
communications and LAN improvements to existing Naval Support Activity
and Naval Air Station facilities.
Of the total amount, the Committee has also provided an additional
$5,000,000 in Operation and Maintenance, Defense-Wide, only for the
DoD-wide objective military personnel system to be used by the Joint
Requirements and Integration Office.
SOFTWARE PROGRAM MANAGERS NETWORK
The Committee continues to support service programs and related
activities provided by the Software Program Managers Network (SPMN).
Despite support for this program at the DoD level and previous Committee
direction, the budget requested no funds. The Committee recommends
$6,000,000 only for this effort in Operation and Maintenance, Navy. The
Committee directs that these funds and operational control of the SPMN
effort be transferred to the Assistant Secretary of the Navy for
Research and Development to: (1) continue original SPMN efforts to
improve acquisition and management of software development and
maintenance within all the services and DoD; (2) assist the Navy and
Naval Reserve in their program management efforts regarding DoD-wide and
Naval military manpower personnel information systems; and (3) assist
the Navy and Naval Reserve in the development of industry and academia
pilot projects to attract, train and retain skilled software personnel
for software intensive projects within the Navy and DoD. It is the
Committee's intent that SPMN reflect the needs of program managers at
the ``grass roots'' level and that it not become an OSD top-down
directed program.
HIGH RISK AUTOMATION SYSTEMS
The General Accounting Office (GAO) has identified a number of major
DoD automation systems as ``high risk''. The central weakness in these
automation systems is that the development effort is moving ahead
without a completed economic analysis, proper milestones, measurable
goals or a reengineering study of the process being automated. The
Committee believes that it is preferable to limit development until
these steps have been taken than to risk a major program failure after
significant funds have been spent.
The Committee therefore recommends a reduction of $110,000,000 to be
allocated as follows:
Operation and Maintenance, Army -$25,000,000
Operation and Maintenance, Navy -25,000,000
Operation and Maintenance, Air Force -25,000,000
Operation and Maintenance, Defense-Wide -15,000,000
Defense Health Program (CHCSII) -20,000,000
The Committee directs that DoD provide a report to the congressional
defense committees on how these reductions are being applied no later
than March 1, 1998. In addition, the Committee directs that none of
these reductions are to be applied against Year 2000 conversion efforts,
automation programs to which the Committee has recommended increased
funding over the budget request, the Reserve Component Automation System
or to any item of special interest.
TITLE IV
RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST AND EVALUATION
ESTIMATES AND APPROPRIATION SUMMARY
The fiscal year 1998 Department of Defense Research, Development,
Test and Evaluation budget requests totals $35,934,491,000. The
accompanying bill recommends $36,704,924,000. The total amount
recommended is an increase of $770,433,000 above the fiscal year 1998
budget estimate, and is $736,197,000 less than the total provided in
fiscal year 1997. The table below summarizes the budget estimates and
the Committee's recommendations.
Offset Folio 175 insert here
federally funded research and development centers (ffrdcs)
The Committee notes that the fiscal year 1998 plan for Federally
Funded Research and Development Centers (FFRDCs) is well above the level
of effort for the prior year. The planned increase of 231 staff
technical years of effort (STE) represents almost a seven percent
increase in level of effort over the limitation set by Congress in 1996.
Also, given the prior year limitation of $1,161,000,000 and the
reduction of $52,000,000 taken against FFRDCs in 1997, the Committee
fails to understand why the Department is reporting an increase in
actual fiscal year 1997 spending.
Moreover, it appears the Department now plans to increase fiscal year
1998 FFRDC expenditures by $49,520,953 over 1997 levels. These trends
and increases are not consistent with prior Congressional direction nor
the recommendation of the Defense Science Board (DSB) in January 1997.
The DSB report challenged the Department's use of FFRDCs and concluded
that the current FFRDC system ``does not provide the best available
service at the most reasonable cost.'' The DSB Task Force recommended
that: (1) work done by FFRDCs be ``more carefully defined and limited''
(2) that competition be introduced and, (3) that management practices be
changed at the beginning of 1998 to incorporate these changes. The
Committee therefore recommends a funding level that is consistent with
the DSB report and prior Congressional direction on FFRDCs and
recommends a reduction of $55,000,000 to bring FFRDC spending back in
line with the established Congressional funding limitation of
$1,100,000,000.
BASIC RESEARCH
The Department of Defense requested over $1.1 billion for basic
research in fiscal year 1998, an increase of over ten percent compared
to the current fiscal year 1997 level. While the Committee supports the
need for the Defense Department to conduct a robust basic university
research program, in the context of the overall fiscal year 1998 defense
budget such funding growth is unwarranted. In each of the services there
are many programs that have long-standing yet unfulfilled warfighting
requirements and which have successfully completed R&D, yet no
production funds are requested in the budget ostensibly due to lack of
funds.
In addition, as in past years this year's budget submission included
large, unfunded shortfalls in defense medical programs, training and
readiness accounts, and other programs such as munitions which have
direct and immediate relevance to warfighting needs and the provision of
an adequate quality of life for service members and their families. The
Committee has provided additional funds in this bill to address these
and other critical shortfalls. However the Committee questions whether
never-ending budget growth in basic research is wise, particularly in
the context of the Administration's failure to adequately address the
Defense Department's weapon system modernization needs. In light of the
Department's proposed misallocation of resources, the Committee
recommends reductions to basic research funding to maintain this program
at the 1997 level.
NATO RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
The Department requested $53,479,000 for NATO Research and
Development across Service accounts. The Committee recommends no
appropriation.
The Committee remains concerned that the NATO Research and
Development program is an example of a well intentioned federal program
which, once begun, never ends. This program, which provides initial
funding for international cooperative research and development projects,
began in fiscal year 1986 at the height of the Cold War. Since that
time, over $800,000,000 has been spent to start cooperative projects,
very few of which have actually resulted in systems being fielded to
U.S. troops, and all of which require the military departments to find
ways to finance outyear costs. The Committee believes that this type of
program is not a priority program and is no longer affordable,
particularly as the Department and Services are trying to find ways of
financing higher priority requirements in areas such as readiness and
modernization. Therefore, the Committee recommends no appropriation.
TACTICAL RADIOS
The Committee commends the Assistant Secretary of Defense for
Command, Control, Communications, and Intelligence (ASDC3I) for
establishing an overall policy and providing planning, programming, and
budgetary guidance to the Services, CINC's, and DoD agencies for the
acquisition of tactical radios. Given the annual budget for tactical
radios, the Committee endorses the ASDC3I's efforts to ensure that
diverse Service and CINC communications requirements are satisfied,
while at the same time, ensuring that the acquisitions are cost
effective. The Committee is pleased that the Under Secretary of Defense
for Acquisition and Technology USD(A&T) and the ASDC3I are currently
reviewing Service communications programs and will make recommendations
for the establishment of a joint program to consolidate existing and
planned Service efforts. Since the review is currently on-going, the
Committee directs that no more than 25 percent of the funds appropriated
for the research and development of a tactical radio may be obligated
until the ASDC3I certifies that the development program meets
interoperability requirements, is not duplicative of other developmental
efforts, and is fully funded in the budget.
SPECIAL ACCESS PROGRAMS
The Committee is concerned about the apparent reluctance of the
military services to respond to Committee requests for budgetary data on
Special Access Programs (SAPs). In several instances, most notably with
the Army, the services failed to provide the Committee with requested
information in a timely manner. In each case, the data was eventually
provided, but only after repeated requests. This situation is
unacceptable. Therefore, the Committee directs the Secretary of Defense
to take necessary actions to ensure the services respond fully and
expeditiously to Committee requests to the military departments for
information on Special Access Programs.
The Committee, during the course of its review, has discovered a
number of programs in the Department that have been treated in a
SAP-like manner, but have not been formally identified to the Committee
as SAPs. Such practices do not conform with agreements between the
Congress and the Department on handling such information, and severely
complicate Congressional oversight of Departmental activities. The
Committee has resolved one such problem with the Air Force already.
However, the Committee is aware of a problem with a Navy program that
has not been adequately resolved. Accordingly, the Committee directs the
Secretary of Defense to submit a report to the Committee no later than
September 30, 1997 that includes (1) a description of the program, (2)
the amount of funding for the program, past and future, by year, with
account and line-item detail, and (3) the steps the Department is taking
to avoid such problems in the future. Further details are provided
separately in the classified annex of this report.
COMBAT SURVIVOR EVADER LOCATOR (CSEL) SURVIVAL RADIO
The Combat Survivor Evader Locator (CSEL) survival radio system was
developed to satisfy a requirement for a communication capability to be
used in the search and rescue of downed airman and crew. Although the
CSEL was designed and developed to include a secure airborne
interrogator, this capability was not included in the current program.
The Committee understands that this deficiency increases the risk to an
airborne rescue force because the downed crew can not provide secure,
real-time position location data and situational awareness to the rescue
force. Therefore, the Committee recommends that the Department of
Defense provide the necessary funding in future budgets for a secure,
airborne interrogator in CSEL.
INSTITUTE FOR DEFENSE ANALYSES
The Committee directs that not more than one-third of the funds (100
staff technical years of effort) in all appropriations in the bill for
the Institute for Defense Analyses (IDA) may be obligated until the
Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Technology provides the
Committee with the results of any and every recent IDA study dealing
with tactical aircraft modernization or technical performance issues, at
any level of classification. The Committee designates funds for IDA to
be an item of special interest, and this prior approval restriction
shall be so noted on DD Form 1414 (Base for Reprogramming Actions) for
fiscal year 1998.
CLASSIFIED PROGRAMS
Adjustments to classified RDT&E programs are addressed in the
classified annex accompanying this report.
RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST AND EVALUATION, ARMY
Fiscal year 1997 appropriation $5,062,763,000
Fiscal year 1998 budget request 4,510,843,000
Committee recommendation 4,686,427,000
Change from budget request +175,584,000
This appropriation funds the Research, Development, Test and
Evaluation Activities of the Department of the Army.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS
AUTHORIZATION CHANGES
The Committee recommends the following changes to the budget request
in accordance with House authorization action:
[In thousands of dollars]
Item Budget request Committee recommended Change from request
Ballistics Technology 33,317 38,317 +5,000
Combat Vehicle and Automotive Adv Tech 32,685 35,685 +3,000
Joint Service Small Arms Program 4,754 11,754 +7,000
Armament Enhancement Initiative 40,313 60,313 +20,000
All Source Analysis System 24,045 27,545 +3,500
Aircraft Mod/Prod Improvements 2,609 22,609 +20,000
Information Systems Security 9,647 12,147 +2,500
BASIC RESEARCH
IN-HOUSE LABORATORY RESEARCH
The Army requested $15,113,000 for in-house laboratory research. The
Committee recommends $14,113,000, a decrease of $1,000,000 due to fiscal
constraints.
DEFENSE RESEARCH SCIENCES
The Army requested $138,165,000 for defense research sciences. The
Committee recommends $120,165,000 a decrease of $18,000,000 to limit
program growth. Of the available funds, $1,000,000 is only to accelerate
Intelligent Software Agent Research at the Army Research Laboratory.
UNIVERSITY AND INDUSTRY RESEARCH CENTERS
The Committee recognizes the importance of electric gun research and
directs that adequate funds be provided in future budget submissions.
ARMY RESEARCH INSTITUTE FOR BEHAVIORAL AND SOCIAL SCIENCES
The Army requested $16,000,000 for the Army Research Institute (ARI)
for Behavioral and Social Sciences. The Committee recommends the budget
request. The Committee recognizes the importance of the ARI's research
activities related to personnel recruitment and training, as well as
issues related to gender and racial integration. The Committee
encourages the Army to adequately fund ARI research activities in future
budget submissions.
EXPLORATORY DEVELOPMENT
SENSORS AND ELECTRONIC SURVIVABILITY
The Army requested $19,294,000 for sensors and electronic
survivability. The Committee recommends $24,294,000, an increase of
$5,000,000 only for the continued development of the passive millimeter
wave camera.
AVIATION ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY
The Army requested $27,282,000 for aviation advanced technology. The
Committee recommends $22,282,000 a decrease of $5,000,000 which
maintains funding at the fiscal year 1997 appropriated level.
COMBAT VEHICLE AND AUTOMOTIVE TECHNOLOGY
The Army requested $33,112,000 for combat vehicle and automotive
technology. The Committee recommends $40,112,000 an increase of
$7,000,000. This includes an increase of $6,000,000 only to modernize
the Army's Tank and Vehicle Simulation Laboratory, an increase of
$3,000,000 only for the continued development of a Voice Instructional
Device for use on the National Automotive Center's Smart Truck program,
and a decrease of $2,000,000 for program termination.
The Committee directs that of the available funds, $1,000,000 is only
to develop the High Output Diesel Engine at the National Automotive
Center.
chemical, smoke, and equipment defeating technology
The Army requested $4,739,000 for chemical, smoke and equipment
defeating technology. The Committee recommends $2,739,000, a decrease of
$2,000,000 to limit program growth.
JOINT SERVICE SMALL ARMS PROGRAM
The Army requested $4,786,000 for the joint service small arms
program. The Committee recommends $9,286,000, an increase of $4,500,000
only for the accelerated development of the Objective Crew Served
Weapon.
WEAPONS AND MUNITIONS TECHNOLOGY
The joint Army and Defense Special Weapons Agency program for
Electro-Thermal Chemical technology development (ETC) is evaluating ETC
for direct fire applications. The Committee believes that ETC technology
may also have indirect fire applications. Therefore, the Committee
directs the Secretary of the Army to conduct a study which explores the
benefits of ETC for Army indirect fire applications. The study is to
address the issues associated with propellant and ETC ignitor
development, as well as system issues associated with platform
integration. The study is to be completed by March 1998. If the study
proves that ETC has indirect fire applications, the Committee encourages
the Army to include this program in the fiscal year 1999 budget request.
ELECTRONICS AND ELECTRONIC DEVICES
The Army requested $20,192,000 for electronics and electronic
devices. The Committee recommends $22,692,000, an increase of $2,500,000
only for the development of standard-combustion, fuel driven,
man-portable, thermophotovoltaic generators.
COUNTERMINE SYSTEMS
The Committee encourages the Army to examine potential funding for
the Charged Particle Beam Countermine System (CPB CMS), which the
Committee believes has the potential to detect and detonate all types of
suface or buried mines at a safe stand-off distance through the use of a
high current electron beam.
HUMAN FACTORS ENGINEERING TECHNOLOGY
The Army requested $14,256,000 for Human Factors Engineering. The
Committee recommends $18,256,000, an increase of $4,000,000 only for
Medical Teams.
ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY TECHNOLOGY
The Army requested $17,519,000 for Environmental Quality Technology.
The Committee recommends $42,219,000, an increase of $24,700,000. Of
this amount, $5,000,000 is only for support of life-cycle environmental
and manufacturing technologies research related to weapons systems and
munitions technology assessment and analysis at the Gallo Center,
Picatinny Arsenal. In addition, $2,000,000 is only for the U.S. Army
Construction and Engineering Research Laboratory to conduct an industry
cost-shared demonstration of emerging high-efficiency natural gas boiler
technology. This increase also provides $5,000,000 only for the
implementation of the Commercialization of Technologies to Lower Defense
Costs Initiative. Finally, the Committee provides $4,000,000 only for
Bioremediation Education, Science and Technology and $8,700,000 only for
the Plasma Energy Pyrolysis System as provided for in the House-passed
Defense authorization bill.
MILITARY ENGINEERING TECHNOLOGY
The Army requested $36,422,000 for military engineering technology.
The Committee recommends $43,922,000, an increase of $7,500,000 only for
further technology development to enhance the military capabilities and
economic efficiency of climate change fuel cells at the U.S. Army Corps
of Engineers Construction Engineering Research Laboratories.
MEDICAL TECHNOLOGY
The Army requested $74,684,000 for Medical Technology. The Committee
recommends $142,484,000, an increase of $67,800,000. Within this
increase, $25,000,000 is only for the continuation of the Army-managed
Neurotoxin Exposure Treatment Research Program, $9,800,000 is only for
neurofibromatosis, $3,500,000 is only for Army nutrition research,
$3,500,000 is only for orthopedic implant research, $6,000,000 is only
for the LSTAT, $10,000,000 is only for prostate cancer research, and
$10,000,000 is only for ovarian cancer research.
NEUROFIBROMATOSIS
The Committee recommends $9,800,000 to continue the Army
neurofibromatosis medical research program which has produced important
advances in the understanding of NF. This work includes important
investigations into genetic mechanisms governing peripheral nerve
regeneration after injury from such things as missile wounds and
chemical toxins, and is important to gaining better understandings of
wound healing. The Committee compliments the Army Medical Research and
Material Command for structuring a highly regarded, peer-reviewed
program that is well coordinated with other research conducted at the
National Institutes of Health. The Committee urges the Army to focus
these funds on research leading to clinical trials of promising
treatments and therapies for NF.
PROSTATE DISEASE
The Committee recommends $10,000,000 to continue the Department's
nationally-recognized program to conduct basic and clinical research
studies to combat diseases of the prostate. The goal of this program is
to develop more effective, more specific and less toxic forms of therapy
for patients in all stages of prostate disease. The Center for Prostate
Disease Research established under this program uses the large network
of military hospitals around the country as a resource for information
on the improved detection and treatment of prostate disease. The
Department should continue to give the highest priority to funding
research that is multi-institutional, multi-disciplinary and regionally
focused.
ADVANCED DEVELOPMENT
MEDICAL ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY
The Department requested $10,677,000 for Medical Advanced Technology.
The Committee recommends $142,177,000, an increase of $131,500,000.
Within this increase, $100,000,000 is only for the Army peer-reviewed
breast cancer program, $8,000,000 is only for the National Medical
Testbed, $6,000,000 is only for catheterization lab upgrades at Walter
Reed, $3,500,000 is only for advanced cancer detection, $3,000,000 is
only for cooperative teleradiology, $6,000,000 is only for advanced
trauma care, $1,500,000 is only for artificial lung research, and
$3,500,000 is only for emergency telemedicine, as proposed in the
House-passed Defense Authorization bill.
AVIATION ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY
The Army requested $31,330,000 for aviation advanced technology. The
Committee recommends $53,830,000, an increase of $22,500,000. Within
this increase, $5,000,000 is only to begin development of a short-range
unmanned aerial vehicle, $2,500,000 is only to define the potential
operational value and key technical issues related to an integrated
manned and unmanned aerial vehicle scout team, $11,600,000 is only for
development of the Stinger Universal Launcher (SUL), and $3,400,000 is
only for the Starstreak missile. The Committee provides the additional
funds for the SUL and Starstreak missile to ensure the Army maintains
the schedule for a fiscal year 1999 side-by-side test of both the
Stinger and the Starstreak missile on the Apache helicopter. The
Committee directs the Army to take all necessary steps, including
budgeting adequate fiscal year 1999 funds, to ensure such a side-by-side
test will take place in fiscal year 1999.
WEAPONS AND MUNITIONS ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY
The Army requested $18,255,000 for weapons and munitions advanced
technology. The Committee recommends $25,255,000, an increase of
$7,000,000. Of the increase, $5,000,000 is only to accelerate trajectory
correctable munitions development and $2,000,000 is only for precision
guided mortar munitions development.
MISSILE AND ROCKET ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY
The Army requested $117,139,000 for missile and rocket advanced
technology development. The Committee recommends $59,439,000, a
reduction of $57,700,000 based on the termination of the Army's Enhanced
Fiber Optic Guided Missile (EFOG M). The Committee notes that EFOG M was
not recommended for authorization this year based on technical and
testing concerns.
This program, as currently structured, is essentially a multiyear
procurement program incrementally funded in the Army's science and
technology (S&T) research budget. Using funds normally associated with
fundamental research and technology demonstrations, the Army plans to
procure and field 256 missiles, 12 launch vehicles, and 4 command
vehicles to the 82nd Airborne for a ``limited go to war capability.''
The Army plans to field the weapon system without independent
operational testing and evaluation (IOT&E), formal milestone reviews, or
many of the other fundamental acquisition requirements in place to
ensure DoD only procures safe, cost effective, operationally suitable,
and supportable weapon systems.
The EFOG M program is part of a larger Rapid Force Projection
Initiative (RFPI) Advanced Concept Technology Demonstration (ACTD). A
``principle'' of ACTDs is that after a technology is demonstrated, it
can be left behind to operational units for further use and evaluation.
The Army is abusing this ``principle'' by procuring missiles and
vehicles far in excess of those required for the ACTD. The ACTD requires
only 44 missiles, 8 launch vehicles, and 2 command vehicles. The Army is
using S&T funds to buy an additional 256 missiles that will not be
consumed in ACTD testing as well as additional launchers and command
vehicles to field an entire company in the 82nd Airborne.
Since the program's funding is buried within a larger R&D line-item,
neither Congress nor OSD has visibility into the yearly quantities and
costs that would normally appear in a missile procurement budget that
complies with the ``full funding'' policy. The Committee also notes that
the 256 missiles are being produced under a multiyear contract that has
never been explicitly approved by Congress as would be required had the
missiles been funded in a procurement account. Abuse of so many basic
acquisition and financial policies jeopardizes the Committee's support
of the ACTD ``leave behind'' principle. The Committee expects DoD to
review its ACTD programs to ensure the minimum amount of equipment is
being developed to support only the ACTD. The Committee has also
included a general provision that addresses this overall growing problem
within DoD by prohibiting the use of R&D funds to buy end-items that
will not be used in support of testing.
LANDMINE WARFARE AND BARRIER ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY
The Army requested $19,332,000 for landmine warfare and barrier
advanced technology. The Committee recommends $25,932,000, an increase
of $6,600,000. Of the increase, $3,900,000 is only to continue the
development of the Vehicular Mounted Mine Detection (VMMD) system and
$2,700,000 is only to test the Ground Stand-off Mine detection system as
part of the VMMD advanced technology demonstration.
line-of-sight technology demonstration
The Army requested $13,000,000 for the Line-Of-Sight Advanced
Technology anti-tank missile system. The Committee recommends no funding
for this program, a decrease of $13,000,000. Starting with the fiscal
year 1998 President's Budget, the Army has restructured the LOSAT
program as an ACTD using an acquisition model very similar to the EFOG M
program (discussed elsewhere in this report). Like EFOG M, the Army is
using the ``leave behind'' principle of ACTDs to develop, procure, and
field 13 fire units and 178 missiles to the 82nd Airborne using science
and technology research funding. The 178 missiles will not be consumed
in testing and Army documentation shows a FY 2003 ``fielding'' date with
a note that states, ``funded [R&D] program provides initial operating
capability.'' The Committee strongly objects to this kind of R&D funded
procurement scheme and states its intent to deny or realign funding for
any programs in the future where such abuse of fundamental and
traditional acquisition program and budget procedure is discovered.
The Committee is also concerned with the number of ``tank killers''
the Army is trying to field in the 82nd Airborne. In the coming years,
the 82nd Airborne's anti-tank capabilities will include Hellfire,
Javelin, and Follow-On To Tow (FOTT) weapon systems. Each of these will
be by far the most advanced anti-tank weapons of their kind on the
battlefield. LOSAT would provide the 82nd Airborne with a capability
that will be, in many ways, duplicative to FOTT. Both weapon systems are
employed on HMMWVs and have similar ranges. While LOSAT has the
advantage of extreme lethality, FOTT has the advantage of having greater
targeting flexibility and being a fire and forget weapon. Also, FOTT is
an objective system for the entire Army and will be proliferated
throughout the Service using the existing Tow infrastructure. Given
these considerations, the Committee views the LOSAT acquisition program
as both inappropriately structured and wasteful and therefore recommends
its termination.
DEMONSTRATION AND VALIDATION
ARMY MISSILE DEFENSE SYSTEMS INTEGRATION
The Army requested $24,138,000 for Army missile defense systems
integration. The Committee recommends $55,638,000, an increase of
$31,500,000 only to test the Tactical High Energy Laser (THEL)
demonstrator. Subsequent to the budget submission, the Secretary of
Defense and Israel agreed the THEL demonstrator should undergo U.S.
government developmental testing. The government developmental test
would be the first opportunity to validate the capability of the
demonstrator to shoot down rockets in flight before it is given to
Israel. The Secretary of Defense proposed that the U.S. provide
two-thirds and the Israeli government one-third of the funds required to
complete the government developmental test. However, no funds are
included in the fiscal year 1998 budget request for the government
developmental test. The recommended increase will pay the two-thirds
share for THEL testing as proposed by the Secretary of Defense. The
Committee notes that the fiscal year 1998 budget includes $16,500,000
for THEL development and contractor testing. The Committee has also
recommended an additional $10,000,000 in program element 0605605A, High
Energy Laser Systems Test Facility, for test site preparation.
AVIATION ADVANCED DEVELOPMENT
The Army requested $7,132,000 for aviation advanced development. The
Committee recommends $15,132,000, an increase of $8,000,000. Of the
amount, $3,000,000 is only to continue the development of the aircrew
integrated common helmet development and $5,000,000 is only to develop
retinal display technologies for the aircrew integrated common helmet.
ARTILLERY SYSTEMS DEVELOPMENT
The Army requested $324,380,000 for artillery systems development
(Crusader). The Committee recommends the amount requested. The Committee
expresses its continued support for the Crusader development program and
believes that the Crusader artillery system has the potential to
increase future artillery and maneuver force effectiveness. The
Committee encourages the Army to provide adequate funding program in
future budget submissions to ensure that the Crusader acquisition plan
remains on schedule.
ENGINEERING AND MANUFACTURING DEVELOPMENT
EW DEVELOPMENT
The Army requested $66,212,000 for EW Development. The Committee
recommends $86,524,000, an increase of $20,312,000 to integrate lessons
learned in the Force XXI Advanced Warfighting Experiment and meet the
goal of IOT&E in fiscal year 1998.
FAMILY OF HEAVY TACTICAL VEHICLES
The Army requested no funding for the family of heavy tactical
vehicles. The Committee recommends $5,000,000 only to design, develop,
and integrate state-of-the-art technologies into future tactical
trailers.
AIR TRAFFIC CONTROL
The Army requested $1,705,000 for air traffic control. The Committee
recommends $4,705,000, an increase of $3,000,000. The Committee has
learned that inadequate funds were budgeted to complete testing of the
Air Traffic Navigation Integration and Coordination System (ATNAVICS).
Therefore, the Committee has transferred funds from ATNAVICS procurement
to research and development to complete testing.
LIGHT TACTICAL WHEELED VEHICLE
The Army requested $9,909,000 for light tactical wheeled vehicle
development. The Committee recommends no funding for this program. The
Army is currently developing a light tactical wheeled vehicle strategy
based on future requirements and budgets and is considering four
alternatives: continue to procure the current vehicle; modify the
current vehicle; procure a new commercial vehicle; or develop a new
light tactical wheeled vehicle. The Committee has requested that the
Army provide detailed cost and requirement analysis of the light
tactical wheeled vehicle strategy; however, the study will not be
complete until fiscal year 1998. Although the Army has not completed its
evaluation of various alternatives for light weight tactical vehicles,
the Army's budget request essentially is predetermining the outcome of
the study. The Committee directs that the Army provide by September 15,
1997 a report outlining the light weight tactical vehicle alternatives
which the Army is currently evaluating. The report is to include the
requirements, estimated development and acquisition costs, and estimated
operation and support costs for each alternative.
COMBAT FEEDING, CLOTHING, AND EQUIPMENT
The Army requested $55,964,000 for combat feeding, clothing and
equipment development. The Committee recommends $65,264,000 an increase
of $9,300,000 only for the continued testing and development of the
Force XXI Landwarrior system.
AUTOMATIC TEST EQUIPMENT DEVELOPMENT
The Army requested $2,582,000 for automatic test equipment
development. The Committee recommends $11,582,000, an increase of
$9,000,000 only for Integrated Family of Test Equipment development.
COMBINED ARMS TACTICAL TRAINER
The Army requested $2,823,000 for the development of the Combined
Arms Tactical Trainer. The Committee recommends $13,323,000, an increase
of $10,500,000 only for the development and testing of the Close Combat
Tactical Trainer (CCTT). After the fiscal year 1998 budget was submitted
to the Congress, the Army made significant changes to the CCTT
acquisition schedule because of problems associated with system
reliability. The new acquisition schedule delays operational testing
until April 1998 and the delivery of an operational system by at least
one year. Since the fiscal year 1998 budget does not reflect the revised
acquisition schedule, the Committee has recommended additional funding
to resolve reliability issues associated with the development of the
CCTT.
LANDMINE WARFARE/BARRIER ENGINEERING DEVELOPMENT
The Army requested $22,605,000 for landmine warfare/barrier
engineering development. The Committee recommends $8,905,000, a decrease
of $13,700,000. The Committee has deleted the funds for the engineering
and manufacturing development (EMD) of the Airborne Standoff Minefield
Detection System (ASTAMIDS). The Committee has and continues to be a
strong supporter of countermine systems and has added funding for the
development of such systems. Last year, the Congress believed that the
ASTAMIDS system was not ready to enter EMD until results from a Bosnia
qualification test were available. Therefore, the Congress provided an
additional $12,000,000 to complete advanced development work required on
the two competing systems in anticipation of a Bosnia qualification
test. Since the budget submission, the Committee has learned that
neither system met the exit criteria for the Bosnia qualification test
and that both ASTAMIDS systems are encountering technical difficulties.
Once again, the Committee believes that it is premature to enter EMD and
appropriates no funds.
SENSE AND DESTROY ARMAMENT MISSILE
The Army requested $22,372,000 the Sense and Destroy Armanent Missile
(SADARM). The Committee recommends $5,494,000, a decrease of $16,878,000
to delay the development of the product improvement program of SADARM.
The Committee is a strong supporter of the SADARM program and has
provided funding to procure SADARM. However, the baseline SADARM
development program was plagued with technical difficulties. Until
scheduled testing is completed on the baseline system in fiscal year
1998, the Committee believes that the product improvement program can be
delayed.
RDT&E MANAGEMENT SUPPORT
DOD HIGH ENERGY LASER TEST FACILITY
The Army requested $14,952,000 for the DoD High Energy Laser Test
Facility (HELSTF). The Committee recommends $30,952,000, an increase of
$16,000,000 of which $10,000,000 is only to conduct live fire tests of
the Tactical High Energy Laser System at HELSTF and $6,000,000 is only
for the solid state laser development program.
MATERIEL SYSTEMS ANALYSIS
The Army requested $29,707,000 for material systems analysis. The
Committee recommends $14,707,000, a decrease of $15,000,000. The
Committee notes that the fiscal year 1998 budget request includes the
transfer of funds from operation and maintenance. However, the Committee
does not believe that the Army's budget submission adequately justifies
the costs associated with material systems analysis. The budget
submission does not provide cost data for salaries, travel, and number
of personnel. Furthermore, the Committee is concerned with the level of
operational testing resources dedicated for Advanced Concept Technology
Demonstrations, Advanced Technology Demonstrations, and the Advanced
Warfighting Experiments. The Committee believes that since these
activities are demonstrations and not formal acquisition programs,
testing costs should be included in the budget lines funding the
individual demonstrations and experiments. Additionally, given the
decrease in Major Defense Acquisition Programs, the Committee believes
that the management and support cost associated with the operational
test of such systems should also decrease.
SUPPORT OF OPERATIONAL TESTING
The Army requested $81,672,000 for support of operational testing.
The Committee recommends $51,672,000, a decrease of $30,000,000. The
Committee is aware that the budget request for this activity increased
in fiscal year 1998 because funding was transferred from operation and
maintenance to research and development. Based on the Army budget
materials, the Committee believes the majority of the fiscal year 1998
funding is to conduct operational testing associated with the Advanced
Warfighting Experiments. Furthermore, the Army's budget justification
materials do not provide cost data for the number of personnel,
salaries, travel and associated operational costs for test and
evaluation support activities. The Committee notes that some of the
systems scheduled to undergo operational testing in fiscal year 1997
have been delayed, such as the ASTAMIDS, Close Combat Tactical Trainer,
and the ATNAVICS system. Therefore, fiscal year 1997 funds should be
available to address any fiscal year 1998 shortfalls.
PROGRAMWIDE ACTIVITIES
The Army requested $86,208,000 for programwide activities. The
Committee recommends $66,208,000, a decrease of $20,000,000. The fiscal
year 1998 budget request is 30 percent higher than last year's
appropriated amount. The Committee notes that the majority of the
increase was to fund the federal workforce restructure. However, the
Committee believes that the Army budget justification materials do not
provide sufficient rationale to warrant such an increase in fiscal year
1998.
MUNITIONS STANDARDIZATION, EFFECTIVENESS AND SAFETY
The Army requested $6,317,000 for munitions standardization,
effectiveness, and safety. The Committee recommends $9,317,000, an
increase of $3,000,000 only to develop a blast chamber for
demilitarizing excess and obsolete ammunition at the Blue Grass Army
Depot.
ENVIRONMENTAL COMPLIANCE
The Army requested $51,378,000 for environmental compliance. The
Committee recommends $56,378,000, an increase of $5,000,000 only for the
U.S. Army Construction and Engineering Research Laboratory for further
technology development to enhance the military applications and economic
efficiency of fuel cells.
In the fiscal year 1994 Defense Appropriations Act, the Congress
provided an increase of $2,700,000 in this program element for an
environmental remediation project that was authorized in the fiscal year
1994 Defense Authorization Act. The Committee is disappointed to note
that the Department redirected $1,700,000 of this funding to another
project. The Committee understands that work has already begun in
coordination with the Army Corps of Engineers, but it cannot be
completed as planned without the restoration of the funds. The Committee
therefore directs the Department to provide $1,700,000 from within
available funds to complete this effort and to expand the project area
accordingly.
AEROSTAT JOINT PROJECT OFFICE
The Army requested $86,193,000 for the Aerostat Joint Program Office.
The Committee recommends no funding for this activity. The Aerostat
Joint Program Office has been conducting concept of operation studies
and developing an operational requirements document. Since fiscal year
1996, the Army has spent over $30,000,000 for concept studies; however,
there is still not a validated requirement or a completed vulnerability
assessment for the Aerostat system. According to the joint program
office, the total cost of the concept development and Advanced Concept
Technology Demonstration phase of the Aerostat program will be over
$600,000,000 after which the Army will have one operational Aerostat.
The Committee is also aware that the Army five year budget plan for this
program is underfunded by $120,000,000.
The Committee is, frankly, taken aback by the Army development
community's grandiose plans for this program in light of the
well-documented and understood shortfalls in not only other Army
modernization programs, but in all Army accounts. Absent any firm
program requirements, validated mission or user need, vulnerability
assessment, or plans to ultimately procure Aerostats, the Committee
recommends termination of this program, as well as rescission of
available prior year appropriations.
COMBAT VEHICLE IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM
The Army requested $136,520,000 for the combat vehicle improvement
program. The Committee recommends $152,520,000, an increase of
$16,000,000 of which $12,000,000 is only to integrate field emission
flat panel displays on the Abrams tank and $4,000,000 is only to
continue the development of the AN/VVR 1 laser warning receiver.
DIGITIZATION
The Army requested $156,960,000 for digitization. The Committee
recommends $75,560,000, a decrease of $81,400,000. Of the amount,
$38,900,000 has been transferred to the Force XXI Initiative
appropriation and $52,500,000 has been transferred to fund Warfighting
Rapid Acquisition Program (WRAP) initiatives not included in the fiscal
year 1998 budget submission. Further details are provided under the
heading Force XXI Initiatives. An additional $10,000,000 is only to
procure Tactical Personnel Communications Services for experimentation
at the next Advanced Warfighting Experiment at Fort Hood.
The Army's Training and Doctrine Command (TRADOC) has played an
important role in the digitization program; however, the Committee
believes that TRADOC's dominant role should not continue into the system
acquisition phase. TRADOC represents the ``user'' and the Committee
believes that digitization development, operational tests, and
evaluation should be under the management of an acquisition executive.
Therefore, the Committee directs that the Army designate a Program
Manager and establish a Battlefield System Acquisition Program Office
prior to the Milestone I/II decision to initiate the system acquisition
phase. The Committee is concerned that without the establishment of an
acquisition program office, that major technical, cost, and schedule
issues can not be adequately managed.
During the March 1997 Advanced Warfighting Experiment, the Army found
that voice-data contention on SINCGARS nets seriously limited the
Commander's ability to command and control his forces. The Army has
plans to replace SINCGARS with an interim Near Term Digital Radio (NTDR)
followed by Future Digital Radio (FDR). The NTDR is currently in
development. FDR development is scheduled for fiscal year 1999; fielding
would begin in fiscal year 2004. The Army wants to field its interim
digitized division in fiscal year 2000; however, until the FDR is
fielded, the division will have a very limited capability to transmit
data. The Committee believes that the digital tactical radio acquisition
program is not in sync with the overall digitization of the battlefield
plan and directs the Army to submit with the fiscal year 1999 budget a
tactical radio plan which would meet the requirements of the interim
digitized division. The plan is to include requirements, cost, and
acquisition schedule. Furthermore, the Committee directs that the Army
coordinate the plan with the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Command,
Control, Communications and Intelligence.
missile/air defense product improvement program
The Army requested $17,412,000 for air defense missile improvements.
The Committee recommends $27,412,000, an increase of $10,000,000 only
for the Patriot Anti-Cruise Missile program.
JOINT TACTICAL GROUND SYSTEM
The Army requested $3,195,000 for the Joint Tactical Ground System.
The Committee recommends $6,195,000, an increase of $3,000,000 to
continue the upgrades under Phase I of the JTAGS P3I program.
END ITEM INDUSTRIAL PREPAREDNESS ACTIVITIES
The Army requested $44,326,000 for end item industrial preparedness
activities. The Committee recommends $54,326,000, an increase of
$10,000,000. Of that amount $5,000,000 is only for the development of
the M829E3 munitions production capability and $5,000,000 only to
accelerate munitions manufacturing technology.
FORCE XXI INITIATIVE
The Army requested no funds for Force XXI initiatives. The Committee
recommends $38,900,000 only for the Warfighting Rapid Acquisition
Program (WRAP). The budget request includes $100,000,000 for WRAP
initiatives in the Army's digitization appropriation. Last year, the
Congress established a separate program element for WRAP initiatives. In
accordance with last year's Act, the Committee recommends the transfer
of WRAP funding from the Digitization to the Force XXI Initiative
program element. The Army has identified fiscal year 1998 WRAP funding
to continue initiatives which were approved in fiscal year 1997. The
Committee has established new program elements for the fiscal year 1997
initiatives and transferred the fiscal year 1998 WRAP funding as
identified by the Army to continue each initiative. The Committee has
provided funding for the following WRAP initiatives in fiscal year 1998:
Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, Army
Striker $3,900,000
Mortar Fire Control 10,000,000
Applique (funded in Digitization) 2,600,000
Tactical Internet (funded in Digitization) 6,000,000
Other Procurement, Army
Gun Laying Positioning System 6,000,000
Radio Frequency Technology 2,900,000
Lightweight Laser Designator/Range Finder 2,800,000
Combat Synthetic Training Assessment Range 5,400,000
Airborne Command and Control System 11,100,000
Avenger Slew to Cue 7,400,000
Palletized Loading System Enhanced 3,000,000
The Committee has recommended a new general provision which prohibits
the DoD from using research and development funds to procure end-items
for delivery to military forces. To comply with the general provision,
the Committee has recommended that the funding budgeted for the
procurement of WRAP items be transferred to Other Procurement, Army.
As in fiscal year 1997, the Congress directs that no funds may be
obligated from the Force XXI Initiative appropriation without prior
notification to the congressional defense committees. Notification is to
include the supporting criteria outlining the technical merit and
maturity; criticality and priority to warfighting requirements;
affordability; effectiveness; and sustainability in future budget
submissions for the items under consideration. Once again, the Committee
directs that none of the Force XXI funds may be used for technologies
included in the budget request, such as applique, night vision
equipment, and radios. Instead, Force XXI funds are to be reprogrammed,
with prior notification, to the appropriate account for obligation.
The Committee notes that the Army's unfunded requirements list
included approximately $90,000,000 for digitization efforts. The
Committee believes that those shortfalls, which ensure interoperability
and systems architecture development, should be funded before Force XXI
initiatives.
STRIKER
The Army requested no funds for Striker. The Committee recommends
$3,900,000 only for Striker. Additional details are provided under the
heading ``Force XXI Initiatives.''
MORTAR FIRE CONTROL
The Army requested no funds for Mortar Fire Control (MFC). The
Committee recommends $10,000,000 only for MFC. Additional details are
provided under the heading ``Force XXI Initiatives.''
THEATER PRECISION STRIKE OPERATIONS
The Army requested no funds for Theater Precision Strike Operations
(TSPO). The Committee recommends $5,000,000 only for TSPO.
PROGRAM RECOMMENDED
The total amount recommended in the bill will provide the following
program in fiscal year 1998:
Offset Folios 0193 to 0195 Insert here
RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST AND EVALUATION, NAVY
Fiscal year 1997 appropriation $8,208,946,000
Fiscal year 1998 budget request 7,611,022,000
Committee recommendation 7,907,837,000
Change from budget request +296,815,000
This appropriation provides funds for the Research, Development, Test
and Evaluation activities of the Department of the Navy and the Marine
Corps.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS
AUTHORIZATION CHANGES
The Committee recommends the following changes in accordance with
House authorization action:
[In thousands of dollars]
Budget request Committee recommendation Change from request
ASW systems development (ADLFP) 22,869 26,669 +3,800
Advanced submarine combat systems development 61,122 62,422 +1,300
Carrier systems development 98,587 10,187 -88,400
Shipboard system component development 19,194 22,694 +3,500
Advanced submarine system development 59,067 162,067 +103,000
Marine Corps assault vehicles 60,134 70,134 +10,000
Marine Corps ground combat support system 36,464 40,064 +3,600
Standards development 36,297 40,297 +4,000
Tactical command system 31,518 41,518 +10,000
H 1 Upgrades 80,735 86,335 +5,600
Acoustic search sensors (AEER) 16,947 20,947 +4,000
Arsenal ship 102,994 0 -102,994
Distributed surveillance 33,048 43,448 +10,400
F/A 18 squadrons 316,976 207,776 -109,200
Tomahawk and Tomahawk mission planning center 93,359 91,500 -1,859
Consolidated training systems development 58,956 36,456 -22,500
BASIC RESEARCH
in-house independent laboratory research
The Navy requested $15,834,000 for in-house independent laboratory
research. The Committee recommends $14,683,000, a decrease of $1,151,000
due to fiscal constraints.
DEFENSE RESEARCH SCIENCES
The Navy requested $366,283,000 for defense research sciences. The
Committee recommends $336,463,000, a decrease of $29,820,000. This
includes a decrease of $39,820,000 to hold the program to the 1997 level
and an increase of $10,000,000 only for molecular design research as
recommended in the House-passed Authorization bill.
EXPLORATORY DEVELOPMENT
surface/aerospace surveillance and weapons technology
The Navy requested $32,273,000 for surface/aerospace surveillance and
weapons technology. The Committee recommends $29,273,000, a decrease of
$3,000,000 due to fiscal constraints.
SURFACE SHIP TECHNOLOGY
The Navy requested $46,859,000 for surface ship technology. The
Committee recommends $53,859,000, an increase of $7,000,000. This
includes increases recommended in the House-passed Defense Authorization
bill: $6,000,000 only for power electronic building blocks, $1,500,000
only for power node control centers, and $2,500,000 only for
micromechanical systems technology for damage tolerant networks. An
additional $2,000,000 is only to enhance on-going Navy collaborative
efforts for the application for underwater vehicle derived component
level intelligent distributed control technology to Navy surface ship
automation. A decrease of $5,000,000 is also recommended due to fiscal
constraints.
AIRCRAFT TECHNOLOGY
The Navy requested $23,590,000 for aircraft technology. The Committee
recommends $25,390,000, an increase of $1,800,000. Within this amount,
$2,800,000 is only to continue the technical evaluation and integration
of advanced high resolution and brightness pixel flat panel displays
into Navy integrated day/night all-weather helmet mounted displays. A
decrease of $1,000,000 is also recommended due to fiscal constraints.
command, control, and communications technology
The Navy requested $65,566,000, for C3 technology. The Committee
recommends $59,566,000, a decrease of $6,000,000 due to fiscal
constraints.
readiness, training, and environmental quality technology
The Navy requested $31,762,000 for readiness, training, and
environmental quality technology. The Committee recommends $47,362,000,
an increase of $15,600,000. Within this amount, $16,000,000 is only for
development of sea-state 3 lighterage systems and $2,600,000 is only for
the Smart Aircrew Integrated Life Support System and
psycho-physiological assessment. A decrease of $3,000,000 is also
recommended due to fiscal constraints. Concerning lighterage, the
Committee recommends that the Navy test extensively the capabilities of
the current ELCAS(M) style pontoons and potential upgrades to perform
sea state 3 missions.
materials, electronics, and computer technology
The Navy requested $76,653,000 for materials, electronics, and
computer technology. The Committee recommends $73,653,000, a decrease of
$3,000,000. Within this amount $2,000,000 is only for qualification of
new processes such as resin transfer molding and second source materials
such as carbon fibers and $2,000,000 is only to develop a composite
storage capsule for laboratory and at-sea testing for use by Navy SEALs
on submarines. A decrease of $7,000,000 is also recommended due to
fiscal constraints.
ELECTRONIC WARFARE TECHNOLOGY
The Navy requested $22,810,000 for electronic warfare technology. The
Committee recommends $21,810,000, a decrease of $1,000,000 due to fiscal
constraints.
UNDERSEA SURVEILLANCE WEAPON TECHNOLOGY
The Navy requested $51,033,000 for undersea surveillance weapon
technology. The Committee recommends $46,033,000, a decrease of
$5,000,000 due to fiscal constraints.
OCEANOGRAPHIC AND ATMOSPHERIC TECHNOLOGY
The Navy requested $48,211,000 for oceanographic and atmospheric
technology. The Committee recommends $77,711,000, an increase of
$29,500,000 as recommended in the House-passed Defense Authorization
bill. Within this amount, $10,000,000 is only to continue autonomous
underwater vehicle and sensor development, $16,000,000 is only for ocean
partnerships, $2,750,000 is only to implement the consolidation of the
Naval Surface Warfare Center South Florida Test Facility through
continuation of collaborative marine vehicle research efforts, and
$750,000 is only for PM 10. In addition, $2,000,000 from available funds
is available only for arctic research as recommended by the House-passed
Defense Authorization bill.
UNDERSEA WARFARE WEAPONRY TECHNOLOGY
The Navy requested $35,736,000 for undersea warfare weaponry
technology. The Committee recommends $31,736,000, a decrease of
$4,000,000 due to fiscal constraints. Of the amount provided, $5,000,000
is only for continued development of COTS airgun technology as an
acoustic surveillance source as recommended in the House-passed Defense
Authorization bill.
ADVANCED DEVELOPMENT
AIR SYSTEMS AND WEAPONS ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY
The Navy requested $35,093,000 for air systems and weapons advanced
technology. The Committee recommends $41,193,00, an increase of
$6,100,000. Within that amount, $11,500,000 is only for Maritime
Avionics Subsystems and Technology (MAST) and $2,000,000 is only for
Integrated High Payoff Rocket Technology. A decrease of $7,400,000 is
also recommended due to fiscal constraints.
PRECISION STRIKE AND AIR DEFENSE
The Navy requested $43,320,000 for precision strike and air defense.
The Committee recommends $44,320,000, an increase of $1,000,000. This
includes an increase of $5,000,000 only for mobile off-shore basing and
a decrease of $4,000,000 due to fiscal constraints.
ADVANCED ELECTRONIC WARFARE TECHNOLOGY
The Navy requested $18,144,000 for advanced electronic warfare
technology. The Committee recommends $17,144,000, a decrease of
$1,000,000 due to fiscal constraints.
SHIP PROPULSION SYSTEM
The Navy requested $39,737,000 for ship propulsion technology. The
Committee recommends $34,737,000, a decrease of $5,000,000. Within this
amount, $5,000,000 is only for active control of machinery rafts
(Project M) which shall be applied to both surface ship and submarine
applications. A decrease of $10,000,000 is also recommended due to
fiscal constraints.
MARINE CORPS ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY DEMONSTRATION
The Marine Corps requested $34,178,000 for the Marine Corps advanced
technology demonstration. The Committee recommends $63,478,000, an
increase of $29,300,000. Within the increase, $20,300,000 is only for
the Commandant's Warfighting Laboratory, $5,000,000 is only to continue
the SMAW product improvement program and $4,000,000 is only for two
kilowatt proton exchange membrane fuel cell development.
Medical Technology
The Navy requested $18,332,000 for Medical Technology. The Committee
recommends $72,732,000, an increase of $54,400,000. Within this
increase, $34,000,000 is available only for bone marrow, $2,600,000 is
only for the naval biodynamics lab, $5,500,000 is only for biocide
materials research, $2,500,000 is only for freeze-dried blood,
$4,000,000 is only for dental research, $4,000,000 is only for the
mobile medical monitor and $3,000,000 is only for rural health. In
addition, the Committee recommends a reduction of $1,200,000 for fleet
health.
Manpower, Personnel and Training
The Navy requested $18,812,000 for manpower, personnel, and training
technology. The Committee recommends $20,502,000, an increase of
$1,690,000. Within this amount, $3,690,000 is only for virtual reality
environment research for training for military and non-combat
operations. The goal of this research is to develop virtual reality
training capability for the Department of Defense, including safe
mission rehearsal and realistic battlefield scenario depiction, and
flexible training simulations to provide three dimensional tactical
pictures. A decrease of $2,000,000 is also recommended due to fiscal
constraints.
Environmental Quality and Logistics
The Navy requested $18,249,000 for environmental quality and
logistics technology. The Committee recommends $18,999,999, an increase
of $750,000. Within this amount, $1,750,000 is only for a 250 kilowatt
proton exchange membrane fuel cell demonstration recommended in the
House-passed Defense Authorization bill and $1,000,000 is only for
visualization of technical information. A decrease of $2,000,000 is also
recommended due to fiscal constraints.
Undersea Warfare Advanced Technology
The Navy requested $54,785,000 for undersea warfare. The Committee
recommends $46,385,000, a decrease of $8,400,000 due to fiscal
constraints.
Shallow Water MCM Demonstrations
The Navy requested $41,602,000 for shallow water mine countermeasure
demonstrations. The Committee recommends $38,352,000, a decrease of
$3,250,000. This includes an increase of $750,000 only for obstacle
destruction through mounting a GPU 5 gunpod on LCAC craft and a decrease
of $4,000,000 due to fiscal constraints.
Advanced Technology Transition
The Navy requested $87,285,000 for advanced technology transition.
The Committee recommends $73,052,000, a decrease of $14,233,000. This
includes a decrease of $18,233,000 to hold the program to the 1997 level
and an increase of $4,000,000 only for the high frequency surface wave
radar. The Committee directs that none of the reduction be applied to
the RAMICS or affordable array technology projects.
c3 advanced technology
The Navy requested $23,768,000 for C3 advanced technology. The
Committee recommends $22,368,000, a reduction of $1,400,000 due to
fiscal constraints.
DEMONSTRATION AND VALIDATION
AVIATION SURVIVABILITY
The Navy requested $7,859,000 for aviation survivability. The
Committee recommends $16,959,000, an increase of $9,100,000 only for
development of the Navy Integrated day/night all-weather display helmet
into the AV 8B, F/A 18, and Advance Strike Fighter aircraft and
$3,000,000 is only for visualization architecture and technology at the
Naval Aircraft Warfare Center Aircraft Division, Patuxent River.
SURFACE AND SHALLOW WATER MINE COUNTERMEASURES
The Navy requested $58,231,000 for surface and shallow water mine
countermeasures. The Committee recommends $71,131,000, an increase of
$12,900,000, of which $7,900,000 is for the remote minehunting system
and $5,000,000 is only for the Integrated Combat Weapon System on MCM
and MHC mine hunting ships. Both projects are recommended in the
House-passed Defense Authorization bill.
ADVANCED SUBMARINE SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT
The Navy requested $59,067,000 for advanced submarine system
development. The Committee recommends $162,067,000, an increase of
$103,000,000 as recommended in the House-passed Defense Authorization
bill. The Committee directs that none of these funds may be used for a
technology demonstrator program until the Navy submits a program plan to
the Appropriations Committees at least 30 days prior to obligation of
funds that provides a plan, acquisition strategy, costs, and schedule.
ADVANCED SURFACE MACHINERY SYSTEMS
The Navy requested $49,741,000 for advanced surface machinery
systems. The Committee recommends $44,741,000, a decrease of $5,000,000
to the Intercooled Recuperative gas turbine engine. The Intercooled Gas
Turbine engine program is an international cooperative development
program to develop a more fuel efficient powerplant for surface
combatant ships. During hearings this year the Committee discovered that
the program requires an additional $100 million to complete development.
After that, there remains an unfunded requirement for an additional $100
million for at-sea testing of the engine. Without at-sea testing, the
engine could never be a candidate for installation in U.S. warships even
after expenditure of over $400 million. The Navy testified this year
that it would recommended termination of the ICR program if the United
Kingdom and France do not pay at least half of the shortfall for full
engine qualification as well as make suitable arrangements for sharing
future cost growth in the development program. The Committee makes this
reduction in anticipation of savings to the United States due to
successful negotiation of an international cost-sharing agreement.
Conventional munitions
The Navy requested $34,190,000 for conventional munitions
technologies. The Committee recommends $38,190,000, an increase of
$4,000,000 only for development of optical correlator technology.
ADVANCED WARHEAD DEVELOPMENT
The budget requested $2,012,000 in the MK 50 torpedo line-item. The
Committee recommends no appropriations since the effort planned is
unrelated to the MK 50 torpedo. The Committee has instead moved these
funds to the lightweight torpedo development line-item, and expects the
Navy to budget for the effort in the appropriate line-item in the
future.
COOPERATIVE ENGAGEMENT
The Navy requested $139,229,000 for development of cooperative
engagement capability. The Committee recommends $223,229,000, an
increase of $84,000,000. Within this amount $20,000,000 is for E 2/CEC
integration, $15,000,000 is for CEC/TBMD development efforts,
$15,000,000 is for development of a low cost common equipment set,
$13,000,000 is for reduced schedule risk and integrated logistics
support, $5,000,000 is for CEC/SSDS integration, $5,000,000 is for
Hawk/CEC integration, $5,000,000 is for design agent transfer,
$3,000,000 is for fleet CEC exercises, and $3,000,000 is for LAMPS data
link interference. The Navy may allocate these funds within the CEC
program to best meet overall program objectives.
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
The Navy requested $52,401,000 for Environmental Protection. The
Committee recommends $56,401,000, an increase of $4,000,000 only for the
Resource Recovery Technology Center.
FACILITIES IMPROVEMENT
The Navy requested $1,720,000 for facilities improvement. The
Committee recommends $6,720,000, an increase of $5,000,000 only for wood
composite research.
LAND ATTACK TECHNOLOGY
The Navy requested $37,809,000 for land attack technology. The
Committee recommends $81,909,000, an increase of $44,100,000. Within
this amount, the following increases are recommended in accordance with
the House-passed Defense Authorization bill: $20,000,000 only for Navy
TACMS, $15,100,000 for the Extended Range Guided Munition, and
$5,000,000 for microelectromechanical systems guidance and control. An
additional $4,000,000 is only for the Land Attack Standard Missile
(LASM). The Navy should not assume Committee approval of the LASM
program until and unless funds are provided in the final Fiscal Year
1998 Defense Appropriations Act. The Committee strongly supports the
next-generation Naval gun system and directs the Navy to keep this
initiative on schedule for program definition and risk reduction
demonstrations leading to the fielding of an advanced Naval 155mm gun
system.
JOINT STRIKE FIGHTER
The Navy requested $448,855,000 for the Joint Strike Fighter. The
Committee has approved the budget request for this program in full in
Navy, Air Force, and DARPA accounts. Within this amount, $6,000,000 is
only to develop and test a high temperature version of the eddy current
sensor and an eddy current array sensor for use on the propulsive lift
system and the engine turbo-machinery. Developing these sensors now will
allow their inclusion in the Joint Strike Fighter baseline design, as
well as make them available for other aircraft engine diagnostics. An
additional $1,000,000 is available only for engine turbine fan
improvement.
ENGINEERING AND MANUFACTURING DEVELOPMENT
OTHER HELO DEVELOPMENT
The Navy requested $73,354,000 for other helicopter development. The
Committee recommends $85,354,000, an increase of $12,000,000 of which
$7,000,000 is only to maintain the schedule of the block II upgrade and
support the insertion of ruggedized, scalable commercial off-the-shelf
avionics technology for the SH 60R helicopter program and $5,000,000 is
only for the air interoperability center fiber optic backbone at the
Naval Air Warfare Center Aircraft Division, Patuxent River.
AIRCREW SYSTEMS DEVELOPMENT
The Navy requested $12,111,000 for aircrew systems development. The
Committee recommends $18,111,000, an increase of $6,000,000 only to
continue phase two of the NACES II ejection seat product improvement
program.
ELECTRONIC WARFARE
The Navy requested $101,803,000 for electronic warfare. The Committee
requested $104,603,000, an increase of $2,800,000 only for precision
targeting as recommended in the House-passed Defense Authorization bill.
SURFACE COMBATANT COMBAT SYSTEM ENGINEERING
The Navy requested $87,934,000 for surface combatant combat system
engineering. The Committee recommends $142,134,000, an increase of
$54,200,000. This includes $43,000,000 only for TBMD/UYQ 70 architecture
development and $14,000,000 for program shortfalls. A reduction of
$2,800,000 is recommended by the General Accounting Office since a joint
tactical control sea test has been postponed until 1999.
ARSENAL SHIP
The Navy requested $102,994,000 and DARPA requested $47,200,000 for
development of an Arsenal Ship demonstrator. The Committee agrees with
the House National Security Committee that a delay in the program is
appropriate, given the great number of changes the Navy proposes to make
in purpose and scope of the demonstrator ship. The Committee questions
the acquisition strategy of continuing with arsenal ship contracts to
construct a $500 million ship which is twice the size of the surface
combatant application to be demonstrated, and which includes contract
options for arsenal ships that differ from a land attack combatant
demonstrator. The Navy should first define its requirements, and then
award contracts; the current acquisition strategy is the reverse. The
Committee is also concerned that CINC's have not requested such a ship.
In the context of the fiscal year 1998 budget, where the Navy proposes
no funding for installation of critical warfighting improvements such as
cooperative engagement, ship self defense, CIWS surface mode, and TBMD
capabilities for DDG 51 ships, the Arsenal ship is clearly of much lower
priority. As noted in the Committee's hearings with Navy witnesses this
year, converting Trident submarines to a conventional land attack
configuration after START II is probably a more effective and affordable
solution to meeting warfighting requirements. Finally, as discussed
elsewhere in this report, the Committee is disturbed about the
Administration's plan to field 12 new production DDG 51 destroyers to
the fleet without cooperative engagement and theater ballistic missile
defense capabilities. The Committee notes that if the Navy were to
cancel the Arsenal Ship Demonstrator, sufficient funds would be
available to fix the destroyer problem as well as many other pressing
surface warfare issues.
LPD 17 CLASS SYSTEMS INTEGRATION
The Navy requested $471,000 for LPD 17 class systems integration. The
Committee recommends $13,471,000, an increase of $13,000,000 only for
initial design studies and ship development efforts for command ship
replacement, land attack weapons integration, shipboard personnel
reduction technology and work process improvements for LPD 17 class
ships.
TSSAM
The Navy requested $9,644,000 for the Navy's participation in the Air
Force JASSM program. The Committee recommends no funds for this program.
The Committee has recommended termination of the JASSM program discussed
elsewhere in this report since the Navy's SLAM ER+ missile, in
production in fiscal year 1998, meets the JASSM threshold requirements.
VLA UPGRADE
The Navy requested no funds for VLA Upgrades. The Committee
recommends $12,000,000 only for integration of the lightweight hybrid
torpedo on the VLA rocket.
AIRBORNE MINE COUNTERMEASURES
The Navy requested $16,503,000 for airborne mine countermeasures. The
Committee recommends $19,503,000, an increase of $3,000,000 only for
SWIMS projector development.
SSN 688 AND TRIDENT MODERNIZATION
The Navy requested $42,294,000 for SSN 688 and Trident submarine
modernization. The Committee recommends $52,294,000, an increase of
$10,000,000 for multi-purpose processors as recommended in the
House-passed Defense Authorization bill.
SUBMARINE COMBAT SYSTEM
The Navy requested $23,701,000 for development of submarine combat
systems. The Committee recommends $2,366,000, a decrease of $21,335,000
as recommended by the General Accounting Office due to postponement of
the SSN 21 submarines' AN/BSY 2 combat system technical evaluation and
operational evaluations beyond fiscal year 1998.
NEW DESIGN SSN
The Navy requested $311,076,000 for development of the New Attack
Submarine. The Committee recommends $331,076,000, an increase of
$20,000,000 of which $17,000,000 is recommended in the House-passed
Defense Authorization bill for the Advanced Submarine Tactical
Electronic Combat System/Integrated Mast and $3,000,000 is only for
glass reinforced plastic and rubber sandwich sonar domes.
SSN 21 DEVELOPMENTS
The Navy requested $49,542,000 for SSN 21 developments. The Committee
recommends $12,332,000, a decrease of $37,210,000 recommended by the
General Accounting Office due to a delay in installation of an advanced
special hull treatment and system qualification/inspection during SSN 21
post shakedown availability.
SHIP CONTRACT DESIGN/LIVE FIRE TESTING
The Navy requested $75,713,000 for ship contract design and live fire
testing. The Committee recommends $64,713,000, a decrease of
$11,000,000. This includes an increase of $17,000,000 to accelerate
advanced technology development for the next aircraft carrier (CVN 77)
as recommended in the House-passed Defense Authorization bill and a
decrease of $28,000,000 to slow the pace of development of the next
generation destroyer (DD 21). These funds have been applied to more
urgent requirements for CIWS surface mode and infrared search and track
development.
NAVY TACTICAL COMPUTER RESOURCES
The Navy requested $4,794,000 for tactical computer resources. The
Committee recommends $39,294,000, an increase of $34,500,000 of which
$17,500,000 is only for integration of AN/UYQ 70 displays into
submarines, $10,000,000 is only for virtual prototyping of electronic
circuits, and $7,000,000 is only to integrate the AN/UYQ 70 Advanced
Display System into existing Marine Expeditionary Force command
elements.
LIGHTWEIGHT TORPEDO DEVELOPMENT
The Navy requested $17,290,000 for development of the lightweight
hybrid torpedo. The Committee recommends $19,302,000, an increase of
$2,012,000 only for lightweight hybrid torpedo software development.
ship self-defense
The Navy requested $132,270,000 for ship self-defense. The Committee
recommends $190,870,000, an increase of $58,600,000. Within this amount,
$19,000,000 is for the Quick Reaction Combat Capability, $12,000,000 is
for the ship self-defense test ship, $8,600,000 is only to refurbish an
AN/SPS 48E for the Wallops Island ship defense test facility, $9,000,000
is only for the development of the SPQ 9B radar, and $10,000,000 is only
for Infrared Search and Track.
Medical Development
The Navy requested $3,620,000 for Medical Development. The Committee
recommends $16,920,000, an increase of $13,300,000. Within this
increase, $8,500,000 is only for casualty monitoring and $4,800,000 is
only for Navy Telemedicine.
DISTRIBUTED SURVEILLANCE SYSTEM
The Navy requested $33,048,000 for the Distributed Surveillance
System program. The Committee recommends $43,448,000, an increase of
$10,400,000. Of this amount, $7,800,000 is only to package the
all-optical deployable system (AODS) into an advanced deployable system
(ADS) and to test the deployment of this system at sea. The remaining
$2,600,000 is for the development of signal processing and detection
algorithms for the ADS.
RDT&E MANAGEMENT SUPPORT
TARGET SYSTEMS DEVELOPMENT
The Navy requested $48,308,000 for target systems development. The
Committee recommends $45,408,000, a reduction of $2,900,000 due to
cancellation of the Non-Cooperative Airborne Vector Scorer after the
budget was submitted.
MAJOR T&E INVESTMENT
The Navy requested $33,236,000 for major test and evaluation
investment. The Committee recommends $39,236,000, an increase of
$6,000,000 only for development of an East Coast Communications Network
at the Naval Aircraft Warfare Center Aircraft Division, Patuxent River.
STUDIES AND ANALYSIS SUPPORT
The Navy requested $8,755,000 for studies and analysis support. The
Committee recommends $6,679,000, a decrease of $2,076,000 to hold the
program at the 1997 level.
TECHNICAL INFORMATION SERVICES
The Navy requested $8,763,000 for technical information services.
Included in that amount is $8,000,000 proposed for the Acquisition
Center of Excellence. When the Committee agreed to a Navy proposal last
year to provide funds for the center ($500,000 was provided in the
Department of Defense Appropriations Act for fiscal year 1998), the
Committee did not know that an additional $16,000,000 is required in
fiscal years 1998 and 1999, and an undetermined amount thereafter. This
amount of funding is inappropriate for a simple support activity to the
acquisition community. The Committee notes that this amount of funding
in fiscal year 1998 could equip two amphibious assault ships with ship
self-defense suites, or six combatant ships with CIWS surface mode, or
six LMSR sealift ships with lighterage, or funded the baseline 6/7
shortfall in the DDG 51 program to provide theater ballistic missile
defense capability to three ships in 1998. The Committee questions the
Navy preference for funding acquisition laboratories in the National
Capital Region at the expense of theater CINC critical warfighting
requirements. The Committee recommends $763,000, a reduction of
$8,000,000 with prejudice.
management, technical, and international support
The Navy requested $24,305,000 for management, technical, and
international support. The Committee recommends $19,305,000, a decrease
of $5,000,000 to hold the program at the 1997 level.
SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY MANAGEMENT
The Navy requested $57,591,000 for science and technology management.
The Committee recommends $55,961,000, a decrease of $1,630,000 due to
fiscal constraints.
TEST AND EVALUATION SUPPORT
The Navy requested $263,934,000 for test and evaluation support. The
Committee recommends $235,908,000, a decrease of $28,026,000. This
includes a decrease of $30,026,000 to hold the program to the fiscal
year 1997 level and an increase of $2,000,000 only for safety items as
recommended in the House-passed Defense Authorization bill.
MARINE CORPS PROGRAM WIDE SUPPORT
The Marine Corps requested $8,207,000 for Marine Corps program wide
support. The Committee recommends $12,707,000, an increase of $4,500,000
only for the development of a small unit biological detector.
OPERATIONAL SYSTEMS DEVELOPMENT
HARM improvement
The Navy requested $6,169,000 for anti-radiation missile development
activities. The Committee recommends $41,169,000, an increase of
$35,000,000 only for continued development of AARGM.
AVIATION IMPROVEMENTS
The Navy requested $60,025,000 for aviation improvements. The
Committee recommends $51,025,000, a decrease of $9,000,000 to defer
proposed engine component improvement new start initiatives until next
year when the production programs are more mature.
MARINE CORPS COMMUNICATIONS SYSTEM
The Marine Corps requested $38,296,000 for Marine Corps
Communications Systems. The Committee recommends $45,296,000, an
increase of $7,000,000. Of the increase, $2,000,000 is only for the
development of a tactical hand-held radio and $5,000,000 is only to
develop a secure digital data link capability for UAV systems.
MARINE CORPS GROUND COMBAT/SUPPORTING ARMS
The Marine Corps requested $12,568,000 for Marine Corps Ground Combat
and Supporting Arms. The Committee recommends $14,668,000, an increase
of $2,100,000 only for the development of the AN/VVR 1 laser warning
receiver.
defense meteorological satellite program (space)
The Navy requested $3,165,000 for the Defense Meteorological
Satellite Program. The Committee recommends $1,198,000, a decrease of
$1,967,000. The Committee has deleted funds for sensor development for
the next generation weather satellite as this effort is premature at
this time. The Committee's recommendation concerning this program is
discussed more fully in the ``Research, Development, Test, and
Evaluation, Air Force'' section of this report.
MANUFACTURING TECHNOLOGY
The Navy requested no funds for manufacturing technology. The
Committee recommends $55,000,000. The Committee makes this
recommendation because Navy witnesses testified that the Navy has
identified over $100,000,000 of manufacturing technology proposals which
are deemed by the Navy to have a significant return on investment by
lowering the risk of acquisition and to make weapon systems more
affordable.
PROGRAM RECOMMENDED
The total recommended in the bill will provide the following program
in fiscal year 1998:
offset folios 209to 211 insert here
RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST AND EVALUATION, AIR FORCE
Fiscal year 1997 appropriation $14,499,606,000
Fiscal year 1998 budget request 14,451,379,000
Committee recommendation 14,315,456,000
Change from budget request -135,923,000
This appropriation funds the Research, Development, Test and
Evaluation activities of the Department of the Air Force.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS
AUTHORIZATION CHANGES
The Committee recommends the following changes in accordance with
House authorization action:
[In thousands of dollars]
Item Budget request Committee recommendation Change from request
Command, Control, Communications 86,067 89,067 +3,000
ICBM DEMVAL 32,837 49,337 +16,500
ICBM EMD 137,944 152,944 +15,000
TITAN 82,384 67,384 -15,000
DARP 0 14,990 +14,990
RSLP 8,013 33,013 +25,000
AIR FORCE AND ARMY LABORATORY RESTRUCTURING
The Committee understands the need to streamline research and
development activities in view of budgetary constraints. However, the
Committee is concerned about plans to combine runway R&D conducted by
the Air Force with R&D the Army is pursuing on pavement repair. The
Committee understands the importance of the airbase deployment and
sustainment work currently being conducted by the Air Force and urges
the Department to ensure that this capability is not lost due to
consolidation of activities at its existing laboratories.
BASIC RESEARCH
DEFENSE RESEARCH SCIENCES
The Air Force requested $226,832,000 for defense research sciences.
The Committee recommends $183,332,000, a net decrease of $43,500,000.
The Committee has recommended a reduction of $48,500,000 and an increase
of $5,000,000 only for the Center for Adaptive Optics.
The Committee's recommendation includes the requested amount of
$650,000 for support to the Sacramento Peak Observatory. The Committee
directs that the full amount be provided to Sacramento Peak and
designates this project to be of specific Committee interest.
EXPLORATORY DEVELOPMENT
MATERIALS
The Air Force requested $70,224,000 for materials exploratory
development. The Committee recommends $73,224,000, an increase of
$3,000,000 only for development of composite shelters.
AEROSPACE AVIONICS
The Air Force requested $69,401,000 for aerospace avionics. The
Committee recommends $68,061,000, a decrease of $1,340,000 which brings
the program more in line with the fiscal year 1997 level.
PHILLIPS LAB EXPLORATORY DEVELOPMENT
The Air Force requested $111,136,000 for Phillips Lab exploratory
development. The Committee recommends $131,636,000, an increase of
$20,500,000. Within this amount $8,000,000 is only for Phase III of the
Terabit fiber optic technology program, $10,000,000 is only for the
MightySat program, and $7,500,000 is only for integrated high payoff
rocket propulsion technology applications.
ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT
ADVANCED MATERIAL FOR WEAPONS SYSTEMS
The Air Force requested $20,596,000 for advanced material for weapons
systems. The Committee recommends $26,596,000, an increase of $6,000,000
only for developing enhanced manufacturing capabilities for infrared
absorbing aircraft coatings.
AEROSPACE PROPULSION SUBSYSTEMS INTEGRATION
The Air Force requested $30,564,000 for aerospace propulsion
subsystems integration. The Committee recommends $28,318,000, a
reduction of $2,246,000 which brings the program more in line with the
fiscal year 1997 level.
AEROSPACE STRUCTURES
The Air Force requested $15,032,000 for aerospace structures. The
Committee recommends $10,423,000, a reduction of $4,609,000 which brings
the program more in line with the fiscal year 1997 level.
CREW SYSTEMS AND PERSONNEL PROTECTION TECHNOLOGY
The Air Force requested $17,204,000 for crew systems and personnel
protection technology. The Committee recommends $26,204,000, an increase
of $9,000,000 which includes $5,000,000 only for ejection seat
technology, $3,000,000 only for helmet display technology and $1,000,000
only for laser eye protection.
FLIGHT VEHICLE TECHNOLOGY INTEGRATION
The Air Force requested $7,795,000 for flight vehicle technology
integration activities. The Committee recommends $6,423,000, a reduction
of $1,372,000 which brings the program more in line with the fiscal year
1997 level.
ELECTRONIC COMBAT TECHNOLOGY
The Air Force requested $25,621,000 for electronic combat technology.
The Committee recommends $30,871,000, an increase of $5,250,000 only for
the closed loop infrared countermeasure (CLIRCM) technology program.
SPACE AND MISSILE ROCKET PROPULSION
The Air Force requested $16,247,000 for space and missile rocket
propulsion. The Committee recommends $30,047,000, an increase of
$13,800,000. Within this amount $3,800,000 is only for the high payoff
rocket propulsion technology initiative, and $10,000,000 is only for the
continuation of rocket testing efforts for the Scorpius low cost
expendable launch vehicle technology project.
BALLISTIC MISSILE TECHNOLOGY
The Air Force requested no funding for the ballistic missile
technology program. The Committee recommends $8,000,000 to continue this
program.
ADVANCED SPACECRAFT TECHNOLOGY
The Air Force requested $40,846,000 for advanced spacecraft
technology. The Committee recommends $72,846,000, an increase of
$32,000,000. Within this amount $15,000,000 is only for the military
spaceplane program, $10,000,000 is only for the solar thermionics
orbital transfer vehicle, and $7,000,000 is only for the miniature
threat satellite reporting system.
CONVENTIONAL WEAPONS TECHNOLOGY
The Air Force requested $26,227,000 for conventional weapons
technology. The Committee recommends $28,227,000, an increase of
$2,000,000 only for development of optical correlator technology.
ADVANCED WEAPONS TECHNOLOGY
The Air Force requested $41,238,000 for advanced weapons technology.
The Committee recommends $56,238,000, an increase of $15,000,000. Of the
amount added, $10,000,000 is only for Geo Space Object Imaging and
$5,000,000 is only for the Special Laser Technology Program (LIME).
AIRBORNE LASER
Though the core mission of the Airborne Laser (ABL) is ballistic
missile defense, the program is being funded in the Air Force rather
than the Ballistic Missile Defense Organization (BMDO). The Committee
believes that ballistic missile defense funding should be centrally
managed to ensure all such programs are properly integrated into a
common architecture and to ensure resources are applied to programs
based on overall ballistic missile defense priorities. Accordingly, the
Committee directs the Secretary of Defense to submit a report to the
congressional defense committees no later than November 15, 1997
discussing whether the ABL program is or is not more properly budgeted
within BMDO.
DEMONSTRATION AND VALIDATION
ADVANCED MILSATCOM
The Air Force requested $41,448,000 for Advanced Milsatcom. The
Committee recommends $41,000,000, a decrease of $448,000. The Committee
notes that program management costs for the Advanced Milsatcom program
are requested to grow at a rate in excess of forecast inflation in
fiscal year 1998.
POLAR ADJUNCT
The Air Force requested $29,585,000 for the Polar Adjunct program.
The Committee recommends no funding, a decrease of $29,585,000. The
Committee's recommendation concerning this program is discussed more
fully in the classified annex to this report.
national polar-orbiting operational environmental satellite system
(npoess)
The Air Force requested $51,504,000 for the National Polar-Orbiting
Operational Environmental Satellite System (NPOESS). The Committee
recommends $26,504,000, a decrease of $25,000,000. The Committee notes
that the launch date of the first NPOESS satellite has been delayed
until 2007 versus 2004 as presented in the fiscal year 1997 budget
justification material. Despite this launch delay of three years, the
Air Force has decided not to substantially alter the near term funding
profile for the NPOESS system. In fact, the Air Force has requested
funds to begin sensor design and development work in fiscal year 1998,
ten years prior to the scheduled first launch. The Committee judges this
approach to be overly conservative even for the satellite community.
The Committee remains fully supportive of the NPOESS program and the
ultimate convergence of the meteorological satellite systems of the
Departments of Defense and Commerce. In making this reduction the
Committee has still provided adequate funding to continue risk reduction
and planning efforts for the system in fiscal year 1998.
The Committee believes that the present program schedule provides an
opportunity for the Department of Defense Space Architect to conduct a
review of the defense space-based meteorological mission area. The space
architect has already conducted reviews in the areas of military
satellite communications and space control which have proven to be very
beneficial to department planning in these areas. The Committee
therefore directs the Space Architect to conduct an architectural review
of the NPOESS program as part of its fiscal year 1998 program plan. The
Office of the Space Architect is further directed to submit to the
Committee a report detailing its plans to conduct the review no later
than January 15, 1998.
space based infrared architecture-dem/val
The Air Force requested $222,401,000 for the demonstration/validation
phase of the space-based infrared system (SBIRS). The Committee
recommends $217,401,000, a decrease of $5,000,000. The Committee
recommends this reduction due to unwarranted cost growth in the areas of
program management and FFRDC support.
The Committee also shares the concern of the Defense Science Board
Task Force on the Space and Missile Tracking System (SMTS) which found
in its August 1996 report that the current lack of an overall system
design plan for both SBIRS high and low segments has added ``confusion,
time and risk to the program.'' The Committee is also disturbed that the
Air Force has retained the present developer of the SBIRS high component
as the overall system of systems engineer for the entire program. As a
potential competitor on the SMTS, this arrangement places the SBIRS high
component developer in a potential conflict of interest. The Committee,
consistent with the recommendations of the Defense Science Board,
directs the Department of the Air Force to appoint an independent third
party systems engineer for the entire SBIRS system. The Committee
believes that by doing so, an objective party will be in a position to
assess the crucial technical trade-offs needed for a robust SBIRS
constellation and ensure deployment at the earliest possible date. The
Committee further directs that none of the funds appropriated for the
SBIRS program may be used to fund the SBIRS high component developer as
the overall system engineer. The Committee also directs the Air Force to
report to the Committee on its efforts to establish the independent
system engineer no later than January 15, 1998.
warfighter 1
Warfighter 1 is a joint government and industry funded venture which
will provide hyperspectral imaging data to both warfighters and
commercial users at 25 percent of the cost of a conventional DoD funded
satellite system. An integrated product team (IPT) initiated by the
Director of Defense Research and Engineering (DDR&E) recently
recommended that the Warfighter 1 program be terminated just days before
the Air Force was to make the contract award. The IPT concerns with the
program centered around the belief that the Warfighter program did not
adequately stress pure technology goals for the processing and
exploitation of hyperspectral imaging data. The Committee does not
concur with the recommendation of the IPT.
It is the Committee's belief that the Warfighter program will benefit
operational users in the field in a timely and cost-effective manner. It
is strongly supported by the Air Force, the CINC United States Space
Command, the National Imagery and Mapping Agency, and the Central MASINT
Office. All of these organizations would be operational users of the
data collected by Warfighter 1.
The Committee also believes that the Department should take advantage
of the unique leveraging opportunity offered by Warfighter which stands
to benefit both operational DoD and commercial users. The conclusion of
the IPT does not adequately consider the views and requirements of this
community.
The Committee therefore directs the Department of the Air Force to
immediately award the contract for the original Warfighter 1 program and
also directs the Under Secretary of Defense (Comptroller) to release all
fiscal year 1997 funds appropriated for the program. Should the IPT's
subsequent deliberations on the Warfighter program lead to a
recommendation for a restructured technology approach to hyperspectral
imaging, the results can be provided to the Air Force for incorporation
into the Warfighter 1 system design. The Committee further directs the
Assistant Secretary of the Air Force for Reserach, Development, and
Acquisition to submit a report to the Committee no later than September
15, 1997 detailing his plans to follow this direction.
evolved expendable launch vehicle program (eelv)
In December of 1996, the Air Force selected two competitors to
develop a new $2 billion, Evolved Expendable Launch Vehicle (EELV). EELV
is important not only to reducing the launch costs of the Department of
Defense, but also to the continued world-wide competitiveness of the
U.S. commercial launch industry. However, the Committee is concerned
that the Department is focusing too narrowly on its national security
requirements and not adequately reflecting the needs of the U.S.
commercial space launch industry. For example, in order to meet its
projected reductions in life cycle costs, the EELV needs to capture at
least 15 percent of the commercial market. This will be difficult to
achieve since recent projections show that the EELV will not be able to
meet the requirements of as much as 42 percent of the estimated
commercial market. If that is the case, then the Air Force will have
developed a new family of launch vehicles that will be primarily used
only for national security payloads, resulting in higher overhead costs
to DoD, while missing an opportunity to maximize the competitive posture
of U.S. industry.
The EELV program is a partnership between the government and
industry. In return for its $2 billion investment, the Department will
obtain a family of launch vehicles with reduced recurring costs of 25 to
50 percent per launch. The ultimate EELV developer will have its
competitive posture enhanced and be relieved of internal investment
requirements to remain viable in the worldwide launch market.
The Committee would note that while partners share benefits, they
also share costs. The Committee believes that the Air Force should
aggressively pursue commercial cost sharing and recoupment contractual
mechanisms as part of the EELV EMD contract. Accordingly the Committee
directs the Air Force to include as significant factors in the EELV
acquisition the degree to which the competitive proposals include the
commercial needs of the U.S. launch vehicle industry as well as
government compensation and cost recoupment offers from the EELV
competitors. The Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and
Technology is directed to provide to the Committee not later than
January 1, 1998, a revised EELV Single Acquisition and Management Plan
(SAMP) that addresses these concerns.
GLOBAL BROADCAST SERVICE
The Air Force requested $56,977,000 for the Global Broadcast System
(GBS). The Committee recommends $46,977,000, a decrease of $10,000,000.
The Committee recommends this reduction due to the delay in the release
of proposal requests for systems engineering and ground terminal
development efforts. The Committee is also concerned that under the
present program schedule GBS space segment payloads will be on orbit 8
to 12 months prior to the availability of the ground control segment and
terminals. The Committee makes this recommendation without prejudice to
the GBS program. Funding provided by the Committee in fiscal year 1998
will still allow the GBS program to proceed to its next phase and allow
the program office to incorporate greater user input into GBS
requirements definition.
ENGINEERING AND MANUFACTURING DEVELOPMENT
INTEGRATED AVIONICS PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT
The Air Force requested $16,494,000 for integrated avionics planning
and development. The Committee recommends $12,994,000, a reduction of
$3,500,000 based on a 4 month delay in the JHMCS EMD contract award.
b 1b
The Air Force requested $216,886,000 for B 1B upgrade activities. The
Committee recommends $222,886,000, a net increase of $6,000,000. This
adjustment includes a reduction of $7,000,000 to CMUP engineering change
orders (ECOs) and an increase of $13,000,000 only for acceleration of
JSOW and JSLAM integration.
SPECIALIZED UNDERGRADUATE PILOT TRAINING
The Air Force requested $80,238,000 for specialized undergraduate
pilot training improvements. The Committee recommends $77,238,000, a
decrease of $3,000,000 based on a 3 month delay in T 38 upgrade
activities caused by a contract protest.
f 22
The Air Force requested $2,071,234,000 for the F 22 program. The
Committee recommends $2,077,234,000, an increase of $6,000,000
transferred from F 22 procurement to this line-item for redesign work
associated with out of production parts (OPP).
EW DEVELOPMENT
The Air Force requested $78,465,000 for electronic warfare system
development. The Committee recommends $65,965,000, a decrease of
$12,500,000. This adjustment includes a $6,000,000 decrease associated
with contract award delays on the F 15 IDECM program and a $6,500,000
decrease based on the cancellation of the F 15 CMWS program. The
Committee notes that the Air Force canceled the F 15 CMWS program for
fiscal year 1998 and out, but fiscal year 1997 funds are still
identified in the budget for the program and these funds are therefore
available to finance other fiscal year 1998 EW requirements.
MUNITIONS DISPENSER DEVELOPMENT
The Air Force requested $18,076,000 for munitions dispenser
development. The Committee recommends $15,900,000, a decrease of
$2,176,000. Of this decrease, $1,300,000 is for Wind Corrected Munition
Dispenser (WCMD) contract savings, and $862,000 is for 20 WCMD assets
inappropriately budgeted in the research and development (R&D) account.
Fiscal year 1998 is the first year the Air Force has requested
production funding for the WCMD program and ostensibly the Congress
must, for the first time, assess the readiness of the program to enter
production. However, the Committee was dismayed to learn that the
decision to initiate production was made not by the Congress but by the
Air Force when it signed a contract to produce 200 WCMD units using
fiscal year 1997 R&D funding. The Committee has learned that 150 of
these weapons are not required for development or test of the WCMD at
all, but will instead be fielded with B 52 squadrons as an ``interim
operational capability.'' Though the fiscal year 1997 R&D budget
requested 200 WCMDs, these were described in the budget backup documents
as ``EMD'' assets with no mention of an intent to field the weapons in
operational units. Procuring assets solely for the purpose of
operational use is clearly a production expense and should be funded in
the production account. The Committee is concerned with what appears to
be a growing trend to get the production ``camel's nose under the tent''
by using R&D funds to initiate procurement. The Committee has included a
general provision in the bill that is intended to end such practices.
The Committee further notes that though the Air Force signed a
contract for 200 WCMD units in fiscal year 1997, these units were not
all fully funded in that year as a consequence of the R&D incremental
funding policy. In fiscal year 1998, the Air Force is requesting funds
to complete assembly on 130 units initiated in fiscal year 1997 and to
buy an additional 20 units for a total of 150 intended for the early B
52 capability. The Committee notes that the 20 all-up-rounds funded in
fiscal year 1998 R&D cost $43,000 each whereas in the same fiscal year
(1998), the Air Force intends to buy production units for $13,000 each.
The Committee sees no reason to pay a 300 percent premium to buy a
weapon in the wrong appropriation. Accordingly, the Committee recommends
a reduction of $862,000 for the 20 R&D funded WCMD units.
joint direct attack munition (jdam)
The Air Force requested $19,553,000 for development of the JDAM
weapon. The Committee recommends $15,353,000, a decrease of $4,200,000
based on the availability of funds beyond that required to finance the
contractor's revised estimate at completion (EAC).
LIFE SUPPORT SYSTEM
The Air Force requested $3,726,000 for life support system
development. The Committee recommends $5,726,000, an increase of
$2,000,000 only for ejection seats.
COMPUTER RESOURCE TECHNOLOGY TRANSITION
The Air Force requested $1,459,000 for computer resource technology
transition. The Committee recommends $6,459,000, an increase of
$5,000,000 only for the National Product Line Asset Center (NPLACE)
Program/Product Line Asset Support (PLAS).
joint air-to-surface standoff missile (jassm)
The Air Force requested $203,321,000 for the JASSM program. The
Committee recommends no appropriation for the program, and instead
proposes a new joint program based on the Navy's SLAM ER+ missile. JASSM
is a follow-on to the very troubled and now terminated TSSAM program.
The Air Force invested $4.3 billion in the missile until the program was
terminated in response to severe technical problems, massive cost
overruns, and numerous schedule delays. In creating the follow-on JASSM
program, the Air Force has not only applied lessons learned from the
TSSAM program, but has also applied lessons from recently successful
acquisition programs like JDAM. Therefore, in making its recommendation,
the Committee does not fault the Air Force's management of the JASSM
program. In fact, it is too early even to assess the JASSM program given
that the missile is still ``on the drawing board'' with at least four
years of development remaining.
The SLAM ER program, on the other hand, is already in production with
an automatic target acquisition (ATA) upgrade entering production in
fiscal year 1998. According to the Navy, this SLAM ER ``+'' variant
meets or exceeds every threshold requirement for the JASSM program,
including the key performance parameters of range, missile mission
effectiveness, and carrier suitability. The Navy believes that
modifications required to deploy the missile on Air Force aircraft
(including bombers) are minor.
The Committee notes that cancellation of JASSM and pursuit of a joint
SLAM ER+ program could save taxpayers anywhere from $450 to $800 million
while fielding the required capability to the Air Force sooner. The
Department of Defense must break the habit of spending hundreds of
millions of dollars pursuing the last few ounces of performance when an
existing weapon with minor modifications can meet its requirements. Even
while faced with severely constrained outyear modernization budgets, the
Department failed to seriously consider this alternative to JASSM in
either of its recent Quadrennial Defense Review (QDR) or Joint
Requirements Oversight Council (JROC) deliberations. Both forums were
formed to make recommendations on just these types of issues. The
Committee is dismayed that the JROC, in particular, would postpone
consideration of the Navy's SLAM ER+ proposal 6 times before deciding
the matter was best addressed by the acquisition community in a process
that will take another year. The Committee does not believe that
taxpayers or warfighters should have to wait another year and spend
another $200 million on JASSM before considering whether SLAM ER+
already meets the JASSM requirements. The Committee has carefully
reviewed data provided by the Air Force, Navy, and industry on each of
the various proposals. The Committee finds the merits of a Joint SLAM
ER+ program compelling and in the absence of a joint, requirements-based
analysis conducted expeditiously by the Department, recommends
termination of the JASSM program.
JSLAM
The Air Force requested no funds for the JSLAM program. The Committee
recommends $63,000,000 only for Air Force participation in a joint SLAM
ER+ program. Though the Navy has offered to provide the Air Force excess
Harpoon missiles for JSLAM conversions, the Committee notes that Air
Force inventory requirements will ultimately require production of new
build missiles. To take efficient advantage of the existing engine
manufacturing capability, the Committee believes that the Air Force
program should include new build missiles at the front-end of Air Force
JSLAM production.
RDT&E MANAGEMENT SUPPORT
THREAT SIMULATOR DEVELOPMENT
The Air Force requested $51,846,000 for threat simulator development.
The Committee recommends $50,346,000, a decrease of $1,500,000. The
Committee notes that the budget funds the entire SADS 2b/f effort in
fiscal year 1998 though the program is projected to extend well into
fiscal year 1999. Since research and development is incrementally
funded, the fiscal year 1999 effort should be funded in that year.
MAJOR T&E INVESTMENT
The Air Force requested $47,336,000 for investment in major test and
evaluation facilities. The Committee recommends $62,136,000, an increase
of $14,800,000 only for instrumentation required to modernize range C4I
capabilities at Eglin Air Force Base.
TEST AND EVALUATION SUPPORT
The Air Force requested $389,348,000 for test and evaluation support.
The Committee recommends $386,348,000, a net decrease of $3,000,000. The
Committee recommendation includes a $3,000,000 reduction based on
unjustified growth in aircraft support, an $8,000,000 reduction based on
unobligated fiscal year 1996 funds, and an $8,000,000 increase only for
enhancements to the South Base Birk Flight Test Facility (BFTF).
OPERATIONAL SYSTEMS DEVELOPMENT
advanced medium range air-to-air missile (amraam)
The Air Force requested $50,781,000 for the AMRAAM program. The
Committee recommends $33,781,000, a decrease of $17,000,000. This
decrease includes a $14,000,000 GAO recommended reduction based on
rephased missile upgrade efforts, and a $3,000,000 reduction to delay
initiation of AMRAAM P3I Phase III until fiscal year 1999.
AIRCRAFT ENGINE COMPONENT IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM
The Air Force requested $93,122,000 for the engine component
improvement program. The Committee recommends $115,122,000, an increase
of $22,000,000. The Committee is concerned about the growing costs in
the Air Force flying hour program attributable to engine reliability and
maintainability issues. Therefore, the Committee recommends additional
funds for the CIP program to help reduce these operating costs.
AGM 86C CONVENTIONAL AIR-LAUNCHED CRUISE MISSILE SYSTEM
The Air Force requested no funds for CALCM research and development.
The Committee recommends $3,500,000 only for development of a hard
target penetrator variant.
airborne warning and control system (awacs)
The Air Force requested $46,807,000 for AWACS. The Committee
recommends $47,807,000, an increase of $1,000,000. The Committee notes
the availability of $12,500,000 in fiscal year 1997 funds from the
terminated AWACS reengine program. The Committee recommends the Air
Force use these prior year funds, in addition to the additional funds
provided in fiscal year 1998, for the AWACS Extend Sentry program
identified by the Air Force as a high priority unfunded requirement.
JOINT SURVEILLANCE AND TARGET ATTACK RADAR SYSTEM (JSTARS)
The Air Force requested $119,189,000 for the JSTARS program. The
Committee recommends $123,189,000, an increase of $4,000,000 only for
integration of an Improved Data Modem on the JSTARS platform.
WORLD-WIDE MILITARY COMMAND AND CONTROL SYSTEM
The Air Force requested $6,820,000 for the Global Command and Control
System (GCCS). The Committee recommends $7,820,000, an increase of
$1,000,000 only for integration of JSAS into GCCS.
SECURITY AND INVESTIGATIVE SERVICES
The Air Force requested $530,000 for security and investigative
services. The Committee recommends $1,530,000, an increase of $1,000,000
only for the AFOSI Computer Crime Investigations Program.
AIR CARGO MATERIAL HANDLING
The Air Force requested $7,947,000 for air cargo material handling
equipment. The Committee recommends $3,447,000, a decrease of
$4,500,000. The Committee notes that the fiscal year 1998 budget
includes $4,500,000 for testing of the Next Generation Small Loader that
is not scheduled to take place until fiscal year 1999.
INDUSTRIAL PREPAREDNESS
The Air Force requested $48,429,000 for industrial preparedness. The
Committee recommends $48,429,000 and directs that of this amount,
$1,000,000 is available only to allow the National Technology Transfer
Center to compile, analyze, value and license technologies available for
commercialization from Air Force research labs.
PRODUCTIVITY, RELIABILITY, AVAILABILITY, MAINTAINABILITY PROGRAM (PRAM)
The Air Force requested $1,032,000 for the PRAM program. The
Committee recommends $12,032,000, an increase of $11,000,000 only for
efforts to develop structural fatigue repairs, corrosion prevention and
control techniques, and reliability and maintainability improvement
opportunities for aging aircraft fleets. The Committee notes that the
Air Force has identified this effort as a high priority unfunded
requirement.
NATO JOINT STARS
The Air Force requested $36,061,000 for the NATO JOINT STARS program.
The Committee recommends $18,061,000, a reduction of $18,000,000 based
on the lack of any NATO decision to proceed with JSTARS acquisition. The
Committee directs that none of the funds can be obligated until such
obligations meet the requirements of current law. The Committee further
directs that none of the funds may be reprogrammed out of the NATO JOINT
STARS program element without the prior approval of the congressional
defense committees.
PROGRAM RECOMMENDED
The total amount recommended in the bill will provide the following
program in fiscal year 1998:
Offset Folios 224 to 226 Insert here
RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST AND EVALUATION, DEFENSE-WIDE
Fiscal year 1997 appropriation $9,362,800,000
Fiscal year 1998 budget request 9,069,680,000
Committee recommendation 9,494,337,000
Change from budget request +424,657,000
This appropriation provides funds for the Research, Development, Test
and Evaluation activities of centrally managed programs and the Defense
Agencies.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS
AUTHORIZATION CHANGES
The Committee recommends the following changes in accordance with
authorization action:
[In thousands of dollars]
Budget request Committee recommendation Change from request
Special Technical Support 11,750 9,750 -2,000
Verification Technology 83,370 69,070 -14,300
Commerical Insertion Technology 47,889 -47,889
Boost Phase Intercept 12,885 -12,885
National Missile Defense 504,091 978,091 +474,000
Navy Lower Tier 267,822 289,822 +22,000
Defense Imagery and Mapping 109,430 134,430 +25,000
Defense Reconnaissance Support 49,403 41,003 -8,400
Manned Reconnaissance 27,784 51,784 +24,000
Defense Airborne Reconnaissance Mgt 21,543 7,543 -14,000
Counter drug 2,500 +2,500
BASIC RESEARCH
in-house independent research
The Department requested $2,169,000 for In-House Independent
Research. The Committee notes that there are ample funds available from
fiscal year 1997 for this activity because of poor obligation rates.
Therefore, the Committee recommends no appropriation.
DEFENSE RESEARCH SCIENCES
The Department requested $76,009,000 for Defense Research Sciences.
The Committee recommends $70,000,000, a decrease of $6,009,000. The
Committee notes that the Department has used this activity as a source
for reprogramming funds in prior fiscal years and therefore recommends a
reduction of $6,009,000 to reflect an appropriate level of funding.
UNIVERSITY RESEARCH SCIENCES
The Department requested $237,788,000 for University Research
Sciences. The Committee recommends $215,212,000. This amount includes an
increase of $10,000,000 only for the Defense Experimental Program to
Stimulate Competitive Research (DEPSCOR) and a net reduction of
$22,576,000 due to program growth and poor execution. The Committee
directs that funds available within the University Research Initiatives
account for Gulf War Illness related research may be used only for that
purpose. The Committee also directs that $3,000,000 be available only
for Clinical Assessment Recording Environment (CARE), as authorized. The
Committee notes that while the 1997 total program funds were lower than
in 1996 (ostensibly due to a change in award dates not a reduction in
the level of effort) in fact, on a monthly basis, the Department spent
41 percent more per month in 1997 on university graduate fellowships,
traineeships and research instrumentation than in 1996. The Committee
therefore recommends a reduction of $32,576,000 due to program growth.
GOVERNMENT AND INDUSTRY COSPONSORSHIP OF UNIVERSITY RESEARCH
The Department requested $14,713,000 for Government and Industry
Cosponsorship of University Research (GICUR). The Committee notes that
this proposed new activity is aimed at encouraging cooperation and
collaboration between government and industry on semiconductor
electronics issues. The Committee agrees that semiconductors are a
critical priority for the Department. However, the Committee also
believes that the Department's prior year investment of $840,000,000 was
adequate to meet the challenges that were presented to the semiconductor
industry over the past decade and therefore, the Committee recommends no
appropriation.
CHEMICAL AND BIOLOGICAL DEFENSE PROGRAM
The Department requested $25,190,000 for Chemical and Biological
Defense basic research. The Committee recommends $28,690,000, an
increase of $3,500,000. The Committee recommends an increase of
$1,500,000 only for basic medical research to develop non-antibiotic
therapies for anthrax and $2,000,000 only for novel agent research.
EXPLORATORY DEVELOPMENT
NEXT GENERATION INTERNET
The Department requested $40,000,000 for the Next Generation Internet
(NGI) program. The Committee recommends $50,000,000, an increase of
$10,000,000 to support the DARPA component of the multi-agency Next
Generation Internet program. The goal of the NGI program is to develop
and demonstrate the technologies, protocols, and standards for a very
high speed, broad bandwidth Next Generation Internet that will offer
reliable, affordable, secure information delivery at rates thousands of
times faster than today. This should enable the use of a wide variety of
new nationally important applications that cannot be accommodated on
today's Internet. The additional $10,000,000 is to be used to support
specific connectivity, functionality, services, and software among the
applications communities and regional consortia that will maximize the
value of the infrastructure connectivity and services deployed by the
NGI. The Committee recognizes the large potential benefit that Next
Generation Internet technology will have for many important sectors of
our economy as well as for national defense. The Committee also
recognizes the value of including technical contributions from as many
sources of innovation as possible in developing future Internet
technology. Accordingly, the Committee directs that all geographic
regions and all qualified concentrations of technical expertise
(including government, university, and commercial) be afforded the
opportunity and the access necessary to have comparable connectivity to
current ``very-high speed backbone network service point of presence''
(VBNS POP) on the Internet.
SUPPORT TECHNOLOGIES--APPLIED RESEARCH
The Department requested $101,932,000 for Support Technologies. The
Committee recommends $141,932,000, an increase of $40,000,000. Within
this increase, $30,000,000 is only for Atmospheric Interceptor
Technology (AIT) to develop new capabilities for current theater missile
defense interceptors. In addition, the Committee recommends $10,000,000
only for wide band gap technologies, as proposed in the House-passed
Defense Authorization bill.
LINCOLN LABORATORY RESEARCH PROGRAM
The Department requested $20,474,000 for Lincoln Laboratory
innovative research and development (IR&D). The Committee recommends
$13,730,000, a reduction of $6,744,000. The Committee notes that the
fiscal year 1998 plan for Federally Funded Research and Development
Centers (FFRDCs) is well above the level of effort for the prior year.
The planned increase of 200 staff technical years of effort (STE) for
Lincoln Laboratory represents a 7 percent increase in level of effort
and a potential $41,000,000 increase in funding. Furthermore, this
increase is not consistent with prior Congressional direction, the
Department's FFRDC management plan, nor the recommendation of the
Defense Science Board (DSB) Report of January 1997. The DSB report
challenged the Department's use of FFRDCs and concluded that the current
FFRDC system ``does not provide the best available service at the most
reasonable cost.'' The DSB Task Force recommended that: (1) work done by
FFRDCs be ``more carefully defined and limited'' (2) that competition be
introduced and, (3) that management practices be changed at the
beginning of 1998 to incorporate these changes. The Committee therefore
recommends a funding level that is consistent with the DSB report and
prior Congressional direction on FFRDCs.
COMPUTING SYSTEMS AND COMMUNICATIONS TECHNOLOGY
The Department requested $341,752,000 for Computing Systems and
Communications Technology. The Committee recommends $325,057,000, a
reduction of $16,695,000 due to program growth. Within the amounts
provided, $7,500,000 is available only for the Reuse Technology Adoption
Program (RTAP), a technology program that enhances the reuse of
information technology and complex event sequences or software
algorithms.
CHEMICAL AND BIOLOGICAL DEFENSE PROGRAM
The Department requested $60,023,000 for Chemical and Biological
Defense exploratory development. The Committee recommends $75,323,000,
an increase of $15,300,000. Within this increase, $9,500,000 is
available only for medical biological research and $5,800,000 is only
for Safeguard.
TACTICAL TECHNOLOGY
The Department requested $157,329,000 for Tactical Technology. The
Committee recommends $126,244,000, a reduction of $31,085,000 for
program growth. This amount includes an increase of $3,000,000 only for
the continuation of simulation based design and virtual reality efforts,
in a collaborative program with private industry, for the Gulf Coast
Region Maritime Technology Center. The Committee notes that the request
for Tactical Technology has increased by 28 percent without substantial
justification. Therefore the Committee recommends a reduction of
$31,085,000, as proposed in the House-passed Defense Authorization bill.
INTEGRATED COMMAND AND CONTROL TECHNOLOGY
The Department requested $37,000,000 for Integrated Command and
Control Technology. The Committee recommends $39,000,000, an increase of
$2,000,000 only for the high definition camera. Within this amount,
$4,000,000 shall be made available only for high definition display
systems technology.
MATERIALS AND ELECTRONICS TECHNOLOGY
The Department requested $192,192,000 for Materials and Electronics
technology. The Committee recommends $208,192,000, an increase of
$16,000,000. Within this increase, $10,000,000 is only for the Defense
Microelectronics Activity and $6,000,000 is only for the Nanofabrication
Laboratory as proposed in the House-passed Defense Authorization bill.
DEFENSE SPECIAL WEAPONS AGENCY
The Department requested $211,971,000 for the Defense Special Weapons
Agency. The Committee recommends $200,593,000, a net reduction of
$11,378,000 to maintain the program at the 1997 funding level. The
amount includes an increase of $5,000,000 only to continue ongoing
bioenvironmental research.
ADVANCED DEVELOPMENT
EXPLOSIVES DEMILITARIZATION TECHNOLOGY
The Department requested $12,259,000 for Explosives Demilitarization
Technology. Within this amount, the Committee recommends $2,000,000 only
for the cryogenic washout program.
COUNTERPROLIFERATION SUPPORT
The Department requested $58,264,000 for Counterproliferation
Support. The Committee recommends $67,264,000, an increase of $9,000,000
only for the Counterproliferation Analysis and Planning System (CAPS).
AUTOMATIC TARGET RECOGNITION
The Department requested $4,789,000 for Automatic Target Recognition.
The Committee recommends $5,989,000, an increase of $1,200,000 only for
optical correlators. The Committee encourages the Director of Defense
Research and Engineering to provide assistance to the services in their
development of miniature ruggedized optical correlators for use on the
Navy Standard missile and the Air Force's AGM 130 missile.
CHEMICAL AND BIOLOGICAL DEFENSE PROGRAM
The Department requested $41,223,000 for Chemical and Biological
Defense advanced development. The Committee recommends $50,773,000, an
increase of $9,550,000. Within this increase, $6,700,000 is available
only for medical biological programs, and $2,850,000 is only for Joint
Service Integrated Suit (JSLIST) industrial production.
SPECIAL TECHNICAL SUPPORT
The Department requested $11,750,000 for Special Technical Support.
The Committee recommends $9,750,000, a reduction of $2,000,000, as
proposed in the House-passed Defense Authorization bill.
VERIFICATION TECHNOLOGY
The Department requested $83,370,000 for Verification Technology
Demonstration. The Committee recommends $69,070,000, a net reduction of
$14,300,000, as proposed in the House-passed Defense Authorization bill.
Within this amount, the Committee recommends an increase of $5,000,000
only for the continuation of an industry-based program begun by DARPA to
accelerate development of nuclear detection systems, including
specialized cryocoolers for portable and remote operations and
optoelectronics for portal monitoring for detection of nuclear
materials, $3,000,000 is only for the continuation of an industry-based
program begun by DARPA for enhanced segregated-surface solid state
detectors, forensics, and analysis techniques in support of nuclear non
proliferation and counter terrorism, and $3,000,000 is only for the
continuation of the Russian Monitoring Technologies Project begun by
DARPA and for a system to provide early warning of the hazards posed by
Russian nuclear reactors in Cuba.
Nuclear Monitoring Technologies
In addition, of the amount available for Nuclear Arms Control
Technology $8,800,000 shall be available only for competitive,
peer-reviewed basic research in nuclear monitoring
technologies--$7,100,000 for explosion seismology only, and $700,000
available only for hydroacoustics, infrasound and radionuclide analysis.
To ensure the peer review process works properly, the Committee
directs that the program be moved from the Defense Special Weapons
Agency to the Nuclear Treaty Programs Office and a program manager
position be established within the Nuclear Treaty Programs Office to
oversee the program. Contracting for the program and associated
operation and maintenance funds should be transferred to the U.S. Army
Space and Strategic Defense Command. The Committee directs that the
program be managed in accordance with the National Research Council
recommendations provided to the Department on the research needed to
meet nuclear treaty monitoring goals. The Committee requests that the
Department provide a report to Congress responding to the National
Research Council recommendations and explaining how this program meets
congressionally mandated objectives.
Seismic Monitoring
The Committee concurs with the concerns expressed in the House-passed
Defense Authorization bill on seismic monitoring and directs that no
funds be available to create redundant capability to that of the U.S.
Geological Survey for monitoring, analyzing and reporting on domestic
seismic events.
GENERIC LOGISTICS R&D TECHNOLOGY DEMONSTRATIONS
The Department of Defense requested $17,267,000 for Generic Logistics
R&D Technology Demonstrations. The Committee recommends $23,867,000, an
increase of $6,600,000 only for the Computer Assisted Technology
Transfer Program (CATT). The Committee notes that there can be a high
percentage of ``no-bids'' when the military seeks to purchase spare
parts in small quantities, as was the case with the KC 135. CATT,
designated by the Defense Logistics Agency as a National Reinvention
Laboratory, seeks to increase the industrial base available to support
DoD spare parts procurement by enhancing the competitiveness of small
and medium sized firms.
STRATEGIC ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH PROGRAM
The Department requested $54,874,000 for the Strategic Environmental
Research and Development Program (SERDP). The Committee recommends
$61,874,000, an increase of $7,000,000 above the budget request. Of
these funds $3,000,000 is to be used only to develop new environmentally
insensitive energetic materials as provided for in the House-passed
Defense Authorization bill.
In addition, the Committee directs the Director of Defense Research
and Engineering, in consultation with the Deputy Under Secretary of
Defense for Environmental Security to continue the research, development
and demonstration program devoted to health and safety issues of
environmental cleanup workers as it relates to the development and
introduction of environmental remediation technologies. The program
shall continue to develop and evaluate protection and safety methods and
techniques necessary for the safe use and application of environmental
remediation technology and to transfer such methods and techniques to
field use. The Committee recommends an increase of $2,000,000 to the
Strategic Environmental Research and Development Program only for this
purpose.
Finally, the Committee provides $2,000,000 only for a risk-based
approach to research the effects of toxic chemicals on human health and
the environment. This research should address questions needed to
establish cleanup criteria related to toxic chemicals associated with
base operations and remediation of waste sites. This research should
improve DoD capabilities for site specific remediation of toxic
chemicals.
ADVANCED ELECTRONICS TECHNOLOGIES
The Department requested $277,044,000 for Advanced Electronics
Technologies. The Committee recommends $285,044,000, an increase of
$8,000,000. Within this increase, the Committee recommends $3,000,000
only for the Center for Microstructures and $5,000,000 only for
cryoelectronics. Within available funds, the Committee recommends
$18,000,000 for Flat Panel Displays.
MARITIME TECHNOLOGY
The Committee supports the idea that of the funds provided for
Maritime Technology (MARITECH) approximately 15 percent should be made
available to small businesses which have the technical expertise and
that DARPA should have the flexibility to waive or reduce the matching
requirement.
ELECTRIC VEHICLES
The Department requested no appropriation for electric vehicles. The
Committee recommends $15,000,000 for Electric Vehicles to continue
ongoing programs in this area.
ADVANCED CONCEPT TECHNOLOGY DEMONSTRATIONS
The Department requested $121,076,000 for Advanced Concept Technology
Demonstrations (ACTDs). The Committee recommends $61,076,000, a
reduction of $60,000,000 due to unsubstantiated program growth. The
Committee notes that the ACTD budget request has doubled since last
year.
COMMERCIAL TECHNOLOGY INSERTION PROGRAM
The Department requested $47,889,000 for the Commercial Technology
Insertion Program. The Committee recommends no appropriation as proposed
in the House-passed Defense Authorization bill. The Committee believes
that many commercial technologies may have promise and should be
considered by the Service program managers and acquisition executives as
viable alternatives to military-unique equipment. However, the Committee
believes this approach should be embedded in the development and
procurement plans of the Services.
ELECTRONIC COMMERCE RESOURCE CENTERS
The Department requested $14,972,000 for Electronic Commerce Resource
Centers (ECRCs). The Committee recommends $47,972,000, an increase of
$33,000,000.
HIGH PERFORMANCE COMPUTING MODERNIZATION PROGRAM
The Department requested $126,211,000. The Committee recommends
$124,880,000, a reduction of $1,331,000 for program growth.
The Committee is concerned that the High Performance Computing
Modernization Program future budget plans de-emphasize the purchase of
new supercomputers for DoD, as evidenced by a reduction in planned
procurement account funds, yet the plans provide for increasing RDT&E
account budgets for the sustainment of operations and related services.
According to the DoD HPC Modernization Plan, dated June 1994, ``. . .
the mission of this program is to modernize the high performance
computational capability of DoD laboratories . . .'' Because of this,
the Committee believes that a more equal balance between Procurement and
RDT&E funds is appropriate and that sustainment of operations and
related services should not dominate the program budgets. The Committee
directs therefore, that DoD provide it verification that the future
procurement budgets are adequate to ensure that the high performance
computing needs of the DoD-wide user community can be met at the levels
planned.
The Committee also notes that DoD, despite a previous request, has
not published an updated High Performance Computing Modernization
Program Plan or Program Implementation Plan since June 1994. The
Committee, therefore, directs again that such plans be published
annually no later than March 15.
SENSOR AND GUIDANCE TECHNOLOGY
The Department requested $166,855,000 for Sensor and Guidance
technology. The Committee recommends $154,855,000, a net reduction of
$12,000,000. Within this amount, $13,000,000 is available only for
GEOSAR technology and $6,000,000 is available only for the GPS Guidance
Package (GGP). The Committee also recommends a reduction of $25,000,000
as proposed in the House-passed Defense Authorization bill.
The Committee understands DARPA is developing a very promising
inertial navigation technology under the Sensor and Guidance Technology
Program. The GPS Guidance Package (GGP) is a Fiber Optic Gyro System
which has the potential to significantly lower the cost, size and weight
of military inertial navigation systems. If the objectives of the
program are met, this activity could drastically reduce the cost and
size of inertial navigation systems, making precise inertial navigation
and positioning available to a much greater number of platforms, both
airborne and ground vehicles.
The Committee understands that due to the aggressive program goals
and the difference in technology between the two original competitors,
DARPA, the Army and the Navy felt strongly that competition should be
maintained at least through the remaining development program. The
Committee strongly agrees that competition should be maintained and
directs DoD to provide not less than $6,000,000 under the Sensor and
Guidance Technology Program to maintain GGP as a competitive program.
MARINE TECHNOLOGY
The Department requested $69,143,000 for Marine Technology. The
Committee recommends $21,943,000, a reduction of $47,200,000 for Arsenal
Ship, as proposed in the House-passed Defense Authorization bill. Within
amounts available, $6,000,000 is available only for smart anti-submarine
warfare (ASW) and Sonar STP technology.
LAND WARFARE TECHNOLOGY
The Department requested $82,580,000 for Land Warfare Technology. The
Committee recommends $89,180,000, an increase of $6,600,000 only for
Active Structural Control. Active Structural Control technology reduces
aircraft noise and vibrations.
DUAL USE PROGRAMS
The Department requested $225,000,000 for Dual Use programs. The
Committee recommends $100,000,000, a reduction of $125,000,000.
JOINT WARGAMING SIMULATION MANAGEMENT OFFICE
The Department requested $71,338,000 for the Joint Wargaming
Simulation Management Office. The Committee recommends $59,968,000, a
reduction of $11,370,000 due to program growth in conformance with
authorization action.
DEMONSTRATION AND VALIDATION
PHYSICAL SECURITY EQUIPMENT
The Department requested $31,553,000 for Physical Security Equipment.
The Committee recommends $18,676,000, a reduction of $12,877,000 due to
program growth. The Committee notes the substantial increase in the
physical security account and reduces the account to prior year levels.
JOINT ROBOTICS PROGRAM
The Committee encourages the department to pursue a Joint Robotic
Vehicle Technology Development Program for manned and unmanned ground
vehicle systems, and make funds available to the U.S. Army
Tank-Automotive and Armaments Research, Development and Engineering
Center to improve the situational awareness, crew safety, and autonomous
control of current and future Army ground vehicle systems that operate
in hazardous and hostile environments.
CALS INITIATIVE
The Department requested $1,916,000 for the CALS Initiative. The
Committee recommends $5,916,000, an increase of $4,000,000 only for the
CALS Integrated Data Environment (IDE).
BALLISTIC MISSILE DEFENSE ORGANIZATION
The Department requested $2,581,944,000 for Ballistic Missile Defense
in the Research, Development, Test and Evaluation title of the bill. The
Committee recommends $3,289,059,000 for the Ballistic Missile Defense
Organization's (BMDO) research and development programs, an increase of
$707,115,000. The Committee recommends specific changes in Ballistic
Missile Defense Organization programs as detailed in the table below.
BALLISTIC MISSILE DEFENSE
[In thousands of dollars]
Budget request Committee recommendation Change from request
National Missile Defense 504,091 978,091 +474,000
Navy Upper Tier 194,898 444,898 +250,000
MEADS (Corps SAM) 47,956 47,956
Boost Phase Intercept 12,885 0 -12,885
Theater High-Altitude Area Defense 294,647 238,647 -56,000
Theater High-Altitude Area Defense 261,480 261,480
AIT +30,000
Navy Lower Tier EMD 267,822 289,822 +22,000
Theater High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD)
The Department requested $294,647,000 for Theater High Altitude Area
Defense (THAAD) Demonstration and Validation and $261,480,000 for
Theater High Altitude Area Defense Engineering and Manufacturing. The
Committee recommends $238,647,000 for Demonstration and Validation, a
reduction of $56,000,000.
Due to the slip in the THAAD schedule, associated with flight test
failures, fiscal year 1998 funds that were budgeted as the second
increment for a contract to acquire 40 User Operational Evaluation
System (UOES) missiles are no longer required. The Committee understands
that the flight test schedule for THAAD has been restructured and that
should an intercept occur in 1998, prior year funds would be available
for the UOES contract.
The Committee is very concerned about the Theater High Altitude Area
Defense (THAAD) program and the four consecutive test failures which did
not achieve an intercept. This type of error points to the need for
greater quality control on the part of the contractor and tighter
management on the part of the program manager. Despite these concerns,
the Committee supports the objectives of the THAAD program and believes
the system should be deployed at the soonest possible date.
Navy Lower Tier
The Department requested $267,822,000 for the Navy Lower Tier
program. The Committee recommends $289,822,000, an increase of
$22,000,000 as proposed in the House-passed Defense Authorization bill.
The Committee was pleased with the recent successful test of the Navy
Lower Tier system and has provided funds for additional targets to
reduce program risk.
NAVY UPPER TIER
The Department requested $194,898,000 for Navy Upper Tier. The
Committee recommends $444,898,000, an increase of $250,000,000. The
Committee believes that the Navy Upper Tier program will provide a
substantial defense capability and is concerned that the
Administration's proposed plan does not include deployment of the Navy
Upper Tier system. Additional funds will enable the Navy to plan for 12
flight tests, to include an intercept in 1999 using the Lightweight
Exoatmospheric Projectile (LEAP) and a modified SM 3 Standard Missile.
In addition, additional funds will permit engineering and kinetic kill
vehicle work needed for system deployment. The current plan only
provides for a flight demonstration program and does not plan for
deployment.
medium extended air defense system (meads) and boost phase intercept
(bpi)
The Committee is concerned about the lack of focus in the Medium
Extended Area Defense System (MEADS) program, formerly Corps SAM, and
the Boost Phase Interceptor (BPI) program. While the Committee supports
the general concept underlying both programs, it believes that neither
program is affordable. Due to the international commitment involved with
the MEADS program, the Committee recommends a completion of the
Preliminary Design and Review program but remains concerned about the
future funding of this expensive program. Furthermore, the Committee
sees the Air Force Airborne Laser (ABL) program as the prime program for
pursuing a boost phase capability. Therefore, the Committee recommends
no appropriation for BPI as proposed in the House-passed Defense
Authorization bill.
NATIONAL MISSILE DEFENSE
The Committee believes that National Missile Defense (NMD) is one of
the highest national security priorities. The Committee is concerned
about the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction and the possible
emergence of a ballistic missile threat from a rogue nation.
The Department requested $504,091,000 for National Missile Defense
(NMD). The Committee recommends $978,091,000, an increase of
$474,000,000, as proposed in both the House and Senate Authorization
bills. The Committee concurs with the recommendations of the
Quadrennnial Defense Review and recommends additional funds to
significantly reduce the cost, schedule and technical risk associated
with the current NMD program. The Committee is pleased with the recent
successful NMD flight test which demonstrated the ability of an
Exoatmospheric Kill Vehicle (EKV) optical seeker to identify and track a
set of threat targets and discriminate between warheads and decoys.
However, the Committee remains concerned about the six month delay in
the program which was caused because of an earlier flight test
malfunction that was attributed to human error. The Committee believes,
as with the THAAD program, that quality control and close management are
critical to timely deployment of this system.
ENGINEERING AND MANUFACTURING
CHEMICAL AND BIOLOGICAL DEFENSE PROGRAM
The Department requested $120,535,000 for Chemical and Biological
Defense. The Committee recommends $138,535,000, an increase of
$18,000,000. Within this increase, $8,000,000 is only for the Joint
Vaccine Program and $10,000,000 is only for decontamination
technologies.
TECHNICAL STUDIES
The Department requested $38,376,000 for technical studies. The
Committee recommends $31,248,000, a reduction of $7,128,000 due to
program growth.
DEFENSE SUPPORT ACTIVITIES
The Department requested $5,992,000 for Defense Support Activities.
The Committee recommends $7,492,000, an increase of $1,500,000 only for
the Commodity Management System Consolidation.
MANAGEMENT HEADQUARTERS
The Department requested $39,193,000 for management headquarters. The
Committee recommends $34,469,000, a reduction of $4,724,000. The
recommended amount funds management headquarters at the prior year
level.
TACTICAL UAVS
The Department requested $122,004,000 for tactical unmanned aerial
vehicles (UAVs). The Committee recommends $60,007,000, a reduction of
$61,997,000.
The Committee agrees with the recommendations set forth in the
House-passed fiscal year 1998 Defense Authorization bill regarding the
Outrider UAV and therefore denies the funding request of $87,497,000 for
this program. The Committee strongly urges the Department to immediately
pursue the recommendation to procure a tactical UAV for the Army.
The Committee provides an additional $11,500,000 to develop the
Tactical Control System (TCS) for the Predator UAV system. The Committee
understands that a memorandum of agreement is being developed between
the TCS program office and the Naval Strike Warfare Center to coordinate
the use of the Predator system in support of CONOPS development.
Additionally, the Department should consider integrating the TCS in the
Pioneer UAV system, especially since the Navy has decided to extend the
service life of the Pioneer UAV.
The Committee also recommends $4,000,000 to continue the UAV
multi-function self-aligned gate array technology development and
demonstration program.
An additional $10,000,000 is recommended to support a vertical
takeoff and landing UAV competition.
ENDURANCE UAVS
The Department requested $216,712,000 for the High Altitude Endurance
(HAE) UAV program. The Committee recommends $192,812,000, a reduction of
$23,900,000. Of this amount, $14,990,000 is a transfer from this account
to an Air Force RDT&E account, PE 0305154F. The request included
$9,000,000 for testing the common ground segment. The Committee
understands that there has been considerable delay in both HAE advanced
technologies demonstrations and that prior year funds are available for
continued testing. Therefore, the Committee denies the request of
$9,000,000.
AIRBORNE RECONNAISSANCE SYSTEMS
The Department requested $212,961,000 for airborne reconnaissance
systems. The Committee recommends $193,961,000, a reduction of
$19,000,000. The adjustments to this account are described below.
The following are recommended changes in accordance with
authorization action:
JMTE Advanced Technology Demonstration +$8,000,000
O Framing Technology +15,000,000
ABIT System Test & Evaluation +3,000,000
JASA Standards -3,000,000
HFE Development -3,000,000
Global Hawk SIGINT Design -16,200,000
The Committee recommends the following additional adjustments:
The Department requested $25,800,000 for the development and testing
of the JSAF Highband Prototype. The Committee is concerned about the
significant amount of funds that have been used to develop a joint
SIGINT system. The Committee does not understand why there continues to
be multiple efforts to develop a SIGINT system to satisfy U 2
requirements: the high band sub-system (HBSS), high band prototype
(HBP), and the U 2 Senior Glass upgrade. Because of these reasons, the
Committee denies the $25,800,000 budget request. The Committee
recommends an additional $3,000,000 to continue the development of the
long range, high data rate airborne lasercom system.
SPECIAL OPERATIONS ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT
The Department requested $8,009,000 for Special Operations advanced
technology development. The Committee recommends $9,009,000, an increase
of $1,000,000 to continue the development of the PRIVATEER II electronic
suite.
SPECIAL OPERATIONS INTELLIGENCE SYSTEMS DEVELOPMENT
The Department requested $4,914,000 for Special Operations
Intelligence Systems Development. The Committee recommends $13,914,000,
an increase of $9,000,000. Of this amount $5,000,000 is to provide
enhancements to the Special Operations Intelligence Vehicle, and
$4,000,000 for the Joint Threat Warning System (JTWS).
SOF OPERATIONAL ENHANCEMENTS
The Department requested $26,357,000 for SOF operational
enhancements. The Committee recommends $32,937,000, an increase of
$6,580,000. Of this amount, $5,800,000 is for the Special Technology
Assault Craft, and $780,000 for a classified program which is explained
in the classified annex to this report.
CASTING EMISSION REDUCTION PROGRAM
The Department of Defense requested no funds for the Casting Emission
Reduction Program. The Committee recommends $12,000,000 only to continue
this five-year research and development initiative between DoD and the
private sector to develop a cleaner and more efficient metal casting
process in order to meet Clean Air Act requirements.
PROGRAM RECOMMENDED
The total amount recommended in the bill will provide the following
program in fiscal year 1998:
Offset Folios 241 to 242 Insert here
DEVELOPMENTAL TEST AND EVALUATION, DEFENSE
Fiscal year 1997 appropriation $282,038,000
Fiscal year 1998 budget request 268,183,000
Committee recommendation 268,183,000
Change from budget request
This appropriation funds Developmental Test and Evaluation, Defense
activities, for direction and supervision of test and evaluation, joint
testing, improvement of the effectiveness and efficiency of the DoD
major ranges and test facilities, and technical and/or operational
evaluation of foreign nations' weapons systems, equipment, and
technologies.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS
PROGRAM RECOMMENDED
The total amount recommended in the bill will provide the following
program in fiscal year 1998:
Offset Folios 244 to Insert here
OPERATIONAL TEST AND EVALUATION, DEFENSE
Fiscal year 1997 appropriation $24,968,000
Fiscal year 1998 budget request 23,384,000
Committee recommendation 32,684,000
Change from budget request +9,300,000
This appropriation funds the activities of the Office of the
Director, Operational Test and Evaluation.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS
PROGRAM RECOMMENDED
The total amount recommended in the bill will provide the following
program in fiscal year 1998:
Offset Folios 246 to Insert
LIVE FIRE TESTING
The Department requested $10,197,000 for Live Fire Testing. The
Committee recommends $19,497,000, an increase of $9,300,000 only for
simulation and modeling.
TITLE V
REVOLVING AND MANAGEMENT FUNDS
DEFENSE WORKING CAPITAL FUNDS
Fiscal year 1997 appropriation $947,900,000
Fiscal year 1998 budget request 33,400,000
Committee recommendation 971,952,000
Change from budget request 938,552,000
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $971,952,000 for the
Defense Working Capital Fund. The recommendation is an increase of
$24,052,000 from the amount appropriated in fiscal year 1997. As
described elsewhere in this report, the Committee supports the
recommendations in the House-passed fiscal year 1998 Defense
Authorization bill to incorporate the Commissaries into the Defense
Working Capital Fund rather than establishing a separate account as
proposed in the budget request.
TRANSITION TO THE WORKING CAPITAL FUNDS
The Committee notes that, in the fiscal year 1998 budget request, DoD
proposed revising the title and structure of the Defense Business
Operations Fund and replacing it with the Army Working Capital Fund, the
Navy Working Capital Fund, the Air Force Working Capital Fund, and the
Defense Working Capital Fund. Despite the change in name, the Committee
recognizes that the financial management improvements brought about by
the Defense Business Operations Fund such as capital budgeting and
recognition of total costs will continue under the Working Capital
Funds. However, the Committee is also aware that the problems that
confronted DoD during its use of the Defense Business Operations Fund
have not changed with the inception of the Working Capital Funds.
In particular, the cash management problems that the Committee has
noted in the past continue under the Working Capital Funds. The
Committee has repeatedly expressed its concern about the problems DoD
has experienced in maintaining adequate cash balances, and DoD's
consequent need to use advance billing. The Committee is encouraged by
the steps DoD has taken in the fiscal year 1998 budget request to
establish rates that more accurately reflect the costs of the Working
Capital Fund activity groups. However, the Committee believes there is
room for further improvement, especially in the area of collections. The
Committee is aware that the Department has just over $5 billion of aging
accounts receivable due to Working Capital Fund activity groups. Of this
amount, the Committee understands that $1.5 billion are 90 days old or
older, and over $1 billion are over 120 days old. It seems clear that
this performance can, and should be improved, and that such improvement
would aid DoD's overall efforts to improve cash management in the
Working Capital Fund activities. Therefore, the Committee directs that
the Department of Defense submit a report, not later than April 30,
1998, detailing measures to improve cash management by reducing the
amount of aging accounts receivable.
MILITARY COMMISSARY FUND, DEFENSE
Fiscal year 1997 appropriation 0
Fiscal year 1998 budget request $938,552,000
Committee recommendation 0
Change from budget request -938,552,000
The Committee supports the recommendation in the House-passed fiscal
year 1998 Defense Authorization bill to incorporate the Commissaries
into the Defense Working Capital Fund rather than establishing a
separate account as proposed by the budget request. The Committee
believes that this realignment should improve the management flexibility
for the operation of the Defense Commissary Agency.
NATIONAL DEFENSE SEALIFT FUND
Fiscal year 1997 appropriation $1,428,002,000
Fiscal year 1998 budget request 1,191,426,000
Committee recommendation 1,199,926,000
Change from budget request +8,500,000
This appropriation provides funds for the lease, operation, and
supply of prepositioning ships; operation of the Ready Reserve Force;
and acquisition of ships for the Military Sealift Command, the Ready
Reserve Force, and the Marine Corps.
LARGE MEDIUM SPEED ROLL-ON/ROLL-OFF (LMSR) SHIPS
The Navy budgeted $812,900,000 for acquisition of LMSR ships. The
Committee recommends $806,400,000, a reduction of $6,500,000 due to
excess advanced procurement funds.
LIGHTERAGE
The Defense Department requested no funds for lighterage, equipment
which is vital for off-loading sealift ships to get equipment and
supplies to shore. Lighterage consists of floating platforms known as
RO/RO discharge facilities, floating piers, or causeway ferries. The
first LMSR ship went to sea this year without any lighterage. The
Committee is disturbed that the Department of Defense is buying 19 LMSR
sealift ships for over $6,000,000,000 for which the proper support
equipment is not planned nor budgeted. The Committee recommends
$15,000,000 only for procurement of sea-state two lighterage to meet
theater CINC requirements.
TITLE VI
OTHER DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE PROGRAMS
DEFENSE HEALTH PROGRAM
Fiscal year 1997 appropriation $10,207,308,000
Fiscal year 1998 budget request (as amended) 10,301,650,000
Committee Recommendation 10,309,750,000
Change from budget request 8,100,000
The Department requested $10,301,650,000 for the Defense Health
Program. The Committee notes that the fiscal year 1998 President's
Budget request submitted to Congress in February underfunded the Defense
Health Program by $274,000,000. Subsequent to the submission of the
budget, the Administration submitted a budget amendment to correct this
shortfall. The Committee strongly agrees with this action and fully
funds the Defense Health Program to include the shortfall of
$274,000,000. The Committee recommends $10,309,750,000 a net increase of
$8,100,000 over the amended budget request in operations and maintenance
only for the following:
Breast Cancer $25,000,000
Head Injury 1,000,000
Air Force Neuroscience 4,900,000
Diabetes Research 4,000,000
Epidermolysis Bullosa 1,000,000
Medical Imaging 4,700,000
Tissue Engineering 4,700,000
HIV 15,000,000
Minimally Invasive Research 13,000,000
Lab Upgrades 8,000,000
Nervous System Studies 4,500,000
Gulf War Illness 4,500,000
PACMEDNET 10,000,000
High Risk Automation Systems (CHCSII) -20,000,000
Tax Liability -70,800,000
Economic Adjustment -1,400,000
MEDICAL RESEARCH
The Committee recommends increases to research and development
accounts only for the following programs:
602716A:
$4,000,000
602787A:
3,500,000
6,000,000
3,500,000
25,000,000
10,000,000
9,800,000
10,000,000
603002A:
100,000,000
8,000,000
6,000,000
3,500,000
3,000,000
6,000,000
1,500,000
3,500,000
603706N:
34,000,000
2,600,000
5,500,000
2,500,000
4,000,000
4,000,000
3,000,000
-1,200,000
604771N:
8,500,000
4,800,000
BREAST CANCER
The Committee has provided an increase of $125,000,000 only for
breast cancer-related research and treatment. The Committee is pleased
that funds appropriated to the Army in prior years for breast cancer
research have been well used. This year the Committee has again provided
funding for valuable research and to help improve access to care and
improve treatment for military members and their dependents with breast
cancer. The Committee recommends an increase of $100,000,000 for
peer-reviewed research and $25,000,000 to improve access to care for
military members and their families.
GULF WAR ILLNESS
The Department estimates that it will spend $74,100,000 for various
Gulf War Illness programs in fiscal year 1998. The Committee recommends
fully funding these programs. In addition, the Committee recommends an
increase of $4,500,000 in conformance with authorization action, only
for Gulf War Clinical Trials to be established by the Secretary of
Defense and the Secretary of Veterans Affairs for a total program of
$78,600,000. This represents an increase of $15,500,000, or 25 percent,
over the fiscal year 1997 program for Gulf War Illness initiatives.
The Committee is concerned that the Departments of Defense and
Veterans Affairs do not currently have a systematic approach to
monitoring the health of Gulf War veterans after their initial
examination and are unable to provide information on the effectiveness
of treatment or whether veterans are better or worse than when first
examined.
The Secretaries of Defense and Veterans Affairs should develop and
implement a plan to address the concerns raised in the June 1997 GAO
report on this subject providing: (1) data on the effectiveness of the
treatments received by these veterans; and (2) data on the long-term
progress of veterans who have reported illnesses after the war to
identify health conditions which are resistant to current therapies. The
application of validated severity indices may be appropriate, but the
departments may suggest other methods.
TRICARE
The Committee is pleased with the progress that has been made in
implementing TRICARE. However, the Committee believes that there are
several areas that deserve further study including: the feasibility of
adopting the APR DRG system; standards relating to quality and access
for children with special needs; and corrective measures for outlier
payments. The Committee directs the Department of Defense to provide a
report on these matters by May 1, 1998.
BONE MARROW RESEARCH
The Committee recommends an increase of $34,000,000 only for the C.W.
Bill Young Marrow Donor Recruitment and Research Program, which is
administered by the Naval Medical Research Institute.
The Committee believes that the C.W. Bill Young Marrow Donor
Recruitment and Research Program is uniquely qualified to provide
support to the Metropolitan Emergency Medical Response teams established
by the Defense Against Mass Destruction Act of 1996 (P.L. 104 201). The
Committee recommends that procedures be established to make available to
these teams the infrastructure and medical expertise of the DoD marrow
donor program in the event of an emergency covered by the Act.
SMOKING CESSATION
Tobacco smoking in the military is estimated to cost the Department
of Defense an estimated $930 million in health expenses and lost
productivity. It is the stated goal of the Department of Defense to
reduce smoking prevalance among active duty personnel from the current
level of 32 percent to 20 percent of all service personnel. Nicotine
replacement therapy, such as nicotine patches or gum, may offer a
cost-effective means of significantly increasing success rates among
service personnel attempting to quit smoking. The Committee urges the
Assistant Secretary of Defense for Health Affairs to implement an
effective smoking reduction plan that meets the objectives of Healthy
People 2000. Furthermore, the Committee urges the Department to make
replacement therapy available to military members and their families.
DIABETES
The Committee has included $4,000,000 only for improved methods of
diabetes detection, prevention, and care. The Committee recommends that
the Department of Defense consider opportunities to conduct this
research in conjunction with the Veterans Administration. The Committee
directs the Department of Defense to provide a report on the status of
this project by February 15, 1998.
MINIMALLY INVASIVE RESEARCH
The Committee recommends $13,000,000 to support a collaborative
effort of industry, medical research institutions, and the Department's
health care organizations to identify and evaluate technologies to
permit the extensive surgical treatment of patients while minimizing the
requirement to open the body with long, deep incisions. Technologies and
techniques under development employing lasers, computers, special
optics, and robotics hold promise for advancing minimally invasive
surgical capabilities. This could have direct and useful application for
battlefield medicine and could reduce the pain, danger, and cost of
surgery provided to the military healthcare population.
Air Force Neuroscience
The Committee recommends $4,900,000 to fund a Cooperative Research
and Development Agreement (CRADA) at Wright Patterson Air Force Base for
neuroscience technology.
Central Nervous System Injury Research
The Committee recommends $4,500,000 to continue active research
programs under Cooperative Agreement DAMD17 93 V 3018 relating to the
mechanism and treatment of central nervous system injury (brain trauma,
spinal cord injury, stroke) and cognitive dysfunction. It is expected
that these funds will support multi-institutional research and training
programs in the areas of brain imaging, cognitive science, central
nervous system injury/plasticity, and telemedicine with the Walter Reed
Institute of Research, the National Institutes of Health, and other Army
medical organizations.
WALTER REED ARMY INSTITUTE OF RESEARCH
The Committee recommends $8,000,000 to acquire essential equipment
for the new Walter Reed Army Institute of Research (WRAIR). Because the
planned occupancy date for the new replacement laboratory has recently
been accelerated from April 1999 to August 1998, funds to equip the
facility were not included in this year's budget request.
Mobile Breast Care Center
The Committee believes the Mobile Breast Care Center is absolutely
essential to effectively addressing the basic and clinical research
needs of at-risk underserved rural and urban communities, and encourages
the Department to provide support for this effort from within available
funds.
Peer Review Panels
The Committee is pleased with the level of diversity of the DoD
prostate cancer initiative's program medical review panel and encourages
that it be sustained. In conjunction with the Institute of Medicine's
fiscal year 1993 report on strategies for managing the breast cancer
research program, the Committee recognizes the critical importance of
the participation of minorities on the program management team, advisory
council, and peer review group of the DoD breast cancer research
program. Thus, the Committee recommends that the DoD breast cancer
research program medical review panel maintain equitable representation
of minorities.
CHEMICAL AGENTS AND MUNITIONS DESTRUCTION, DEFENSE
Fiscal year 1997 appropriated amount $758,447,000
Fiscal year 1998 budget request 620,700,000
Committee recommendation 595,700,000
Change from budget request -25,000,000
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS
PROGRAM REDUCTIONS
The DoD requested $620,700,000 for the destruction of chemical agents
and munitions. The Committee recommends $595,700,000, a decrease of
$25,000,000 due poor obligation rates.
STORAGE FACILITIES
In June 1997, the GAO issued a report which stated that communities
surrounding the Umatilla Depot lack a number of safety measures,
including decontamination equipment, sirens, and tone alert radios. The
GAO report, if accurate, causes the Committee concern for the citizens
in the towns surrounding the storage facility. Therefore, the Committee
directs the Army to ensure the integrity of the nerve gas storage
facilities and to minimize the degree of risk to the surrounding
communities.
PROGRAM RECOMMENDED
The total amount recommended in the bill will provide the following
program in fiscal year 1997:
Offset Folios 255 Insert here
DRUG INTERDICTION AND COUNTER-DRUG ACTIVITIES, DEFENSE
Fiscal year 1997 appropriation $807,000,000
Fiscal year 1998 budget request 652,582,000
Committee recommendation 713,082,000
Change from budget request +60,500,000
This appropriation provides funds for Military Personnel; Operation
and Maintenance; Procurement; and, Research, Development, Test and
Evaluation, for drug interdiction and counter-drug activities of the
Department of Defense.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
The Department of Defense requested $652,582,000 for Drug
Interdiction and Counter-Drug Activities, a reduction of $154,418,000
from the fiscal year 1997 appropriated level. The Committee recommends
$713,082,000, an increase of $60,500,000.
NATIONAL GUARD COUNTER-DRUG PROGRAM
Once again the Department of Defense has not adequately provided
funds for the National Guard Counter-Drug Support Program. The budget
request would fund less than half the state and local law enforcement
requests for National Guard Counter-Drug Support. The Committee has
provided additional funds for specific National Guard activities and
directs the Department to follow proper reprogramming procedures for
each program in this account.
LEA SUPPORT
The Committee provided additional funds in fiscal year 1997 for
operation Laser Strike and other projects in the Southern Command area
of responsibility. These additional resources, in combination with the
programs requested in the budget, have led to recent success achieved by
participating nations in stemming the production and transfer of illegal
drugs. Among the more immediate effects of this effort is the dramatic
reduction in traffic along the air bridge in the Andean region which had
been used as the chief means of transport for raw coca to processing
sites. The Committee compliments the Commander-in-Chief of the Southern
Command and the Department for their contribution and leadership in this
area. The Committee recommends an additional $15,000,000 over the budget
request in the LEA Support program to be used to continue and build on
this effort in the Source Nations and directs the Department to present
a detailed plan on how it will utilize this additional funding to the
congressional defense committees within 60 days of enactment of this
act.
GULF STATES INITIATIVE
The Committee recommends $16,166,000 for the Gulf States Initiative
(GSI), an addition of $12,800,000 over the budget request. The Committee
believes that the infrastructure and capabilities developed by the
participants in the GSI have direct application to counter-terrorism
activities. Accordingly, the Committee directs that funds for the GSI
shall be used for sustainment costs for the C4 of GSI, improvements to
existing processing and analysis centers for the four GSI states, and
for broadening the GSI focus to include counter-terrorism. The Committee
directs that $3,031,000, an addition of $800,000 over the budget
request, be provided to the Regional Counter-drug Training Academy
(RCTA).
The Committee is disappointed in the Department's lack of budgetary
and management support for the GSI, and in its proposal to shift
management responsibility to the Defense Information Systems Agency
(DISA). The Committee believes such action is unwise and instead directs
the Department to submit a plan to the Committee prior to conference
committee action on the fiscal year 1998 bill to transfer all program
funding responsibility and program management of the GSI, except those
dealing with the RCTA, to the Joint Military Intelligence program.
HIDTA CRACK HOUSE DEMOLITION
The Committee is aware that various Guard units have been used to
demolish crack houses in Texas, in a manner which enhances readiness.
The Committee is also aware of an urgent need to expand this activity to
the state of Indiana. Therefore, the Committee recommends $2,300,000
above the budget request for Guard State plans only for Crack House
Demolition and related missions for the National Guard in the Indiana
High Intensity Drug Trafficking Area (HIDTA).
CIVIL AIR PATROL
The Committee recommends $2,800,000 above the budget request, for the
Civil Air Patrol (CAP). Funds made available to the CAP for the
Department of Defense Drug Interdiction activities may be used for CAP's
demand reduction program involving youth programs as well as operational
and training drug reconnaissance missions for federal, state, and local
government agencies; for administrative costs, including the hiring of
CAP employees; for travel and per diem expenses of CAP personnel in
support of those missions; and for equipment needed for mission support
performance. The Department of the Air Force should waive reimbursement
from the federal, state and local government agencies for use of these
funds.
C 26 AIRCRAFT PHOTO RECONNAISSANCE UPGRADES
The Committee recommends $11,000,000 only to form fit upgrade the KS
87 sensors on Air National Guard C 26 counter-drug aircraft to electro
optical framing capability to include image processing equipment and
spares support.
MULTIJURISDICTIONAL TASK FORCE TRAINING
The Committee recommends $4,000,000 above the budget request for
multijurisdictional task force training and Military Police School
training at the Criminal Justice Institute.
PROGRAM RECOMMENDED
The total amount recommended in the bill will provide the following
program in fiscal year 1998:
[In thousands of dollars]
Budget request Committee recommended Change from budget
Dismantling Cartels 54,306 54,306
Source Nation Support 166,763 180,963 +14,200
Detection & Monitoring 124,686 124,686
Law Enforcement Agency Support 223,589 269,389 +45,800
Demand Reduction 83,238 83,738 +500
Total, Drug Interdiction and Counter-drug Activities, Defense 652,582 713,082 +60,500
OFFICE OF THE INSPECTOR GENERAL
Fiscal year 1997 appropriation $139,157,000
Fiscal year 1998 budget request 138,380,000
Committee recommendation 142,980,000
Change from budget request +4,600,000
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $142,980,000 for the
Office of the Inspector General. The recommendation is an increase of
$3,823,000 from the amount appropriated in fiscal year 1997.
TITLE VII
RELATED AGENCIES
NATIONAL FOREIGN INTELLIGENCE PROGRAM
INTRODUCTION
The National Foreign Intelligence Program consists of those
intelligence activities of the Government which provide the President,
other officers of the Executive Branch, and the Congress with national
foreign intelligence on broad strategic concerns bearing on U.S.
National security. These concerns are stated by the National Security
Council in the form of long-range and short-range requirements for the
principal users of intelligence, and include political and support to
military theater commanders.
The National Foreign Intelligence Program budget funded in the
Department of Defense Appropriations Act consists primarily of resources
of the Central Intelligence Agency; the Defense Intelligence Agency, the
National Reconnaissance Office, the National Security Agency, the
National Imagery and Mapping Agency, the intelligence services of the
Department of the Army, Navy and the Air Force; the Intelligence
Community Management Staff; and the CIA Retirement and Disability System
Fund.
CLASSIFIED ANNEX
Because of the highly sensitive nature of intelligence programs, the
results of the Committee's budget review are published in a separate,
detailed and comprehensive classified annex. The intelligence community,
Department of Defense and other organizations are expected to comply
fully with the recommendations and directives in the classified annex
accompanying the fiscal year 1998 Defense Approprations bill.
CENTRAL INTELLIGENCE AGENCY RETIREMENT AND DISABILITY SYSTEM FUND
Fiscal year 1997 appropriation $196,400,000
Fiscal year 1998 budget request 196,900,000
Committee recommendation 196,900,000
Change from budget request 0
This appropriation provides payments of benefits to qualified
beneficiaries in accordance with the Central Intelligence Agency
Retirement Act of 1964 for Certain Employees (P.L. 88 643). This statue
authorized the establishment of a CIA Retirement and Disability System
(CIARDS) for a limited number of CIA employees, and authorized the
establishment and maintenance of a Fund from which benefits would be
paid to those beneficiaries.
INTELLIGENCE COMMUNITY MANAGEMENT ACCOUNT
Fiscal year 1997 appropriation $129,164,000
Fiscal year 1998 budget request 122,580,000
Committee recommendation 125,580,000
Change from budget request +3,000,000
This appropriation provides funds for the activities that support the
Director of Central Intelligence (DCI) and the Intelligence Community.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
The budget requested $122,580,000 for the Intelligence Community
Management Account. The Committee recommends $125,580,000, an increase
of $3,000,000. Details of adjustments to this account are included in
the classified annex accompanying this report.
NATIONAL SECURITY EDUCATION TRUST FUND
Fiscal year 1997 appropriation $5,100,000
Fiscal year 1998 budget request 2,000,000
Committee recommendation 2,000,000
Change from budget request 0
The National Security Education Trust Fund was established to provide
scholarships and fellowships to U.S. students to pursue higher education
studies abroad and grants to U.S. institutions for programs of study in
foreign areas and languages. The budget requested $2,000,000. The
Committee recommends funding the budget request.
PAYMENT TO KAHO'OLAWE ISLAND CONVEYANCE, REMEDIATION, AND ENVIRONMENTAL
RESTORATION FUND
Fiscal year 1997 appropriation $10,000,000
Fiscal year 1998 budget request 10,000,000
Committee recommendation 10,000,000
Change from budget request 0
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $10,000,000 for Payment
to Kaho'olawe Island Conveyance, Remediation, and Environmental
Restoration Fund. The Committee recommendation does not change from the
amount appropriated in fiscal year 1997.
TITLE VIII
GENERAL PROVISIONS
The accompanying bill includes 102 general provisions. Most of these
provisions were included in the Department of Defense Appropriations Act
for fiscal year 1997 and many have been included in the Defense
Appropriations Act for a number of years.
Actions taken by the Committee to amend last year's provisions or new
provisions recommended by the Committee are discussed below or in the
applicable section of the report.
DEFINITION OF PROGRAM, PROJECT AND ACTIVITY
For purposes of the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act
of 1985 (Public Law 99 177) as amended by the Balanced Budget and
Emergency Deficit Control Reaffirmation Act of 1987 (Public Law 100 119)
and by the Budget Enforcement Act of 1990 (Public Law 101 508), the
following information provides the definitions of the term ``program,
project, and activity'' for appropriations contained in the Department
of Defense Appropriations Act. The term ``program, project, and
activity'' shall include the most specific level of budget items,
identified in the Department of Defense Appropriations Act, 1997, the
accompanying House and Senate Committee reports, the conference report
and accompanying joint explanatory statement of the managers of the
Committee on Conference, the related classified reports, and the P 1 and
R 1 budget justification documents as subsequently modified by
Congressional action.
In carrying out any Presidential sequestration, the Department of
Defense and agencies shall conform to the definition for ``program,
project, and activity'' set forth above with the following exception:
For Military Personnel and the Operation and Maintenance accounts the
term ``program, project, and activity'' is defined as the appropriations
accounts contained in the Department of Defense Appropriations Act.
The Department and agencies should carry forth the Presidential
sequestration order in a manner that would not adversely affect or alter
Congressional policies and priorities established for the Department of
Defense and the related agencies and no program, project, and activity
should be eliminated or be reduced to a level of funding which would
adversely affect the Department's ability to effectively continue any
program, project and activity.
MILITARY PERSONNEL BUDGET JUSTIFICATION
The Committee has included Section 8092 in the General Provisions,
which directs the Department to forward to the congressional defense
committees a budget justification document for the active and reserve
personnel accounts with the fiscal year 1999 budget submission. The
Committee directs this ``M 1'' document to identify at the budget
activity, activity group, and subactivity group level, the amounts
requested by the President for fiscal year 1999.
LIMITATION ON FIELD OPERATING AGENCIES AND HEADQUARTERS ACTIVITIES
The Committee supports efforts to reduce personnel in headquarters
activities, but is concerned some organizations may reassign their
personnel to other organizations while those personnel continue to
perform the same headquarters mission. The Committee therefore
recommends amending a previously-enacted General Provision (Section
8052) to place additional limits on the manner in which personnel shifts
can take place. The provision does not affect personnel assigned to a
non-headquarters activity who take a rotational assignment at a
headquarters for career development purposes.
WARRANTIES
The Committee has included a new general provision, Section 8095,
which reduces $50,000,000 of the funds in the Procurement title of the
bill due to the proposed elimination of the requirement in Title X of
United States Code mandating warranties for the acquisition of defense
weapon systems. A recent General Accounting Office report indicates that
the Department of Defense spends $271,000,000 annually on warranties as
required by Title X even though most warranties under this legislation
have proven to be not cost-effective. The Defense Department has
proposed on numerous occasions that the warranty legislation be
repealed, and the General Accounting Office now also makes the same
recommendation. The House National Security Committee proposes to repeal
the warranty legislation in Title X (Section 2403 of Title 10, United
States Code) in the House Defense Authorization Bill for fiscal year
1998, while the Senate Armed Services Committee proposes to modify the
warranty legislation in the Senate Defense Authorization Bill for fiscal
year 1998 to make it optional rather than mandatory. Thus, there is
broad consensus that the warranty requirements of Title X will be
removed and the Department of Defense will be able to eliminate cost
ineffective warranty provisions from defense weapon system acquisition
contracts. The Committee recommends a reduction of $50,000,000 in
anticipation of savings from these actions.
NATIONAL IMAGERY AND MAPPING AGENCY
The National Imagery and Mapping Agency (NIMA) has not complied with
previous directives regarding the use of the qualifications based
selection process for its contracts for mapping production services.
Therefore, a General Provision (Section 8096) is included which requires
NIMA to use this selection process, commonly referred to as the Brooks
Act, for mapping related services. The Committee has provided an
exception to this requirement only for purposes that are critical to
national security and after the Deputy Secretary of Defense has
submitted a notification report to the Committee on Appropriations
explaining the reasons for exceptions to this contracting out provision.
NAVIGATION AND SAFETY EQUIPMENT
Last year, in the wake of the fatal air crash in Croatia involving
the Secretary of Commerce, Congress appropriated $96 million in support
of Department of Defense initiative to upgrade its military
passenger-carrying aircraft with modern, safety related equipment such
as global positioning system receivers, flight data recorders, cockpit
voice recorders, ground proximity warning systems, and traffic collision
avoidance systems. This was intended to be a high priority effort
spanning several years. The Committee is disappointed that, despite the
Department's stated commitment to make this program a matter of the
highest priority, the Air Force failed to request funds in its fiscal
year 1998 budget to fully fund the second phase of this program for
troops and passenger aircraft. Instead, the Air Force has identified
this program as an unfunded requirement. Accordingly, the Committee has
designated in the bill $20 million only for this program to be derived
from funds in the Aircraft Procurement, Air Force account. The Committee
directs that these modifications may not be funded from any other
programs in this bill for which funds have been added over the budget
request, or from the phase I navigational safety modifications contained
in the fiscal year 1998 President's Budget. The Committee directs the
Secretary of the Air Force to report to the congressional defense
committees on sources of the funds 30 days prior to phase II
obligations. The Committee has further included a general provision
(Section 8098) that directs the Department to submit an aviation safety
program plan specifying the appropriate level of safety upgrades
required for all DoD aircraft and the associated funding profile no
later than November 15, 1997.
TACWAR
The Committee recognizes the importance of theater combat simulations
for the purpose of acquiring insight into future force structure
decisions and funding choices. However, the Committee is concerned over
the adequacy of the models being used by the Department to evaluate and
determine these significant future decisions. The Committee is
particularly concerned over the outdated nature of the TACWAR model
which played a key role in supporting the Quadrennial Defense Review
(QDR), and its inability to meaningfully assess asymmetrical U.S.
advantages such as stealth, communications and airpower. The committee
notes that in testimony before the Congress, all four service chiefs and
the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs have testified to the inadequacy of the
current DOD models.
The Committee believes it is necessary to direct a thorough,
independent review of the current models and modeling structure. As
such, in Section 8099 of the bill, the Committee directs the Defense
Science Board (DSB) to review the current models used by Department of
Defense and report back to the Committee as to 1) the DSB's evaluation
of the current models utilized by DOD with particular emphasis on the
TACWAR model and its ability to adequately measure airpower, stealth and
other asymmetrical U.S. advantages and, 2) DSB recommendations for
improvements to current models and modeling techniques. The Committee
directs the Department to advise the Congress no later than April 15,
1998 of the best alternatives for theater combat simulations.
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES REPORTING REQUIREMENTS
The following items are included in accordance with various
requirements of the Rules of the House of Representatives.
CHANGES IN APPLICATION OF EXISTING LAW
Pursuant to clause 3 of rule XXI of the House of Representatives, the
following statements are submitted describing the effect of provisions
which directly or indirectly change the application of existing law.
Language is included in various parts of the bill to continue
on-going activities which require annual authorization or additional
legislation, which to date has not been enacted.
The bill includes a number of provisions which place limitations on
the use of funds in the bill or change existing limitations and which
might, under some circumstances, be construed as changing the
application of existing law.
The bill includes a number of provisions, which have been virtually
unchanged for many years, that are technically considered legislation.
The bill provides that appropriations shall remain available for more
than one year for some programs for which the basic authorizing
legislation does not presently authorize such extended availability.
In various places in the bill, the Committee has earmarked funds
within appropriation accounts in order to fund specific programs and has
adjusted some existing earmarkings.
The bill includes a number of provisions which make portions of the
appropriations subject to enactment of authorizing legislation.
Those additional changes in the fiscal year 1998 bill, which might be
interpreted as changing existing law, are as follows:
APPROPRIATIONS LANGUAGE
Language has been deleted in ``Operation and Maintenance, Army''
which makes funds available to the Department of the Interior to support
the Memorial Day and Fourth of July ceremonies in the National Capital
Region.
Language has been amended in ``Operation and Maintenance, Navy''
which changes the amount available for emergency and extraordinary
expenses.
Language has been deleted in ``Operation and Maintenance,
Defense-Wide'' which earmarked funds for federally owned education
facilities located on military facilities, and which transferred funds
to the Harnett County School Board, Lillington, North Carolina. Language
has also been amended to change the amount available for emergency and
extraordinary expenses.
Language has been included in the ``Overseas Contingency Operations
Transfer Fund'' to allow the Secretary of Defense to transfer funds from
this account to operation and maintenance and working capital funds.
Language has been amended in ``United States Court of Appeals for the
Armed Forces'' to change the amount available for official
representation purposes.
Language has been deleted in ``Environmental Restoration, Army''
which restricted the amount of funds which could be used by the Corps of
Engineers for total environmental remediation contracts.
Language has been included in ``Former Soviet Union Threat
Reduction'' which limits the obligational availability of funds in this
account.
Language has been deleted for the ``Quality of Life Enhancements,
Defense'' appropriation account.
Language has been included in ``Aircraft Procurement, Army'' which
earmarks funds for UH 60 helicopters for the Army National Guard and for
the Navy Reserve.
Language has been deleted in ``Procurement of Weapons and Tracked
Combat Vehicles, Army'' which allowed funds to be obligated for future
year V903 diesel engine requirements.
Language has been deleted in ``Other Procurement, Army'' which
allowed funds to be obligated for future year V903 diesel engine
requirements and which authorized the procurement of passenger
replacement vehicles.
Language has been deleted in ``Shipbuilding and Conversion, Navy''
which earmarked funds for certain ship programs and includes language
which restricts the availability of funds for the overhaul of the CVN 69
and the production of DDG 51 destroyers..
Language has been included in ``Other Procurement, Navy'' concerning
the purchase of passenger motor vehicles for replacement.
Language has been amended in ``Procurement, Marine Corps'' which
changes the number of passenger vehicles to be procured.
Language has been included in ``Aircraft Procurement, Air Force''
which earmarks funds for navigational safety modifications for Air Force
troop and passenger aircraft.
Language has been amended in ``Other Procurement, Air Force'' which
changes the number of passenger vehicles to be procured and the price
limitation per vehicle.
Language has been amended in ``Procurement, Defense-Wide'' to change
the number of passenger vehicles to be procured.
Language has been deleted in ``Research, Development, Test and
Evaluation, Air Force'' which earmarked funds for the F 22 two seat
variant study and for development of reusable launch vehicle
technologies.
Language has been included in ``Research, Development, Test and
Evaluation, Air Force'' which earmarked funds for coal-derived jet fuel
technologies.
Language has been included in ``Research, Development, Test and
Evaluation, Defense-Wide'' concerning the Dual-Use Application Program.
Language has also been amended to change the amount of funds earmarked
for the Navy Upper Tier program.
Language has been amended in ``Revolving and Management Funds'' to
change the name of the ``Defense Business Operations Fund'' to ``Defense
Working Capital Funds''.
Language has been deleted from ``Defense Health Program'' which
earmarks funds for obtaining emergency communications funds from the Red
Cross and which allows the Secretary of Defense to obligate funds for
private physicians to work with the U.S. Army on Desert Storm Syndrome
research.
Language has been deleted in ``Chemical Agents and Munitions
Destruction, Defense'' which earmarks funds for the Johnston Atoll
off-island leave program and which provides authority for service
secretaries to grant travel allowances for participants in the program.
Language has been amended in ``Office of the Inspector General'' to
change the amount available for emergency and extraordinary expenses.
Language has been added to the ``Intelligence Community Management
Account'' which restricts obligational availability of funds for the
Advanced Research and Development Committee, the Environmental
Intelligence and Applications program, and the National Drug
Intelligence Center.
General Provisions
Section 8006 has been amended to allow transfers to be made between
working capital funds and the ``Foreign Currency Fluctuations, Defense''
appropriation.
Section 8008 has been amended to require formal submission of
multiyear contract proposals and to authorize the multiyear procurement
of the Family of Medium Tactical Vehicles.
Section 8022 has been amended to change a citation with respect to
title 10 of the United States Code.
Section 8030 has been amended to change the amount of overall funding
made available to the Civil Air Patrol and the amount available for
operation and maintenance.
Section 8031 has been amended to delete language which limits the
number of staff years of technical effort which may be funded for
defense FFRDCs and amends language directing the Secretary of Defense to
reduce the number of staff years to be performed by defense FFRDCs and
reduces funds for FFRDCs and consultants by $141,300,000 in fiscal year
1998.
Section 8044 has been amended to change the title of the
appropriation from the ``Defense Business Operations Fund'' to ``Working
Capital Funds''.
Section 8045 has been amended to make permanent the prohibition on
the use of appropriated funds to modify aircraft, weapons, ships or
other end-items of the Military Departments that are planned to be
retired or disposed of within five years of the completion of the
modification.
Section 8052 has been amended concerning the increase or transfer of
DoD personnel assigned to headquarters activities and field operating
agencies.
Section 8055 has been included to rescind funds from the following
programs:
FISCAL YEAR 1996
xlShipbuilding and Conversion, Navy:
AFS ship conversion $35,600,000
xlOther Procurement, Navy:
Shipboard Tactical Communications 3,300,000
FISCAL YEAR 1997
xlAircraft Procurement, Army:
Blackhawk Advance Procurement 10,000,000
xlProcurement of Ammunition, Army:
Armament Retooling and Manufacturing Support 5,000,000
xlOther Procurement, Army:
20-ton Dump Trucks 40,000,000
Maneuver Control System 6,000,000
xlAircraft Procurement, Navy:
F/A 18E/F Advance Procurement 24,000,000
xlOther Procurement, Navy:
Shipboard Tactical Communications 2,200,000
xlAircraft Procurement, Air Force:
Small VCX 27,000,000
xlResearch, Development, Test and Evaluation, Army:
Aerostat 7,000,000
Section 8062 has been amended to change the amount of the Pentagon
Reservation renovation total cost cap.
Section 8076 has been amended to extend the obligational availability
of funds for the B 2 program.
Section 8078 has been amended concerning the transfer of funds for
the ``Shipbuilding and Conversion, Navy'' account, and for the
``Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, Air Force'' account for
the F 22 project.
Section 8079 has been amended to require a specific date for the
Defense Department Comptroller to submit a report to the congressional
defense committees detailing programs whose budget request was reduced
because Congress appropriated funds above the budget request in the
previous fiscal year.
Section 8082 has been amended concerning the National Guard Distance
Learning project.
Section 8084 has been added which makes a technical correction
extending the availability of funds appropriated to the Army in the
fiscal year 1992 Defense Appropriations Act.
Section 8085 has been added which makes a technical correction
extending the availability of funds made available in the fiscal year
1994 Defense Appropriations Act for certain activities at Homestead Air
Force Base.
Section 8086 has been added which provides for continuation of the
graduate education program at the Air Force Institute of Technology.
Section 8087 has been added concerning the deposit of funds to the
Foreign Military Sales Trust Fund for credit to the Canadian Government.
Section 8088 has been added concerning the Fisher House Trust Fund.
Section 8089 has been added which grants authority for refunds from
Government travel cards to be credited to operation and maintenance
accounts.
Section 8090 has been added which grants authority for withdrawal
credits for military customers of the Marine Corps supply activity
group.
Section 8091 has been added which allows DoD to pay interest
penalties associated with the purchase of supplies, materials, services,
and other contractual obligations from the appropriation account which
made the purchase.
Section 8092 has been added requiring the Department of Defense to
submit budget justification documents for the active and reserve
Military Personnel accounts which identifies all requested amounts at
the budget activity, activity group, and subactivity levels.
Section 8093 has been added which reduces the ``Operation and
Maintenance, Army'' budget request by $15,000,000 and the ``Operation
and Maintenance, Navy'' budget request by $85,000,000 to compensate for
excess inventory held by these services.
Section 8094 has been added which reduces the ``Environmental
Restoration, Army'' budget request by $73,000,000 to reflect funds
carried by the Army as a result of shared cleanup costs.
Section 8095 has been added which reduces the budget request by
$50,000,000 to reflect savings from the proposed repeal of Section 2403
of title 10, United States Code.
Section 8096 has been added restricting the use of appropriated funds
for the National Imagery and Mapping Agency for mapping, charting, and
geodesy activities unless contracts for these services are awarded in
accordance with the selection process in 40 U.S.C. 541 et seq. and 10
U.S.C. 2855.
Section 8097 has been added which provides for the use of contract
authority in Working Capital Funds of the Department of Defense to
support the practice of capital budgeting.
Section 8098 has been added requiring the Secretary of Defense to
submit a report on an aviation safety plan.
Section 8099 has been added requiring the Secretary of Defense to
submit a report on alternatives for current theater combat simulations.
Section 8100 has been added which restricts the use of Research and
Development funding for the procurement of end-items.
Section 8101 has been added which requires the Department of Defense
to establish new budget subactivities in the applicable appropriations
accounts to separately identify all costs associated with NATO
expansion. This section also requires that DoD provide detailed budget
justification estimates for the cost of such expansion.
Section 8102 has been added which restricts the obligational
availability of funds for the deployment of U.S. ground forces in the
Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina after June 30, 1998 or a later date
as specifically proscribed by law. The section also prohibits the use of
appropriated funds for support of law enforcement activities in the
Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina and directs the President to submit a
report no later than December 15, 1997 on the political and military
conditions in the Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina and restricts the
availability of funds for the operation of United States ground forces
in Bosnia-Herzegovina to 60 percent of the fiscal year 1998
appropriation before the report is submitted.
APPROPRIATIONS NOT AUTHORIZED BY LAW
Pursuant to clause 3 of rule XXI of the House of Representatives, the
following lists the appropriations in the accompanying bill which are
not authorized by law:
Military Personnel, Army
Military Personnel, Navy
Military Personnel, Marine Corps
Military Personnel, Air Force
Reserve Personnel, Army
Reserve Personnel, Navy
Reserve Personnel, Marine Corps
Reserve Personnel, Air Force
National Guard Personnel, Army
National Guard Personnel, Air Force
Operation and Maintenance, Army
Operation and Maintenance, Navy
Operation and Maintenance, Marine Corps
Operation and Maintenance, Air Force
Operation and Maintenance, Defense-Wide
Operation and Maintenance, Army Reserve
Operation and Maintenance, Navy Reserve
Operation and Maintenance, Marine Corps Reserve
Operation and Maintenance, Air Force Reserve
Operation and Maintenance, Army National Guard
Operation and Maintenance, Air National Guard
Overseas Contingency Operations Transfer Fund
United States Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces
Environmental Restoration, Army
Environmental Restoration, Navy
Environmental Restoration, Air Force
Environmental Restoration, Defense-Wide
Environmental Restoration, Formerly Used Defense Sites
Former Soviet Union Threat Reduction
Overseas Humanitarian, Disaster, and Civic Aid
Aircraft Procurement, Army
Missile Procurement, Army
Procurement of Weapons and Tracked Combat Vehicles
Procurement of Ammunition, Army
Other Procurement, Army
Aircraft Procurement, Navy
Weapons Procurement, Navy
Procurement of Ammunition, Navy and Marine Corps
Shipbuilding and Conversion, Navy
Other Procurement, Navy
Procurement, Marine Corps
Aircraft Procurement, Air Force
Missile Procurement, Air Force
Procurement of Ammunition, Air Force
Other Procurement, Air Force
Procurement, Defense-Wide
National Guard and Reserve Equipment
Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, Army
Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, Navy
Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, Air Force
Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, Defense-Wide
Developmental Test and Evaluation, Defense
Operational Test and Evaluation, Defense
Defense Capital Working Fund
National Defense Sealift Fund
Defense Health Program
Chemical Agents and Munitions Destruction, Defense
Drug Interdiction and Counter-Drug Activities, Defense
Office of the Inspector General
Central Intelligence Agency Retirement and Disability System Fund
Intelligence Community Management Account
Payment to Kaho'olawe Island Conveyance, Remediation and Environmental
Restoration Fund
National Security Education Trust Fund
TRANSFER OF FUNDS
Pursuant to clause 1(b), rule X of the House of Representatives the
following is submitted describing the transfer of funds provided in the
accompanying bill.
Appropriations to which transfer is made Amount Appropriations from which transfer is made Amount
Operation and Maintenance, Army $50,000,000 National Defense Stockpile Transaction Fund $150,000,000
Operation and Maintenance, Navy 50,000,000 xl xl
Operation and Maintenance, Air Force 50,000,000 xl xl
Language has been included in ``Overseas Contingency Operations
Transfer Fund'' which provides for the transfer of funds out of this
account to other appropriation accounts of the Department of Defense.
Language has been included in ``Environmental Restoration, Army''
which provides for the transfer of funds out of and into this account.
Language has been included in ``Environmental Restoration, Navy''
which provides for the transfer of funds out of and into this account.
Language has been included in ``Environmental Restoration, Air
Force'' which provides for the transfer of funds out of and into this
account.
Language has been included in ``Environmental Restoration,
Defense-Wide'' which provides for the transfer of funds out of an into
this account.
Language has been included in ``Environmental Restoration, Formerly
Used Defense Sites'' which provides for the transfer of funds out of and
into this account.
Language has been included in ``Drug Interdiction and Counter-Drug
Activities, Defense'' which transfers funds to other appropriations
accounts of the Department of Defense.
Language has been included in the ``Intelligence Community Management
Account'' which transfers funds to the Department of Justice.
Section 8078 contains language which transfers funds as follows:
xlAppropriations to which transfer is made:
Shipbuilding and Conversion, Navy 1989/2000 $21,572,000
Shipbuilding and Conversion, Navy 1991/2001 24,633,000
Shipbuilding and Conversion, Navy 1996/2000 5,592,000
Shipbuilding and Conversion, Navy 1997/2001 24,160,000
Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, Air Force 1997/98 73,531,000
-------------
Total 149,488,000
=============
xlAppropriations from which transfer is made:
Shipbuilding and Conversion, Navy 1989/2000 21,572,000
Shipbuilding and Conversion, Navy 1991/2000 24,633,000
Shipbuilding and Conversion, Navy 1994/1998 1,454,000
Shipbuilding and Conversion, Navy 1995/1999 715,000
Shipbuilding and Conversion, Navy 1996/2000 23,983,000
Shipbuilding and Conversion, Navy 1997/2001 3,600,000
Aircraft Procurement, Air Force 1997/1999 73,531,000
-------------
Total 149,488,000
Six provisions (Sections 8006, 8014, 8037, 8062, 8064, 8078) contain
language which allows transfer of funds between accounts.
RESCISSIONS
Pursuant to clause (b) of rule X of the House of Representatives, the
following table is submitted describing the rescissions recommended in
the accompanying bill.
Aircraft Procurement, Army 1997/1999 $10,000,000
Procurement of Ammunition, Army 1997/1999 5,000,000
Other Procurement, Army 1997/1999 46,000,000
Aircraft Procurement, Navy 1997/1999 24,000,000
Other Procurement, Army 1997/1999 2,200,000
Aircraft Procurement, Air Force 1997/1999 27,000,000
Shipbuilding and Conversion, Navy 1996/2000 35,600,000
Other Procurement, Navy 1996/1998 3,300,000
Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, Army 1997/1999 7,000,000
CONSTITUTIONAL AUTHORITY
Clause 2(l)(4) of rule XI of the Rules of the House of
Representatives states that: ``Each report of a committee on a bill or
joint resolution of a public character, shall include a statement citing
the specific powers granted to the Congress in the Constitution to enact
the law proposed by the joint resolution.''
The Committee on Appropriations based its authority to report this
legislation from Clause 7 of Section 9 of Article I of the Constitution
of the United States of America which states: ``No money shall be drawn
from the Treasury but in consequence of Appropriations made by law . .
.''
Appropriations contained in this Act are made pursuant to this
specific power granted by the Constitution.
COMPARISION WITH BUDGET RESOLUTION
Section 308(a)(1)(A) of the Congressional Budget and Impoundment
Control Act of 1974 (Public Law 93 344), requires that the report
accompanying a bill providing new budget authority contain a statement
detailing how the authority compares with the reports submitted under
section 602(b) of the Act for the most recently agreed to concurrent
resolution on the budget for the fiscal year. This information follows:
[In millions of dollars]
602(b) Allocation This bill
Budget authority Outlays Budget authority Outlays
Discretionary 248,140 244,574 248,138 244,563
Mandatory 197 197 197 197
The bill provides no new spending authority as described in section
401(c)(2) of the Congressional Budget and Impoundment Control Act of
1974 (Public Law 93 344), as amended.
FIVE-YEAR PROJECTION OF OUTLAYS
In compliance with section 308(a)(1)(C) of the Congressional Budget
Act of 1974 (Public Law 93 344), as amended, the following table
contains five-year projections associated with the budget provided in
the accompanying bill.
[In millions of dollars]
Budget authority in the bill $248,335
1998 165,067
1999 49,031
2000 18,369
2001 8,002
2002 6,132
FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE TO STATE AND LOCAL GOVERNMENTS
In accordance with section 308(a)(1)(D) of the Congressional Budget
Act of 1974 (Public Law 93 344), as amended, no new budget or outlays
are provided by the accompanying bill for financial assistance to state
and local governments.
Offset Folios 274 to 282 Insert here
DISSENTING VIEWS OF HON. DAVE OBEY
Our former Chairman Jamie Whitten used to insist on referring to this
bill as a ``military spending'' bill as opposed to a ``defense'' bill.
The point being that the ``spending'' inserted in this bill didn't
always coincide with our country's highest ``defense'' priorities. I
certainly agreed with him back then, and I think his point is magnified
many times by what is happening in today's era.
Today, despite the collapse of the Soviet Empire, and an 80% drop in
Russian military spending; despite the dissipation of other serious
conventional military threats from places like Iraq and the slow motion
disintegration of the North Korean military; despite Defense Secretary
Cohen's studied conclusion that the United States will have no ``global
peer competitor'' between now and at least the year 2015; and despite
clear warnings that we should be paying more attention to new, more
insidious threats such as:
the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, especially
chemical and biological weapons, to rogue states and even to terrorist
organizations;
the proliferation of sophisticated conventional weapons capabilities
throughout East Asia, the Middle East and now possibly Latin America;
the ability of international drug lords to corrupt entire countries
and even regions of the world,
the growing capability of some nations and other groups to conduct
``cyber warfare'' attacks to disrupt critical computer systems that
control our banking system, electric grids, telephone systems, air
traffic control system, Wall Street, as well as many battlefield
information systems;
despite all of these realities, this Congress continues to plow
billions of dollars into systems like the F 22 fighter, the B 2 bomber,
and the Seawolf submarine that were literally justified and designed to
fight the old Soviet Empire at the height of its military power.
One of the Navy personnel assigned to serve on the brand new $2.4
billion Seawolf submarine summed up this situation pretty well according
to an article in the July 19, 1997 Washington Post. In describing the
new Seawolf submarine he said:
This is an incredible system, and although a lot of
people complain about the cost of the Seawolf, I think it's
worth every penny * * * Now if we could just find somebody to
fight with it.
This couldn't be more poignant. This submarine is a $2.4 billion
anti-ship weapon that lost its military rationale the day the Berlin
Wall fell. It is being built and put into service at the same time we
are retiring scores of Los Angeles class attack submarines years earlier
than planned because the threat has evaporated and they don't have a
bona fide mission. The Seawolf can't be justified on a military basis,
yet Congress simply can't kick the military spending habit with the
result that billions of taxpayers' money is wasted.
GETTING READY FOR THE WRONG WAR?
But the problem is much deeper than the issue of simply wasting
billions of tax dollars on unneeded military systems. The pattern of
Congressional military spending since the end of the Cold War raises
serious questions as to whether backward-looking Congressional defense
policies are causing us to get ready for the wrong war.
This is not a new phenomenon, nor is it unique to the United States.
The status quo ethos among military decision makers around the world
seems to be one of preparing to re-fight the last war instead of
preparing for the next. There are countless examples of this throughout
history, including such recent examples as the continued emphasis of the
U.S. Navy on battleships
prior to World War II instead of moving to air power and
aircraft carriers, or the stubborn insistence of the French military to
continue to rely on the Maginot Line and outdated tactics in the face of
changed German Blitzkrieg tactics.
But this problem extends beyond the halls of Congress. History shows
that Congress has rarely taken meaningful, comprehensive defense policy
initiatives on its own. There is no question that Congress depends on
the Pentagon and the Administration to lead the way, with Congress
making changes mainly on the margins.
Unfortunately, recent leadership from the Pentagon has been
disappointing as well. Service turf battles, bureaucratic momentum, and
defense industry politics appear to have hamstrung the Pentagon in the
critical task of modernizing its overall defense strategy to meet our
new post-Cold War defense challenges. The recently completed Quadrennial
Defense Review is a case in point. It missed the opportunity to push us
forward. Months of work on the QDR by Pentagon strategists culminated in
a familiar ``Cold War'' vision: a force built around carriers, jets,
tanks, and other traditional big ticket items.
Former Reagan Administration official Richard Perle said this about
the Quadrennial Defense Review:
the QDR is an extremely important missed
opportunity. It is, by and large business as usual * * * I
wish we had some radical document but we don't. It nibbled at
the edges.
An analyst within the Office of the Secretary of Defense put it more
clearly:
the QDR put the profits of defense contractors and
the interests of the congressional pork barrel before the
welfare of the soldier or the taxpayer. [Defense Week, 6 30
97]
A good question is whether our potential adversaries of the future
are also standing pat. For instance, many observers have expressed
concern about the future direction of China. Although we should resist
the notion of creating a self-fulfilling prophecy about Chinese foreign
and military aspirations, there is also no doubt that Chinese military
and foreign policy actions must be watched. In this respect, the
Pentagon's Office of Net Assessment says the lessons of Desert Storm
were not lost on Chinese military planners. Here is what one press
report said about a recent Pentagon study of Chinese military doctrine:
Rather than gird for the open land and air battles
at which the United States excels, potential foes can invest
in cheap but sophisticated sea mines, jamming gear, and
missiles. * * * Instead of tanks, ships, and jets, the Chinese
theorists list anti-satellite devices, defenses against
stealthy aircraft, lasers, and electronic sabotage equipment
as key weapons of the future. [U.S. News, 5 12 97]
Pentagon military planners have made similar assessments. The ``Joint
Strategy Review'' issued by the Joint Staff at the Pentagon was
summarized as follows:
[the Joint Strategy Review] projected that potential
enemies cannot hope to challenge U.S. forces in head-to-head
engagements, and instead would seek to strike at potential
U.S. vulnerabilities in protecting its vast information
infrastructure, engage in acts of terrorism and develop
chemical or biological weapons and the long range launchers to
use them. * * * Moreover, the assessment found most combat
will take place in urban areas where enemies can easily mix
with the population. This reduces the advantages of precision
weapons * * *'' [Defense News, March 30, 1997]
One has to ask why we continue to pour billions into Cold War weapons
systems designed to fight a huge Soviet Army on the plains of central
Europe when our experts tell us the threats of the future will likely
come from a different direction. Continuing these expensive, unnecessary
Cold War systems squeezes important programs that do have relevance for
our future national security, such as the Nunn-Lugar Cooperative Threat
Reduction Program and, more importantly, exacts a price from our other
non-defense programs to pay for these extravagances.
PELL GRANTS/CANCER RESEARCH/HIGHWAYS
I for one, think we should take the billions we are wasting in this
bill for more B 2 bombers the Air Force doesn't want, for more
submarines we
don't need, for the F 22 fighter that is being brought into
service years earlier than it needs to be, and for many other programs
the Pentagon doesn't even have in its five-year spending plan and apply
it to Pell Grants to give more of our kids an education.
If we cut out the $4.7 billion in this bill for redundant Cold War
weapons like the F 22 fighter, the new attack submarine, and the B 2
bomber and instead applied it to education and cancer research, we could
help over 400,000 more kids go to college under the Pell Grant program,
raise their maximum grant from $3,000 to $3,900, and, as an added bonus,
more than double the NIH cancer research program. This could all be done
starting next fiscal year.
If we used the $20 billion ``rainy day'' reserve fund that is buried
in the five-year DoD procurement budget to fix up our roads and bridges,
we could increase national highway investments by 20% a year--creating
200,000 additional jobs and helping the local economy in all 50 states.
That is what the American People would like to spend their money on,
and that is what this Committee could decide today if it had the will.
FOLLOW THE MONEY
Why can't we find savings in the military and apply it to these
worthy areas?
Why is it that all the rhetoric we hear from our Republican friends
about cutting the waste out of government programs and making sure that
we are spending only for essential items just seems to melt away when
this bill, the single largest spending bill we vote on each year, moves
forward?
The answer becomes clearer when you look a little deeper as to where
the hundreds of billions of dollars in this bill are spent, and who it
benefits. How this bill is put together has much more to do with where
the spending occurs and who it is spent on, than what it is for.
There is enormous pressure in Congress to keep the dollars and jobs
flowing to the same areas, to the same corporations, for the same
systems.
There is also a strong incentive to keep the revolving door going
between the Pentagon and the military contractors they have come to know
so well.
There is pressure to keep military spending up in vote-rich states
like California and Texas.
That all adds up to maintaining the status quo and mis-allocating
literally billions of dollars that could be better used for a host of
more important national purposes.
I had the GAO pull together some information on where the Defense
Department spends its money. They produced an extensive report put out
by the DoD Directorate for Information entitled ``Atlas/Data Abstract
for the United States and Selected Areas'' that lists where over $215
billion in DoD spending for FY 1996 for operating costs like military
and civilian payrolls, retired pay, and for military procurement/R&D
prime contracts over $25,000 were spent by state and even within the
states. These data aren't perfect, but the report as a whole gives as
complete a picture of the geographic distribution of military spending
as there is. I would suggest every Member take a look at this report. It
explains much about why budget priorities are as they are.
It probably won't surprise anyone that the Southern states and
California come out the winners and the Midwest, Mountain, and small New
England states come out the losers. But what some may not know is how
lopsided the military spending geography is between California and the
South on the one hand, and the rest of the country on the other.
TOP 4 STATES GET MORE THAN 38 STATES COMBINED
For instance, according to this report, the top four states receiving
DoD funds in FY 1996--California, Virginia, Texas, and Florida--received
nearly 40% of the total spent.
State Amount received (in billions) Percent of total
1. California $31.0 14.5
2. Virginia 21.0 9.8
3. Texas 17.4 8.1
4. Florida 12.6 5.9
------------------------------- -------------------
Total 82.0 38.3
These four states received more military funds than the sum total of
39 other states (including the District of Columbia):
State Amount received (in billions) Percent of total
51. Vermont $0.3 0.1
50. Wyoming 0.3 0.1
49. South Dakota 0.4 0.2
48. Montana 0.4 0.2
47. Delaware 0.4 0.2
46. West Virginia 0.5 0.2
45. Idaho 0.5 0.2
44. North Dakota 0.6 0.2
43. Iowa 0.6 0.3
42. Oregon 0.7 0.3
41. Rhode Island 0.8 0.4
40. New Hampshire 0.8 0.4
39. Arkansas 1.0 0.5
38. Wisconsin 1.0 0.5
37. Nebraska 1.0 0.5
36. Nevada 1.1 0.5
35. Utah 1.3 0.6
34. Maine 1.3 0.6
33. Minnesota 1.4 0.7
32. Alaska 1.5 0.7
31. Kansas 1.9 0.9
30. New Mexico 1.9 0.9
29. Michigan 2.1 1.0
28. Tennessee 2.2 1.1
27. Louisiana 2.4 1.2
26. Indiana 2.6 1.2
25. Kentucky 2.6 1.2
24. District of Columbia 2.8 1.3
23. Oklahoma 3.0 1.4
22. Mississippi 3.3 1.5
21. Connecticut 3.3 1.5
20. South Carolina 3.3 1.6
19. Hawaii 3.3 1.6
18. Illinois 3.3 1.6
17. New Jersey 4.0 1.9
16. Alabama 4.1 1.9
15. Colorado 4.2 2.0
14. Arizona 4.8 2.3
13. Ohio 5.1 2.4
-------------------------------- -------------------
Total \1\79.1 \1\36.8
\1\Does not add due to rounding.
NINE SOUTHERN STATES PLUS CALIFORNIA GET 51%
Split another way, these data are even more striking. The DoD spends
over half of its funds (51%) in nine Southern states and California.
State Amount received (in billions) Percent of total
California $31.0 14.5
Virginia 21.0 9.8
Texas 17.4 8.1
Florida 12.6 5.9
Georgia 8.4 3.9
North Carolina 5.7 2.7
Alabama 4.1 1.9
South Carolina 3.3 1.5
Mississippi 3.3 1.5
Louisiana 2.4 1.1
-------------------------------- -------------------
Total 109.2 50.9
Ten states received about $109 billion in military spending for FY
1996 and the other 40 states and the District of Columbia received about
$106 billion. Four military dollars are spent in these 10 states for
every one dollar spent in the 40 other states.
California alone received more DoD dollars than 26 other states
combined.
Virginia alone received more DoD dollars than 22 states combined.
Texas alone received more DoD dollars than 20 states combined.
Florida alone received more DoD dollars than 14 states combined.
Georgia alone received more DoD dollars than 13 states combined.
MILITARY SPENDING--GOP LEADERSHIP CONNECTION
When we see this geographic disparity in the distribution of funds
and then compare it to a list of the home states of the persons who sit
in the top leadership positions in the Congress, and the states
represented by those who control the major military spending committees,
it becomes crystal clear why we see the distorted and lopsided spending
priorities coming out of this Body.
Many people in the rest of the country are being denied educational
opportunities, are not getting their roads and bridges fixed, are
drinking contaminated water and worrying about the safety of their food
supply because the current House leadership won't cut the billions in
pork out of this bill--pork that is headed straight home. Billions that
can be cut without hurting our national security.
Even though poll after poll shows the American People want to invest
more in education, in the environment, in transportation, and in the
National Parks, this Congressional leadership is more than willing to
give these national priorities short shrift in order to keep pumping
money into this military spending machine.
And, for the same reason, this Congressional leadership will continue
its heavy resistance to cutting systems designed for yesterday's
military threats to pay for meeting the real threats of tomorrow.
These lopsided military spending patterns combined with the
geographic representation of the current House leadership all but ensure
that we will continue to see larger than necessary military budgets and
status quo military policy guidance from Congress.
The following table depicts key state-by-state data on Department of
Defense spending for FY 1996 derived from the Department of Defense
report Atlas/Data Abstract for the United States and Selected Areas,
Fiscal Year 1996.
DOD EST. PAYROLL, CONTRACTS, AND GRANTS BY STATE--FISCAL YEAR 1996
[Dollar amounts in thousands]
State Total compensation\1\ Total contracts\2\ Grants\3\ Grand total State percent of total
1. California $12,331,651 $18,229,724 $480,332 $31,041,707 14.46
2. Virginia 11,355,738 9,562,978 73,442 20,992,138 9.78
3. Texas 8,382,520 8,819,096 161,353 17,362,969 8.09
4. Florida 6,669,595 5,862,639 116,062 12,648,296 5.89
5. Missouri 1,630,373 7,093,009 38,523 8,761,905 4.08
6. Georgia 4,332,083 3,965,723 52,833 8,350,639 3.89
7. Maryland 3,264,795 4,136,785 98,039 7,499,619 3.49
8. Washington 3,812,840 2,382,417 48,132 6,243,389 2.91
9. Pennsylvania 2,218,245 3,687,357 89,035 5,994,637 2.79
10. North Carolina 4,259,461 1,421,071 44,667 5,725,199 2.67
11. Massachusetts 842,895 4,674,647 123,102 5,640,644 2.63
12. New York 1,687,611 3,501,013 110,062 5,298,686 2.47
13. Ohio 2,336,540 2,732,748 48,924 5,118,212 2.38
14. Arizona 1,864,504 2,910,935 45,937 4,821,376 2.25
15. Colorado 2,157,396 2,045,076 27,742 4,230,214 1.97
16. Alabama 2,182,770 1,838,276 33,918 4,054,964 1.89
17. New Jersey 1,418,681 2,564,266 44,777 4,027,724 1.88
18. Nebraska 711,294 3,220,337 9,317 3,940,948 1.84
19. Illinois 1,988,147 1,256,010 65,983 3,310,140 1.54
20. Hawaii 2,330,507 928,480 49,911 3,308,898 1.54
21. South Carolina 2,262,837 1,012,497 32,781 3,308,115 1.54
22. Connecticut 613,098 2,638,260 30,492 3,281,850 1.53
23. Mississippi 1,300,819 1,912,106 46,468 3,259,393 1.52
24. Oklahoma 2,171,991 771,232 11,940 2,955,163 1.38
25. District of Columbia 1,236,791 1,482,673 39,589 2,759,053 1.29
26. Kentucky 1,723,007 874,094 14,886 2,611,987 1.22
27. Indiana 1,021,635 1,552,012 31,085 2,604,732 1.21
28. Louisiana 1,333,057 1,077,869 28,537 2,439,463 1.14
29. Tennessee 1,071,609 1,137,232 26,537 2,235,378 1.04
30. Michigan 763,592 1,241,336 108,379 2,113,307 0.98
31. New Mexico 1,168,071 676,391 20,408 1,864,870 0.87
32. Kansas 1,079,437 762,593 12,300 1,854,330 0.86
33. Alaska 878,995 564,890 15,893 1,459,778 0.68
34. Minnesota 393,418 960,361 72,548 1,426,327 0.66
35. Maine 524,536 797,224 10,216 1,331,976 0.62
36. Utah 915,508 394,678 15,570 1,325,756 0.62
37. Nevada 776,969 285,262 4,732 1,066,963 0.50
38. Wisconsin 412,549 551,276 44,655 1,008,480 0.47
39. Arkansas 730,388 249,281 27,155 1,006,824 0.47
40. New Hampshire 239,909 567,892 28,243 836,044 0.39
41. Rhode Island 437,243 333,969 13,163 784,375 0.37
42. Oregon 481,196 202,863 40,326 724,385 0.34
43. Iowa 244,354 370,617 21,547 636,518 0.30
44. North Dakota 438,501 106,089 10,176 554,766 0.26
45. Idaho 346,324 132,517 9,073 487,914 0.23
46. West Virginia 241,691 199,324 20,920 461,935 0.22
47. Delaware 331,551 101,554 12,303 445,408 0.21
48. Montana 297,566 90,611 8,904 397,081 0.18
49. South Dakato 257,727 109,969 5,075 372,771 0.17
50. Wyoming 232,534 91,513 5,314 329,361 0.15
51. Vermont 89,800 225,426 6,818 322,044 0.15
------------------------ --------------------- ------------ -------------- -------------------------
Total 214,638,651 100.00
\1\Includes funds for civilian pay, military active duty pay, reserve and National Guard pay, retired military pay.
\2\Prime contract awards over $25,000 for civil functions contracts and military functions contracts. Prime contracts are generally reported at the location where the work is performed. For example, if a contractor is located in Nevada and wins a construction job in Utah, the contract will be listed for Utah.
\3\Funds obligated by grants, cooperative agreements, or other non-procurement instruments reported at the location where the work is performed.
Dave Obey.
|
NEWSLETTER
|
| Join the GlobalSecurity.org mailing list |
|
|
|
