00 000                                 

                                       2000                                  

                          106 th Congress  2nd Session                      

                            HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES                        

                                      Report                                 

                                      106 616                                 

                                                                             

                                                                         



                             FLOYD D. SPENCE                             

         NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2001         


                                                                           


                               R E P O R T                               


                                  OF THE                                 


                       COMMITTEE ON ARMED SERVICES                       

                         HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES                        


                                    ON                                   


                                H.R. 4205                                


                              together with                              


                             ADDITIONAL VIEWS                            


       [Including cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Office]      


                                                                         

[Graphic Image Not Available]
                                                                         


   May 12, 2000.--Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the   
 State of the Union and ordered to be printed                            

                                                                        


 FLOYD D. SPENCE NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2001


    64 304                                                                  

     2000                                                                    

    106 th Congress  2nd Session                                            

    HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES                                                

                                      Report                                 

                                      106 616                                 

                                                                             

                                                                         



                             FLOYD D. SPENCE                             

         NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2001         


                                                                           


                               R E P O R T                               


                                  OF THE                                 


                       COMMITTEE ON ARMED SERVICES                       

                         HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES                        


                                    ON                                   


                                H.R. 4205                                


                              together with                              


                             ADDITIONAL VIEWS                            


       [Including cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Office]      


                                                                         

[Graphic Image Not Available]
                                                                         


   May 12, 2000.--Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the   
 State of the Union and ordered to be printed                            

                             HOUSE COMMITTEE ON ARMED SERVICES                    

                                 ONE HUNDRED SIXTH CONGRESS                       

       FLOYD D. SPENCE, South Carolina,  Chairman                              



          BOB STUMP, Arizona                                    IKE SKELTON, Missouri

          DUNCAN HUNTER, California                             NORMAN SISISKY, Virginia
          JOHN R. KASICH, Ohio                                   JOHN M. SPRATT, Jr.,  South Carolina
          HERBERT H. BATEMAN, Virginia                          SOLOMON P. ORTIZ, Texas
          JAMES V. HANSEN, Utah                                 OWEN PICKETT, Virginia
          CURT WELDON, Pennsylvania                             LANE EVANS, Illinois
          JOEL HEFLEY, Colorado                                 GENE TAYLOR, Mississippi
          JIM SAXTON, New Jersey                                NEIL ABERCROMBIE, Hawaii
          STEVE BUYER, Indiana                                  MARTIN T. MEEHAN, Massachusetts
          TILLIE K. FOWLER, Florida                             ROBERT A. UNDERWOOD, Guam
           JOHN M. McHUGH,  New York                            PATRICK J. KENNEDY, Rhode Island
          JAMES TALENT, Missouri                                ROD R. BLAGOJEVICH,  Illinois
          TERRY EVERETT, Alabama                                SILVESTRE REYES,  Texas
          ROSCOE G. BARTLETT, Maryland                          TOM ALLEN,  Maine
           HOWARD ``BUCK'' McKEON,  California                  VIC SNYDER,  Arkansas
           J.C. WATTS, Jr.,  Oklahoma                           JIM TURNER,  Texas
          MAC THORNBERRY, Texas                                 ADAM SMITH,  Washington
          JOHN N. HOSTETTLER, Indiana                           LORETTA SANCHEZ,  California
          SAXBY CHAMBLISS, Georgia                              JAMES H. MALONEY,  Connecticut
          VAN HILLEARY, Tennessee                                MIKE McINTYRE,  North Carolina
          JOE SCARBOROUGH, Florida                              CIRO D. RODRIGUEZ, Texas
           WALTER B. JONES, Jr.,  North Carolina                 CYNTHIA A. McKINNEY,  Georgia
          LINDSEY GRAHAM,  South Carolina                       ELLEN O. TAUSCHER, California
          JIM RYUN,  Kansas                                     ROBERT BRADY, Pennsylvania
          BOB RILEY,  Alabama                                   ROBERT E. ANDREWS, New Jersey
          JIM GIBBONS,  Nevada                                  BARON P. HILL, Indiana
          MARY BONO, California                                 MIKE THOMPSON, California
          JOSEPH PITTS, Pennsylvania                            JOHN B. LARSON, Connecticut
          ROBIN HAYES, North Carolina                           
          STEVEN KUYKENDALL, California                         
          DONALD SHERWOOD, Pennsylvania                         

        Robert S. Rangel,  Staff Director                                      


                            C O N T E N T S                             

    Purpose                                                                 

        2                                                                       

    Relationship of Authorization to Appropriations                         

        2                                                                       

    Summary of Authorization in the Bill                                    

        2                                                                       

    Summary Table of Authorizations                                         

        3                                                                       

    Rationale for the Committee Bill                                        

        10                                                                      

    Hearings                                                                

        17                                                                      


    DIVISION A--DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION                         

        19                                                                      


    TITLE I--PROCUREMENT                                                    

        19                                                                      

    OVERVIEW                                                                

        19                                                                      

    Aircraft Procurement, Army                                              

        22                                                                      

    Overview                                                                

        22                                                                      

    Items of Special Interest                                               

        26                                                                      

     AH 64 modifications                                                     

        26                                                                      

     Airborne reconnaissance low (ARL)                                       

        26                                                                      

     Airborne communications                                                 

        26                                                                      

     Aircraft survivability equipment (ASE)                                  

        27                                                                      

     Aircraft survivability equipment (ASE) modifications                    

        27                                                                      

     CH 47 Chinook/UH 60 Blackhawk crashworthy fuel tanks                    

        28                                                                      

     Helicopter crashworthy seats                                            

        28                                                                      

     TH 67 Creek                                                             

        28                                                                      

     UH 60 Blackhawk                                                         

        29                                                                      

    Missile Procurement, Army                                               

        29                                                                      

    Overview                                                                

        29                                                                      

    Items of Special Interest                                               

        32                                                                      

     Army tactical missile system (ATACMS) system summary                    

        32                                                                      

     Multipurpose individual munition (MPIM) advance procurement             

        32                                                                      

     Patriot advanced capability-2 (PAC 2)                                   

        32                                                                      

     Patriot anti-cruise missile (PACM)                                      

        32                                                                      

    Weapons and Tracked Combat Vehicles, Army                               

        33                                                                      

    Overview                                                                

        33                                                                      

    Items of Special Interest                                               

        37                                                                      

          Armored vehicle launch bridge (AVLB) service life extension program
     (SLEP)                                                                  
        37                                                                      

     Bradley base sustainment                                                

        37                                                                      

     Bradley fighting vehicle system (BFVS) series (modifications)           

        37                                                                      

     Heavy assault bridge (HAB) system                                       

        38                                                                      

     Improved recovery vehicle (IRV)                                         

        38                                                                      

     Industrial preparedness                                                 

        38                                                                      

     M1 Abrams tank modifications                                            

        39                                                                      

     M113 carrier modifications                                              

        39                                                                      

     M249 squad automatic weapon (SAW)                                       

        39                                                                      

     MK19 3 grenade launcher                                                 

        40                                                                      

     Small arms production industrial base                                   

        40                                                                      

    Ammunition Procurement, Army                                            

        40                                                                      

    Overview                                                                

        40                                                                      

    Items of Special Interest                                               

        44                                                                      

     Army ammunition procurement                                             

        44                                                                      

    Other Procurement, Army                                                 

        44                                                                      

    Overview                                                                

        44                                                                      

    Items of Special Interest                                               

        54                                                                      

     Army data distribution system (ADDS)                                    

        54                                                                      

     Automated data processing equipment (ADPE)                              

        54                                                                      

     Army training modernization                                             

        54                                                                      

     Combat support medical                                                  

        55                                                                      

     Combat training centers instrumentation support                         

        55                                                                      

     Communications equipment system upgrades                                

        56                                                                      

     Construction equipment service life extension program (SLEP)            

        56                                                                      

     Cranes                                                                  

        57                                                                      

     Deployable universal combat earthmovers (DEUCE)                         

        57                                                                      

     Family of heavy tactical vehicles (FHTV)                                

        57                                                                      

     Family of medium tactical vehicles (FMTV)                               

        58                                                                      

     High mobility multipurpose-wheeled vehicle (HMMWV)                      

        58                                                                      

     Hydraulic excavator (HYEX)                                              

        58                                                                      

     Information system security program (ISSP)                              

        59                                                                      

     Integrated family of test equipment (IFTE)                              

        59                                                                      

     Laundries, showers, and latrines                                        

        59                                                                      

     Lightweight maintenance enclosure (LME)                                 

        60                                                                      

     M56 smoke generator system                                              

        60                                                                      

     M915/M916 line haul truck tractor                                       

        60                                                                      

     Night vision devices                                                    

        60                                                                      

     Nonsystem training devices                                              

        61                                                                      

     Reserve component automation system (RCAS)                              

        61                                                                      

     Ribbon bridge                                                           

        62                                                                      

   Single channel ground and airborne radio systems (SINCGARS) family      

        62                                                                      

     Small tug                                                               

        63                                                                      

     Standard integrated command post system (SICPS)                         

        63                                                                      

     Standard teleoperating kit                                              

        63                                                                      

     Vibratory self-propelled roller                                         

        64                                                                      

    Chemical Agents and Munitions Destruction, Army                         

        64                                                                      

    Overview                                                                

        64                                                                      

    Items of Special Interest                                               

        66                                                                      

     Chemical agents and munitions destruction                               

        66                                                                      

    Aircraft Procurement, Navy                                              

        66                                                                      

    Overview                                                                

        66                                                                      

    Items of Special Interest                                               

        71                                                                      

     Advanced helicopter emergency egress lighting system (ADHEELS)          

        71                                                                      

     AN/AVR 2A laser detecting set                                           

        71                                                                      

     AV 8B                                                                   

        71                                                                      

     C 40A                                                                   

        72                                                                      

     CH 60S                                                                  

        72                                                                      

      2 modifications                                                        

        72                                                                      

     EA 6B modifications                                                     

        73                                                                      

        73                                                                      

     F/A 18C/D tactical aircraft moving map capability (TAMMAC)              

        74                                                                      

     F/A 18E/F                                                               

        75                                                                      

     HH/UH 1N reclamation and conversion program                             

        75                                                                      

     H 46 modifications                                                      

        76                                                                      

     H 53 modifications                                                      

        76                                                                      

     KC 130J                                                                 

        76                                                                      

     T 45 training system (TS)                                               

        77                                                                      

   Tactical air reconnaissance pod system (TARPS)-completely digital (CD)  

        77                                                                      

     UC 35                                                                   

        78                                                                      

    Weapons Procurement, Navy                                               

        78                                                                      

    Overview                                                                

        78                                                                      

    Items of Special Interest                                               

        82                                                                      

     Hellfire II missile                                                     

        82                                                                      

     Improved tactical air-launched decoy (ITALD)                            

        82                                                                      

     Joint standoff weapon (JSOW)                                            

        82                                                                      

     Standoff land attack missile-expanded response (SLAM ER)                

        82                                                                      

    Ammunition Procurement, Navy/Marine Corps                               

        83                                                                      

    Overview                                                                

        83                                                                      

    Items of Special Interest                                               

        84                                                                      

     Navy ammunition procurement                                             

        84                                                                      

     Marine Corps ammunition procurement                                     

        84                                                                      

    Shipbuilding and Conversion, Navy                                       

        84                                                                      

    Overview                                                                

        84                                                                      

    Items of Special Interest                                               

        89                                                                      


     LHD 8 amphibious assault ship                                           

        89                                                                      

     Auxiliary dry cargo ship                                                

        89                                                                      

     Submarine force level                                                   

        89                                                                      

     Submarine refueling overhauls                                           

        90                                                                      

    Other Procurement, Navy                                                 

        91                                                                      

    Overview                                                                

        91                                                                      

    Items of Special Interest                                               

        101                                                                     

     AN/SPS 73 (V) surface search radar                                      

        101                                                                     

     Aviation life support                                                   

        101                                                                     

     Education support equipment                                             

        101                                                                     

     High-pressure cleaner                                                   

        101                                                                     

     Joint tactical terminal                                                 

        102                                                                     

     Mobile remote emitter simulator (MRES)                                  

        102                                                                     

     Nuclear attack submarine (SSN) acoustics                                

        102                                                                     

     Operating forces industrial plant equipment                             

        103                                                                     

     Other training equipment                                                

        103                                                                     

     Sonobuoys                                                               

        103                                                                     

     Undersea warfare support equipment                                      

        103                                                                     

     WSN 7B ring laser gyro (RLG)                                            

        104                                                                     

    Procurement, Marine Corps                                               

        104                                                                     

    Overview                                                                

        104                                                                     

    Items of Special Interest                                               

        109                                                                     

     Command post systems                                                    

        109                                                                     

     High mobility multipurpose wheeled vehicle (HMMWV)                      

        109                                                                     

     Improved recovery vehicle (IRV)                                         

        109                                                                     

     Material handling equipment                                             

        110                                                                     

     Modification kits (intelligence)                                        

        110                                                                     

     Radio systems                                                           

        111                                                                     

     Small unit riverine craft (SURC)                                        

        111                                                                     

     Training devices                                                        

        111                                                                     

    Aircraft Procurement, Air Force                                         

        112                                                                     

    Overview                                                                

        112                                                                     

    Items of Special Interest                                               

        119                                                                     

     A 10 modifications                                                      

        119                                                                     

     Aircraft navigational and passenger safety equipment                    

        119                                                                     

     C 130 modifications                                                     

        120                                                                     

     Compass call block 30/35 mission crew simulator (MCS)                   

        120                                                                     

     C 135 modifications                                                     

        121                                                                     

     C 17                                                                    

        121                                                                     

     C 17 reverse-affiliate units                                            

        122                                                                     

     Defense airborne reconnaissance program (DARP), line 56                 

        122                                                                     

     Defense airborne reconnaissance program (DARP), line 80                 

        124                                                                     

        124                                                                     

        125                                                                     

        125                                                                     

        126                                                                     

        127                                                                     

      8C joint surveillance and target attack radar system (STARS)           

        128                                                                     

     Lightweight environmentally sealed parachute assembly (LESPA)           

        128                                                                     

     Predator                                                                

        128                                                                     

     T 3A modifications                                                      

        129                                                                     

    Ammunition Procurement, Air Force                                       

        129                                                                     

    Overview                                                                

        129                                                                     

    Missile Procurement, Air Force                                          

        132                                                                     

    Overview                                                                

        132                                                                     

    Items of Special Interest                                               

        136                                                                     

     AGM 65 modifications                                                    

        136                                                                     

     Medium launch vehicle (MLV)                                             

        136                                                                     

     Titan                                                                   

        136                                                                     

    Other Procurement, Air Force                                            

        136                                                                     

    Overview                                                                

        136                                                                     

    Items of Special Interest                                               

        142                                                                     

     Automatic data processing equipment (ADPE)                              

        142                                                                     

     AN/FPS 117 radar beacon replacement                                     

        142                                                                     

     Eagle vision                                                            

        142                                                                     

     Rivet joint mission trainer (RJMT)                                      

        142                                                                     

     Senior scout                                                            

        143                                                                     

          Situation awareness data link (SADL) gateway for the theater air   
     control system (TACS)                                                   
        143                                                                     

     Supply asset tracking system (SATS)                                     

        143                                                                     

    Procurement, Defense-Wide                                               

        144                                                                     

    Overview                                                                

        144                                                                     

    Items of  Special Interest                                              

        149                                                                     

     Automated document conversion system (ADCS)                             

        149                                                                     

     Counternarcotics discreet operations radio (CONDOR)                     

        149                                                                     

     Patriot advanced capability 3 (PAC 3)                                   

        149                                                                     

     Portable intelligence collection and relay capability (PICRC)           

        149                                                                     

    Chemical Agents and Munitions Destruction, Defense                      

        150                                                                     

    Overview                                                                

        150                                                                     

    Items of Special Interest                                               

        152                                                                     

     Chemical agents and munitions destruction                               

        152                                                                     

     Chemical stockpile disposal project                                     

        152                                                                     

     Chemical stockpile emergency preparedness project (CSEPP)               

        153                                                                     

     Alternative technologies and approaches project                         

        153                                                                     

     Non-stockpile chemical materiel project                                 

        153                                                                     

     Chemical agent identification sets                                      

        154                                                                     

     Assembled chemical weapons assessment (ACWA)                            

        154                                                                     

    LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS                                                  

        155                                                                     

    Subtitle A--Authorization of Appropriations                             

        155                                                                     

    Sections 101 107--Authorization of Appropriations                       

        155                                                                     

    Subtitle B--Army Programs                                               

        155                                                                     

    Section 111--Multiyear Procurement Authority                            

        155                                                                     

        Section 112--Increase in Limitation on Number of Bunker Defeat      
    Munitions that May be Acquired                                          
        155                                                                     

    Section 113--Armament Retooling and Manufacturing Support Initiative    

        156                                                                     

    Subtitle C--Navy Programs                                               

        156                                                                     

    Section 121--Submarine Force Structure                                  

        156                                                                     

    Section 122--Virginia Class Submarine Program                           

        156                                                                     

        Section 123--Retention of Configuration of Certain Naval Reserve    
    Frigates                                                                
        156                                                                     

        Section 124--Extension of Multiyear Procurement Authority for       
    Arleigh Burke Class Destroyers                                          
        156                                                                     

    Subtitle D--Air Force Programs                                          

        157                                                                     

    Section 131--Annual Report on Operational Status of B 2 Bomber          

        157                                                                     

    Subtitle E--Joint Programs                                              

        157                                                                     

        Section 141--Study of Production Alternatives for the Joint Strike  
    Fighter Program                                                         
        157                                                                     


    TITLE II--RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST, AND EVALUATION                   

        158                                                                     

    OVERVIEW                                                                

        158                                                                     

    Army RDT&E                                                              

        161                                                                     

    Overview                                                                

        161                                                                     

    Items of Special Interest                                               

        170                                                                     

     Advanced artillery systems                                              

        170                                                                     

     Advanced battery technology                                             

        170                                                                     

     Aircrew coordination training                                           

        171                                                                     

     Apache Longbow focused modernization program                            

        171                                                                     

     Army tactical unmanned aerial vehicles                                  

        171                                                                     

     Breacher system                                                         

        171                                                                     

     Chinook helicopter modification and improvement                         

        172                                                                     

     Comanche                                                                

        172                                                                     

     Combat identification dismounted soldier (CIDDS)                        

        173                                                                     

     Combustion-driven eye-safe self-powered laser                           

        173                                                                     

     Common ground station                                                   

        173                                                                     

     Communications and networking technologies                              

        174                                                                     

     Defense manufacturing technology                                        

        174                                                                     

     Emergency preparedness training                                         

        175                                                                     

     Future combat system                                                    

        175                                                                     

     Future rotorcraft technologies                                          

        176                                                                     

     Guardrail common sensor                                                 

        177                                                                     

     Helmet mounted infrared sensor development                              

        177                                                                     

     High-energy laser test facility                                         

        177                                                                     

     Hypersonic wind tunnels                                                 

        177                                                                     

     Integrated inertial measurement unit-geo-positioning system             

        178                                                                     


     Land information warfare activity                                       

        178                                                                     

     Medical errors reduction research                                       

        178                                                                     

     Mobile tactical high energy laser                                       

        179                                                                     

     National automotive center-university innovative research               

        179                                                                     

     Passive millimeter wave camera                                          

        179                                                                     

     Real-time heart rate variability                                        

        179                                                                     

     Semi-automated imagery processor                                        

        180                                                                     

     Starstreak                                                              

        180                                                                     

     Surveillance control data link (SCDL)                                   

        180                                                                     

     Thermal fluid based combat feeding system                               

        181                                                                     

     Trajectory correctable munitions                                        

        181                                                                     

     Volumetrically controlled manufacturing technology                      

        181                                                                     

    Navy RDT&E                                                              

        182                                                                     

    Overview                                                                

        182                                                                     

    Items of Special Interest                                               

        193                                                                     

     Advanced amphibious assault vehicle                                     

        193                                                                     

     Advanced anti-radiation guided missile                                  

        193                                                                     

     Advanced deployable system                                              

        194                                                                     

     Advanced technology demonstrations and fleet battle experiments         

        194                                                                     

     Advanced waterjet propulsor                                             

        195                                                                     

     Aircraft survivability study                                            

        195                                                                     

     Aviation depot maintenance technology                                   

        196                                                                     

     Aviation modernization plan                                             

        196                                                                     

     Battle force tactical trainer (BFTT)                                    

        197                                                                     

     Beartrap                                                                

        197                                                                     

     C 2 eight-blade composite propeller system                              

        198                                                                     

     Common command and decision system                                      

        198                                                                     

     Common towed array                                                      

        199                                                                     

     Composite advanced sail development                                     

        199                                                                     

     CVNX aircraft carrier design product modeling                           

        200                                                                     

     Distributed engineering plant                                           

        200                                                                     

     Distributed marine environment forecast system                          

        201                                                                     

     DP 2 thrust vectoring system proof-of-concept demonstration             

        201                                                                     

     Dry chemical fire suppressant                                           

        202                                                                     

     E2 C2 rotordome and control surface improvements                        

        202                                                                     

     Extended range guided munition                                          

        202                                                                     

        203                                                                     

          Fielded system obsolescence, technology insertion and technology   
     refreshment                                                             
        204                                                                     

     Fleet health technology and occupational lung disease                   

        205                                                                     

     Flight worthy transparent armor system                                  

        205                                                                     

     High mobility artillery rocket system (HIMARS)                          

        206                                                                     

     High performance sigma-delta waveform generator                         

        206                                                                     

     Hybrid fiberoptic/wireless communication technology                     

        206                                                                     

     Hybrid light detection and ranging (LIDAR)/radar technology             

        207                                                                     

     Hyperspectral research                                                  

        207                                                                     

     Insensitive munitions                                                   

        207                                                                     

     Integrated aviation life support systems                                

        208                                                                     

     Integrated semiconductor bridge based fuze                              

        208                                                                     

          Intermediate modulus carbon fiber and ultra-high thermal           
     conductivity graphite fibers                                            
        208                                                                     

     Joint forces command operational testbed                                

        209                                                                     

     Joint helmet mounted cueing system                                      

        209                                                                     

     Joint tactical combat training system                                   

        210                                                                     

     Lightweight environmentally sealed parachute assembly (LESPA)           

        210                                                                     

     Littoral support fast patrol craft                                      

        210                                                                     

     Location of global positioning systems (GPS) jammers                    

        211                                                                     

     Malaria deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) vaccine                             

        211                                                                     

     Manned reconnaissance systems                                           

        211                                                                     

     Marine Corps dragon warrior UAV                                         

        211                                                                     

     Marine mammal research                                                  

        212                                                                     

     Maritime technology (MARITECH) program                                  

        212                                                                     

     Mobile electronic warfare support system                                

        213                                                                     

     Mobile integrated diagnostic and data analysis system (MIDDAS)          

        213                                                                     

     Multi-function radar/volume search radar and the Navy's radar roadmap   

        213                                                                     

     Multipurpose processor                                                  

        214                                                                     

     Naval space surveillance                                                

        215                                                                     

     Navy mine countermeasures program                                       

        215                                                                     

     Advanced sensors for mine countermeasures and oceanography              

        215                                                                     

     AN/AQS 20/X mine hunting sonar                                          

        216                                                                     

          Synthetic aperture sonar development for long-term mine            
     reconnaissance system                                                   
        216                                                                     

     Naval modeling and simulation                                           

        217                                                                     

     New composite materials for aircraft canopies                           

        217                                                                     

     Optical correlation technology for automatic target recognition         

        218                                                                     

     Optically multiplexed wideband radar beam-forming array                 

        218                                                                     

     P 3 modernization program                                               

        218                                                                     

     P 3 special mission squadron sensor upgrade                             

        219                                                                     

     Parametric airborne dipping sonar                                       

        219                                                                     

     Power node control centers                                              

        220                                                                     

     Project M                                                               

        220                                                                     

     Radio frequency integration and testing environment                     

        221                                                                     

     Remote precision gun                                                    

        221                                                                     

     S 3B surveillance system upgrade program                                

        222                                                                     

     Ship service fuel cell program                                          

        222                                                                     

     Silicon carbide and gallium nitride semiconductor substrates            

        222                                                                     

     Single flux quantum electronics                                         

        223                                                                     

     SSGN Conversion                                                         

        223                                                                     

     Submarine sonar dome window                                             

        225                                                                     

     Supply chain management and development best practices                  

        225                                                                     

     Surface ship torpedo defense                                            

        226                                                                     

     Tactical unmanned aerial vehicles                                       

        226                                                                     

     Vacuum electronics                                                      

        226                                                                     

     Vectored thrust ducted propeller compound helicopter demonstration      

        227                                                                     

     Virtual test bed for advanced electrical ship systems                   

        228                                                                     

    Air Force RDT&E                                                         

        228                                                                     

    Overview                                                                

        228                                                                     

    Items of Special Interest                                               

        239                                                                     

     21st century affordable aircraft thrust demonstration project           

        239                                                                     

     Aging landing gear life extension                                       

        239                                                                     

     Airborne laser                                                          

        239                                                                     

     Airborne reconnaissance systems                                         

        240                                                                     

     Air Force/National Reconnaissance Office (NRO) partnership              

        241                                                                     

     Air Force science and technology                                        

        241                                                                     

     Aerospace propulsion                                                    

        242                                                                     

     Aircrew laser eye protection                                            

        242                                                                     

     Ballistic missile technology                                            

        243                                                                     

     Combat identification                                                   

        243                                                                     

     Composite affordability initiative                                      

        243                                                                     

     Low cost launch technology                                              

        244                                                                     

     Miniature satellite threat reporting system                             

        244                                                                     

     Specialty aerospace metals                                              

        244                                                                     

     Upper atmospheric and astronomical research                             

        245                                                                     

     Advanced message-oriented data security module (AMODSM)                 

        245                                                                     

     B 1B link 16 data link                                                  

        246                                                                     

     B 2 upgrades                                                            

        246                                                                     

     B 52 modified miniature receive terminals configuration                 

        247                                                                     

     Defense reconnaissance support program                                  

        247                                                                     

     Discoverer II                                                           

        247                                                                     

     Eagle vision                                                            

        248                                                                     

     Electronic warfare development                                          

        248                                                                     

     Extended range cruise missile (ERCM)                                    

        249                                                                     

     Global hawk unmanned aerial vehicle                                     

        249                                                                     

     Hyperspectral imagery system                                            

        250                                                                     

     Integrated broadcast service                                            

        250                                                                     

     Joint ejection seat program                                             

        251                                                                     

     Joint strike fighter                                                    

        252                                                                     

     Military strategic and tactical relay (MILSTAR)                         

        253                                                                     

     Mobile approach control system                                          

        254                                                                     

     Multi-link antenna system                                               

        254                                                                     

     Satellite control network                                               

        255                                                                     

     Small smart munitions                                                   

        255                                                                     

     Space-based infrared system-high (SBIRS-High)                           

        256                                                                     


     Space-based infrared system-low (SBIRS-Low)                             

        256                                                                     

     Spacelift range system                                                  

        257                                                                     

     U 2 senior year electro-optic system polarimetry                        

        258                                                                     

    Defense Wide RDT&E                                                      

        259                                                                     

    Overview                                                                

        259                                                                     

    Items of Special Interest                                               

        268                                                                     

     Advanced sensor applications program                                    

        268                                                                     

     Ballistic missile defense (BMD)                                         

        268                                                                     

     Advanced technology development                                         

        269                                                                     

     Liquid surrogate target                                                 

        269                                                                     

     National missile defense (NMD)                                          

        270                                                                     

     Navy theater wide                                                       

        271                                                                     

     Russian-American cooperative national missile defense                   

        272                                                                     

     Support technology                                                      

        272                                                                     

     Wide bandwidth information infrastructure                               

        272                                                                     

     Chemical-biological defense program                                     

        273                                                                     

     Chemical and biological defense program initiatives                     

        273                                                                     

     Optical computing device materials for chemical sensors                 

        274                                                                     

     Commercial off-the-shelf-receiver development                           

        274                                                                     

     Competitive sustainment demonstration                                   

        275                                                                     

     Complex systems design                                                  

        275                                                                     

     Computational fluid dynamics and finite element analysis                

        275                                                                     

     Computer network security                                               

        276                                                                     

     CV 22 Osprey radar improvements                                         

        276                                                                     

     Defense agency science and technology funding                           

        276                                                                     

     Biological warfare defense                                              

        277                                                                     

     Computing systems and communications technology                         

        277                                                                     

     Extensible information systems                                          

        278                                                                     

     Nuclear sustainment and counter-proliferation technologies              

        278                                                                     

     Defense experimental program to stimulate competitive research          

        278                                                                     

     Facial recognition technology                                           

        278                                                                     

     High definition displays for military applications                      

        278                                                                     

     High energy laser research and development                              

        279                                                                     

     Defense-wide high energy laser development                              

        279                                                                     

     Free electron laser                                                     

        280                                                                     

     Solid state laser                                                       

        280                                                                     

     Information technology, superiority and assurance                       

        281                                                                     

     Interference with global positioning system                             

        282                                                                     

     MC 130 autonomous landing guidance system                               

        282                                                                     

     Medical free electron laser                                             

        283                                                                     

     Microelectromechanical systems sensor development                       

        283                                                                     

     National imagery and mapping agency                                     

        283                                                                     

     Requirement for ``designated laboratory''                               

        284                                                                     

     Science and technology affordability initiative                         

        284                                                                     

     Special operations tactical video system                                

        285                                                                     

     Tactical and support aircraft noise reduction                           

        285                                                                     

     Texas regional institute for environmental studies                      

        286                                                                     

     Thermionics for space power systems                                     

        286                                                                     

     TRICARE encounter data system                                           

        286                                                                     

     Ultra-wideband radar                                                    

        286                                                                     

    Operational Test and Evaluation, Defense                                

        287                                                                     

    Overview                                                                

        287                                                                     

    Items of Special Interest                                               

        289                                                                     

     Central test and evaluation investment program                          

        289                                                                     

    LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS                                                  

        290                                                                     

    Subtitle A--Authorization of Appropriations                             

        290                                                                     

    Section 201--Authorization of Appropriations                            

        290                                                                     

    Section 202--Amount for Basic and Applied Research                      

        290                                                                     

    Subtitle B--Program Requirements, Restrictions, and Limitations         

        290                                                                     

    Section 211--High Energy Laser Programs                                 

        290                                                                     

    Section 212--Management of Space-Based Infrared System-Low              

        291                                                                     

    Section 213--Joint Strike Fighter                                       

        291                                                                     

    Subtitle C--Ballistic Missile Defense                                   

        291                                                                     

    Section 231--Funding for Fiscal Year 2001                               

        291                                                                     

        Section 232--Sense of Congress Concerning Commitment to Deploy      
    National Missile Defense                                                
        291                                                                     

    Section 233--Reports on Ballistic Missile Threat Posed By North Korea   

        292                                                                     

        Section 234--Plan to Modify Ballistic Missile Defense Architecture  
    to Cover Intermediate-Range Ballistic Missile Threats                   
        292                                                                     

        Section 235--Designation of Airborne Laser Program as a Program     
    Element of Ballistic Missile Defense Program                            
        293                                                                     

    Subtitle D--Other Matters                                               

        293                                                                     

        Section 241--Recognition of Those Individuals Instrumental to Naval 
    Research Efforts During the Period from Before World War II Through the 
    End of the Cold War                                                     
        293                                                                     


    TITLE III--OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE                                    

        294                                                                     

    OVERVIEW                                                                

        294                                                                     

    ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST                                               

        324                                                                     

    Budget Request Increases                                                

        324                                                                     

    Critical Readiness Accounts                                             

        324                                                                     

     Depot maintenance                                                       

        324                                                                     

     Real property maintenance                                               

        324                                                                     

     Miscellaneous unfunded requirements                                     

        324                                                                     

     Mobility enhancement funding                                            

        325                                                                     

     Training accounts                                                       

        325                                                                     

    Army Cold Weather Clothing                                              

        325                                                                     

    Budget Request Reductions                                               

        326                                                                     

    Civilian Personnel Reductions                                           

        326                                                                     

    Excess Foreign Currencies Reductions                                    

        326                                                                     

    Headquarters Reductions                                                 

        326                                                                     

    Joint Chiefs of Staff Training Exercises                                

        327                                                                     

    Other Items of Special Interest                                         

        327                                                                     

    Accountability of Operation and Maintenance Funding                     

        327                                                                     

    Environmental Issues                                                    

        327                                                                     

    Fines and Penalties                                                     

        327                                                                     

    Navy Environmental Leadership Program                                   

        328                                                                     

    Intelligence Issues                                                     

        328                                                                     

    Cryptologic Skills Training                                             

        328                                                                     

    Defense Foreign Language Program                                        

        328                                                                     

    Distributed Common Ground System                                        

        329                                                                     

    Eagle Vision Commercial Imagery                                         

        329                                                                     

    Integrated Broadcast Service                                            

        330                                                                     

    RC 135 and U 2 Operations and Maintenance                               

        330                                                                     

    Morale, Welfare, and Recreation Issues                                  

        330                                                                     

    Armed Forces Recreation Centers                                         

        330                                                                     

    Lodging Programs                                                        

        331                                                                     

    Nonappropriated Fund Support of Official Activities                     

        331                                                                     

    Other Issues                                                            

        332                                                                     

    Army Apprenticeship Program                                             

        332                                                                     

    Army Workload and Performance System                                    

        332                                                                     

    Automatic Identification Technology                                     

        333                                                                     

    Civilian Air Traffic Controllers                                        

        333                                                                     

    Commercial Technologies for Maintenance Activities                      

        334                                                                     

    Container Freight Station Operations                                    

        334                                                                     

    Core Logistics Capabilities                                             

        334                                                                     

    Defense Joint Accounting System                                         

        335                                                                     

        Defense Personnel Records Imaging System-Electronics Military       
    Personnel Records System                                                
        336                                                                     

    Department of Defense Civilian Personnel                                

        336                                                                     

     Personnel safety                                                        

        336                                                                     

     Recruiting and retention                                                

        337                                                                     

    Financial Policy                                                        

        337                                                                     

    Local School Renovation and Repair                                      

        338                                                                     

    Logistics Support Planning                                              

        338                                                                     

    Military Affiliate Radio System                                         

        339                                                                     

    National Maintenance Program                                            

        340                                                                     

    Naval Audit Service                                                     

        341                                                                     

    Reserve Component Automation System (RCAS)                              

        341                                                                     

    Spare and Repair Parts                                                  

        341                                                                     

    Urban Warfare Training                                                  

        342                                                                     

    LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS                                                  

        342                                                                     

    Subtitle A--Authorization Of Appropriations                             

        342                                                                     


    Section 301--Operation and Maintenance Funding                          

        342                                                                     

    Section 302--Working Capital Funds                                      

        342                                                                     

    Section 303--Armed Forces Retirement Home                               

        343                                                                     

    Section 304--Transfer From National Defense Stockpile Transaction Fund  

        343                                                                     

    Subtitle B--Environmental Provisions                                    

        343                                                                     

        Section 311--Payment of Fines and Penalties Imposed for             
    Environmental Violations                                                
        343                                                                     

        Section 312--Necessity of Military Low-Level Flight Training to     
    Protect National Security and Enhance Military Readiness                
        343                                                                     

        Section 313--Use of Environmental Restoration Accounts to Relocate  
    Activities from Defense Environmental Restoration Sites                 
        343                                                                     

    Subtitle C--Commissaries and Nonappropriated Fund Instrumentalities     

        343                                                                     

        Section 321--Use of Appropriated Funds to Cover Operating Expenses  
    of Commissary Stores                                                    
        343                                                                     

        Section 322--Adjustment of Sales Prices of Commissary Store Goods   
    and Services to Cover Certain Expenses                                  
        344                                                                     

        Section 323--Use of Surcharges for Construction and Improvement of  
    Commissary Stores                                                       
        344                                                                     

        Section 324--Inclusion of Magazines and Other Periodicals as an     
    Authorized Commissary Merchandise Category                              
        344                                                                     

        Section 325--Use of Most Economical Distribution Method for         
    Distilled Spirits                                                       
        345                                                                     

        Section 326--Report on Effects of Availability of Slot Machines on  
    United States Military Installations Overseas                           
        345                                                                     

    Subtitle D--Performance of Functions by Private-Sector Sources          

        345                                                                     

        Section 331--Inclusion of Additional Information in Reports to      
    Congress Required before Conversion of Commercial or Industrial Type    
    Functions to Contractor Performance                                     
        345                                                                     

    Section 332--Limitation Regarding Navy Marine Corps Intranet Contract   

        345                                                                     

    Subtitle E--Defense Dependents Education                                

        346                                                                     

        Section 341--Assistance to Local Educational Agencies that Benefit  
    Dependents of Members of the Armed Forces and Department of Defense     
    Civilian Employees                                                      
        346                                                                     

        Section 342--Eligibility Requirements for Attendance at Department  
    of Defense Domestic Dependent Elementary and Secondary Schools          
        346                                                                     

    Subtitle F--Military Readiness Issues                                   

        347                                                                     

        Section 351--Additional Capabilities of, and Reporting Requirements 
    for, the Readiness Reporting System                                     
        347                                                                     

        Section 352--Reporting Requirements Regarding Transfers from        
    High-Priority Readiness Appropriations                                  
        347                                                                     

        Section 353--Department of Defense Strategic Plan to Reduce Backlog 
    in Maintance and Repair of Defense Facilities                           
        347                                                                     

    Subtitle G--Other Matters                                               

        348                                                                     

        Section 361--Authority to Ensure Demilitarization of Significant    
    Military Equipment Formerly Owned by the Department of Defense          
        348                                                                     

        Section 362--Annual Report on Public Sale of Certain Military       
    Equipment Identified on United States Munitions List                    
        348                                                                     

        Section 363--Registration of Certain Information Technology Systems 
    with Chief Information Officer                                          
        349                                                                     

        Section 364--Studies and Reports Required as Precondition to Certain
    Manpower Reductions                                                     
        349                                                                     

        Section 365--National Guard Assistance for Certain Youth and        
    Chartable Organizations                                                 
        349                                                                     


    TITLE IV--MILITARY PERSONNEL AUTHORIZATIONS                             

        352                                                                     

    Subtitle A--Active Forces                                               

        352                                                                     

    Section 401--End Strengths for Active Forces                            

        352                                                                     

    Section 402--Revision in Permanent End Strength Minimum Levels          

        352                                                                     

    Section 403--Adjustment to End Strength Flexibility Authority           

        353                                                                     

    Subtitle B--Reserve Forces                                              

        353                                                                     

    Section 411--End Strengths for Selected Reserve                         

        353                                                                     

        Section 412--End Strengths for Reserves on Active Duty in Support of
    the Reserves                                                            
        353                                                                     

    Section 413--End Strength for Military Technicians (Dual Status)        

        354                                                                     

        Section 414--Increase in Number of Members in Certain Grades        
    Authorized to Be on Active Duty in Support of the Reserves              
        354                                                                     

    Subtitle C--Authorization of Appropriations                             

        355                                                                     

    Section 421--Authorization of Appropriations for Military Personnel     

        355                                                                     


    TITLE V--MILITARY PERSONNEL POLICY                                      

        358                                                                     

    ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST                                               

        358                                                                     

    Defense Prisoner of War/Missing in Action Office                        

        358                                                                     

        Department of Defense International Student Program at the Military 
    Colleges                                                                
        358                                                                     

    Funding for Recruiting and Retention                                    

        359                                                                     

    Homosexual Conduct Briefings                                            

        360                                                                     

    Incentives for Overseas Assignments                                     

        360                                                                     

    National Guard Military Technician Overtime Pay                         

        361                                                                     

    Uniformed Services Former Spouse Protection Act                         

        361                                                                     

    LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS                                                  

        361                                                                     

    Subtitle A--General Personnel Management Authorities                    

        361                                                                     

        Section 501--Authority for Secretary of Defense to Suspend Certain  
    Personnel Strength Limitations During War or National Emergency         
        361                                                                     

        Section 502--Authority to Issue Posthumous Commissions in the Case  
    of Members Dying Before Official Recommendation for Appointment or      
    Promotion is Approved by Secretary Concerned                            
        362                                                                     

        Section 503--Technical Correction to Retired Grade Rule for Army and
    Air Force Officers                                                      
        362                                                                     

        Section 504--Extension to End of Calendar Year of Expiration Date   
    for Certain Force Drawdown Transition Authorities                       
        362                                                                     

        Section 505--Clarification of Requirements for Composition of       
    Active-Duty List Selection Boards When Reserve Officers are Under       
    Consideration                                                           
        363                                                                     

    Section 506--Voluntary Separation Incentive                             

        363                                                                     

        Section 507--Congressional Review Period for Assignment of Women to 
    Duty on Submarines and for Any Proposed Reconfiguration or Design of    
    Submarines to Accommodate Female Crew Members                           
        363                                                                     

    Subtitle B--Reserve Component Personnel Policy                          

        363                                                                     

        Section 511--Exemption from Active-Duty List for Reserve Officers on
    Active Duty for a Period of Three Years or Less                         
        363                                                                     

        Section 512--Exemption of Reserve Component Medical and Dental      
    Officers from Counting in Grade Strengths                               
        363                                                                     

        Section 513--Continuation of Officers on the Reserve Active Status  
    List Without Requirement for Application                                
        364                                                                     

        Section 514--Authority to Retain Reserve Component Chaplains and    
    Officers in Medical Specialties Until Specified Age                     
        364                                                                     

        Section 515--Authority for Temporary Increase in Number of Reserve  
    Component Personnel Serving on Active Duty or Full-Time National Guard  
    Duty in Certain Grades                                                  
        364                                                                     

        Section 516--Authority for Provision of Legal Services to Reserve   
    Component Members Following Release from Active Duty                    
        364                                                                     

        Section 517--Entitlement to Separation Pay for Reserve Officers     
    Released from Active Duty Upon Declining Selective Continuation on      
    Active Duty After Second Failure of Selection for Promotion             
        364                                                                     

        Section 518--Extension of Involuntary Civil Service Retirement Date 
    for Certain Reserve Technicians                                         
        365                                                                     

    Subtitle C--Education and Training                                      

        365                                                                     

        Section 521--College Tuition Assistance Program for Pursuit of      
    Degrees by Members of the Marine Corps Platoon Leaders Class Program    
        365                                                                     

        Section 522--Review of Allocation of Junior Reserve Officers        
    Training Corps Units Among the Services                                 
        365                                                                     

        Section 523--Authority for Naval Postgraduate School to Enroll      
    Certain Defense Industry Civilians in Specified Programs Relating to    
    Defense Product Development                                             
        366                                                                     

    Subtitle D--Decorations, Awards, and Commendations                      

        366                                                                     

        Section 531--Authority for Award of the Medal of Honor to Andrew J. 
    Smith for Valor during the Civil War                                    
        366                                                                     

        Section 532--Authority for Award of the Medal of Honor to Ed W.     
    Freeman for Valor during the Vietnam Conflict                           
        366                                                                     


        Section 533--Consideration of Proposals for Posthumous or Honorary  
    Promotions or Appointments of Members or Former Members of the Armed    
    Forces and Other Qualified Persons                                      
        366                                                                     

        Section 534--Waiver of Time Limitations for Award of Navy           
    Distinguished Flying Cross to Certain Persons                           
        367                                                                     

        Section 535--Addition of Certain Information to Markers on Graves   
    Containing Remains of Certain Unknowns from the U.S.S. ARIZONA Who Died 
    in the Japanese Attack on Pearl Harbor on December 7, 1941              
        367                                                                     

        Section 536--Sense of Congress Regarding Final Crew of U.S.S.       
    INDIANAPOLIS                                                            
        367                                                                     

        Section 537--Posthumous Advancement of Rear Admiral (Retired)       
    Husband E. Kimmel and Major General (Retired) Walter C. Short on Retired
    Lists                                                                   
        367                                                                     

        Section 538--Commendation of Citizens of Remy, France, for World War
    II Actions                                                              
        367                                                                     

    Subtitle E--Military Justice Matters                                    

        368                                                                     

    Section 541--Recognition by States of Military Testamentary Instruments 

        368                                                                     

        Section 542--Probable Cause Required for Entry of Names of Subjects 
    into Official Criminal Investigative Reports                            
        368                                                                     

        Section 543--Collection and Use of DNA Identification Information   
    from Violent and Sexual Offenders in the Armed Forces                   
        368                                                                     

        Section 544--Limitation on Secretarial Authority to Grant Clemency  
    for Military Prisoners Serving Sentence of Confinement for Life Without 
    Eligibility for Parole                                                  
        368                                                                     

        Section 545--Authority for Civilian Special Agents of Military      
    Department Criminal Investigative Organizations to Execute Warrants and 
    Make Arrests                                                            
        369                                                                     

    Subtitle F--Other Matters                                               

        369                                                                     

    Section 551--Funeral Honors Duty Compensation                           

        369                                                                     

        Section 552--Test of Ability of Reserve Component Intelligence Units
    and Personnel to Meet Current and Emerging Defense Intelligence Needs   
        369                                                                     

    Section 553--National Guard Challenge Program                           

        369                                                                     

        Section 554--Study of Use of Civilian Contractor Pilots for         
    Operational Support Missions                                            
        370                                                                     

        Section 555--Pilot Program to Enhance Military Recruiting by        
    Improving Military Awareness of School Counselors and Educators         
        370                                                                     

        Section 556--Reimbursement for Expenses Incurred by Members in      
    Connection with Cancellation of Leave on Short Notice                   
        370                                                                     


    TITLE VI--COMPENSATION AND OTHER PERSONNEL BENEFITS                     

        371                                                                     

    OVERVIEW                                                                

        371                                                                     

    ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST                                               

        372                                                                     

    Briefings on Benefits of Military Service                               

        372                                                                     

    Extension of Time Limitation on Use of Reserve Education Benefits       

        373                                                                     

    Improved Basic Allowance for Housing                                    

        373                                                                     

    Military Pay Day Every 14 Days                                          

        373                                                                     

    Pay Table Reform for Mid-Grade Enlisted Members                         

        374                                                                     

    Reimbursement for Reservists' Travel Expenses                           

        374                                                                     

    Reimbursement of Permanent Change of Station Expenses                   

        374                                                                     

    Retired Pay Following Reduction in Grade                                

        375                                                                     

    LEGISLATIVE  PROVISIONS                                                 

        375                                                                     

    Subtitle A--Pay and Allowances                                          

        375                                                                     

    Section 601--Increase in Basic Pay for Fiscal Year 2001                 

        375                                                                     

        Section 602--Revised Method for Calculation of Basic Allowance for  
    Subsistence                                                             
        375                                                                     

        Section 603--Family Subsistence Supplemental Allowance for          
    Low-Income Members of the Armed Forces                                  
        375                                                                     

        Section 604--Calculation of Basic Allowance for Housing for Inside  
    the United States                                                       
        376                                                                     

        Section 605--Equitable Treatment of Junior Enlisted Members in      
    Computation of Basic Allowance for Housing                              
        376                                                                     

        Section 606--Basic Allowance for Housing Authorized for Additional  
    Members Without Dependents Who Are on Sea Duty                          
        376                                                                     

        Section 607--Personal Money Allowance for Senior Enlisted Members of
    the Armed Forces                                                        
        376                                                                     

        Section 608--Allowance for Officers for Purchase of Required        
    Uniforms and Equipment                                                  
        377                                                                     

        Section 609--Increase in Monthly Subsistence Allowance for Members  
    of Precommissioning Programs                                            
        377                                                                     

        Section 610--Additional Amount Available for Fiscal Year 2001       
    Increase in Basic Allowance for Housing Inside the United States        
        377                                                                     

    Subtitle B--Bonuses and Special and Incentive Pays                      

        377                                                                     

        Section 611--Extension of Certain Bonuses and Special Pay           
    Authorities for Reserve Forces                                          
        377                                                                     

        Section 612--Extension of Certain Bonuses and Special Pay           
    Authorities for Nurse Officer Candidates, Registered Nurses and Nurse   
    Anesthetists                                                            
        378                                                                     

        Section 613--Extension of Authorities Relating to Payment of Other  
    Bonuses and Special Pays                                                
        378                                                                     

        Section 614--Consistency of Authorities for Special Pay for Reserve 
    Medical and Dental Officers                                             
        378                                                                     

    Section 615--Special Pay for Coast Guard Physician Assistants           

        378                                                                     

    Section 616--Special Duty Assignment Pay for Enlisted Members           

        378                                                                     

    Section 617--Revision of Career Sea Pay                                 

        378                                                                     

    Section 618--Revision of Enlistment Bonus Authority                     

        379                                                                     

        Section 619--Authorization of Retention Bonus for Members of the    
    Armed Forces Qualified in a Critical Military Skill                     
        379                                                                     

        Section 620--Elimination of Required Congressional Notification     
    before Implementation of Certain Special Pay Authority                  
        379                                                                     

    Subtitle C--Travel and Transportation Allowances                        

        379                                                                     

        Section 631--Advance Payments for Temporary Lodging of Members and  
    Dependents                                                              
        379                                                                     

        Section 632--Additional Transportation Allowance Regarding Baggage  
    and Household Effects                                                   
        379                                                                     

        Section 633--Equitable Dislocation Allowances for Junior Enlisted   
    Members                                                                 
        379                                                                     

        Section 634--Authority to Reimburse Military Recruiters, Senior ROTC
    Cadre, and Military Entrance Processing Personnel for Certain Parking   
    Expenses                                                                
        379                                                                     

    Section 635--Expansion of Funded Student Travel for Dependents          

        380                                                                     

    Subtitle D--Retirement and Survivor Benefit Matters                     

        380                                                                     

        Section 641--Increase in Maximum Number of Reserve Retirement Points
    That May be Credited in Any Year                                        
        380                                                                     

        Section 642--Reserve Component Survivor Benefit Plan Spousal Consent
    Requirement                                                             
        380                                                                     

    Subtitle E--Other Matters                                               

        380                                                                     

    Section 651--Participation in Thrift Savings Plan                       

        380                                                                     


    TITLE VII--HEALTH CARE PROVISIONS                                       

        381                                                                     

    OVERVIEW                                                                

        381                                                                     

    ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST                                               

        382                                                                     

    Funding for the Defense Health Program                                  

        382                                                                     

    Preventive Health Care Services                                         

        383                                                                     

        Report on Computer-Based Patient Record and Medical Records Tracking
    System                                                                  
        383                                                                     

    Report on Mandatory Enrollment Program for TRICARE Beneficaries         

        384                                                                     

    Subtitle A--Health Care Services                                        

        384                                                                     

        Section 701--Two-Year Extension of Authority for Use of Contract    
    Physicians at Military Entrance Processing Stations and Elsewhere       
    Outside Medical Treatment Facilities                                    
        384                                                                     

    Section 702--Medical and Dental Care for Medal of Honor Recipients      

        384                                                                     

        Section 703--Provision of Domiciliary and Custodial Care for CHAMPUS
    Beneficiaries and Certain Former CHAMPUS Beneficiaries                  
        385                                                                     

        Section 704--Demonstration Project for Expanded Access to Mental    
    Health Counselors                                                       
        385                                                                     

    Section 705--Teleradiology Demonstration Project                        

        385                                                                     

    Subtitle B--TRICARE Program                                             

        386                                                                     

        Section 711--Additional Beneficiaries Under TRICARE Prime Remote    
    Program in the Continental United States                                
        386                                                                     

    Section 712--Elimination of Copayments for Immediate Family             

        386                                                                     

        Section 713--Modernization of TRICARE Business Practices and        
    Increased Use of Military Treatment Facilities                          
        386                                                                     


    Section 714--Claims Processing Improvements                             

        387                                                                     

        Section 715--Prohibition Against Requirement for Prior Authorization
    for Certain Referrals; Report on Nonavailability-of-Health-Care         
    Statements                                                              
        388                                                                     

        Section 716--Authority to Establish Special Locality-Based          
    Reimbursement Rates; Reports                                            
        388                                                                     

    Section 717--Reimbursement for Certain Travel Expenses                  

        388                                                                     

    Section 718--Reduction of Catastrophic Cap                              

        388                                                                     

        Section 719--Report on Protections Against Health Care Providers    
    Seeking Direct Reimbursement from Members of the Uniformed Services     
        389                                                                     

    Section 720--Disenrollment Process for TRICARE Retiree Dental Program   

        389                                                                     

        Subtitle C--Health Care Programs for Medicare-Eligible Department of
    Defense Beneficiaries                                                   
        389                                                                     

    Section 721--Implementation of TRICARE Senior Pharmacy Program          

        389                                                                     

        Section 722--Study on Health Care Options for Medicare-Eligible     
    Military Retirees                                                       
        390                                                                     

        Section 723--Extended Coverage Under Federal Employees Health       
    Benefits Program                                                        
        390                                                                     

    Section 724--Extension of TRICARE Senior Supplement Program             

        391                                                                     

    Section 725--Extension of TRICARE Senior Prime Demonstration Project    

        391                                                                     

    Subtitle D--Other Matters                                               

        391                                                                     

    Section 731--Training in Health Care Management and Administration      

        391                                                                     

        Section 732--Study of Accrual Financing for Health Care for Military
    Retirees                                                                
        391                                                                     

        Section 733--Tracking Patient Safety in Military Medical Treatment  
    Facilities                                                              
        391                                                                     

    Section 734--Pharmaceutical Identification Technology                   

        392                                                                     

    Section 735--Management of Vaccine Immunization Program                 

        392                                                                     

        Section 736--Study on Feasibility of Sharing Biomedical Research    
    Facility                                                                
        392                                                                     

    Section 738--VA/DOD Sharing Agreements for Health Services              

        393                                                                     


        TITLE VIII--ACQUISTION POLICY, ACQUISITION MANAGEMENT, AND RELATED  
    MATTERS                                                                 
        394                                                                     

    ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST                                               

        394                                                                     

        Procurement of Military Clothing and Clothing-Related Items by      
    Military Installations in the United States                             
        394                                                                     

        Compliance with Applicable Labor Laws in Procurement of Military    
    Clothing                                                                
        394                                                                     

    LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS                                                  

        394                                                                     

        Section 801--Extension of Authority for Department of Defense       
    Acquisition Pilot Programs; Reports Required                            
        394                                                                     

        Section 802--Technical Data Rights for Items Developed Exclusively  
    at Private Expense                                                      
        395                                                                     

        Section 803--Management of Acquisition of Mission-Essential Software
    for Major Defense Acquisition Programs                                  
        395                                                                     

        Section 804--Extension of Waiver Period for Live-Fire Survivability 
    Testing for MH 47E and MH 60K Helicopter Modification Programs          
        395                                                                     

        Section 805--Three-Year Extension of Authority of Defense Advanced  
    Research Projects Agency to Carry Out Certain Prototype Projects        
        395                                                                     

        Section 806--Certification of Major Automated Information Systems as
    to Compliance with Clinger-Cohen Act                                    
        396                                                                     

    Section 807--Limitations on Procurement of Certain Items                

        396                                                                     

    Section 808--Multiyear Services Contracts                               

        396                                                                     

        Section 809--Study on Impact of Foreign Sourcing of Systems on      
    Long-Term Military Readiness and Related Industrial Infrastructure      
        396                                                                     

        Section 810--Prohibition Against Use of Department of Defense Funds 
    to Give or Withhold a Preference to a Marketer or Vendor of Firearms or 
    Ammunition                                                              
        397                                                                     

        Section 811--Study and Report on Practice of Contract Bundling in   
    Military Construction Contracts                                         
        397                                                                     


    TITLE IX--DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE ORGANIZATION AND MANGEMENT              

        398                                                                     

    ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST                                               

        398                                                                     

    Center for the Study of Chinese Military Affairs                        

        398                                                                     

    Management Headquarters                                                 

        399                                                                     

    LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS                                                  

        399                                                                     

        Section 901--Change of Title of Certain Positions in the            
    Headquarters, Marine Corps                                              
        399                                                                     

        Section 902--Further Reductions in Defense Acquisition and Support  
    Workforce                                                               
        399                                                                     

        Section 903--Clarification of Scope of Inspector General Authorities
    under Military Whistleblower Law                                        
        400                                                                     

        Section 904--Report on Number of Personnel Assigned to Legislative  
    Liaison Functions                                                       
        400                                                                     

        Section 905--Joint Report on Establishment of National Collaborative
    Information Analysis Capability                                         
        400                                                                     

    Section 906--Organization and Management of Civil Air Patrol            

        401                                                                     

    Section 907--Report on Network Centric Warfare                          

        401                                                                     

    Section 908--Defense Institute for Hemispheric Security Cooperation     

        402                                                                     

    Section 909--Department of Defense Regional Centers for Security Studies

        403                                                                     

        Section 910--Change in Name of Armed Forces Staff College to Joint  
    Forces Staff College                                                    
        403                                                                     


    TITLE X--GENERAL PROVISIONS                                             

        404                                                                     

    ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST                                               

        404                                                                     

    Counter-Drug Activities                                                 

        404                                                                     

    Overview                                                                

        404                                                                     

    Funding                                                                 

        405                                                                     

    Items of Special Interest                                               

        405                                                                     

     Air National Guard fighter operations                                   

        405                                                                     

     Coastal Patrol equipment procurement                                    

        406                                                                     

     Operation Caper Focus                                                   

        406                                                                     

     Puerto Rico ROTHR security                                              

        406                                                                     

     Southwest border fence                                                  

        406                                                                     

    OTHER MATTERS                                                           

        406                                                                     

    Quadrennial Defense Review                                              

        406                                                                     

        Department of Defense Personnel Security Investigation Requirements 
    Priorities                                                              
        407                                                                     

    LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS                                                  

        408                                                                     

    Subtitle A--Financial Matters                                           

        408                                                                     

    Section 1001--Transfer Authority                                        

        408                                                                     

    Section 1002--Incorporation of Classified Annex                         

        408                                                                     

        Section 1003--Authorization of Emergency Supplemental Appropriations
    for Fiscal Year 2000                                                    
        408                                                                     

     Department of Defense                                                   

        408                                                                     

     Department of Energy                                                    

        409                                                                     

        Section 1004--Contingent Repeal of Certain Provisions Shifting      
    Certain Outlays from One Fiscal Year to Another                         
        409                                                                     

        Section 1005--Limitation on Funds for Bosnia and Kosovo Peacekeeping
    Operations for Fiscal Year 2001                                         
        409                                                                     

    Subtitle B--Naval Vessels and Shipyards                                 

        410                                                                     

    Section 1011--National Defense Features Program                         

        410                                                                     

    Subtitle C--Counter-Drug Activities                                     

        410                                                                     

        Section 1021--Report on Department of Defense Expenditures to       
    Support Foreign Counter-Drug Activities                                 
        410                                                                     

    Section 1022--Report on Tethered Aerostat Radar System                  

        410                                                                     

    Subtitle D--Other Matters                                               

        411                                                                     

        Section 1031--Funds for Administrative Expenses Under Defense Export
    Loan Guarantee Program                                                  
        411                                                                     

    Section 1032--Technical and Clerical Amendments                         

        411                                                                     

        Section 1033--Transfer of Vietnam Era TA 4 Aircraft to Nonprofit    
    Foundation                                                              
        411                                                                     

    Section 1034--Transfer of 19th Century Cannon to Museum                 

        411                                                                     

    Section 1035--Expenditures for Declassification Activities              

        411                                                                     

        Section 1036--Authority to Provide Loan Guarantees to Improve       
    Domestic Preparedness to Combat Cyberterrorism                          
        412                                                                     

    Section 1037--V 22 Cockpit Aircraft Voice and Flight Data Recorders     

        413                                                                     


    TITLE XI--DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE CIVILIAN PERSONNEL                      

        414                                                                     

    LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS                                                  

        414                                                                     


        Section 1101--Employment and Compensation Provisions for Employees  
    of Temporary Organizations Established by Law or Executive Order        
        414                                                                     

    Section 1102--Restructuring the Restriction on Degree Training          

        414                                                                     

        Section 1103--Continuation of Tuition Reimbursement and Training for
    Certain Acquisition Personnel                                           
        414                                                                     

        Section 1104--Extension of Authority for Civilian Employees of the  
    Department of Defense to Participate Voluntarily in Reductions in Force 
        414                                                                     

        Section 1105--Expansion of Defense Civilian Intelligence Personnel  
    System Positions                                                        
        415                                                                     

        Section 1106--Pilot Program for Reengineering the Equal Employment  
    Opportunity Complaint Process                                           
        415                                                                     


    TITLE XII--MATTERS RELATING TO OTHER NATIONS                            

        416                                                                     

    ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST                                               

        416                                                                     

    Arms Control Implementation                                             

        416                                                                     

    LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS                                                  

        416                                                                     

        Section 1201--Support of United Nations-Sponsored Efforts to Inspect
    and Monitor Iraqi Weapons Activities                                    
        416                                                                     

        Section 1202--Annual Report Assessing Effect of Continued Operations
    in the Balkans Region on Readiness to Execute the National Military     
    Strategy                                                                
        417                                                                     

    Section 1203--Situation in the Balkans                                  

        417                                                                     

    Section 1204--Limitation on Number of Military Personnel in Colombia    

        419                                                                     


        TITLE XIII--COOPERATIVE THREAT REDUCTION WITH STATES OF THE FORMER  
    SOVIET UNION                                                            
        420                                                                     

    OVERVIEW                                                                

        420                                                                     

    ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST                                               

        421                                                                     

    Arms Elimination Projects in Russia                                     

        421                                                                     

    Arms Elimination Projects in Ukraine                                    

        422                                                                     

    Biological Weapons Proliferation Prevention in Russia                   

        422                                                                     

    Chemical Weapons Destruction in Russia                                  

        424                                                                     

    Defense and Military Contacts                                           

        426                                                                     

    Elimination of Plutonium Production in Russia                           

        426                                                                     

    Fissile Material Processing and Packaging                               

        427                                                                     

    Fissile Material Storage Facility                                       

        427                                                                     

    Nuclear Weapons Storage Security in Russia                              

        428                                                                     

    Nuclear Weapons Transportation Security                                 

        428                                                                     

    Other Assessments and Administrative Support                            

        429                                                                     

    LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS                                                  

        429                                                                     

        Section 1301--Specification of Cooperative Threat Reduction Programs
    and Funds                                                               
        429                                                                     

    Section 1302--Funding Allocations                                       

        430                                                                     

        Section 1303--Prohibition on Use of Funds for Elimination of        
    Conventional Weapons                                                    
        430                                                                     

        Section 1304--Limitations on Use of Funds for Fissile Material      
    Storage Facility                                                        
        430                                                                     

        Section 1305--Limitation on Use of Funds Until Submission of        
    Multiyear Plan                                                          
        430                                                                     

    Section 1306--Russian Nonstrategic Nuclear Arms                         

        430                                                                     

        Section 1307--Limitation on Use of Funds to Support Warhead         
    Dismantlement Processing                                                
        430                                                                     

    Section 1308--Agreement on Nuclear Weapons Storage Sites                

        430                                                                     

        Section 1309--Prohibition on Use of Funds for Construction of Fossil
    Fuel Energy Plants                                                      
        430                                                                     

    Section 1310--Audits of Cooperative Threat Reduction Programs           

        430                                                                     

        Section 1311--Limitation on Use of Funds for Prevention of          
    Biological Weapons Proliferation in Russia                              
        431                                                                     


        TITLE XIV--COMMISSION TO ASSESS THE THREAT TO THE UNITED STATES FROM
    ELECTROMAGNETIC PULSE (EMP) ATTACK                                      
        432                                                                     

    OVERVIEW                                                                

        432                                                                     

    LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS                                                  

        433                                                                     

    Section 1401--Establishment of Commission                               

        433                                                                     

    Section 1402--Duties of Commission                                      

        433                                                                     

    Section 1403--Report                                                    

        433                                                                     

    Section 1404--Powers                                                    

        433                                                                     

    Section 1405--Commission Procedures                                     

        433                                                                     

    Section 1406--Personnel Members                                         

        433                                                                     

    Section 1407--Miscellaneous Administrative Provisions                   

        433                                                                     

    Section 1408--Funding                                                   

        433                                                                     

    Section 1409--Termination of the Commission                             

        433                                                                     


    TITLE XV--PROVISIONS REGARDING VIEQUES ISLAND, PUERTO RICO              

        434                                                                     

    OVERVIEW                                                                

        434                                                                     

        Section 1501--Conditions on Disposal of Naval Ammunition Support    
    Detachment, Vieques Island                                              
        435                                                                     

    Section 1502--Retention of Eastern Portion of Vieques Island            

        436                                                                     

    Section 1503--Limitations on Military Use of Vieques Island             

        436                                                                     

    Section 1504--Economic Assistance for Residents of Vieques Island       

        436                                                                     


    DIVISION B--MILITARY CONSTRUCTION AUTHORIZATIONS                        

        437                                                                     

    PURPOSE                                                                 

        437                                                                     

    MILITARY CONSTRUCTION OVERVIEW                                          

        437                                                                     


    TITLE XXI--ARMY                                                         

        455                                                                     

    SUMMARY                                                                 

        455                                                                     

    ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST                                               

        455                                                                     

    Condition of Barracks to Support Basic Training                         

        455                                                                     

    Improvements to Military Family Housing                                 

        455                                                                     

    Planning and Design                                                     

        456                                                                     

    Unspecified Minor Construction                                          

        456                                                                     

    LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS                                                  

        456                                                                     

    Section 2101--Authorized Army Construction and Land Acquisition Projects

        456                                                                     

    Section 2102--Family Housing                                            

        456                                                                     

    Section 2103--Improvements to Military Family Housing Units             

        456                                                                     

    Section 2104--Authorization of Appropriations, Army                     

        456                                                                     

        Section 2105--Modification of Authority to Carry Out Certain Fiscal 
    Year 1999 Project                                                       
        456                                                                     


    TITLE XXII--NAVY                                                        

        457                                                                     

    SUMMARY                                                                 

        457                                                                     

    ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST                                               

        457                                                                     

        Acquisition of Prepositioned Equipment Maintenance Facilities,      
    Blount Island, Jacksonville, Florida                                    
        457                                                                     

    Improvements to Military Family Housing                                 

        457                                                                     

    LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS                                                  

        457                                                                     

    Section 2201--Authorized Navy Construction and Land Acquisition Projects

        457                                                                     

    Section 2202--Family Housing                                            

        458                                                                     

    Section 2203--Improvements to Military Family Housing Units             

        458                                                                     

    Section 2204--Authorization of Appropriations, Navy                     

        458                                                                     

        Section 2205--Modification of Authority to Carry Out Fiscal Year    
    1997 Project at Marine Corps Combat Development Command, Quantico,      
    Virginia                                                                
        458                                                                     


    TITLE XXIII--AIR FORCE                                                  

        459                                                                     

    SUMMARY                                                                 

        459                                                                     

    ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST                                               

        459                                                                     

    Rome Research Site, New York                                            

        459                                                                     

    LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS                                                  

        459                                                                     

        Section 2301--Authorized Air Force Construction and Land Acquisition
    Projects                                                                
        459                                                                     

    Section 2302--Family Housing                                            

        459                                                                     

    Section 2303--Improvements to Military Family Housing Units             

        460                                                                     

    Section 2304--Authorization of Appropriations, Air Force                

        460                                                                     


    TITLE XXIV--DEFENSE AGENCIES                                            

        461                                                                     

    SUMMARY                                                                 

        461                                                                     

    ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST                                               

        461                                                                     

        Forward Operating Locations in Support of Counter-Drug and Drug     
    Interdiction Activities                                                 
        461                                                                     

    LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS                                                  

        461                                                                     

        Section 2401--Authorized Defense Agencies Construction and Land     
    Acquisition Projects                                                    
        461                                                                     


    Section 2402--Authorization Of Appropriations, Defense Agencies         

        461                                                                     


    TITLE XXV--NORTH ATLANTIC TREATY ORGANIZATION INFRASTRUCTURE            

        462                                                                     

    SUMMARY                                                                 

        462                                                                     

    LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS                                                  

        462                                                                     

    Section 2501--Authorized NATO Construction and Land Acquisition Projects

        462                                                                     

    Section 2502--Authorization of Appropriations, NATO                     

        462                                                                     


    TITLE XXVI--GUARD AND RESERVE FORCES FACILITIES                         

        463                                                                     

    SUMMARY                                                                 

        463                                                                     

    ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST                                               

        463                                                                     

    Planning and Design, Army National Guard                                

        463                                                                     

    Planning and Design, Army Reserve                                       

        463                                                                     

    Unspecified Minor Construction, Army Reserve                            

        463                                                                     

    LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS                                                  

        463                                                                     

        Section 2601--Authorized Guard and Reserve Construction and Land    
    Acquisition Projects                                                    
        463                                                                     


    TITLE XXVII--EXPIRATION AND EXTENSION OF AUTHORIZATIONS                 

        464                                                                     

    LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS                                                  

        464                                                                     

        Section 2701--Expiration of Authorizations and Amounts Required to  
    be Specified by Law                                                     
        464                                                                     

        Section 2702--Extensions of Authorizations of Certain Fiscal Year   
    1998 Projects                                                           
        464                                                                     

        Section 2703--Extension of Authorizations of Certain Fiscal Year    
    1997 Projects                                                           
        464                                                                     

    Section 2704--Effective Date                                            

        464                                                                     


    TITLE XXVIII--GENERAL PROVISIONS                                        

        465                                                                     

    ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST                                               

        465                                                                     

    Military Housing Privatization Initiative                               

        465                                                                     

    Water Quality Issues Affecting Military Installations in the Area of    

    Kaiserslautern, Germany                                                 

        465                                                                     

    LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS                                                  

        465                                                                     

        Subtitle A--Military Construction Program and Military Family       
    Housing Changes                                                         
        465                                                                     

    Section 2801--Revision of Limitations on Space by Pay Grade             

        465                                                                     

        Section 2802--Leasing of Military Family Housing, United States     
    Southern Command, Miami, Florida                                        
        466                                                                     

        Section 2803--Alternative Authority for Acquisition and Improvement 
    of Military Housing                                                     
        466                                                                     

        Section 2804--Expansion of Definition of Armory to Include Readiness
    Centers                                                                 
        466                                                                     

    Subtitle B--Real Property and Facilities Administration                 

        466                                                                     

        Section 2811--Increase in Threshold for Notice and Wait Requirements
    for Real Property Transactions                                          
        466                                                                     

        Section 2812--Enhancement of Authority of Military Departments to   
    Lease Non-Excess Property                                               
        466                                                                     

        Section 2813--Conveyance Authority Regarding Utility Systems of     
    Military Departments                                                    
        466                                                                     

    Subtitle C--Land Conveyances Generally                                  

        467                                                                     

    Part I--Army Conveyances                                                

        467                                                                     

    Section 2831--Transfer of Jurisdiction, Rock Island Arsenal, Illinois   

        467                                                                     

    Section 2832--Land Conveyance, Army Reserve Center, Galesburg, Illinois 

        467                                                                     

    Section 2833--Land Conveyance, Army Reserve Center, Winona, Minnesota   

        467                                                                     

    Section 2834--Land Conveyance, Fort Polk, Louisiana                     

        467                                                                     

    Section 2835--Land Conveyance, Fort Pickett, Virginia                   

        467                                                                     

    Section 2836--Land Conveyance, Fort Dix, New Jersey                     

        467                                                                     

    Section 2837--Land Conveyance, Nike Site 43, Elrama, Pennsylvania       

        468                                                                     

    Section 2838--Land Exchange, Fort Hood, Texas                           

        468                                                                     

        Section 2839--Land Conveyance, Charles Melvin Price Support Center, 
    Illinois                                                                
        468                                                                     

        Section 2840--Land Conveyance, Army Reserve Local Training Center,  
    Chattanooga, Tennessee                                                  
        468                                                                     

    Part II--Navy Conveyances                                               

        468                                                                     

        Section 2851--Modification of Authority for Oxnard Harbor District, 
    Port Hueneme, California, to Use Certain Navy Property                  
        468                                                                     

        Section 2852--Modification of Land Conveyance, Marine Corps Air     
    Station, El Toro, California                                            
        469                                                                     

        Section 2853--Transfer of Jurisdiction, Marine Corps Air Station,   
    Miramar, California                                                     
        469                                                                     

        Section 2854--Lease of Property, Marine Corps Air Station, Miramar, 
    California                                                              
        469                                                                     

    Section 2855--Lease of Property, Naval Air Station, Pensacola, Florida  

        469                                                                     

        Section 2856--Land Exchange, Marine Corps Recruit Depot, San Diego, 
    California                                                              
        470                                                                     

    Section 2857--Land Exchange, Naval Air Reserve Center, Columbus, Ohio   

        470                                                                     

    Section 2858--Land Conveyance, Naval Reserve Center, Tampa, Florida     

        470                                                                     

    Part III--Air Force Conveyances                                         

        470                                                                     

    Section 2861--Land Conveyance, Wright Patterson Air Force Base, Ohio    

        470                                                                     

    Section 2862--Land Conveyance, Point Arena Air Force Station, California

        471                                                                     

    Section 2863--Land Conveyance, Los Angeles Air Force Base, California   

        471                                                                     

    Part IV--Other Conveyances                                              

        471                                                                     

        Section 2871--Conveyance of Army and Air Force Exchange Service     
    Property, Farmers Branch, Texas                                         
        471                                                                     

    Subtitle D--Other Matters                                               

        471                                                                     

        Section 2881--Retention of Easement Authority to Leased Parkland,   
    Marine Corps Base, Camp Pendleton, California                           
        471                                                                     

        Section 2882--Extension of Demonstration Project for Purchase of    
    Fire, Security, Police, Public Works, and Utility Services from Local   
    Government Agencies                                                     
        472                                                                     

    Section 2883--Establishment of World War II Memorial on Guam            

        472                                                                     

        Section 2884--Naming of the Army Missile Testing Range at Kwajalein 
    Atoll as the Ronald Reagan Ballistic Defense Test Site at Kwajalein     
    Atoll                                                                   
        472                                                                     

        Section 2885--Designation of Building at Fort Belvoir, Virginia, in 
    Honor of Andrew T. McNamara                                             
        472                                                                     

        Section 2886--Redesignation of the Balboa Naval Hospital, San Diego,
    California, in Honor of Bob Wilson, a Former Member of the House of     
    Representatives                                                         
        472                                                                     

        Section 2887--Sense of Congress Regarding Importance of Expansion of
    National Training Center, Fort Irwin, California                        
        472                                                                     


        DIVISION C--DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY NATIONAL SECURITY AUTHORIZATION AND
    OTHER AUTHORIZATIONS                                                    
        473                                                                     


    TITLE XXXI--DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY NATIONAL SECURITY PROGRAMS             

        473                                                                     

    OVERVIEW                                                                

        473                                                                     

    Environmental and Other Defense Activities                              

        492                                                                     

    Overview                                                                

        492                                                                     

    Items of Special Interest                                               

        492                                                                     

          Acceleration of the 94 1 program and restoration of infrastructure 
     at the Savannah River Site                                              
        492                                                                     

     Energy Employees Compensation Initiative                                

        492                                                                     

     Hanford tank waste remediation system privatization, phase I            

        494                                                                     

     Mixed oxide fuel fabrication facility                                   

        494                                                                     

     Nonproliferation and national security                                  

        495                                                                     

     Worker and community transition                                         

        495                                                                     

    National Nuclear Security Administration                                

        496                                                                     

    Items of Special Interest                                               

        496                                                                     

          Budget Structure of the National Nuclear Security Administration   
     (NNSA) Campaigns                                                        
        496                                                                     

     Advanced Design and Production Technology (ADAPT)                       

        497                                                                     

     Advanced radiography                                                    

        497                                                                     

     Defense computing and modeling                                          

        498                                                                     

     Laser development                                                       

        500                                                                     

     Pit manufacturing readiness                                             

        501                                                                     


     Tritium readiness                                                       

        502                                                                     

     Construction projects                                                   

        502                                                                     

     Defense programs requirements process                                   

        502                                                                     

     Department of Energy Reorganization Issues                              

        503                                                                     

     Directed stockpile work                                                 

        505                                                                     

     Stockpile evaluation                                                    

        505                                                                     

     Stockpile maintenance                                                   

        505                                                                     

     Program direction for defense programs                                  

        506                                                                     

     Readiness in Technical Base and Facilities (RTBF)                       

        506                                                                     

     Operations of facilities                                                

        507                                                                     

     Special projects                                                        

        507                                                                     

    LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS                                                  

        508                                                                     

    Subtitle A--National Security Programs Authorizations                   

        508                                                                     

    Section 3101--National Nuclear Security Administration                  

        508                                                                     

    Section 3102--Defense Environmental Restoration and Waste Management    

        508                                                                     

    Section 3103--Other Defense Activities                                  

        508                                                                     

    Section 3104--Defense Facilities Closure Projects                       

        508                                                                     

    Section 3105--Defense Environmental Management Privatization            

        508                                                                     

    Section 3106--Defense Nuclear Waste Disposal                            

        508                                                                     

    Subtitle B--Recurring General Provisions                                

        508                                                                     

    Section 3121--Reprogramming                                             

        508                                                                     

    Section 3122--Limits on General Plant Projects                          

        508                                                                     

    Section 3123--Limits on Construction Projects                           

        508                                                                     

    Section 3124--Fund Transfer Authority                                   

        509                                                                     

    Section 3125--Authority for Conceptual and Construction Design          

        509                                                                     

        Section 3126--Authority for Emergency Planning, Design and          
    Construction Activities                                                 
        509                                                                     

    Section 3127--Availability of Funds                                     

        509                                                                     

        Section 3128--Authority Relating to Transfer of Defense             
    Environmental Management Funds                                          
        509                                                                     

        Section 3131--Funding for Termination Costs for Tank Waste          
    Remediation System Environmental Project, Richland, Washington          
        509                                                                     

        Section 3132--Enhanced Cooperation Between National Nuclear Security
    Administration and Ballistic Missile Defense Organization               
        510                                                                     

        Section 3133--Required Contents of Future-Years Nuclear Security    
    Program to be Submitted with Fiscal Year 2002 Budget and Limitation on  
    Obligation of Certain Funds Pending Submission of that Program          
        510                                                                     

    Section 3134--Limitation on Obligation of Certain Funds                 

        510                                                                     


    TITLE XXXII--DEFENSE NUCLEAR FACILITIES SAFETY BOARD                    

        511                                                                     

    ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST                                               

        511                                                                     

    Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board                                 

        511                                                                     

    LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS                                                  

        511                                                                     

    Section 3201--Authorization                                             

        511                                                                     


    TITLE XXXIII--NATIONAL DEFENSE STOCKPILE                                

        512                                                                     

    LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS                                                  

        512                                                                     

    Section 3301--Authorized Uses of Stockpile Funds                        

        512                                                                     

        Section 3302--Use of Excess Titanium Sponge in the National Defense 
    Stockpile to Manufacture Department of Defense Equipment                
        512                                                                     


    TITLE XXXIV--MARITIME ADMINISTRATION                                    

        513                                                                     

    ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST                                               

        513                                                                     

    Merchant Marine Academy                                                 

        513                                                                     

    LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS                                                  

        513                                                                     

    Section 3401--Authorization  of Appropriations for Fiscal Year 2001     

        513                                                                     

        Section 3402--Extension of Period For Disposal of Obsolete Vessels  
    From the National Reserve Fleet                                         
        513                                                                     

        Section 3403--Authority to Convey National Defense Reserve Fleet    
    Vessel, GLACIER                                                         
        513                                                                     

    Departmental Data                                                       

        514                                                                     

    Department of Defense Authorization Request                             

        514                                                                     

    Military Construction Authorization Request                             

        515                                                                     

    Committee Position                                                      

        515                                                                     

    Communications From Other Committees                                    

        515                                                                     

    Fiscal Data                                                             

        521                                                                     

    Congressional Budget Office Estimate                                    

        521                                                                     

    Congressional Budget Office Cost Estimate                               

        521                                                                     

    Committee Cost Estimate                                                 

        542                                                                     

    Oversight Findings                                                      

        542                                                                     

    Constitutional Authority Statement                                      

        542                                                                     

    Statement of Federal Mandates                                           

        542                                                                     

    Roll Call Votes                                                         

        542                                                                     

    Changes in Existing Law Made by the Bill, as Reported                   

        551                                                                     

    Additional Views                                                        

        690                                                                     

   Additional views of John M. Spratt, Jr                                  

        690                                                                     

   Additional views of Steven T. Kuykendall                                

        694                                                                     

   Additional views of Baron P. Hill                                       

        695                                                                     

   Additional views of Joseph R. Pitts, John M. Spratt, Jr                 

        697                                                                     

      Additional views of Robert A. Underwood, Neil Abercrombie, Solomon P.
   Ortiz, Thomas H. Allen, Silvestre Reyes                                 
        698                                                                     

      Additional views of Loretta Sanchez, Lane Evans, Neil Abercrombie,   
   Patrick J. Kennedy, Thomas H. Allen, Adam Smith, Ellen O. Tauscher,     
   Robert E. Andrews, Mike Thompson                                        
        700                                                                     

      Additional views of Loretta Sanchez, Neil Abercrombie, Ike Skelton,  
   Robert A. Underwood, Patrick J. Kennedy, Robert A. Brady                
        701                                                                     


106 th Congress                                                         

Report                                                                  

                                                                            

                                                                             

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES                                                

2d Session                                                              

106 616                                                                 

                                                                        



       FLOYD D. SPENCE NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2001 



                                                                         

  May 12, 2000.--Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the    
 State of the Union and ordered to be printed                            
                                                                         

  Mr. Spence , from the Committee on Armed Services, submitted the       
 following                                                               
 REPORT                                                                  

 together with                                                           

 ADDITIONAL VIEWS                                                        

 [To accompany H.R. 4205]                                                

 [Including cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Office]            


      The Committee on Armed Services, to whom was referred the bill (H.R. 
   4205) to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2001 for military     
   activities of the Department of Defense and for military construction,  
   to prescribe military personnel strengths for fiscal year 2001, and for 
   other purposes, having considered the same, report favorably thereon    
   with amendments and recommend that the bill as amended do pass.         
   The amendments are as follows:                                          

      The MDBUamendment strikes out all after the enacting clause of the   
   bill and inserts a new text which appears in italic type in the reported
   bill.                                                                   
      The title of the bill is amended to reflect the amendment to the text
   of the bill.                                                            
                          EXPLANATION OF THE COMMITTEE AMENDMENTS                 

      The committee adopted an amendment in the nature of a substitute     
   during the consideration of H.R. 4205. The title of the bill is amended 
   to reflect the amendment to the text of the bill. The remainder of the  
   report discusses the bill, as amended.                                  
                                          PURPOSE                                 

      The bill would--(1) Authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2001 for
   procurement and for research, development, test and evaluation (RDT&E); 
   (2) Authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2001 for operation and     
   maintenance (O&M) and for working capital funds; (3) Authorize for      
   fiscal year 2001: (a) the personnel strength for each active duty       
   component of the military departments; (b) the personnel strength for   
   the Selected Reserve for each reserve component of the armed forces; (c)
   the military training student loads for each of the active and reserve  
   components of the military departments; (4) Modify various elements of  
   compensation for military personnel and impose certain requirements and 
   limitations on personnel actions in the defense establishment; (5)      
   Authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2001 for military construction 
   and family housing; (6) Authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2001   
   for the Department of Energy national security programs; (7) Modify     
   provisions related to the National Defense Stockpile; and (8) Authorize 
   appropriations for fiscal year 2001 for the Maritime Administration.    
                      RELATIONSHIP OF AUTHORIZATION TO APPROPRIATIONS             

      The bill does not generally provide budget authority. The bill       
   authorizes appropriations. Subsequent appropriation acts provide budget 
   authority. The bill addresses the following categories in the Department
   of Defense budget: procurement; research, development, test and         
   evaluation; operation and maintenance; working capital funds, military  
   personnel; and military construction and family housing. The bill also  
   addresses Department of Energy National Security Programs and the       
   Maritime Administration.                                                
      Active duty and reserve personnel strengths authorized in this bill  
   and legislation affecting compensation for military personnel determine 
   the remaining appropriation requirements of the Department of Defense.  
   However, this bill does not provide authorization of specific dollar    
   amounts for personnel.                                                  
                            SUMMARY OF AUTHORIZATION IN THE BILL                  

      The President requested budget authority of $305.3 billion for the   
   national defense budget function for fiscal year 2001. Of this amount,  
   the President requested $291.0 billion for the Department of Defense    
   (including $8.0 billion for military construction and family housing)   
   and $13.1 billion for Department of Energy national security programs   
   and the Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board.                        
      The committee recommends an overall level of $309.9 billion in budget
   authority. This amount is consistent with the discretionary defense     
   spending limitations imposed by the Balanced Budget Act of 1997 and it  
   represents an increase of approximately $21.1 billion from the amount   
   authorized for appropriation by the National Defense Authorization Act  
   for Fiscal Year 2000 (Public Law 106 65). Overall, the committee's      
   recommendation is consistent with the amounts established in the        
   Concurrent Resolution on the Budget for Fiscal Year 2001 for the        
   national defense budget function.                                       
                              SUMMARY TABLE OF AUTHORIZATIONS                     

      The following table provides a summary of the amounts requested and  
   that would be authorized for appropriation in the bill (in the column   
   labeled ``Budget Authority Implication of Committee Recommendation'')   
   and the committee's estimate of how the committee's recommendations     
   relate to the budget totals for the national defense function. For      
   purposes of estimating the budget authority implications of committee   
   action, the table reflects the numbers contained in the President's     
   budget for proposals not in the committee's legislative jurisdiction.   

[Graphic Image Not Available]

[Graphic Image Not Available]

[Graphic Image Not Available]

[Graphic Image Not Available]

[Graphic Image Not Available]

[Graphic Image Not Available]


                              RATIONALE FOR THE COMMITTEE BILL                    

      The National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2001 is the   
   first defense authorization bill prepared for the new millennium. It    
   reflects the committee's view of, and commitment to, the policies,      
   programs, and priorities required to maintain U.S. military preeminence 
   in the 21st century.                                                    
      The committee bill authorizes $309.9 billion for defense during      
   fiscal year 2001--an addition of $4.5 billion to the Administration's   
   defense budget request. Although this bill continues the trend of adding
   to the Administration's defense budget request, the committee remains   
   troubled by the mismatch between requirements, forces, and resources    
   that continues to exist and will remain, even with the increases        
   contained in this bill.                                                 
      In the committee's view, the public debate over the adequacy of U.S. 
   defense funding has turned an important corner. In recent years, efforts
   to increase defense have encountered skepticism and outright opposition 
   by an Administration that came into office believing that defense could 
   be reduced substantially without risk to the national security. The end 
   of the Cold War was accompanied by annual real decreases in defense     
   spending, as the ``peace dividend'' was applied to other priorities.    
   There now appears to be a general consensus that U.S. defense spending  
   has fallen too far too fast. These real decreases have resulted in      
   significant problems in readiness, equipment modernization, and quality 
   of life for U.S. service personnel, and a significant overall decline in
   U.S. military capability. This year, the committee has again sought to  
   address the most critical shortfalls in these areas by increasing       
   funding above the Administration's budget request.                      
                         MDBU U.S. STRATEGY FOR THE NEW MILLENNIUM                

      U.S. military strategy continues to be guided by the tenets outlined 
   in the 1997 Quadrennial Defense Review (QDR). The QDR, building upon its
   predecessor, the 1993 Bottom-Up Review, postulated that the sizing and  
   composition of U.S. military forces should be based on the requirement  
   to fight two nearly simultaneous major theater wars. While the committee
   believes that the two major theater war standard has been a realistic   
   and useful planning tool, the QDR was a budget-driven exercise, rather  
   than a strategy-driven one. Even so, the defense resources historically 
   requested by the Administration have never been adequate to execute the 
   strategy without accepting a greater than prudent level of risk.        
      Testifying before the committee on October 21, 1999, the Air Force,  
   Navy, and Marine Corps service chiefs each stated that they lacked the  
   capabilities required of a true ``two major theater war'' military      
   force. Army Chief of Staff General Eric Shinseki declared that the Army 
   could execute the two major theater war strategy only with ``high       
   risk.'' In subsequent testimony on February 10, 2000, General Shinseki  
   stated, ``You measure that risk in national treasure, lives, and        
   expended dollars.'' Former Secretary of Defense James Schlesinger told  
   the committee on February 8, 2000, ``The simple reality today is that we
   cannot fight two MRCs [major regional contingencies] more or less       
   simultaneously.'' Even former Secretary of Defense William Perry, who   
   oversaw the Clinton Administration's early defense efforts, testified   
   before the committee, ``We do not have a capability of fighting two     
   [major theater wars] at the same time. For one thing, we do not have    
   enough airlift and sealift to go to two places at once.''               
      The next Administration will have an ability, through the QDR        
   process, to place its imprint on the strategy that will guide the level 
   and composition of U.S. military forces in the new millennium. The      
   committee expects that the next QDR, due out in September 2001, will be 
   strategy-based and not budget constrained. The committee has long       
   believed that the level of resources necessary for defense must flow    
   from an assessment of U.S. strategy, existing and emerging threats, and 
   the force levels required to deal with those threats. Under this        
   Administration, the reverse has been true. Anticipated budget levels    
   have driven the sizing and composition of U.S. forces and the strategy  
   that can be implemented with those force levels. This approach stands   
   sound national security planning on its head.                           
      The committee's approach again this year has been guided by an effort
   to develop a defense budget that is more responsive to the post-Cold War
   threats faced by the United States and commensurate with America's      
   global responsibilities--and, in so doing, to ensure that U.S. forces   
   can successfully execute their missions at the lowest possible level of 
   risk.                                                                   
                      MDBU MAINTAINING AMERICA'S MILITARY PREEMINENCE             

      In its Phase I report last fall on the emerging global security      
   environment, the United States Commission on National Security/21st     
   Century reported that the United States can expect to confront a variety
   of new and asymmetric threats in the next several decades that will pose
   significant challenges to U.S. security. These threats include the      
   spread of ballistic missiles and weapons of mass destruction,           
   information warfare, terrorism, and the use by other states of space for
   military purposes. According to the commission, ``threats to American   
   security will be more diffuse, harder to anticipate, and more difficult 
   to neutralize than ever before. Deterrence will not work as it once did;
   in many cases it may not work at all.''                                 
      In its Phase II report, issued in April 2000, the commission         
   concluded, ``The maintenance of America's strength is a long-term       
   commitment and cannot be assured without conscious, dedicated effort.'' 
   This places a premium on ensuring that America's armed forces are       
   sufficiently resourced, manned, and equipped, to successfully confront  
   emerging threats. This fundamental principle has guided the committee's 
   approach to the defense budget for the past six years. The committee    
   agrees with the commission's conclusion that without a sustained defense
   effort, the United States ``will find its power reduced, its interests  
   challenged even more than they are today, and its influence eroded.''   
   Secretary Schlesinger echoed this point in testimony before the         
   committee on February 8, 2000, when he stated, ``The United States      
   simply cannot continue to play the global leadership role envisioned by 
   the current national security strategy without a substantial increase in
   defense spending.MDBU . . . We are resting on our laurels as the sole   
   superpower,'' he stated, and warned that without sustained increases in 
   defense, ``we are likely to see a train wreck.''                        
      Unfortunately, in the past year, additional strains have been imposed
   on the U.S. military, as the armed forces continue to be asked to do    
   more with less. This reality has again called into question the armed   
   forces' ability to carry out the national military strategy postulated  
   in the QDR. One year ago, U.S. forces led NATO's Operation Allied Force 
   campaign against Yugoslavia. For the Air Force, this operation was the  
   equivalent of a major theater war. The 78MDBU-day military campaign     
   exposed serious strains within the U.S. military, illuminating problems 
   that have resulted from underfunding and over-extending the military. It
   also led to the second major peacekeeping operation involving U.S.      
   forces in the Balkans in five years. Like the peacekeeping mission in   
   Bosnia, the NATO-led Kosovo peacekeeping operation is of indefinite     
   duration and threatens to involve the United States in an ever-deepening
   quagmire. The requirements of peacekeeping pose significant burdens on  
   U.S. forces that detract from their primary warfighting mission. As a   
   result, readiness has declined, equipment has been severely strained,   
   and quality of life has suffered.                                       
      The committee recognizes that the United States has global interests 
   and responsibilities. However, the increasing use of the armed forces   
   for humanitarian and civil support missions abroad diminishes the       
   military's capacity to respond to a significant conflict or crisis. The 
   U.S. armed forces were employed overseas more times in the past decade  
   than in the previous 45 years. Since 1989, the Army has participated in 
   35 major deployments, including a significant number of peacekeeping    
   missions. During the same period, the Army, including its Reserve       
   Components, reduced its force structure by more than 34 percent.        
   Continued high operating tempos risk bending the force to the breaking  
   point. The employment of U.S. military forces should be selective and   
   based on a pragmatic calculation of the risks and benefits to U.S.      
   national security. In establishing the funding priorities in this year's
   bill, the committee is again guided by this fundamental principle.      
                      MDBU THE ADMINISTRATION'S DEFENSE BUDGET REQUEST            

      The President's defense budget request for fiscal year 2001 reflects 
   the first significant real increase in defense funding in a decade and, 
   unlike in previous years, does not appear to be premised on questionable
   economic assumptions, assumed savings, and outlay gimmicks. In          
   submitting its proposed budget, the Administration appears to recognize 
   that quality of life, readiness, and modernization shortfalls are real, 
   that they have real-world implications, and that increased defense      
   spending is necessary. However, as Secretary of Defense William Cohen   
   testified before the committee on February 9, 2000, ``One budgetary     
   year, one submission or two submissions of real growth increase does not
   a military make. It's going to take sustained commitment over the       
   years.''                                                                
      Unfortunately, despite the increases proposed by the President this  
   year, serious mismatches between strategy, forces, and resources        
   continue to exist. Over the past eight years, the Administration's      
   cumulative defense budget requests have fallen more than $300 billion   
   short of even covering the costs of inflation relative to the fiscal    
   year 1993 defense spending levels it inherited--spending levels that    
   already reflected significant cutbacks resulting from President Bush's  
   post-Cold War downsizing of the U.S. military.                          
      Although U.S. military strategy remains essentially unchanged from   
   that articulated in the QDR, the committee believes that the            
   Administration's current and planned levels of defense funding are      
   insufficient to carry out that strategy. The committee believes that the
   United States will need to invest significantly more resources in order 
   to maintain even current military capabilities. As Secretary Schlesinger
   testified before the committee on February 8, 2000, ``We cannot maintain
   the present force structure and reequip the forces on the present budget
   levels or the prospective budget levels. . . . The simple reality is    
   that we cannot sustain those forces. This is not a matter of opinion. It
   is a matter of simple arithmetic. . . .'' The committee has sought      
   repeatedly to provide additional resources for defense that would       
   address the most serious deficiencies that exist.                       

      Despite significant congressional increases to the defense budget    
   last year, the service chiefs testified before the committee in October 
   1999 to having at least $9 billion in critical unfunded requirements in 
   fiscal year 2000, excluding the unbudgeted costs of Kosovo operations.  
   Few, if any, of these shortfalls were addressed in the fiscal year 2000 
   supplemental submitted with the budget request. This led the House to   
   support a significant increase to the Administration's supplemental     
   request. In testimony before the committee earlier this year, the       
   service chiefs identified nearly $16 billion in unfunded military       
   requirements. Since last year, their five-year estimate of shortfalls   
   has increased from $38 billion to $84 billion. As General Eric Shinseki,
   Army Chief of Staff, testified, ``there is still a mismatch between the 
   resources we have and the requirements we may face.''                   
      In a recent report, the Center for Strategic and International       
   Studies (CSIS) concluded, ``A substantial defense strategy-resources    
   mismatch MDBU. MDBU. MDBU. already exists. It is profound. It has been  
   ongoing for some time and will take years to overcome. It is reaching   
   crisis proportions and requires immediate attention.'' With this in     
   mind, the committee has sought to address in this year's budget the most
   serious aspects of this mismatch as they relate to readiness,           
   modernization, and quality of life.                                     
                                  MDBU RESTORING READINESS                        

      Restoring military readiness is a key priority for the committee, as 
   U.S. military readiness is essential to securing America's future as the
   world's sole superpower. In recent years, readiness has suffered as a   
   result of high operations tempo resulting from the high pace of         
   unscheduled contingency deployments around the world.                   
      Historically, the Administration has sought to pay for these         
   deployments by raiding critical readiness accounts. In addition,        
   near-term readiness has been purchased at the expense of future         
   modernization. Admiral Jay Johnson, Chief of Navy Operations, told the  
   committee in October 1999 that ``fiscal constraints force us too often  
   to choose between near-term readiness and future modernization and      
   recapitalization.'' General James Jones, Commandant of the Marine Corps,
   stated, ``We have sacrificed our procurement accounts to assist in      
   meeting the growing costs of keeping our aging equipment and weapons    
   MDBU`ready.'''                                                          
      Unfortunately, the Administration's fiscal year 2001 defense budget  
   request contains few if any increases to readiness accounts and falls   
   well short of addressing the serious readiness problems that exist.     
   Moreover, current budget projections indicate that funding for critical 
   readiness needs will decline next year. Existing readiness problems     
   include a shortage of spare parts, aging equipment, decaying            
   infrastructure, growing equipment and facilities' backlogs, insufficient
   training, and personnel shortages. According to Air Force Chief of Staff
   General Michael Ryan, the overall combat readiness of the Air Force has 
   declined by 26 percent since 1996.                                      
      The committee finds this situation troubling, particularly in light  
   of the fact that the Administration has at long last acknowledged that  
   serious readiness shortfalls exist. In testifying on the fiscal year    
   2001 budget request on February 9, 2000, General Henry Shelton, Chairman
   of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, acknowledged that even recent funding     
   increases ``will not guarantee the levels of readiness needed to        
   significantly reduce risk in executing the National Military Strategy.''
      Over the past five years, the Congress has added more than $7 billion
   to the Administration's budget requests to fund day-to-day operations,  
   training, equipment and facility maintenance, and spare parts. The      
   committee bill continues this trend by adding significant additional    
   resources for critical readiness priorities.                            
                                  MDBU EQUIPPING THE FORCE                        

      For the United States to remain the world's preeminent military      
   power, additional investment in the development and procurement of      
   modern technology and equipment is essential. Our men and women in      
   uniform cannot be expected to fight and win the nation's wars in the    
   21st century solely with equipment developed and acquired in the 20th   
   century.                                                                
      Although this year's budget request increases funding for research,  
   development, testing, and evaluation for the first time in five years,  
   important shortfalls remain in these critical accounts. In particular,  
   additional efforts are required in the area of national and theater     
   missile defenses. The committee budget reflects the committee's         
   historically strong support for the development of technologies that    
   could be deployed to protect the American homeland from the real and    
   growing threat posed by the proliferation of ballistic missiles and the 
   weapons of mass destruction they carry.                                 
      The Administration's budget request for fiscal year 2001 meets, for  
   the first time, the Administration's own target of providing $60 billion
   for the procurement of equipment essential to a modern military.        
   However, this goal was attained through the use of innovative           
   accounting, such as including submarine overhaul funds in the           
   procurement accounts for the first time.                                
      Despite meeting this milestone, the committee is troubled by the fact
   that the $60.3 billion request is $1.5 billion below what the           
   Administration projected the request would be one year ago. This is     
   difficult to comprehend in an overall defense budget characterized by   
   real spending growth.                                                   
      The committee notes that the military of 2000 is continuing to live  
   off the equipment investment decisions made almost two decades earlier. 
   The defense build-up that occurred under President Reagan has served the
   nation well. However, the force that resulted from this build-up is     
   precisely the one being worn out as a result of extensive operational   
   deployments and inadequate resourcing. As Secretary Schlesinger told the
   committee, the U.S. military continues to live off and wear out the     
   ``capital'' of the late Cold War.                                       
      During its examination of the Administration's budget request, the   
   committee heard testimony from a variety of witnesses, including former 
   Department of Defense officials, who testified that the Administration's
   procurement budget was insufficient to modernize and equip the current  
   QDR force well into the 21st century. The CSIS report estimated that    
   ``DOD procurement budgets will need to average $164 billion annually''  
   over the next 10 years ``to provide for steady and continued            
   modernization and replacement of the QDR force.MDBU . . .'' Other       
   estimates have suggested that the current procurement budget is         
   underfunded by $25 billion to $50 billion. Former Deputy Secretary of   
   Defense John Hamre, in Senate testimony, stated, ``Even though we got to
   $60 billion in our modernization budget, we're still not really making  
   up for the hole that we dug for ourselves during . . . the second half  
   of the '80s and the MDBU'90s.'' Even Secretary Perry testified before   
   the committee that procurement is underfunded. ``My own judgment is it  
   probably needs to be perhaps $70 to $80 billion,'' he declared.         
      Over the past five years, the committee has added nearly $18 billion 
   to the Administration's procurement budget requests and this bill adds  
   another $2.0 billion to the procurement accounts largely to meet the    
   most critical unfunded modernization requirements identified by the     
   service chiefs.                                                         
                     MDBU KEEPING FAITH MDBUWITH OUR MILITARY PERSONNEL           

      Ensuring a decent quality of life for military personnel and their   
   families remains central to the committee's efforts to revitalize the   
   all-volunteer U.S. armed forces. America's military is only as good as  
   the people who serve in it. Recruiting and retaining top-notch personnel
   remains a key committee priority in this year's bill.                   
      In recent years, each of the military services has encountered       
   difficulty in recruiting and retaining qualified personnel. With this in
   mind, the committee bill makes a series of improvements to the pay,     
   allowances, benefits, and living conditions of American military        
   personnel that significantly enhance the quality of life for them and   
   their families. The committee's actions follow up on last year's        
   initiatives taken by the Congress with respect to pay raises, pay table 
   reform, military retirement benefits, basic allowance for housing,      
   special pay and retention bonuses, and the military Thrift Savings Plan.
      In particular, the committee bill removes the barriers to an         
   effective military healthcare system by restoring access to prescription
   drug benefits for Medicare-eligible retirees, reduces out-of-pocket     
   costs for service personnel participating in the TRICARE Prime and      
   TRICARE Prime Remote programs, and expands the coverage provided under  
   this program to family members. Moreover, the bill allows TRICARE       
   reimbursements to be tailored to local area costs and allows            
   reimbursement for travel expenses incurred resulting from long-distance 
   referrals for medical care. The committee bill also makes a number of   
   management initiatives that are expected to save the Defense Health     
   Program over $500 million, which can be reinvested in benefits, instead 
   of being squandered on administration. The committee's actions will     
   result in improved access, portability of benefit, and increased savings
   to U.S. service personnel for medical care.                             
      In short, the committee bill fulfills the promise to make continued  
   improvements in compensation and health care programs begun in last     
   year's National Defense Authorization Act. In addition, the committee   
   bill includes a provision to eliminate the statutory requirement that   
   service members pay for 15 percent of housing costs from their own      
   pockets, and to authorize the Secretary of Defense to increase the basic
   allowance for housing rates while reducing out-of-pocket housing        
   expenses for military members to zero by fiscal year 2005.              
      Military healthcare, morale, welfare, and recreation programs, as    
   well as the quality of facilities in which military personnel live and  
   work, also have a tangible effect on service members, their families,   
   and career decisions. Unfortunately, the Administration's budget request
   significantly underfunds military construction and healthcare           
   improvements. The committee bill goes a long way toward improving the   
   quality of life for U.S. military personnel and their families.         
                  MDBU THE COMMITTEE BILL: INVESTING FOR THE 21ST CENTURY         

      Over the past five years, the Congress has added nearly $50 billion  
   to the Administration's proposed defense budgets. These increases were  
   necessary, but not sufficient. They have helped stop the hemorrhaging of
   America's defenses, but restoring U.S. military capability to that      
   required by U.S. commitments and national interests requires more. While
   the committee recognizes that additional defense investments are        
   required, there is no question that U.S. national security would be     
   worse off had the committee and the Congress not acted in a responsible 
   manner to address the military's most pressing problems.                
      Modernizing and maintaining today's military forces, following on the
   heels of a decade of real decline in defense budgets, will require the  
   kind of sustained commitment and investment in the years ahead that took
   place in the early 1980s. Some may argue that the nation cannot afford  
   such an investment. In the committee's view, what the nation cannot     
   afford is another decade, like the last, of declining defense budgets   
   and shrinking military forces if the United States is to remain a       
   superpower able to promote and protect its global interests.            
      It is with this reality in mind that the committee has crafted a     
   defense budget designed to provide our service personnel with the best  
   tools our country can produce to enable them to defend our nation's     
   people, interests, and values. The committee bill represents the minimum
   funding necessary to accomplish that goal. Although a greater level of  
   investment in America's security will be necessary over the coming years
   if the nation is to be secure from the range of threats it will likely  
   confront, this bill is a necessary first step toward ensuring that      
   America's military can meet the challenges that lie ahead, and ensure   
   the safety and security of all Americans, well into the new millennium. 

                                          HEARINGS                                

      Committee consideration of the National Defense Authorization Act for
   Fiscal Year 2001 results from extensive hearings that began on February 
   9, 2000 and that were completed on March 23, 2000. The full committee   
   conducted 6 sessions. In addition, a total of 27 sessions were conducted
   by five different subcommittees and two panels of the committee on      
   various titles of the bill. MDBU                                        

          DIVISION A--DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION                         

          MDBU TITLE I--PROCUREMENT                                               

          MDBU OVERVIEW                                                           

      In October 1995, the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff first     
   advised the Secretary of Defense that in order to recapitalize the U.S. 
   armed forces after a decade of ever-decreasing defense procurement      
   budgets, $60 billion would be required annually and should be achieved  
   by fiscal year 1998. Over four years after this pronouncement and three 
   years after its subsequent endorsement by the 1997 Quadrennial Defense  
   Review (QDR), the fiscal year 2001 budget request finally reached that  
   level, although it is $1.5 billion below what was forecast at the time  
   the fiscal year 2000 budget was submitted to the Congress one year      
   agoMDBU--the sixth consecutive year in which this situation has         
   occurred. Consequently, it is not surprising that the service chiefs    
   continue to lament that many of their modernization needs are going     
   unmet. What is surprising is the fact that, notwithstanding these unmet 
   needs, the future years defense program similarly forecasts reductions  
   to the procurement budgets in fiscal years 2004 and 2005 from those made
   a year ago while, at the same time, prominent former Department of      
   Defense (DOD) leaders in the current Administration advocate large      
   increases to these budgets.                                             
      For example, former Secretary of Defense, William Perry, testified   
   before the committee earlier this year that, ``Procurement proposed to  
   you in this budget is $60 billion in round figures. My own judgment is  
   it probably needs to be perhaps $70 to $80 billion MDBU. MDBU. MDBU.''  
   Also, in testimony before the Defense Subcommittee of the Senate        
   Appropriations Committee just prior to his resignation in March, former 
   Deputy Secretary of Defense, John Hamre, noted, ``Even though we got to 
   $60 billion in our modernization budget, we're still not really making  
   up for the hole that we dug for ourselves during the '90s. . . .        
   actually the second half of the '80s and the '90s. And we're going to   
   have to do a better job later on. This is where people said, MDBU`Well  
   what will it cost to do that?' I don't believe it's $100 billion a year 
   to do that, but I think it's in the $10 billion to $15 billion more a   
   year for procurement in order to start getting out of that hole.''      
      Having added nearly $18 billion to the procurement budget requests of
   the past five years, the committee obviously shares the views of the two
   former senior DOD officials. However, during most of this period the    
   committee has found itself to be seriously hampered in advocating a     
   dramatically larger modernization budget by a lack of support from the  
   DOD civilian leadership--including those individuals who now have       
   testified that, indeed, increased procurement funding is required.      
   Consequently, it has been unable to sustain the healthy $5 to $6 billion
   adds to the procurement accounts that it made in fiscal years 1996 and  
   1997. Nevertheless, fiscal year 2001 marks the sixth consecutive year   
   the committee has increased the President's procurement budget, and the 
   $2.6 billion added has again been largely devoted to funding equipment  
   for which, according to the service chiefs, requirements have not been  
   met.                                                                    
      The committee continues to strongly believe that the resources       
   provided to the Department to carry out its national security strategy  
   of preparing to win two nearly simultaneous major theater wars is       
   inadequate. If this strategy remains intact following the fiscal year   
   2001 QDR, then it is imperative that the next Administration provide    
   adequate resources to modernize our armed forces from the outset and    
   sustain these resources for as long as required. As stated by former    
   Secretary of Defense James Schlesinger in his testimony to the committee
   this year, ``The United States simply cannot continue to play the global
   leadership role envisioned by the current national security strategy    
   without a substantial increase in defense spending.MDBU .MDBU .MDBU     
   .MDBU We cannot maintain the present force structure and reequip the    
   forces on the present budget levels or the prospective budget levels.'' 

[Graphic Image Not Available]

                                 AIRCRAFT PROCUREMENT, ARMY                       

                                          OVERVIEW                                

      The budget request contained $1,323.3 million for Aircraft           
   Procurement, Army for fiscal year 2001. The committee recommends        
   authorization of $1,542.8 million for fiscal year 2001.                 
      The committee recommends approval of the request except for those    
   programs adjusted in the following table. Unless otherwise specified,   
   adjustments are without prejudice and based on affordability            
   considerations.                                                         

[Graphic Image Not Available]

[Graphic Image Not Available]

[Graphic Image Not Available]


                                  ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST                       

           AH 64 modifications                                                     

      The budget request contained $18.5 million for AH 64 modifications   
   but included no funds to continue procurement of the oil debris         
   detection system (ODDS) or the vibration management enhancement program 
   (VMEP).                                                                 
      The ODDS is an on-board detection system that alerts aircrews to the 
   presence of metal chips in engines and propeller gear boxes, which      
   allows flights to be terminated prior to catastrophic failure of        
   critical components. The system also permits the clearing of smaller    
   particles that routinely accumulate in engine oil and cause false       
   impending engine failure alarms resulting in unnecessary termination of 
   aircraft missions and costly engine diagnostics.                        
      The VMEP is an Army National Guard (ARNG) effort currently directed  
   toward resolving vibration management problems on the ARNG's AH 64      
   Apache fleet, but the committee understands the technology is also      
   applicable to the UH 60 Blackhawk. The committee continues to support   
   the VMEP because of its belief that such on-board diagnostic            
   capabilities contribute significantly to both aircrew safety and        
   improved aircraft reliability.                                          
      Since the ODDS, which has been successfully integrated into other    
   Department of Defense aircraft, both reduces aircraft maintenance costs 
   and enhances aircrew safety, the committee recommends an increase of    
   $5.0 million to incorporate the ODDS on AH 64 Apaches. The committee    
   also recommends an increase of $7.0 million to continue procurement of  
   VMEP systems for the ARNG Apache fleet and to transition this technology
   to the Blackhawk.                                                       
      In total, the committee recommends $30.5 million for AH 64           
   modifications, an increase of $12.0 million.                            
           Airborne reconnaissance low (ARL)                                       

      The budget request contained no funds to procure ARL aircraft. The   
   ARL supports intelligence collection requirements for forward-deployed  
   force projection, operations other-than-war, and mid-intensity          
   conflicts.                                                              
      The committee understands that the final ARL aircraft validated by   
   the Joint Requirements Oversight Council remains unfunded and is        
   required to replace the less capable ARL-imagery intelligence (I)       
   aircraft lost in South America in 1999. The ARL M possesses integrated  
   imagery intelligence, communications intelligence, a moving target      
   indicator and synthetic aperture radar; consequently, it offers a       
   broader intelligence collection capability than the ARL I aircraft.     
      The committee notes that the Army Chief of Staff has identified a    
   $31.0 million unfunded requirement in fiscal year 2001 for this         
   replacement aircraft. In support of this requirement, the committee     
   recommends $31.0 million for one ARL M replacement aircraft.            
           Airborne communications                                                 

      The budget request contained no funds to continue procurement of the 
   AN/ARC 220 aviation high frequency radios, which provide secure voice   
   and data communications capability between Army helicopters flying      
   nap-of-the-earth missions and beyond-line-of-sight aviation tactical    
   operations centers.                                                     
      The committee notes that the Task Force Hawk after action report     
   identified the lack of such capability in AH 64 Apache attack           
   helicopters as a major deficiency for conducting long-range strike      
   missions. The committee understands that the budget request will result 
   in a break in the production line. The committee further notes that the 
   Army Chief of Staff has identified a $31.8 million unfunded requirement 
   in fiscal year 2001 for AH 64 Apache and OH 58D Kiowa Warrior helicopter
   radios.                                                                 
      Consequently, the committee recommends an increase of $31.8 million  
   to ensure the fielding of radios for both AH 64 Apache attack           
   helicopters and OH 58D Kiowa Warriors and to prevent a production line  
   break.                                                                  
           Aircraft survivability equipment (ASE)                                  

   The budget request contained no funds for the procurement of ASE.       

      The Aircraft Survivability Equipment Trainer (ASET) IV is a          
   ground-based, mobile aviation threat emitter simulation and training    
   system which enables both fixed and rotary wing aviators to recognize   
   surface-to-air-missile (SAM) and anti-aircraft artillery threats in     
   order to employ the correct aircraft evasive maneuvers. ASET IV systems 
   are currently fielded at major training centers throughout the United   
   States and Germany and require that an aircraft have a fully operational
   ASE suite of sensors on board for training.                             
      Congress added $7.4 million in fiscal year 1998, $6.4 million in     
   fiscal year 1999, and $12.5 million in fiscal year 2000 for ASET IV     
   upgrades and notes that the necessity of this training device was a     
   subject of discussion in the Task Force Hawk After Action Report.       
   However, additional validated requirements exist and several systems in 
   their present configuration still lack the capability to simulate the   
   most current infrared (IR) and SAM threats, thereby limiting aircrew    
   training. The committee believes this situation is inconsistent with the
   Army's ``train as you fight'' concept.MDBU                              
      Consistent with its past actions, and based on the Army's requirement
   for forces to train in realistic threat environments, the committee     
   recommends an increase of $8.0 million for upgrading ASET IV systems    
   with current IR SAM threat simulators.                                  
           Aircraft survivability equipment (ASE) modifications                    

      The budget request contained $4.5 million to procure ASE             
   modifications but included no funds for AN/AVR 2A laser detecting sets  
   (LDS). The LDS is the only device in the Army capable of providing      
   warning to helicopter crews when they have been illuminated by a        
   laser-targeted weapon. It detects, identifies, and characterizes threats
   360-degrees-around and plus-or-minus 45 degrees above-and-below an      
   aircraft.                                                               
      The committee continues to be concerned with the growing laser threat
   to helicopter aircrews and notes the limited fielding of this system to 
   force package one                                                       

                    aircraft only. The committee also notes the identification by 
          the Army Chief of Staff of an unfunded requirement in fiscal year 2001  
          to complete LDS ``A'' kit installation on AH 64A Apaches, AH 64D Apache 
          Longbows, and MH 47D/E and MH 60K/L Special Operations Aircraft as well 
          as to prevent a production line break.                                  
      Based on a growing laser threat to Army attack and special operations
   aircraft and its desire to extend fielding of this system beyond force  
   package one units, the committee recommends an increase of $20.0 million
   for procurement of AN/AVR 2A LDS A kits.                                
           CH 47 Chinook/UH 60 Blackhawk crashworthy fuel tanks                    

      The budget request contained $117.1 million for modifications to CH  
   47 Chinooks and $3.0 million for modifications to UH 60 Blackhawks but  
   included no funds for the procurement of CH 47 internal crashworthy fuel
   tanks or UH 60 external crashworthy fuel tanks for Army National Guard  
   (ARNG) units.                                                           
      The committee understands that both the UH 60's external fuel tanks  
   and the CH 47's internal fuel tanks are subject to rupture in the event 
   of a crash, posing a safety risk to flight crews and passengers. Since  
   current battlefield flight scenarios require these helicopters to fly   
   long-range missions into hostile environments, the committee believes   
   that extended range, crashworthy fuel tanks are critical to the safety  
   and survivability of these aircraft.                                    
      Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $5.0 million to   
   continue upgrading ARNG CH 47s with internal crashworthy fuel tanks and 
   $9.0 million to begin procurement of external crashworthy fuel tanks for
   ARNG UH 60s.                                                            
           Helicopter crashworthy seats                                            

      The committee is concerned about improving the safety performance of 
   Army helicopter seats. While existing pilot and the co-pilot seats offer
   some protection in the event of a hard impact in a crash, passenger and 
   troop seats offer minimal or no protection from the acceleration forces 
   created by such a crash, resulting in fatalities and serious injury of  
   soldiers.                                                               
      Accordingly, the committee strongly encourages the Department of the 
   Army to include funds in its fiscal year 2002 budget request for the UH 
   60 Blackhawk and CH 47 Chinook helicopters to begin procurement of      
   passenger and troop compartment crashworthy seats, which can provide    
   protection for a majority of expected survivable crashes.               
           TH 67 Creek                                                             

      The budget request contained no funds to procure TH 67 Creek training
   helicopters.                                                            
      The committee notes that a shortfall in visual flight, instrument    
   flight, and basic combat skills training helicopters will occur with the
   anticipated retirement of Vietnam-era UH 1 and OH 58 A/C aircraft as    
   outlined in the draft fiscal year 2000 Army Aviation Modernization Plan.
   The committee understands that the Army does not intend to replace these
   retiring aircraft due to affordability concerns. However, the committee 
   also notes that the Army Chief of Staff has identified a $35.0 million  
   unfunded requirement in fiscal year 2001 for 27 TH 67s.                 
      Based on the need to replace the aging Huey and OH 58 A/C fleet as   
   soon as possible and the need to provide quality training for Army      
   aviators, the committee recommends an increase of $24.0 million for 19  
   TH 67 helicopters.                                                      
           UH 60 Blackhawk                                                         

      The budget request contained $64.7 million for the procurement of six
   UH 60L Blackhawk utility helicopters for the Army National Guard (ARNG) 
   but included no funds for UH 60Q enhanced medical evacuation (MEDEVAC)  
   helicopters or Firehawk conversion kits for the ARNG. The Blackhawk is  
   the Army's primary utility helicopter for air assault, general support  
   and aero medical evacuation missions.                                   
      The committee notes that the Army Chief of Staff has identified a    
   $196.0 million unfunded requirement in fiscal year 2001 for the         
   procurement of 20 additional Blackhawks for the ARNG in recognition of a
   shortfall that has persisted for a number of years in ARNG units. The   
   committee also notes that the UH 60Q MEDEVAC helicopter is the number   
   one near-term medical modernization program for the Army and provides   
   enhanced medical evacuation and treatment of six litter or seven        
   ambulatory patients in a state-of-the-art medical treatment cabin       
   interior. Finally, the committee notes that the Firehawk conversion kit,
   which enables a UH 60 to carry up to 1000 gallons of water in the under 
   fuselage tank and fully refill via a snorkel system in approximately one
   minute after dropping its payload on a fire, greatly enhances the ARNG's
   ability to support forest firefighting requirements.                    
      Consistent with its actions in prior fiscal years, the committee     
   recommends an increase of $27.9 million to procure three additional UH  
   60L Blackhawks and $40.2 million to procure three UH 60Q MEDEVAC        
   variants. The committee also recommends $3.0 million to procure two     
   Firehawk conversion kits for the ARNG.                                  
      In total, the committee recommends $135.8 million for the UH 60      
   helicopter, an increase of $71.1 million.                               
                                 MISSILE PROCUREMENT, ARMY                        

                                          OVERVIEW                                

      The budget request contained $1,295.7 million for Missile            
   Procurement, Army for fiscal year 2001. The committee recommends        
   authorization of $1,367.7 million for fiscal year 2001.                 
      The committee recommends approval of the request except for those    
   programs adjusted in the following table. Unless otherwise specified,   
   adjustments are without prejudice and based on affordability            
   considerations.                                                         

[Graphic Image Not Available]

[Graphic Image Not Available]


                                  ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST                       

           Army tactical missile system (ATACMS) system summary                    

      The budget request contained $15.0 million for ATAMCS Block IA       
   missile production support costs, but included no funds to procure      
   ATACMS Block IV missiles. The ATACMS is a surface-to-surface, global    
   positioning system-guided missile for deep-strike attacks against       
   tactical surface-to-surface and surface-to-air missile sites, logistics 
   elements, and command, control, communications complexes.               
      The committee is aware of the ATACMS Block IV upgrade that will      
   incorporate Standoff Land Attack Missile-Expanded Response warheads into
   51 ATACMS Block IA missiles. This warhead upgrade is designed to limit  
   collateral damage when used against targets in urban environments and is
   a direct outgrowth of the Army's inability to conduct deep strike       
   missions against such targets with its existing ATACMS missile inventory
   during Operation Allied Force.                                          
      The committee believes that the Army should have the capability to   
   provide joint force commanders with a surface-to-surface deep strike    
   option, which produces limited collateral damage in urban environments. 
   Therefore, the committee recommends $10.0 million to upgrade 51 ATACMS  
   Block IA missiles to Block IV configuration.                            
           Multipurpose individual munition (MPIM) advance procurement             

      The budget request contained $3.5 million for advance procurement of 
   the MPIM. Subsequent to the submission of the budget request to         
   Congress, Army program officials identified additional alternate warhead
   research, development, test and evaluation work required to develop     
   further the lethality of the MPIM and reduce its weight. Accordingly,   
   the committee recommends a transfer of the $3.5 million requested for   
   MPIM advance procurement to PE 64802A for this purpose.                 
           Patriot advanced capability-2 (PAC 2)                                   

      The budget request contained $22.9 million for Patriot missile       
   modifications.                                                          
      The committee is aware that certain variants of the PAC 2 missile    
   have recently experienced unexpectedly high rates of failure in certain 
   components. Although reductions in unit readiness have not yet occured, 
   the committee believes that repair and upgrade of these missiles is     
   needed to assure that PAC 2 inventories remain sufficiently robust to   
   meet validated requirements. The committee understands that acceleration
   of this process by one year will help meet this objective, provide for  
   earlier fielding of a guidance-enhanced missile with improved ballistic 
   and cruise missile defense capabilities, and generate significant cost  
   savings.                                                                
      Therefore, the committee recommends $88.4 million for Patriot        
   modifications, and increase of $65.5 million.                           
           Patriot anti-cruise missile (PACM)                                      

   The budget request contained no funds for PACM procurement.             

      The PACM program has developed a new seeker that would provide older 
   Patriot missiles with anti-cruise missile capabilities. The statement of
   managers accompanying the conference report on H.R. 1401 (H.            
   Rept.106-162) required the Secretary of Defense to use the Defense      
   Science Board (DSB) to assess PACM capabilities and the opportunity     
   costs of PACM acquisition. The committee notes that the final DSB report
   indicates that between $100 and $125 million of research and development
   funding are needed to complete PACM design, resolve parts obsolescence, 
   prepare facilities for production, integrate PACM with Patriot ground   
   elements, and complete ground and flight testing. The DSB also indicated
   that the cost to upgrade PAC 2 airframes to the PACM configuration is   
   about $1.0 million per missile. The committee believes that, even if    
   ground- and flight-testing needed to make an informed judgment on the   
   technical merits of the missile were complete, the costs identified by  
   the DSB would still be prohibitive. For these reasons, the committee    
   recommends no funds for PACM procurement, as requested.                 
                         WEAPONS AND TRACKED COMBAT VEHICLES, ARMY                

                                          OVERVIEW                                

      The budget request contained $1,874.6 million for procurement of Army
   weapons and tracked combat vehicles for fiscal year 2001. The committee 
   recommends authorization of $2,167.9 million for fiscal year 2001.      
      The committee recommends approval of the request except for those    
   programs adjusted in the following table. Unless otherwise specified,   
   adjustments are without prejudice and based on affordability            
   considerations.                                                         

[Graphic Image Not Available]

[Graphic Image Not Available]

[Graphic Image Not Available]

                                  ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST                       

                      Armored vehicle launch bridge (AVLB) service life extension  
           program (SLEP)                                                          
      The budget request contained $15.3 million to conduct a SLEP of AVLB 
   vehicles. As a result of the cancellation of the Wolverine Heavy Assault
   Bridge (HAB), a SLEP for the 36-year old, 60-ton military load class    
   (MLC) AVLB is now a priority for the Army. The SLEP will upgrade the    
   AVLB to a 70-ton MLC bridge, which will enable both the Abrams tank and 
   Hercules Improved Recovery Vehicles to safely cross expanses at full    
   span.                                                                   
      The committee notes the importance of this system and recognizes that
   a number of these vehicles will remain in the Army inventory after the  
   fielding of the Wolverine HAB. The committee further notes its continued
   support for the Wolverine HAB, which is discussed elsewhere in this     
   report. Therefore, the committee recommends a decrease of $10.3 million 
   for the AVLB SLEP.                                                      
           Bradley base sustainment                                                

      The budget request contained $359.4 million for the procurement of   
   Bradley A3 fighting vehicle upgrades, of which $6.1 million was included
   for fielding Army National Guard (ARNG) A2 Operation Desert Storm (ODS) 
   variants.                                                               
      The Bradley A2ODS is derived from upgrading the first-generation     
   Bradley A0's lethality, survivability, and mobility, as well as the     
   situational awareness of its crew. Modifications include installation of
   a laser range finder, Global Positioning System navigation capability, a
   combat identification system, a driver's thermal viewer, and a missile  
   countermeasure device.                                                  
      When the Army completes all of its planned upgrades to the Bradley,  
   the active fleet will include a mix of the most advanced A3 variant,    
   along with A2 and A2ODS versions. The majority of the ARNG's Bradley    
   fleet, however, will remain unmodified and comprised mainly of          
   first-generation A0 vehicles, which were not mobilized during the       
   Persian Gulf War because of major survivability deficiencies. However,  
   as part of the new ARNG enhanced brigades, the committee notes that some
   of these A0 vehicles will be required to deploy with active Army forces.
      Because ARNG enhanced brigades will comprise an increasing percentage
   of the Army's warfighting capability as a result of active force        
   reductions, the committee recommends $440.7 million, an increase of     
   $81.3 million, for upgrading an additional 65 Bradley A0 vehicles to the
   A2ODS variant for the ARNG.                                             
           Bradley fighting vehicle system (BFVS) series (modifications)           

      The budget request contained $37.1 million to procure modification   
   kits for the BFVS but included no funds to procure AN/VVR 1 laser       
   warning receivers (LWR). The AN/VVR 1 LWR provides warning to armored   
   vehicle crews when a threat laser used to direct a laser-guided weapon  
   to its target has illuminated them.                                     

      Because the committee is aware of the proliferation of laser-guided  
   weapons and the increasing threat they pose to armored vehicles, it     
   recommends an increase of $20.0 million to procure additional AN/VVR-1  
   LWRs for the protection of high value warfighting assets.               
           Heavy assault bridge (HAB) system                                       

      The budget request contained no funds to continue procurement of the 
   HAB.                                                                    
      The HAB is a 70-ton military load-class bridge transported on a      
   modified M1A2 Abrams system enhancement program (SEP) tank chassis. The 
   system is capable of spanning gaps up to 79 feet, can be deployed in 5  
   minutes, and can be retrieved from either end in less than 10 minutes.  
      The committee is concerned by the Secretary of the Army's termination
   of this program, especially after having provided a $14.0 million       
   increase for HAB advance procurement in fiscal year 2000, as well as    
   having authorized a combined M1A2 SEP/HAB multiyear procurement         
   contract. The committee notes that the Army Chief of Staff has          
   identified the HAB as the Army's top unfunded modernization requirement 
   in fiscal year 2001.                                                    
      Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $59.2 million   
   for 12 vehicles and $13.1 million in advance procurement for fiscal year
   2002 to maintain HAB production.                                        
           Improved recovery vehicle (IRV)                                         

      The budget request contained $68.4 million to procure IRVs but       
   included no funds for the procurement of IRVs for the Army Reserve.     
      The 56-ton M88A1 is capable of towing only vehicles weighing less    
   than 60 tons. Consequently, two M88A1s are required to safely tow an    
   Abrams tank if it is rendered immobile due to combat damage or          
   mechanical failure. The M88A2 IRV upgrade includes increased engine     
   horsepower, as well as braking, steering, winch, lift, and suspension   
   capabilities required to safely recover Abrams tanks and other heavy    
   combat systems. MDBU                                                    
      The committee understands that the Army Reserve has a shortfall of   
   three companies of IRVs in force package one reserve units. Accordingly,
   the committee recommends $76.7 million, an increase of $8.3 million, for
   additional M88A2 IRV upgrades for the Army Reserve.                     
           Industrial preparedness                                                 

      The budget request contained $3.6 million for storage and maintenance
   of laid away equipment and facilities at Hawthorne Army Depot and Rock  
   Island and Watervliet Arsenals, but included no funds for expanding the 
   Armament Retooling and Support (ARMS) Initiative to include the         
   manufacturing arsenals.                                                 
      The committee recommends a provision (sec. 113) that would expand the
   ARMS Initiative to attract commercial tenants to these arsenals. The    
   committee believes that collocating such tenants with existing          
   ammunition plants has helped maintain both facilities and perishable    
   industrial skills of the ammunition production workforce with minimal   
   expenditure of public funds and that a similar effort to offset the     
   underutilization of the manufacturing arsenals would be equally         
   beneficial.                                                             
      Therefore, the committee recommends $15.6 million, an increase of    
   $12.0 million to expand the ARMS initiative to include the manufacturing
   arsenals.                                                               
           M1 Abrams tank modifications                                            

      The budget request contained $36.1 million for M1 Abrams tank        
   modifications but included no funds for the procurement of M1A2 Abrams  
   System Enhancement Program (SEP) tank under armor auxiliary power units 
   (UAAPU).                                                                
      The UAAPU is designed to power tank weapon systems in lieu of an     
   idling M1A2 Abrams SEP tank's gas turbine engine, which will reduce     
   engine wear, fuel consumption, fuel storage and transportation          
   requirements while increasing the operating life of the tank's          
   batteries. The committee notes that the Army Chief of Staff has         
   identified an $18.9 million unfunded requirement in fiscal year 2001MDBU
   for 80 UAAPUs for M1A2 SEP tanks.                                       
      The committee believes that the savings realized by using an UAAPU   
   will be considerable and, therefore, recommends $55.0 million, an       
   increase of $18.9 million, for 80 UAAPUs.                               
           M113 carrier modifications                                              

      The budget request contained $45.1 million for M113 carrier          
   modifications, of which $43.2 million was for M113 MDBU``A3MDBU''       
   upgrades. The M113A3 upgrade program, which is expected to add an       
   additional 20 years of service life to the vehicle, includes            
   installation of a new engine, transmission, external armored fuel tanks,
   driver controls, and internal Kevlar spall liners.                      
      The committee notes that M113A3 upgrades are among the highest       
   unfunded requirements identified by the Army Chief of Staff in fiscal   
   year 2001. The committee further notes that additional funds would      
   accelerate the fielding of A3 upgrades for force package two from fiscal
   year 2004 into fiscal year 2002.                                        
      Therefore, consistent with its actions taken in prior fiscal years,  
   the committee recommends $95.1 million, an increase of $50.0 million for
   additional M113A3 upgrade kits.                                         
           M249 squad automatic weapon (SAW)                                       

      The budget request contained no funds for the procurement of the M249
   SAW.                                                                    
      The M249 SAW is a lightweight machine gun capable of delivering a    
   sustained volume of automatic, accurate, and highly lethal fire up to   
   ranges of 800 meters. It is fielded throughout the Army in airborne,    
   light and mechanized infantry, and air cavalry units. The committee is  
   concerned that the Army has eliminated funds for this weapon in the     
   future years defense program but notes that the Army Chief of Staff has 
   identified an $18.3 million unfunded requirement in fiscal year 2001 for
   the 4,280 remaining SAWs to complete the Army's procurement objective of
   these weapons. Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of     
   $18.3 million for this purpose to complete the procurement objective of 
   M249 SAWs.                                                              
           MK19-3 grenade launcher                                                 

      The budget request contained $11.8 million to procure MK19 3 grenade 
   launchers. The MK19 3 40 millimeter automatic grenade launcher can      
   engage point targets up to 1,500 meters in range and provide suppressive
   fire up to 2,200 meters. The MK19 3 can also be used as a crew-served   
   weapon mounted on armored vehicles and High Mobility Multipurpose       
   Wheeled Vehicles.                                                       
      The committee notes that the Army Chief of Staff hasMDBU identified  
   an $8.1 million unfunded requirement in fiscal year 2001 for MK19 3s for
   Army National Guard (ARNG) units. The committee also notes this weapon's
   increased importance in military operations in urban terrain and the    
   increasing deployment of ARNG units into contingency operations of this 
   type.                                                                   
      Based on these factors, and consistent with prior year actions to add
   funds for MK19s, the committee recommends $14.3 million, an increase of 
   $2.5 million to procure additional MK19 3 grenade launchers.            
           Small arms production industrial base                                   

      The committee understands that there is reluctance within the        
   Department of the Army to forward requests for waivers to expand the    
   competition on particular small arms critical repair parts contracts to 
   the Secretary of Defense, pursuant to the authority provided in section 
   2473 of title 10, United States Code. The committee is concerned that   
   such waivers requested by the Army from the Secretary of Defense have   
   been denied. To ensure that competition is available, when necessary,   
   the committee reiterates that waivers on small arms critical repair     
   parts contracts should be forwarded to, and granted by, the Secretary of
   Defense when he believes it is not necessary to preserve the small arms 
   production industrial base.                                             

                                          OVERVIEW                                

      The budget request contained $1,131.3 million for Ammunition         
   Procurement, Army for fiscal year 2001. The committee recommends        
   authorization of $1,199.3 million for fiscal year 2001.                 
      The committee recommends approval of the request except for those    
   programs adjusted in the following table. Unless otherwise specified,   
   adjustments are without prejudice and based on affordability            
   considerations.                                                         

[Graphic Image Not Available]

[Graphic Image Not Available]

[Graphic Image Not Available]


                                  ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST                       

           Army ammunition procurement                                             

      The budget request contained $1,131.3 million for procurement of     
   ammunition and production base support. The committee recommends        
   $1,199.3 million, an increase of $68.0 million for the following types  
   of ammunition programs, which include top unfunded requirements         
   identified by the Chief of Staff of the Army in fiscal year 2001:       

          [Dollars in millions]                                                   

 Small/Medium Cal Ammunition:                                            

  CTG .50 cal, SLAPT M 903 (M 962)                                        

 $6.0                                                                    

  CTG .50 cal, Mk 211                                                     

 2.0                                                                     

 Mortar Ammunition:                                                      

  CTG mortar 60mm Illum M721/M767                                         

 8.0                                                                     

  CTG 120mm HE M934 w/MO Fuze                                             

 5.4                                                                     

  CTG 120mm Illum XM930 w/MTSQ Fuze                                       

 6.6                                                                     

 Artillery Ammunition:                                                   

  Modular Artillery Charge System                                         

 20.0                                                                    

 Rockets:                                                                

  Bunker Defeating Munition                                               

 10.0                                                                    

 Demolition Munitions:                                                   

  APOBS                                                                   

 2.0                                                                     

 Production Base Support:                                                

  ARMS Initiative                                                         

 8.0                                                                     


                                  OTHER PROCUREMENT, ARMY                         

                                          OVERVIEW                                

      The budget request contained $3,795.9 million for Other Procurement, 
   Army for fiscal year 2001. The committee recommends authorization of    
   $4,095.3 million for fiscal year 2001.                                  
      The committee recommends approval of the request except for those    
   programs adjusted in the following table. Unless otherwise specified,   
   adjustments are without prejudice and based on affordability            
   considerations.                                                         

[Graphic Image Not Available]

[Graphic Image Not Available]

[Graphic Image Not Available]

[Graphic Image Not Available]

[Graphic Image Not Available]

[Graphic Image Not Available]

[Graphic Image Not Available]

[Graphic Image Not Available]

[Graphic Image Not Available]

                                  ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST                       

           Army data distribution system (ADDS)                                    

      The budget request contained $32.7 million to procure Enhanced       
   Position Location Reporting System (EPLRS) radios but included no funds 
   to procure EPLRS for the Army National Guard (ARNG).                    
      The EPLRS radio is the Army's primary position location reporting    
   system, providing combat commanders information on the position of their
   forces, in addition to supporting the majority of the data              
   communications requirements for brigade and below command and control.  
   The system provides secure, jam-resistant, near-real-time communications
   and is essential to battlefield operations.                             
      The committee notes that procurement and fielding of additional EPLRS
   is a high priority for the ARNG since many of its units are in          
   deployment rotations to the Balkans and, as a result, must have the     
   necessary data communications capabilities to operate alongside active  
   Army units.                                                             
      Accordingly, the committee recommends $51.2 million for ADDS, an     
   increase of $18.5 million to procure EPLRS for an ARNG enhanced brigade.
           Automated data processing equipment (ADPE)                              

      The budget request contained $172.1 million for procurement of ADPE, 
   of which $485,000 was included for automatic identification technology  
   (AIT).                                                                  
      AIT devices, which consist of various radio frequency, bar code      
   scanning, and data carrier devices, are components of automated         
   logistics systems that expedite receiving, storage, distribution, and   
   inventory management of new and repairable items. These devices are also
   used to automate manufacturing process controls for aircraft repair     
   parts and to track ground support equipment at various military depots. 
      The committee believes that substantial savings can continue to be   
   achieved from further implementation of these devices in automated      
   inventory and repair processes. Therefore, the committee recommends     
   $178.1 million, an increase of $6.0 million, for maintenance AIT        
   implementation.                                                         
           Army training modernization                                             

      The budget request contained $36.0 million to procure digital        
   training facilities and supporting infrastructure for The Army Distance 
   Learning Program (TADLP), of which $10.9 million was included for Army  
   National Guard (ARNG) distributed training technology.                  
      TADLP provides automation and supporting infrastructure to improve   
   the training of service members and civilian workers in both the active 
   and reserve components to a single standard, particularly in military   
   occupational skill qualifications. Additionally, it provides a highly   
   effective means of delivering training and education to deployed troops 
   while reducing training delivery time and support costs.                

      The committee is aware of prior year increases in ARNG funding for   
   online courseware and training to enhance its role in support of ``first
   responders'' to weapons of mass destruction (WMD) incidents. The        
   committee understands that the ARNG has identified over 120 training    
   courses as essential for online WMD-related training and believes it is 
   important to support the ARNG's WMD first-response training requirement.
      Therefore, the committee recommends $44.0 million for TADLP, an      
   increase of $8.0 million, for ARNG distributive training technology to  
   continue online courseware development and procure                      
   commercial-off-the-shelf management system hardware and software for WMD
   first-response training requirements.                                   
           Combat support medical                                                  

      The budget request contained $31.6 million to procure deployable     
   medical systems and field medical equipment but included no funds for   
   rapid intravenous (IV) infusion pumps or for Life Support for Trauma and
   Transport (LSTAT) units. The budget request also contained $6.3 million 
   in PE 64807A, but included funds for LSTAT.                             
      The Rapid IV infusion pump is a miniature, portable, lightweight pump
   specifically designed for life-saving intravenous fluid resuscitation by
   a medic in the field to restore blood pressure and prevent shock and    
   death of victims with severe blood loss or dehydration. This system was 
   developed in conjunction with the Walter Reed Army Medical Institute of 
   Research and has received Food and Drug Administration approval. The    
   committee understands that it is estimated that up to 15 percent of the 
   soldiers that died in Vietnam who were not immediate battlefield        
   casualties would have survived their wounds if rapid infusion of fluids 
   had been a possibility during that conflict.                            
      The LSTAT integrates a set of commercially available, Food and Drug  
   Administration-approved medical devices in a self-contained             
   mini-intensive care, medical evacuation platform, which provides        
   advanced life-support, on-board ventilation, suction, environmental     
   control, oxygen generation, and patient monitoring to stabilize wounded 
   soldiers near the battlefront as they are evacuated. LSTAT is configured
   on a NATO-standard litter, is broadly interoperable with other medical  
   systems and compatible with most evacuation platforms including UH 60s, 
   UH 1s, C 130s, and High Mobility Multi-purpose Wheeled Vehicles.        
      The committee is impressed with the potential life saving capability 
   that these devices offer, and, therefore, recommends $45.6 million, an  
   increase of $8.0 million to procure rapid IV infusion pumps and $6.0    
   million to begin procurement of LSTAT units. The committee also         
   recommends $10.3 million in PE64807A, an increase of $4.0 million for   
   development of expanded LSTAT capabilities.                             
           Combat training centers instrumentation support                         

      The budget request contained $81.8 million for combat training       
   centers support but included no funds for either the Army National Guard
   (ARNG) deployable force-on-force instrumented range system (DFIRST) or  
   the multi-purpose range complex-heavy (MPRC H).                         
      Encouraged by the fact that the DFIRST system was chosen over all    
   current force-on-force instrumentation systems by the All Service Combat
   Identification Evaluation Team (ASCIET) as the instrumentation system   
   for the fiscal year 1999 Joint Exercise, in the committee report on H.R.
   1401 (H. Rept. 106 162), the committee recommended a pilot program at   
   two ARNG training sites to explore the capabilities and benefits of     
   DFIRST systems to increase readiness of ARNG units through more         
   effective training and at a lower cost with greater safety. To continue 
   this concept of force-on-force, simulation-based training at regional   
   training centers, the committee recommends an increase of $10.5 million 
   for the three additional DFIRSTs.                                       
      The committee understands that targeting electronic upgrades are     
   needed for the MPRC H authorized by the Military Construction           
   Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2000 (division B of Public Law 106    
   65). The committee believes that such upgrades are absolutely paramount 
   for effectively training ARNG units for their growing worldwide         
   deployments.                                                            
      Therefore, the committee recommends $3.2 million for MPRC H targetry 
   electronic upgrades. In total, the committee recommends $95.5 million   
   for combat training centers, an increase of $13.7 million.              
           Communications equipment system upgrades                                

      The committee believes that currently fielded military radios and    
   communication systems still require upgrades to improve operational     
   capability and dependability, as well as reduce operations and support  
   costs and is aware that Military Standard 188 141A includes an approved 
   miniaturized, multi-function, digital communications technology, based  
   on compressor and expander techniques, that dramatically improves       
   quality of voice and data communications over both wired and wireless   
   networks. Accordingly, the committee expects the Department of Defense  
   to continue to use this technology, when cost effective, to upgrade and 
   improve current communications systems such as, but not limited to, the 
   Single Channel Ground and Airborne Radio System, the Joint Tactical     
   Radio System, and the ARC 190 and PRC 104 radios.                       
           Construction equipment service life extension program (SLEP)            

      The budget request contained $2.0 million for service life extensions
   to various types of construction equipment but included no funds to     
   conduct an Army National Guard (ARNG) D 7 dozer and Army Reserve heavy  
   grader and scraper SLEP.                                                
      The committee understands that the majority of the currently fielded 
   ARNG D 7 dozers have an average age of 27 years, well beyond their      
   intended 15 year service lives and that there are no plans to replace   
   them. Additionally, the committee notes that the average age of Army    
   Reserve graders and scrapers is 15 years. Both of these types of        
   equipment continue to have greater demands placed on them by the        
   increased ``operations-other-than-war'' deployments being fulfilled by  
   the reserve component have been called upon to fulfill.                 
      Therefore, the committee recommends $12.0 million for construction   
   equipment SLEPs, an increase of $5.0 million for an ARNG D 7 dozer SLEP 
   and $5.0 million for an Army Reserve heavy scraper and grader SLEP.     
           Cranes                                                                  

      The budget request contained $6.1 million to procure cranes, of which
   $3.0 million was included for the procurement of three replacement      
   wheel-mounted, 25-ton all-terrain cranes (ATECs). However, no ATECs were
   requested for the Army Reserve (AR).                                    
      The ATEC is a multi-use, state-of-the-art, commercial all-terrain    
   crane used for engineer construction excavation, lifting and loading    
   general supplies and materiel, and bridging movement. The ATEC replaces 
   three existing types of cranes, which range in age from 19 to 30 years  
   old and suffer from low operational readiness rates and high operations 
   and support costs, with a single, state-of-the-art unit that exceeds all
   three of the obsolete cranes' capabilities.                             
      The committee notes the importance of ATECs in fulfilling Army       
   Reserve combat support and combat service support mission requirements  
   and recommends $16.1 million, an increase of $10.0 million, to procure  
   ATECs for the Army Reserve.                                             
           Deployable universal combat earthmovers (DEUCE)                         

      The budget request contained $14.1 million to procure DEUCEs. The    
   DEUCE is a military-unique, high speed, earthmoving tractor capable of  
   clearing, leveling, and excavating operations for light and airborne    
   divisions.                                                              
      The committee understands that the DUECE will be a critical piece of 
   equipment for the Army's interim medium brigades. The committee notes   
   that the Army Chief of Staff has identified a $14.0 million unfunded    
   requirement in fiscal year 2001 to procure 36 DEUCEs for the Army's     
   initial and interim brigades as part of the service's transformation.   
      Therefore, the committee recommends $24.3 million, an increase of    
   $10.2 million, to begin fielding DEUCEs to the interim brigades.        
           Family of heavy tactical vehicles (FHTV)                                

      The budget request contained $166.1 million for the procurement of   
   the FHTV. Although the budget request included $121.8 million for Army  
   National Guard (ARNG) FHTV and $6.2 million for Army Reserve FHTV, no   
   funds were included for the procurement of Heavy Expanded Mobility      
   Tactical Trucks (HEMTT) or Heavy Expanded Mobility Trailers (HEMAT) for 
   ARNG Multiple Launch Rocket System (MLRS) battalion conversions. The    
   HEMTT is a diesel powered, 10-ton, 8-wheel drive, tactical vehicle that 
   transports ammunition, and petroleum. The vehicle is also produced in   
   wrecker, tanker, and tractor variants and is the prime mover in support 
   of certain missile systems, including the MLRS.                         
      The committee notes the Army Chief of Staff has identified an        
   unfunded requirement in fiscal year 2001 for additional HEMMTs and      
   HEMATs for ARNG MLRS battalion conversion. The committee is also aware  
   of a HEMTT fire truck shortfall in two Army Reserve combat service      
   support companies that are designated as force package one units. These 
   vehicles would replace obsolete fire trucks that were commercially      
   adapted for military purposes.                                          

      The committee recommends $171.1 million for the FHTV, an increase of 
   $3.8 million to procure both HEMTTs and HEMATs for ARNG MLRS battalion  
   conversion and $1.2 million to procure three HEMTT fire trucks for the  
   Army Reserve.                                                           
           Family of medium tactical vehicles (FMTV)                               

      The budget request contained $438.3 million for procurement of, and  
   identified improvements to the FMTV, of which $84.0 million was included
   for two and one-half-ton variants for the Army National Guard (ARNG) and
   $33.8 million was included for these variants for the Army Reserve. The 
   FMTV comprise the Army's two and one-half-ton and five-ton, common      
   chassis cargo and utility trucks. The committee notes that the Army     
   Chief of Staff has identified a $118.9 million unfunded requirement in  
   fiscal year 2001 for reserve component FMTV due to the increasing       
   reliance upon the reserves for combat support and combat service support
   missions.                                                               
      The committee strongly supports upgrading the reserve component's    
   aging fleet of trucks and, therefore, recommends $473.3 million, an     
   increase of $35.0 million for additional Army Reserve two and           
   one-half-ton and five-ton FMTVs.                                        
           High mobility multipurpose-wheeled vehicle (HMMWV)                      

      The budget request contained $110.7 million for 1,002 HMMWVA2s, which
   incorporate upgraded electrical, braking, engine and transmission       
   improvements as well as a 15-year corrosion prevention program, but     
   included no funds for HMMWVs to fill critical shortages in Army Reserve 
   combat support and combat service support units.                        
      The HMMWV is a multi-service, four-wheel drive utility and logistics 
   vehicle. The Army fleet is used for personnel and weapons transport,    
   medical evacuation, and as an air defense weapon-mount platform. While  
   recognizing that the HMMWVs requested in the budget will replace older  
   vehicles in high priority active component units, the committee is      
   concerned that certain Army Reserve units do not have enough HMMWVs to  
   meet their growing mission and deployment requirements.                 
      Therefore, the committee recommends $115.7 million, an increase of   
   $5.0 million, for 100 Army Reserve HMMWVA2s.                            
           Hydraulic excavator (HYEX)                                              

      The budget request contained $8.3 million for procurement of HYEXs,  
   of which $2.6 million was included for 11 Army Reserve HYEXs. The HYEX  
   is a diesel driven, self-propelled, tracked vehicle with a wide variety 
   of excavation attachments used for general excavation; digging;         
   trenching and lifting for lines of communication;                       
   logistics-over-the-shore, and other construction activities primarily in
   support of Corps and Echelons Above Corps levels.                       
      The committee understands that a HYEX shortfall exists in high       
   priority Army Reserve construction units and that these units will      
   continue to operate existing obsolete equipment for the foreseeable     
   future until it is replaced.                                            
      Based upon increased reliance on the reserve component to provide    
   engineer equipment for operations-other-than-war, and                   
   disaster/humanitarian relief operations, the committee recommends $10.6 
   million, an increase of $2.3 million, for 13 additional Type I HYEXs for
   the Army Reserve.                                                       
           Information system security program (ISSP)                              

      The budget request contained $54.4 million, $46.6 million, and $15.7 
   million to procure secure voice and data equipment for the Army, Navy,  
   and Air Force respectively.                                             
      The committee report on H.R. 1401 (H. Rept. 106 162) recommended an  
   increase of $9.0 million in fiscal year 2000 to support the services'   
   efforts to replace older secure voice and data systems with modern      
   multi-media secure digital communications equipment. The committee      
   continues to strongly support upgrading critical telecommunications     
   equipment to safeguard classified or sensitive information in the face  
   of growing information security threats.                                
      Therefore, in order to accelerate the replacement of obsolete secure 
   voice and data terminals, the committee recommends an increase of $12.0 
   million to procure additional secure terminal equipment: $4.0 million   
   for the Army ISSP, $4.0 million for the Navy and Marine Corps ISSP, and 
   $4.0 million for the Air Force ISSP.                                    
           Integrated family of test equipment (IFTE)                              

      The budget request contained $65.4 million to procure IFTE, of which 
   $37.1 million was included for Contact Test Sets (CTS) Soldier Portable 
   On-System Repair Tool (SPORT).                                          
      The CTS SPORT is the Army's standard lightweight, ruggedized,        
   portable tester used at all levels of maintenance to automatically      
   diagnose faulty electronic components for immediate replacement.        
      The committee has strongly supported the IFTE program over the years 
   and continues to believe in the productivity improvements resulting from
   automatic test equipment usage. Therefore, the committee recommends     
   $70.4 million for IFTE, an increase of $5.0 million, to procure         
   additional CTS SPORTs.                                                  
      However, the committee is aware that the current CTS SPORT indefinite
   delivery/indefinite quantity (ID/IQ) contract will expire in June 2001. 
   Based on the importance of the CTS SPORT to numerous weapons systems and
   to avoid possible fielding interruptions for this equipment, the        
   committee expects the Secretary of the Army to extend the current ID/IQ 
   contract for CTS SPORT and understands that this extension would require
   no government costs.                                                    
           Laundries, showers, and latrines                                        

      The budget request contained $12.6 million to procure the Laundry    
   Advanced System (LADS). The LADS is a mobile field laundry designed to  
   launder clothing at four times the capacity of the current, but obsolete
   M 85 field laundry system and recycle 99 percent of the water used by   
   the M 85 system.                                                        
      The committee believes the logistical benefit to field combat service
   support units from reduced water usage combined with the enhancement to 
   deployed soldiers' quality of life provided by LADS are impressive.     
   Consequently, the committee strongly supports the Army's efforts to     
   replace the obsolete and unserviceable M 85 system and recommends $21.6 
   million, an increase of 9.0 million, to accelerate procurement of LADS. 
           Lightweight maintenance enclosure (LME)                                 

      The budget request contained $2.0 million to procure LMEs. The LME is
   a lightweight, frame-supported tent designed to provide forward deployed
   maintenance units a quick setup-and-takedown enclosed shelter in which  
   to perform field maintenance operations across the battlefield in all   
   climatic conditions.                                                    
      The committee notes that mobility will be the hallmark of the Army's 
   future medium brigades and that they must therefore be capable of       
   rapidly repairing and maintaining equipment while deployed. The         
   committee also notes that the Army Chief of Staff has identified a $4.6 
   million unfunded requirement in fiscal year 2001 for LMEs to maintain   
   production at minimum sustaining rate.                                  
      Therefore, the committee recommends $6.6 million, an increase of $4.6
   million, for the procurement of additional LMEs and to maintain a       
   minimum production rate.                                                
           M56 smoke generator system                                              

      The budget request contained $11.4 million for the procurement of M56
   smoke generator systems.                                                
      The M56 smoke generator system, the primary battlefield obscurant for
   Army light forces, is a High Mobility Multipurpose Wheeled              
   Vehicle-mounted system capable of disseminating smoke in both a         
   stationary mode and on the move. The M56 can defeat enemy sensors such  
   as tank thermal sights as well as smart and guided munitions, which     
   operate in the visual through far infrared regimes of the               
   electromagnetic spectrum.                                               
      The committee understands that the M56 has been designated as an     
   essential item of equipment for early entry forces yet is not being     
   produced at an economic production rate. Therefore, to address this     
   problem, the committee recommends $22.8 million, an increase of $11.4   
   million, to reach an economic production rate of this system.           
           M915/M916 line haul truck tractor                                       

      The budget request contained $43.0 million for 915A3 line haul       
   tractors, of which $3.4 million was included for M915A3s for the Army   
   Reserve. The M915A3 line haul tractor is a six-by-four wheel drive      
   vehicle fielded primarily in medium transportation companies and used to
   haul containers and petroleum over both primary and secondary roads.    
      The committee notes that currently fielded M915 tractors are         
   experiencing reduced mission capable rates and are both difficult and   
   expensive to operate due to old age. To correct this deficiency and to  
   fill critical shortages in Army Reserve line haul companies, the        
   committee recommends $44.6 million for M915/M916 line haul truck        
   tractors, an increase of $1.6 million to procure 12 additional upgraded 
   M915A3 tractors.                                                        
           Night vision devices                                                    


      The budget request contained $34.1 million to procure night vision   
   devices, of which $29.5 million was included for AN/PVS 7 night vision  
   goggles. However, no funds were included for third generation, 25       
   millimeter (mm) image intensification tube upgrades.                    
      The AN/PVS 7 night vision goggle is a state-of-the-art               
   image-intensifying system, which can be head- or helmet-mounted to      
   enhance the dismounted soldier's nighttime operations. The 25mm image   
   intensification tube upgrade program, which replaces less capable tubes 
   with the third generation variant in fielded AN/PVS 4 night vision      
   goggles and AN/TVS 5 night vision sights, provides a minimum 25 percent 
   resolution increase in these systems.                                   
      The committee has consistently supported additional funds for night  
   vision devices the past five years, and notes that the Army Chief of    
   Staff has identified $14.8 million unfunded requirements in fiscal year 
   2001 to procure AN/PVS 7 night vision goggles and $8.4 million for third
   generation, 25mm image intensification tube upgrades.                   
      Consistent with prior year actions, the committee recommends an      
   increase of $12.0 million for AN/PVS 7 night vision goggles and $8.4    
   million for third generation, 25mm image intensification tube upgrades. 
   The committee expects $400,000 of the AN/PVS 7 increase to be used to   
   procure these goggles for Army Reserve combat support units.            
           Nonsystem training devices                                              

      The budget request contained $91.9 million for procurement of various
   training devices and range modernization but no funds were included for 
   continued procurement of engagement skills trainer (EST) 2000 or Abrams 
   Full-crew Interactive Skills Trainers (A FIST) XXI upgrades for the Army
   National Guard (ARNG).                                                  
      The EST 2000 simulates three-dimensional targets in several realistic
   terrain environments, providing marksmanship, squad-tactical, and       
   close-range shoot-no-shoot training. This system also provides both     
   shooter and instructor with real-time and post-exercise weapon handling 
   technique feedback. The committee understands that the ARNG has a       
   requirement for 100 EST 2000 systems.                                   
      The ARNG A FISTs do not meet current Army tank gunnery training      
   standards and require software upgrades to enhance training on the tank 
   commander's weapon station and to provide identical gunnery matrices to 
   the Conduct Of Fire Trainer, the Army's standard for stand-alone        
   precision gunnery training devices. The committee understands that these
   upgrades will offer significant training advantages for tank crews as   
   well as reduced maintenance costs. The committee also understands that  
   the ARNG has developed a three-year, A FIST XXI conversion program to   
   incorporate these upgrades.                                             
      The committee believes that these training systems are critical for  
   ARNG forces' marksmanship and gunnery simulation training in light of   
   their increased worldwide deployments. Therefore, the committee         
   recommends an increase of $8.0 million for procurement of 30 EST 2000   
   systems and an increase of $9.0 million for the first increment of a    
   three-year A FIST XXI conversion program, both for the ARNG. In total,  
   the committee recommends $108.9 million for nonsystem training devices, 
   an increase of $17.0 million.                                           
           Reserve component automation system (RCAS)                              

      The budget request contained $91.5 million to procure and field RCAS 
   equipment and software.                                                 
      The RCAS is critical to the day-to-day operation and mobilization    
   capability of the Army National Guard and Army Reserve. If continued    
   support for, and improvements to, this program are not made, the reserve
   components will experience a significant deterioration in their ability 
   to mobilize in support of national security missions in a timely manner.
      The committee understands that there is a limitation of Army funds   
   allocated for the RCAS beyond fiscal year 2002.                         
      The committee expects the Secretary of the Army to budget sufficient 
   funds in the future years defense program to ensure that the RCAS will  
   be able to effectively fulfill the administrative support and           
   mobilization requirements of the reserve components. The committee also 
   expects the Secretary to provide a report to the congressional defense  
   committees on the yearly allocation of funds required annually maintain 
   and improve the RCAS program by March 1, 2001.                          
           Ribbon bridge                                                           

      The budget request contained $15.7 million for ribbon bridge         
   equipment but included no funds to procure this equipment for Army      
   National Guard (ARNG) multi-role bridge companies (MRBC). Ribbon bridge 
   equipment consists of 10-ton, 8-wheel drive M1977 Heavy Expanded        
   Mobility Tactical Truck Common Bridge Transporters, M15 Bridge Adaptor  
   Pallets, and M14 Improved Boat Cradles.                                 
      The committee understands that seven ARNG MRBC will be established in
   fiscal year 2001 using existing engineer bridging equipment and older,  
   lower-capacity, five-ton trucks. The committee also understands that    
   without additional funds, these new MRBC units will not begin conversion
   to the new equipment required for their mission until fiscal year 2004. 
      Therefore, the committee recommends $42.7 million for ribbon bridging
   equipment, an increase of $27.0 million to accelerate the fielding of   
   two ARNG MRBC.                                                          
           Single channel ground and airborne radio systems (SINCGARS) family      

      The budget request contained $18.3 million for the procurement and   
   the fielding of airborne SINCGARS, but included no funds to procure     
   SINCGARS advanced system improvement program (ASIP) radios for the Army 
   National Guard (ARNG).                                                  
      The SINCGARS ASIP radio upgrades early version voice-only radios and 
   includes a tactical Internet controller and integrated communications   
   security enhancements, which provide commanders a highly reliable,      
   easily maintained, secure voice and data handling command and control   
   capability.                                                             
      The committee understands that two ARNG divisions still require      
   improved SINCGARS; and, without these upgraded radios, these forces will
   be unable to transmit and receive data from their active Army components
   when participating together in joint and combined operations.           
      Therefore, the committee recommends $49.0 million for SINCGARS, an   
   increase of $30.7 million, to procure SINCGARS ASIP radios for one ARNG 
   division.                                                               
           Small tug                                                               

   The budget request contained no funds to procure small tugs.            

      The small tug is a 60-foot, steel hull, twin propeller vessel        
   designed to tow general cargo barges in harbors, inland waterways, and  
   along coastlines. It is also capable of assisting larger tugs in mooring
   ships of all sizes at piers and in restricted navigation waterways,     
   moving of floating cranes and machine shops, and performing             
   line-handling duties.                                                   
      The committee is aware of the Army's intent to replace its unreliable
   40-year old small tugs that were used in Operations Desert Shield and   
   Desert Storm and understands that it has increased its requirement to   
   fifteen tugs to replace these older vessels. The committee included an  
   increase of $4.7 million in fiscal year 1999 to procure two additional  
   tugs and $9.0 million in fiscal year 2000 to complete the earlier       
   requirement of eight tugs. However, the committee notes that the Army   
   has not budgeted for the additional seven new tugs in its future years  
   defense program.                                                        
      Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $9.0 million to   
   accelerate procurement of 3 additional vessels towards completion of the
   requirement for 15 small tugs.                                          
           Standard integrated command post system (SICPS)                         

      The budget request contained $36.0 million to procure SICPS          
   components, of which $1.3 million was included for modular command post 
   system (MCPS) tents.                                                    
      The MCPS tent consists of a lightweight aluminum frame,              
   interchangeable fabric wall sections, fabric roof, floors and liners,   
   worktables, map boards, and light sets. Multiple MCPS tents can be      
   interconnected to create a large complex. The committee notes the Army  
   Chief of Staff has identified a $40.1 million unfunded requirement in   
   fiscal year 2001 to accelerate the procurement of SICPS components for  
   force packages one and two.                                             
      The committee is aware of the vital role MCPS tents play in growing  
   worldwide deployments and, therefore, recommends $41.0 million, an      
   increase of $2.0 million and $3.0 million respectively, to procure MCPS 
   for active and Army National Guard units.                               
           Standard teleoperating kit                                              

      The budget request contained $700,000 to procure Standardized Robotic
   System (SRS) vehicle teleoperating kits.                                
      The SRS kit can be installed on existing tracked or wheeled vehicles 
   to enable them to be operated by remote control, if circumstances       
   dictate, to clear mines. The committee understands that SRS contingency 
   sets have been responsible for detonating hundreds of mines while       
   deployed in Bosnia. The committee also notes that redesigned combat     
   engineer force structure requires SRS equipment at all force levels,    
   including the new interim medium brigades.                              
      Based on the successful employment of this technology and the        
   critical life saving mission that it performs, the committee recommends 
   $10.7 million for standard teleoperating equipment, an increase of $10.0
   million for additional SRS kits.                                        
           Vibratory self-propelled roller                                         

      The budget request contained $4.7 million to procure vibratory       
   self-propelled rollers. The vibratory self-propelled roller is a        
   commercial compacting vehicle used to support construction of airfields,
   logistic areas, and roads required to deploy and sustain Army forces.   
      The committee notes that the last major procurement of this equipment
   occurred in the early 1980s and that its 22-year average age, combined  
   with the effects of increased deployments, has reduced its readiness    
   ratings to unsatisfactory levels. The committee also notes that the Army
   Chief of Staff has identified a $10.0 million unfunded requirement in   
   fiscal year 2001 to replace vibratory self-propelled rollers for both   
   the active and reserve components as a fiscal year 2001 unfunded        
   requirement.                                                            
      Accordingly, the committee recommends $11.7 million, an increase of  
   $7.0 million to procure 96 additional vibratory self-propelled rollers, 
   including $3.0 million for active Army units and $4.0 million for Army  
   Reserve units.                                                          
                      CHEMICAL AGENTS AND MUNITIONS DESTRUCTION, ARMY             

                                          OVERVIEW                                

      The budget request contained $1,003.5 million for Chemical Agents and
   Munitions Destruction, Army, for fiscal year 2001. The committee        
   recommends no funds for fiscal year 2001.                               

[Graphic Image Not Available]

                                  ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST                       

                         CHEMICAL AGENTS AND MUNITIONS DESTRUCTION                

      The budget request contained $1,003.5 million for Chemical Agents and
   Munitions Destruction, Army.                                            
      The committee notes that section 1412 of the National Defense        
   Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1986 (Public Law 99 145), as amended, 
   requires that funds for the destruction of the U.S. stockpile of lethal 
   chemical agents and munitions, including funds for military construction
   projects necessary to carry out the demilitarization program shall only 
   be authorized and appropriated in the budget of the Department of       
   Defense (DOD) as a separate program and shall not be included in the    
   budget accounts for any military department. The committee notes that   
   for the second year in a row, the Department's budget request contained 
   funds for the chemical demilitarization program in a budget account of  
   the Department of the Army in direct violation of the law.              
      The committee believes that the original legislation, which mandated 
   that funds for the chemical demilitarization program be authorized and  
   appropriated in a defense-wide budget account in order to emphasize that
   destruction of the chemical weapons stockpile was a national issue      
   affecting all of the Department and not just a single military service, 
   was sound in 1986, when the estimated cost of the chemical stockpile    
   demilitarization program was approximately $1.5 billion, and is even    
   more valid today, when the estimated cost of the program has grown      
   almost ten-fold.                                                        
      Accordingly, the committee recommends no funding for Chemical Agents 
   and Munitions Destruction, Army, a decrease of $1,003.5 million. The    
   committee recommends an increase of $877.1 million for Chemical Agents  
   and Munitions Destruction, Defense.                                     
                                 AIRCRAFT PROCUREMENT, NAVY                       

                                          OVERVIEW                                

      The budget request contained $7,963.9 million for Aircraft           
   Procurement, Navy for fiscal year 2001. The committee recommends        
   authorization of $8,205.8 million for fiscal year 2001.                 
      The committee recommends approval of the request except for those    
   programs adjusted in the following table. Unless otherwise specified,   
   adjustments are without prejudice and based on affordability            
   considerations.                                                         

[Graphic Image Not Available]

[Graphic Image Not Available]

[Graphic Image Not Available]

[Graphic Image Not Available]


                                  ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST                       

           Advanced helicopter emergency egress lighting system (ADHEELS)          

      The budget request contained $21.1 million for SH 60 series          
   modifications but included no funds for the ADHEELS. The ADHEELS        
   provides crew escape lighting for H 60 series helicopters in the event  
   of water impact.                                                        
      The committee understands that the Department of the Navy has        
   selected ADHEELS as its future helicopter escape lighting system due to 
   its superior performance, significantly increased operational           
   reliability, and lower life-cycle costs.                                
      The committee strongly supports this choice and recommends $29.1     
   million, an increase of $8.0 million for accelerated ADHEELS procurement
   and installation in both new production and existing H 60 series        
   helicopters.                                                            
           AN/AVR 2A laser detecting set                                           

      The budget request contained $41.9 million for common electronic     
   countermeasures modifications, of which $13.5 million was included for  
   an AN/AAR 47 sensor upgrade.                                            
      The AN/AVR 2A laser detecting set alerts pilots to the presence of   
   impending laser beamriding missile attack in sufficient time to take    
   evasive action. The committee notes that the Department of the Navy     
   plans a laser warning capability upgrade to the AN/AAR 47 missile       
   approach warning system, which would eliminate the need for a           
   stand-alone AN/AVR 2A, but is concerned that the AN/AAR 47 upgrade might
   not be as capable as the existing AN/AVR 2A.                            
      Therefore, the committee expects that procurement and installation of
   the AN/AAR 47 sensor upgrade should not occur until the Commander of    
   Navy Operational Test and Evaluation Forces ensures that adequate       
   testing is undertaken, including side-by-side, on-aircraft testing      
   comparing it with the AN/AVR 2A.                                        
           AV 8B                                                                   

      The budget request contained $226.6 million to procure 10            
   remanufactured AV 8B aircraft. The AV 8B remanufacture program combines 
   a new fuselage, a power plant, and radar with other mission systems     
   upgrades to produce a significantly more capable aircraft at 70 percent 
   of the cost of a new aircraft. The committee notes that the Department  
   of the Navy plans for fiscal year 2001 to be the last year for          
   procurement of remanufactured AV 8Bs.                                   
      The committee recognizes that the AV 8B performs the close air       
   support (CAS) mission, which is critical to the successful employment of
   Marine forces. Additionally, the committee believes that the short      
   take-off, vertical land (STOVL), radar-equipped AV 8B will remain an    
   important component of CAS capability until its replacement by the      
   Marine Corps' joint strike fighter (JSF) STOVL variant, currently in the
   demonstration and validation phase of its development.                  
      Since the committee understands that the Marine Corps' JSF variant is
   currently planned for its initial operational capability in fiscal year 
   2008, it expects the Secretary of the Navy to ensure that the Marine    
   Corps has procured sufficient STOVL, radar-equipped AV 8Bs prior to     
   discontinuing the AV 8B remanufacture program.                          
           C 40A                                                                   

   The budget request contained no funds for procurement of C 40A aircraft.

      The C 40A, a long-range commercial-derivative airlift aircraft used  
   to transport high priority passengers and cargo, will replace the Navy's
   27-year-old C 9 fleet which is reaching the end of its service life.    
      The committee understands that the Navy's aging C 9 fleet is not     
   compliant with either future global navigation requirements or noise    
   abatement standards, that will restrict future flights into European    
   airfields. The committee also notes that the Chief of Naval Operations  
   has identified additional C 40A aircraft for the Naval Reserve among his
   top unfunded requirements in fiscal year 2001.                          
      Consequently, the committee recommends an increase of $54.0 million  
   to procure an additional C 40A aircraft for the Naval Reserve.          
           CH 60S                                                                  

      The budget request contained $165.1 million for 15 CH 60S helicopters
   and $80.4 million for advance procurement of 16 CH 60Ss in fiscal year  
   2002.                                                                   
      The CH 60S replaces the H 46D for the Navy's helicopter combat       
   support missions including vertical replenishment, cargo and personnel  
   transfer, and search and rescue.                                        
      The committee understands that the aging H 46D is increasingly       
   expensive to operate and that its replacement with a fleet of H 60      
   series helicopters will avoid an estimated $22.0 billion of support     
   costs over the next 20 years. The committee also notes that the Chief of
   Naval Operations has identified additional CH 60S helicopters among his 
   top unfunded requirements in fiscal year 2001.                          
      The committee believes that the aging H 46D fleet should be retired  
   as soon as practical and, therefore, recommends $207.0 million, an      
   increase of $41.9 million for two additional CH 60S helicopters.        
            2 modifications                                                        

      The budget request contained $18.5 million for E 2 modifications but 
   included no funds to upgrade ready-storage Group I-configured E 2C      
   aircraft to the Hawkeye 2000 configuration.                             
      Group I-configured E 2C aircraft are no longer usable for the Navy's 
   fleet operations due to their outdated computer and communications      
   capabilities but could be modified to the Hawkeye 2000 configuration    
   which would upgrade this aircraft with satellite communications; a      
   commercial-off-the-shelf, high-capacity mission computer and associated 
   workstations; and the cooperative engagement capability. The committee  
   understands that this modification will provide the E 2C fleet with a   
   quantum leap in situational awareness and fleet-wide connectivity.      
      Accordingly, the committee recommends $57.5 million, an increase of  
   $39.0 million, to upgrade one ready-storage Group I E 2Cs to the Hawkeye
   2000 configuration.                                                     
           EA 6B modifications                                                     

      The budget request contained $203.1 million for EA 6B modifications  
   but included no funds for the AN/ASW 41 automatic flight control system 
   (AFCS), which provides the EA 6B pilot with automatic speed, attitude   
   and altitude control capabilities. The budget request also contained no 
   funds for HAVE QUICK ARC 164 radios which employ a rapid                
   frequency-hopping technique to provide an anti-jam radio capability.    
      The committee understands that replacement of the current flight     
   control system with the AN/ASW 41 AFCS will significantly increase this 
   aircraft's mission capable rates through improved reliability and       
   reduced maintenance man-hours. The committee notes that the Chief of    
   Naval Operations has identified the AN/ASW 41 AFCS among his unfunded   
   requirements in fiscal year 2001 and, therefore, recommends an increase 
   of $21.0 million for this purpose.                                      
      The committee understands that only 41 of the Department of the      
   Navy's 123 EA 6Bs are equipped with either an ARC 164, ARC 182, or ARC  
   210 HAVE QUICK anti-jam radio and that during the recent Operation      
   Allied Force engagement many EA 6Bs were not capable of jam-free        
   ultra-high frequency (UHF) communications with other Allied aircraft in 
   composite-force strike packages. As a result of the EA 6B's HAVE QUICK  
   radio deficiency, the committee also understands that entire Operation  
   Allied Force strike packages were forced to use single UHF frequencies  
   which were vulnerable to communications jamming and could be easily     
   monitored by our adversaries with a potential to compromise operational 
   mission execution plans.                                                
      While the committee is aware of the Department's plans to equip the  
   EA 6B fleet with ARC-210 radios as part of the block 89A upgrade, it    
   believes that an interim anti-jam radio capability is critical for any  
   future EA 6B combat operations until the block 89A upgrade is complete  
   in fiscal year 2005. Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase  
   of $2.0 million to equip 40 additional EA 6B aircraft with ARC 164      
   anti-jam radios.                                                        
      In total, the committee recommends $226.1 million for EA 6B          
   modifications, an increase of $23.0 million.                            
            18 series modifications                                                

      The budget request contained $212.6 million for F 18 series          
   modifications, of which $22.7 million was included for engineering      
   change proposal (ECP) 583 kits to modify six Marine Corps F/A 18A       
   aircraft, $3.0 million was included for installation of ECP 560         
   modification kits for seven Naval Reserve F/A 18A aircraft, $5.3 million
   was included for two advanced targeting forward-looking infrared        
   (ATFLIR) pods for both Navy and Marine Corps F/A 18C/D aircraft, and    
   $23.8 million was included for the advanced tactical airborne           
   reconnaissance system (ATARS).                                          

      The ECP 583 modification kit upgrades the radar, avionics and weapons
   delivery capability of the Marine Corps' F/A 18A model aircraft to the  
   same capability as later-model F/A 18Cs. Without this capability, the   
   F/A 18A cannot autonomously deliver precision-guided munitions (PGMs) or
   employ the Air Intercept Missile (AIM) 120 Advanced Medium Range        
   Air-to-Air Missile (AMRAAM). The committee notes that the Navy's        
   long-range attack aircraft plans include the employment of the F/A 18A  
   until at least 2015. Despite the fact that the Marine Corps has a       
   requirement to upgrade 76 of its F/A 18As with this modification, the   
   Department of the Navy has thus far only planned to upgrade 34 aircraft.
   However, the committee notes that both the Chief of Naval Operations    
   (CNO) and the Commandant of the Marine Corps (CMC) have identified ECP  
   583 among their top unfunded aviation requirements in fiscal year 2001  
   and recommends an increase of $86.9 million to procure twenty additional
   ECP 583 upgrade kits for the Marine Corps' F/A 18A aircraft fleet--10   
   for the active component and 10 for the Marine Corps Reserve.           
      The ECP 560 modification kit upgrades only the avionics and weapons  
   delivery capability of the Naval Reserve's F/A 18A aircraft to employ   
   PGMs and the AIM 120 AMRAAM, improving both the Naval Reserve's F/A 18A 
   capability and its commonality with the Navy's F/A 18C aircraft fleet.  
   The committee notes that only 13 of the Naval Reserve's 52 F/A 18As have
   undergone ECP 560 modification upgrades, but understands that the Navy  
   plans to retain its Naval Reserve F/A 18As in the inventory until at    
   least 2012. The committee further notes that the CNO has identified the 
   ECP 560 among his unfunded requirements for the Naval Reserve in fiscal 
   year 2001 and recommends an increase of $31.0 million for this purpose. 
      The ATFLIR pod detects, classifies and tracks ground targets for     
   engagement with precision-guided munitions. The ATFLIR pod replaces the 
   existing tactical forward-looking infrared pod that, the committee      
   understands, has inadequate resolution, loses target track during high-G
   maneuvering, and does not maintain automatic track at required ranges.  
   The committee notes that both the CNO and CMC have also included the    
   ATFLIR among their unfunded requirements for fiscal year 2001 and       
   recommends an increase of $9.6 million for an additional three ATFLIR   
   pods for the Marine Corps Reserve F/A 18 aircraft.                      
      The ATARS is an image acquisition, data storage, and data link sensor
   suite planned for use on the Marine Corps' F/A 18D aircraft. The        
   committee notes that the recently completed ATARS operational evaluation
   concluded that the system was not operationally suitable due to         
   reliability and availability problems with its ground station component.
   As a result, the committee believes that the Department of the Navy's   
   $23.8 million ATARS procurement request exceeds requirements and,       
   consequently, recommends a decrease of that amount.                     
      In total, the committee recommends $316.3 million, an increase of    
   $103.7 million, for F 18 series modifications.                          
           F/A 18C/D tactical aircraft moving map capability (TAMMAC)              

      The budget request contained $71.6 million for common avionics       
   changes but included no funds for procurement of TAMMAC units for F/A   
   18C/D aircraft.                                                         
      The TAMMAC, which replaces obsolete data storage and digital video   
   units, is a modular hardware and software system with significant       
   memory, information processing, and video output capabilities. It       
   provides aircrews with a graphic presentation of the aircraft's present 
   position as well as relative positions of targets, threats, terrain     
   features, no-fly zones, and safe bases. The committee understands that  
   the TAMMAC also includes a ground proximity warning system to improve   
   flight safety and will be less expensive to operate and support than the
   existing units.                                                         
      The committee notes that the Chief of Naval Operations has included  
   procurement of the TAMMAC for the F/A 18C/D aircraft among his unfunded 
   requirements in fiscal year 2001. Accordingly, the committee recommends 
   $80.9 million, an increase of $9.3 million to procure 80 TAMMAC units   
   for F/A 18C/D aircraft.                                                 
           F/A 18E/F                                                               

      The budget request contained $2,818.6 million for 42 F/A 18E/F       
   aircraft, and $101.1 million for advance procurement of 45 aircraft in  
   fiscal year 2002.                                                       
      In its report on H.R. 1401 (H. Rept. 106 162), the committee         
   supported the Navy's requirement to replace its aging fighter/attack    
   aircraft fleet by authorizing a multiyear procurement of 222 aircraft.  
   However, the committee notes that the Department of the Navy now plans  
   to procure three less aircraft in fiscal year 2002 than projected in    
   fiscal year 2000, which results in 219 F/A 18E/F aircraft planned for   
   the multiyear procurement period between fiscal years 2000 through 2004.
      Consistent with the planned program of the Department of the Navy for
   fiscal year 2002, the committee recommends $2,612.8 million, a decrease 
   of $205.8 million and three aircraft. The committee understands that    
   this reduction will maintain the F/A 18E/F fiscal year 2001 procurement 
   quantity within a range that will not affect the multiyear procurement  
   contract.                                                               
           HH/UH 1N reclamation and conversion program                             

      The budget request contained no funds for the HH/UH 1N reclamation   
   and conversion program.                                                 
      The HH/UH 1N reclamation and conversion program would restore old    
   HH/UH 1N helicopters, currently in long-term storage facilities, for    
   entry into a remanufacture production line that rebuilds the aircraft's 
   avionics, propulsion, and other systems.                                
      The committee understands that current H 1 remanufacture plans would 
   remove UH 1N helicopters from the Marine Corps' operating fleet for     
   entry into the H 1 remanufacture production line, decreasing the number 
   of UH 1Ns in some of the Marine Corps' UH 1N helicopter squadrons below 
   their authorized strength. In order to avoid this situation, the        
   committee notes that both the Chief of Naval Operations and the         
   Commandant of the Marine Corps have identified the HH/UH 1N reclamation 
   and conversion program among their unfunded requirements in fiscal year 
   2001.                                                                   
      The committee believes that UH 1N fleet readiness will suffer if     
   operational aircraft are removed from the fleet to be upgraded.         
   Consequently, the committee recommends an increase of $17.5 million for 
   the HH UH 1N reclamation and conversion program and believes that this  
   increase will provide for induction of fourteen helicopters into the    
   remanufacture production line.                                          
           H 46 modifications                                                      

      The budget request contained $16.6 million for H 46 modifications but
   included no funds for the CH 46E engine reliability improvement program 
   (ERIP) to rebuild the CH 46E's key engine components, providing improved
   performance, safety, and reliability.                                   
      Subsequent to the submission of the budget request, the committee    
   learned that the mean time between engine removals (MTBR) of the CH     
   46E's engine has rapidly declined to 363 hours, and that the CH 46E's   
   engine performance has degraded 10 percent from original specifications.
   To address this problem, the committee understands that an ERIP would   
   restore the engine's MTBR to the planned interval of 900 hours, greatly 
   reducing operation and support costs in the process.                    
      The committee notes that both the Chief of Naval Operations and the  
   Commandant of the Marine Corps have identified the ERIP as an unfunded  
   requirement in fiscal year 2001. Since the CH 46E is scheduled to remain
   in service until 2012, the committee recommends $21.6 million, an       
   increase of $5.0 million to begin an ERIP for the CH 46E engine and     
   encourages the Department of the Navy to budget to complete the ERIP    
   within the fiscal year 2002 future years defense program.               
           H 53 modifications                                                      

      The budget request contained $19.9 million for H 53 helicopter       
   modifications but included no funds for AN/AAQ 29 forward looking       
   infrared (FLIR) system kits that would provide an improved capability   
   for the Marine Corps' CH 53E helicopters to operate at night and in poor
   weather conditions.                                                     
      The AN/AAQ 29 FLIR, which replaces the out-of-production AN/AAQ 16   
   FLIR, provides aircrews and embarked ground force commanders with       
   infrared video displays, flight information, and navigational data. The 
   committee understands that only 42 of the Marine Corps' 165 CH 53E      
   helicopters are equipped with a FLIR system and notes that both the     
   Chief of Naval Operations and the Commandant of the Marine Corps have   
   included 23 AN/AAQ 29 FLIR system kits among their unfunded requirements
   in fiscal year 2001.                                                    
      Accordingly, the committee recommends $34.9 million, an increase of  
   $15.0 million, for 23 AN/AAQ 29 FLIR system kits: $12.4 million for 19  
   system kits for active component CH 53Es, and $2.6 million for 4 system 
   kits for the Marine Corps Reserve CH 53Es.                              
           KC 130J                                                                 

   The budget request contained $154.8 million for two KC 130J aircraft.   

      The KC 130J is a tactical airlift aircraft that also serves as a     
   tanker for both helicopters and tactical fighters. The KC 130J replaces 
   existing KC 130F, R, and T                                              

                    models, providing increased speed and range, a higher cruise  
          ceiling, and a shorter take-off distance compared to the older models.  
      The Marine Corps currently has an inventory of 35 KC 130Fs, 14 KC    
   130Rs, and 28 KC 130Ts. The KC 130F, which was procured between 1960 and
   1962, is the oldest aircraft in the inventory and is approaching the end
   of its service life. The committee understands that a recent service    
   life assessment of the KC 130F fleet revealed that unless procurement of
   KC 130Js is accelerated or a comprehensive and costly service life      
   extension program is undertaken, an inventory shortfall of 15 aircraft  
   may occur as early as 2001.                                             
      In its report on H.R. 1401 (H. Rept. 106 162), the committee         
   recommended an increase of four KC 130Js and notes that the Commandant  
   of the Marine Corps has identified additional KC 130J aircraft among his
   highest unfunded aviation procurement requirements in fiscal year 2001. 
      Therefore, consistent with its prior actions, the committee          
   recommends $231.1 million, an increase of $76.3 million for one         
   additional KC 130J aircraft.                                            
           T 45 training system (TS)                                               

      The budget request contained $268.6 million to procure 12 T 45C      
   aircraft and associated ground-based training equipment and $5.1 million
   for advance procurement of 4 T 45C aircraft in fiscal year 2002. The T  
   45TS is an integrated training system that combines the T 45 aircraft,  
   simulators, and computer-based training for the Navy's                  
   intermediate-level undergraduate pilot training.                        
      The committee notes that the T 45 aircraft procurement objective has 
   decreased from 234 in the Department of the Navy's budget request for   
   fiscal year 2000 to 169 in its request for fiscal year 2001. The        
   committee further notes that the Navy plans to close its T 45 production
   line in fiscal year 2002 although the requirement for the T 45 remains  
   at 234. Since the Navy has experienced a recent shortage of pilots and  
   the Chief of Naval Operations has identified additional T 45 aircraft   
   among his unfunded requirements in fiscal year 2001, the committee is   
   puzzled by both the decrease in its T 45 procurement objective and its  
   proposed shutdown of the T 45 production line in fiscal year 2002.      
      Consequently, the committee recommends $301.4 million, an increase of
   $32.8 million for two additional aircraft. Further, the committee       
   encourages the Department of the Navy to restore funding in its future  
   years defense program to continue T 45 production.                      
           Tactical air reconnaissance pod system (TARPS)-completely digital (CD)  

      The budget request contained $37.1 million for other production      
   charges but included no funds for the TARPS CD system, an electro-optic 
   sensor upgrade designed to validate clear-weather digital imaging       
   technologies and to mitigate development risks for the shared           
   reconnaissance pod (SHARP) system.                                      
      The committee notes the recent, successful at-sea deployment of the  
   TARPS CD system and believes that the progress of the Navy's digital    
   imaging technology risk-mitigation efforts thus far provides sufficient 
   confidence to build on these efforts through the integration of a       
   non-developmental, commercial off-the-shelf (COTS) synthetic aperture   
   radar (SAR) sensor which will provide day/night imagery in all-weather  
   conditions. Since the committee understands that an all-weather         
   reconnaissance capability is a requirement for the SHARP system, it     
   fully supports further risk-mitigation activities integrating a SAR     
   sensor on the TARPS CD system.                                          
      Accordingly, the committee recommends $44.1 million, an increase of  
   $7.0 million, to integrate a COTS SAR sensor into the TARPS CD.         
           UC 35                                                                   

      The budget request contained no funds for procurement of UC 35       
   aircraft for the Army, Navy or the Marine Corps.                        
      The UC 35 is a medium-range, medium-lift operational support         
   aircraft. The committee understands that the Army, Navy, and the Marine 
   Corps conduct the operational support airlift mission with the          
   short-range C 12 aircraft, which is increasingly expensive to operate,  
   and does not meet payload, range, or avionics requirements. The         
   committee notes that the Army Chief of Staff, the Chief of Naval        
   Operations, and the Commandant of the Marine Corps have each identified 
   the procurement of UC 35s among their unfunded requirements in fiscal   
   year 2001.                                                              
      Consequently, the committee recommends an increase of $22.8 million  
   for three UC 35 aircraft: $7.6 million for one Army aircraft and $15.2  
   million for one aircraft each for the Navy and Marine Corps.            
                                 WEAPONS PROCUREMENT, NAVY                        

                                          OVERVIEW                                

      The budget request contained $1,434.3 million for Weapons            
   Procurement, Navy for fiscal year 2001. The committee recommends        
   authorization of $1,562.3 million for fiscal year 2001.                 
      The committee recommends approval of the request except for those    
   programs adjusted in the following table. Unless otherwise specified,   
   adjustments are without prejudice and based on affordability            
   considerations.                                                         

[Graphic Image Not Available]

[Graphic Image Not Available]

[Graphic Image Not Available]

                                  ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST                       

           Hellfire II missile                                                     

   The budget request contained no funds for Hellfire II missiles.         

      The Hellfire II missile is a laser-guided, anti-armor and anti-ship  
   weapon used by the Marine Corps on the AH 1W helicopter and by the Navy 
   on the SH 60B helicopter. The committee notes that, despite increased   
   funding provided by Congress in fiscal years 1998 and 2000, the         
   Department of the Navy has not met its inventory requirement for these  
   missiles. The committee further notes that, as a result of this         
   situation, the Chief of Naval Operations has identified procurement of  
   Hellfire II missiles among his top unfunded readiness requirements in   
   fiscal year 2001.                                                       
      Therefore, consistent with its prior actions, the committee          
   recommends an increase of $55.0 million to procure additional Hellfire  
   II missiles.                                                            
           Improved tactical air-launched decoy (ITALD)                            

      The budget request contained $58.9 million for aerial targets but    
   included no funds for the ITALD.                                        
      The ITALD, launched from Navy strike aircraft, is used to deceive and
   saturate hostile air defense systems, thereby enhancing strike aircraft 
   survivability. The committee understands that only 260 ITALDs have been 
   funded to date against a Navy requirement for 1500 to 1750 systems.     
   Because the committee believes that the use of tactical decoys          
   significantly improves both aircrew survival and mission success, the   
   committee recommends $68.9 million, an increase of $10.0 million, to    
   procure additional ITALDs.                                              
           Joint standoff weapon (JSOW)                                            

      The budget request contained $171.6 million for the JSOW, a standoff 
   air-to-ground glide weapon that uses global positioning system          
   satellites and an inertial navigation system for precision guidance.    
      The committee understands that the JSOW has performed flawlessly in  
   over 60 combat deliveries and notes that the Chief of Naval Operations  
   has identified the procurement of additional JSOWs among his top two    
   unfunded weapons requirements in fiscal year 2001.                      
      Consequently, the committee recommends $206.6 million, an increase of
   $35.0 million, to accelerate procurement of additional JSOWs.           
           Standoff land attack missile-expanded response (SLAM ER)                

      The budget request contained $27.9 million to convert 30 standoff    
   land attack missiles (SLAMs) to the SLAM ER configuration. The SLAM ER  
   is a long-range, air-to-ground, precision-guided missile that improves  
   the SLAM's range, accuracy and lethality.                               

      The committee notes that the SLAM ER has recently completed its      
   operational test and evaluation with both operationally effective and   
   suitable ratings. The committee also notes that the Chief of Naval      
   Operations has included the conversion of 60 SLAMs to the SLAM ER       
   configuration among his unfunded requirements in fiscal year 2001 in    
   order to reduce the risk of future missile shortages for a major theater
   war or contingency operation.                                           
      Therefore, the committee recommends $57.9 million, an increase of    
   $30.0 million, for the conversion of an additional 60 SLAMs to the SLAM 
   ER configuration.                                                       
                         AMMUNITION PROCUREMENT, NAVY/MARINE CORPS                

                                          OVERVIEW                                

      The budget request contained $429.6 million for Ammunition           
   Procurement, Navy/Marine Corps for fiscal year 2001. The committee      
   recommends authorization of $481.3 million for fiscal year 2001.        
      The committee recommends approval of the request except for those    
   programs adjusted in the following table. Unless otherwise specified,   
   adjustments are without prejudice and based on affordability            
   considerations.                                                         

[Graphic Image Not Available]

[Graphic Image Not Available]

                                  ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST                       

           Navy ammunition procurement                                             

      The budget request contained $295.9 million for procurement of       
   ammunition. The committee recommends $317.4 million, an increase of     
   $21.5 million for the following types of ammunition, which are among the
   top unfunded requirements identified by the Chief of Naval Operations in
   fiscal year 2001:                                                       

          [Dollars in millions]                                                   

  GBU 10/12/16 laser guided bombs/kits                                    

 $15.0                                                                   

  MJU 52/B IR expendables                                                 

 6.5                                                                     


           Marine corps ammunition procurement                                     

      The budget request contained $133.7 million for procurement of       
   ammunition. The committee recommends $163.9 million, an increase of     
   $30.2 million for the following types of ammunition, which are among the
   top unfunded requirements identified by the Commandant of the Marine    
   Corps in fiscal year 2001:                                              

          [Dollars in millions]                                                   

  5.56mm, all types                                                       

 $3.0                                                                    

  7.62mm, all types                                                       

 1.0                                                                     

  APOBS                                                                   

 2.0                                                                     

  .50 caliber                                                             

 1.0                                                                     

  Rocket, 83mm HEDP                                                       

 10.7                                                                    

  Rocket, 83mm HE Common Practice                                         

 4.6                                                                     

  155mm Projectile Extended Range M795                                    

 7.9                                                                     


                             SHIPBUILDING AND CONVERSION, NAVY                    

                                          OVERVIEW                                

      The budget request contained $12,296.9 million for Shipbuilding and  
   Conversion, Navy for fiscal year 2001. The committee recommends         
   authorization of $11,982.0 million for fiscal year 2001.                
      The committee recommends approval of the request except for those    
   programs adjusted in the following table. Unless otherwise specified,   
   adjustments are without prejudice and based on affordability            
   considerations.                                                         

[Graphic Image Not Available]

[Graphic Image Not Available]


                                  ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST                       

           LHD 8 amphibious assault ship                                           

      The budget request contained no funds for procurement of a WASP-class
   (LHD) amphibious assault ship.                                          
      The committee understands that the Navy intends to procure the LHD 8 
   amphibious assault ship in fiscal year 2005 due to funding constraints, 
   but notes that both the Chief of Naval Operations and the Commandant of 
   the Marine Corps have identified the LHD 8 as an unfunded requirement in
   fiscal year 2001. The committee further notes that procurement of the   
   LHD 8 before fiscal year 2005 could result in significant savings and   
   result in more stable funding for the Navy's shipbuilding plan.         
      Therefore, the committee recommends an additional $10.0 million for  
   advance procurement and long lead materials for the construction of LHD 
   8.                                                                      
           Auxiliary dry cargo ship                                                

      The budget request contained $339.0 million for the procurement of an
   auxiliary dry cargo ship (ADC(X)).                                      
      The committee is satisfied that the Navy has programmed sufficient   
   resources to provide for engineering and other one-time costs of the    
   lead shipyard in the ADC(X) program. However, since the program calls   
   for the ADC(X) class ships to be built by two shipyards, the committee  
   is concerned that the Navy has not also provided sufficient resources to
   fund engineering and other non-recurring activities unique to the second
   shipyard. The committee understands that if these activities are not    
   adequately funded, the award of the prime contract for the ADC(X) may be
   delayed.                                                                
      The committee is concerned that procurement of ADC(X) ships in the   
   Shipbuilding and Conversion, Navy (SCN) account does not adequately     
   reflect the unique logistics and sealift mission of these vessels. The  
   committee understands that the ADC(X) will be used to move cargo and    
   other supplies to forward-deployed fleet units and believes that a      
   vessel performing this mission would be more appropriately funded in the
   National Defense Sealift Fund (NDSF). The committee has therefore       
   transferred the funds requested for the ADC(X) in the SCN account to the
   NDSF and directs the Secretary of the Navy to fund ADC(X) procurement in
   the NDSF in future budget requests.                                     
      Accordingly, the committee recommends a reduction of $339.0 million  
   to the Shipbuilding and Conversion, Navy request and an increase of     
   $349.0 million to the National Defense Sealift Fund, including $339.0   
   million to procure an ADC(X) and $10.0 million to fund engineering and  
   other non-recurring activities necessary to support construction of this
   ship class at two shipyards.                                            
           Submarine force level                                                   

      The 1997 Quadrennial Defense Review (QDR) established a force of 50  
   nuclear powered attack submarines (SSNs) as adequate to support the     
   national military strategy and subsequent budget requests have supported
   this force level. However, the 1999 Attack Submarine Study conducted by 
   the Joint Chiefs of Staff found that the QDR force level is insufficient
   to meet near- and long-term operational requirements. Due to the low    
   rate of attack submarine procurement during the 1990s any force         
   structure increase above the QFR level over the long-term would require 
   a sustained increase in VIRGINIA class SSN procurement.                 
      Although sustained procurement of sufficient numbers of new          
   submarines is the only long-term solution to the SSN force structure    
   shortfall, the committee is aware of near-term cost-effective           
   opportunities to increase the number of submarines in the fleet. The    
   committee understands that the budget request contains sufficient funds 
   through fiscal year 2005 to refuel four LOS ANGELES class SSNs that     
   would otherwise be retired well before the end of their useful service  
   lives and strongly supports this effort as well as a longer-term        
   opportunity to refuel, in lieu of retirement, an additional three LOS   
   ANGELES class SSNs.                                                     
      The committee is also aware of the opportunity to refuel and convert 
   four OHIO class nuclear powered ballistic missile submarines (SSBNs) to 
   nuclear powered cruise missile submarines (SSGNs) in lieu of retirement.
   Although its final configuration would be dictated by arms control      
   considerations, the SSGN would provide a stealthy conventional strike   
   platform to support theater Commanders-in-Chief (CINC) requirements for 
   precision cruise missiles.                                              
      The committee supports the use of all reasonable means to increase   
   the submarine force level through increased procurement of new          
   submarines as well as refueling and conversion, in lieu of early        
   retirement, of existing submarines. The committee believes that this    
   combination of efforts would provide the most cost-effective way of     
   maintaining an adequate submarine force that is capable of meeting      
   current and future challenges to U.S. national security interests.      
           Submarine refueling overhauls                                           

      The budget request contained $72.3 million for advance procurement   
   for submarine refueling overhauls but included no funds for advance     
   procurement for refueling overhauls associated with the conversion of   
   ballistic missile submarines to cruise missile submarines.              
      The committee is aware of the Navy's proposal to convert four OHIO   
   class nuclear-powered ballistic missile submarines (SSBNs) to nuclear   
   powered cruise missile submarines (SSGNs) as a means of providing       
   theater Commanders-in-Chief (CINCs) with increased numbers of cruise    
   missiles for conventional precision strike missions. The committee notes
   that a requirement of any conversion program would be the refueling of  
   the nuclear reactors of the candidate SSBNs. The committee understands  
   that the Navy has no experience with refueling OHIO class SSBNs and that
   the submarines converted to SSGNs would also be the first of the class  
   to require refueling.                                                   
      Therefore, in order to reduce risk in any potential SSGN conversion  
   program, the committee recommends $86.3 million for submarine refueling 
   overhauls, an increase of $14.0 million, for advance planning and       
   procurement for OHIO class submarine refueling overhauls.               
                                  OTHER PROCUREMENT, NAVY                         

                                          OVERVIEW                                

      The budget request contained $3,334.6 million for Other Procurement, 
   Navy for fiscal year 2001. The committee recommends authorization of    
   $3,432.0 million for fiscal year 2001.                                  
      The committee recommends approval of the request except for those    
   programs adjusted in the following table. Unless otherwise specified,   
   adjustments are without prejudice and based on affordability            
   considerations.                                                         

[Graphic Image Not Available]

[Graphic Image Not Available]

[Graphic Image Not Available]

[Graphic Image Not Available]

[Graphic Image Not Available]

[Graphic Image Not Available]

[Graphic Image Not Available]

[Graphic Image Not Available]

[Graphic Image Not Available]


                                  ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST                       

           AN/SPS 73 (V) surface search radar                                      

      The budget request contained $4.9 million for items less than $5.0   
   million but contained no funds for the AN/SPS 73 (V) surface search     
   radar.                                                                  
      The Navy currently operates several different surface search radars  
   on its ships but has begun the replacement of these various systems with
   the AN/SPS 73 (V) radar. The AN/SPS 73 (V) is a commercial-off-the-shelf
   system that has improved performance over current radars and reduced    
   support costs through standardized logistics and maintenance            
   requirements. The committee continues to support the accelerated        
   standardization of surface search radars and recommends an increase of  
   $14.0 million for the procurement of additional AN/SPS 73 (V) radars for
   this purpose.                                                           
           Aviation life support                                                   

      The budget request contained $20.4 million for aviation life support 
   equipment for Navy and Marine Corps aircrews.                           
      The Marine Corps currently uses a mix of aircrew night vision systems
   procured during the 1980s and 1990s, some of which are incompatible with
   the latest glass cockpit displays in new fleet aircraft. The Marine     
   Corps is moving toward a standardized configuration for aircrew night   
   vision equipment, but currently has an inadequate supply of modern      
   systems. The committee notes that this shortfall was identified by both 
   the Chief of Naval Operations and the Commandant of the Marine Corps as 
   an unfunded requirement in fiscal year 2001.                            
      The committee notes that Congress has previously added funds to this 
   program to facilitate the upgrading of fixed and rotary wing aircrews   
   with state-of-the-art night vision systems. The committee supports the  
   continuation of this effort and recommends an increase of $9.9 million  
   to procure additional AN/AVS 9 night vision goggles for Marine Corps    
   aircrews.                                                               
           Education support equipment                                             

      The budget request contained $2.1 million for the virtual recruiting 
   program, which utilizes computer-based recruiting kiosks.               
      The committee understands that the Navy is facing serious challenges 
   in meeting recruiting goals and has established a pilot program to use  
   computer-based kiosks to provide potential recruits with access to      
   information about the Navy in an interactive format. The committee      
   further understands that the preliminary results of the pilot project   
   have been very successful but that the budget request fails to fully    
   fund this promising program.                                            
      Accordingly, the committee recommends $4.1 million for education     
   support equipment, an increase of $2.0 million, to procure an additional
   150 armed forces recruiting kiosks in order to fully fund the virtual   
   recruiting program.                                                     
           High-pressure cleaner                                                   

      The budget request contained $58.9 million for ship support equipment
   items less than $5.0 million but included no funds for high-pressure    
   non-hazardous dry steam solvent-based cleaners.                         
      The committee is aware that the Navy and the Marine Corps are each   
   using high-pressure dry steam solvent-based cleaners facilities to clean
   turbine engine parts, avionics, printed circuit boards, and a wide      
   variety of other military equipment in an environmentally responsible   
   manner. The committee also understands that the Navy has estimated      
   substantial maintenance cost savings associated with the use of these   
   cleaners and recognizes the value of their widespread use.              
      The committee agrees with the Navy's findings and, therefore,        
   recommends $60.9 million for ship support equipment items less than $5.0
   million, an increase of $2.0 million, for the procurement of            
   high-pressure dry steam solvent-based cleaners.                         
           Joint tactical terminal                                                 

      The budget request contained $32,000 for the Joint Tactical Terminal 
   (JTT).                                                                  
      The committee is fully supportive of the Navy's efforts to field the 
   JTT but is aware that the Navy has a shortfall in purchasing the        
   required number of terminals.                                           
      Accordingly, the committee recommends $6.0 million, and increase of  
   $6.0 million, to correct this deficiency.                               
           Mobile remote emitter simulator (MRES)                                  

      The budget request contained $15.1 million for weapons range support 
   but included no funds to procure MRES systems.                          
      The MRES is a high power electronic warfare threat simulator that is 
   capable of illuminating aircraft, ships and other signal collection     
   platforms.                                                              
      The committee notes that Congress provided additional funding to     
   procure an MRES system each year since fiscal year 1998 in order to     
   upgrade the Navy's electronic warfare testing and training facilities.  
   The committee supports the continuation of this modernization effort and
   recommends an increase of $7.5 million for the procurement and          
   installation of one MRES system.                                        
           Nuclear attack submarine (SSN) acoustics                                

      The budget request contained $106.6 million for SSN acoustics but    
   included no funds for the refurbishment and upgrade of TB 23 submarine  
   towed arrays.                                                           
      The committee understands that the Navy intends to upgrade all       
   submarine towed acoustic arrays with the TB 29A array beginning in 2002 
   but at a rate that will require the TB 23 array to remain in service for
   at least the next decade. The committee further understands that the TB 
   23 array must be refurbished and upgraded periodically to maintain the  
   reliability and effectiveness of this critical acoustic sensor.         
   Therefore, in order to ensure that the submarine force retains modern   
   and reliable acoustic sensors until completely outfitted with the TB 29A
   array, the committee recommends $114.6 million for SSN acoustics, an    
   increase of $8.0 million, to sustain the TB 23 array refurbishment and  
   upgrade program.                                                        
           Operating forces industrial plant equipment                             

      The budget request contained $2.7 million for operating forces       
   industrial plant equipment but included no funds for expeditionary      
   maintenance facilities (EMF).                                           
      The committee is aware that the Navy is decommissioning its repair   
   tenders, thereby limiting its ability to rapidly deploy a ship and      
   equipment repair capability to support forward deployed forces. However,
   the committee is also aware that EMF, surface and air transportable,    
   self-contained repair and maintenance facilities that can be operational
   within 72 hours of deployment, can meet the Navy's needs for a rapidly  
   deployable repair and maintenance capability.                           
      The committee fully supports the EMF concept and, therefore,         
   recommends $7.7 million for industrial plant equipment, an increase of  
   $5.0 million, to procure seven of the facilities.                       
           Other training equipment                                                

      The budget request included $21.4 million for other training         
   equipment, of which $16.4 million for the procurement of equipment to   
   support the Battle Force Tactical Training (BFTT) program.              
      The BFTT system allows surface combatants and aircraft carriers to   
   conduct realistic coordinated training scenarios using ownship equipment
   instead of shore-based training simulators. In fiscal year 2000,        
   Congress provided funds for upgrades to the BFTT system in order to     
   provide an Air Traffic Control (ATC) training capability for aircraft   
   carrier crews. In order to complete this upgrade, the committee         
   recommends an increase of $4.0 million.                                 
           Sonobuoys                                                               

      The budget request contained $49.5 million for the procurement of    
   sonobuoys, including AN/SSQ 36, AN/SSQ 53E, AN/SSQ 57, AN/SSQ 62E,      
   AN/SSQ 77, AN/SSQ 101, and Signal Underwater Sound (SUS) buoys.         
      The committee notes that the Navy's peacetime annual requirement for 
   sonobuoys is approximately 100,000 units of all types, but the budget   
   request would fund about 63,000. The Navy's low sonobuoy procurement    
   rate continues to fall far short of annual peacetime anti-submarine     
   warfare (ASW) training requirements.                                    
      The committee is concerned that the supply of sonobuoys could be     
   quickly exhausted in the event of a major theater contingency involving 
   airborne ASW operations. Accordingly, the committee recommends an       
   increase of $18.0 million to address the sonobuoy shortfall, distributed
   as follows: $3.0 million for AN/SSQ 53E, $5.0 million for AN/SSQ 62E,   
   and $10.0 million for AN/SSQ 77.                                        
           Undersea warfare support equipment                                      

      The budget request contained $847,000 for undersea warfare support   
   equipment but included no funds for surface sonar windows and domes.    
      The committee understands that the Navy has developed a new material 
   and production process for surface ship sonar dome windows because      
   reliable sources for the material previously used are no longer         
   available. The committee also understands that it is critical that the  
   Navy validate the new sonar dome material fabrication process to support
   orders for spare sonar dome windows.                                    
      Therefore the committee recommends $5.8 million for undersea warfare 
   support equipment, an increase of $5.0 million, to complete development 
   of production tooling and fabrication of the first production sonar dome
   with the new material system.                                           
           WSN 7B ring laser gyro (RLG)                                            

      The budget request contained $33.4 million for other navigation      
   equipment, including $7.4 million for the procurement of 11 WSN 7 RLGs. 
      The WSN 7 RLG is the common RLG ship navigation system for surface   
   ships and submarines.                                                   
      The committee has recommended a total increase of $52.0 million for  
   the procurement and installation of WSN 7 RLGs over the four preceding  
   fiscal years. Consistent with its actions in prior fiscal years, the    
   committee recommends an increase of $12.0 million for the procurement   
   and installation of additional WSN 7B RLGs, associated system field     
   change kits, and simulators. This increase will allow the Navy to       
   accelerate significantly the replacement of maintenance-intensive WSN 2 
   conventional gyro navigation systems in surface ships with the WSN 7B   
   RLG.                                                                    
                                 PROCUREMENT, MARINE CORPS                        

                                          OVERVIEW                                

      The budget request contained $1,171.9 million for Procurement, Marine
   Corps for fiscal year 2001. The committee recommends authorization of   
   $1,254.7 million for fiscal year 2001.                                  
      The committee recommends approval of the request except for those    
   programs adjusted in the following table. Unless otherwise specified,   
   adjustments are without prejudice and based on affordability            
   considerations.                                                         

[Graphic Image Not Available]

[Graphic Image Not Available]

[Graphic Image Not Available]

[Graphic Image Not Available]


                                  ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST                       

           Command post systems                                                    

      The budget request contained $9.5 million to procure equipment for   
   command post systems but included no funds for additional common end    
   user computer equipment for the Marine Forces Reserve (MARFORRES).      
      The MARFORRES is currently implementing state-of-the-art information 
   system networks to enable greater management of and communications with 
   remote units. These information systems have enabled the migration from 
   paper and manual-based business processes to the network-based flow of  
   information in support of growing personnel management requirements for 
   pay, medical entitlements, retention and separation. The committee      
   understands that additional computer hardware and software, high speed  
   printers, scanners, and multi-functional phones are required to expand  
   the employment of these networks and notes that the Commandant of the   
   Marine Corps has identified a $2.0 million unfunded requirement for this
   equipment in fiscal year 2001.                                          
      Therefore, the committee recommends $11.5 million, and increase of   
   $2.0 million, for additional common end user computer equipment for the 
   MARFORRES.                                                              
           High mobility multipurpose wheeled vehicle (HMMWV)                      

      The budget request contained $124.4 million for HMMWVA2s, which      
   incorporate upgraded electrical, braking, engine, and transmission      
   improvements as well as a 15-year corrosion prevention program.         
      The HMMWV is a multi-service, four-wheel drive utility and logistics 
   vehicle. The Marine Corps fleet is used for personnel and weapons       
   transport, medical evacuation, and as an air defense weapon-mount       
   platform.                                                               
      The committee understands that a 1997 corrosion study concluded that 
   of the more than 17,800 HMMWVs procured by the Marine Corps from 1985 to
   1995, 27 percent of the fleet was unserviceable due to severely corroded
   frames that no longer complied with manufacturer specifications. The    
   committee notes that the Commandant of the Marine Corps has identified  
   the accelerated procurement of additional HMMWVA2s to replace these     
   unserviceable vehicles as his number one ground unfunded requirement in 
   fiscal year 2001.                                                       
      The committee strongly supports this effort and, therefore,          
   recommends $147.4 million, an increase of $23.0 million, for additional 
   HMMWVA2s.                                                               
           Improved recovery vehicle (IRV)                                         

   The budget request contained $42.6 million to procure IRVs.             

      The 56-ton M88A1 is capable of towing only vehicles weighing less    
   than 60 tons. Consequently, two M88A1s are required to safely tow an    
   Abrams tank if it is rendered immobile due to combat damage or          
   mechanical failure. The M88A2 IRV upgrade includes increased engine     
   horsepower, as well as braking, steering, winch, lift, and suspension   
   capabilities required to safely recover Abrams tanks and other heavy    
   combat systems.                                                         
      The committee notes that the Commandant of the Marine Corps has      
   identified a $14.5 million unfunded requirement in fiscal year 2001 for 
   5 additional IRVs, which would accelerate the buyout of the program by  
   one year. Accordingly, the committee recommends $57.1 million, an       
   increase of $14.5 million, for 5 additional M88A2 IRV upgrades to       
   support future expeditionary operations.                                
           Material handling equipment                                             

      The budget request contained $36.3 million for the procurement of    
   various types of material handling equipment but included no funds for  
   the remanufacture or product improvement of D 7G bulldozers and         
   scrapers.                                                               
      The D 7G bulldozer/scraper fleet is used throughout Marine Corps     
   combat engineer and support units for airfield construction, as well as 
   for combat clearing and debris excavation.                              
      The committee notes that the service's bulldozer and scraper fleet is
   over 15 years old and rapidly deteriorating. The committee also notes   
   that the D 7G remanufacturing/product improve program will extend the   
   life of these bulldozers and scrapers for an additional 10 years.       
      Consistent with its actions in prior years, the committee recommends 
   $48.4 million, an increase of $7.0 million, to remanufacture/product    
   improve 62 D 7G bulldozers and $5.1 million to remanufacture/product    
   improve 45 scrapers.                                                    
           Modification kits (intelligence)                                        

      The budget request contained $5.0 million for modifications to       
   various tactical intelligence systems, but no funds were included to    
   procure Joint Surveillance Target and Attack Radar System (Joint STARS) 
   Common Ground Stations (CGS) or Joint Service Workstations (JSWS).      
      The Joint STARS CGS will provide the Marine Air-Ground Task Force    
   (MAGTF) commander with near-real-time battle space surveillance and     
   command and control capability by integrating into a single station the 
   processing of signals, imagery, and other intelligence received through 
   a data link from the Air Force's E 8 Joint STARS aircraft radar. The    
   system detects, locates, tracks, and classifies both moving and         
   stationary targets beyond the forward line of troops. The JSWS, a       
   principal component of the Joint STARS CGS, was developed for fixed-site
   locations that do not require all of the communications assets and      
   deployability provided by a CGS. The committee notes the Commandant of  
   the Marine Corps has identified an $8.5 million unfunded requirement in 
   fiscal year 2001 to procure 1 CGS and 3 JSWS, which would accelerate the
   approved acquisition objective by one year to fiscal year 2001.         
      The committee is aware of the proven success of the CGS and          
   understands the additional CGS and three JSWSs will provide the         
   necessary assets for MAGTFs throughout the Fleet Marine Force, while    
   greatly enhancing the MAGTF commanders' situational awareness.          
   Therefore, the committee recommends $13.5 million, an increase of $8.5  
   million, for 1 Joint STARS CGS and 3 JSWSs.                             
           Radio systems                                                           

      The budget request contained $3.1 million for procurement of radio   
   systems but no funds were included to procure Tactical Hand Held Radios 
   (THHR).                                                                 
      The THHR is a military-ready, multi-band, secure voice and data radio
   that will provide Marine reconnaissance teams, and squad-/ platoon-size 
   units with a lightweight, standardized, maintainable communications     
   capability that is interoperable with numerous Department of Defense    
   legacy communications radios.                                           
      The committee notes that the Commandant of the Marine Corps has      
   identified THHRs as an unfunded requirement in fiscal year 2001, which  
   would meet the entire acquisition objective for replacing existing      
   obsolete radios. Because the committee believes that the services must  
   have interoperable communications in support of the growing number of   
   joint operation deployments and supports the need for greater           
   communications capability within small units, the committee recommends  
   $15.1 million for radio systems, an increase $12.0 million to procure   
   THHRs.                                                                  
           Small unit riverine craft (SURC)                                        

   The budget request contained no funds to procure a SURC.                

      The committee understands that there is a requirement for a SURC to  
   support Marine Corps operations for a fast, shallow draft, high capacity
   craft that is C 130 deployable and that such a craft would provide      
   Marine units with the capability to insert combat troops into a         
   riverside environment.                                                  
      The committee is supportive of this requirement and, therefore,      
   recommends an increase of $2.0 million to procure a SURC for the Marine 
   Corps.                                                                  
           Training devices                                                        

      The budget request contained $30.8 million to procure of numerous    
   training and simulation systems, but no funds were included for upgrades
   to fielded indoor simulated marksmanship trainers (ISMT).               
      The ISMT-enhanced (E) will be a deployable, interactive,             
   three-dimensional simulation-based indoor training system for individual
   and small tactical unit marksmanship training. System enhancements will 
   allow Marines to receive marksmanship training on all infantry weapons  
   and replicate known-distance range qualification courses, offensive and 
   defensive combat situations, and shoot-no-shoot decision-making         
   exercises, all of which would normally be performed on an outdoor range 
   using live ammunition. The committee notes that 97 of the Marine Corps' 
   603 ISMTs will receive the enhanced upgrade in fiscal year 2000 and that
   the Commandant of the Marine Corps has identified an $8.7 million       
   unfunded requirement in fiscal year 2001 to upgrade the remaining 506   
   ISMTs.                                                                  
      The committee believes that it is critical for Marines to maintain   
   high marksmanship standards and that the ISMT E will provide the        
   training designed to compliment live-fire requirements. Therefore, the  
   committee recommends $39.5 million, an increase of $8.7 million, to     
   complete ISMT E upgrades.                                               
                              AIRCRAFT PROCUREMENT, AIR FORCE                     

                                          OVERVIEW                                

      The budget request contained $9,539.6 million for Aircraft           
   Procurement, Air Force for fiscal year 2001. The committee recommends   
   authorization of $10,267.2 million for fiscal year 2001.                
      The committee recommends approval of the request except for those    
   programs adjusted in the following table. Unless otherwise specified,   
   adjustments are without prejudice and based on affordability            
   considerations.                                                         

[Graphic Image Not Available]

[Graphic Image Not Available]

[Graphic Image Not Available]

[Graphic Image Not Available]

[Graphic Image Not Available]

[Graphic Image Not Available]


                                  ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST                       

           A 10 modifications                                                      

      The budget request contained $33.9 million for A 10 aircraft         
   modifications but included no funds for the integrated flight and fire  
   control computer (IFFCC) or for the situation awareness data link (SADL)
   for the Air National Guard's (ANG) A 10 fleet.                          
      The IFFCC is a replacement for the A 10's existing weapons delivery  
   computer, which has no additional processing power for future growth.   
   The committee understands that the Air Force plans to conduct a         
   multi-stage improvement program for the A 10 that will significantly    
   enhance its communications, threat warning and precision-guided         
   munitions capabilities but will be unable to proceed with this program  
   without the IFFCC. The committee notes that the Air Force Chief of Staff
   has identified the IFFCC among his top 20 unfunded requirements in      
   fiscal year 2001 in recognition of its importance to future A 10        
   modernization and recommends an increase of $6.8 million for this       
   purpose.                                                                
      The SADL provides the ANG A 10 fleet with an all-weather, secure,    
   jam-resistant, low-cost data link using commercial-off-the-shelf        
   enhanced position location reporting system radios. The committee       
   understands that the A 10 SADL would prevent battlefield fratricide,    
   integrate with the Army and Marine Corps digitized battlefield, and has 
   growth capability for future data link upgrades. The committee notes    
   that the Chief of the Air National Guard has identified the A 10 SADL   
   among his unfunded requirements for fiscal year 2001 and recommends an  
   increase of $8.6 million for this cost effective modification.          
      In total, the committee recommends $49.3 million, an increase of     
   $15.4 million, for A 10 aircraft modifications.                         
           Aircraft navigational and passenger safety equipment                    

      The budget request contained various amounts in several aircraft     
   modification budget lines for the procurement and installation of       
   aircraft navigational and passenger safety equipment.                   
      The committee has recommended increases for passenger and            
   navigational safety for several years, supporting the Secretary of      
   Defense's directive to improve aircraft flight and passenger safety     
   subsequent to the crash of a cabinet secretary's CT 43 aircraft in 1996.
   These increases have funded both terrain avoidance warning systems      
   (TAWS), which project an aircraft's position relative to the ground and 
   improves pilot situational awareness by warning of potential ground     
   impact, and traffic collision and avoidance systems (TCAS), which       
   provide predictive collision avoidance information regarding an         
   aircraft's position relative to another aircraft. The committee notes   
   that other safety upgrades are also planned in the future years defense 
   program (FYDP) such as cockpit voice recorders, flight data recorders,  
   and predictive windshear radars.                                        
      While the Department of Defense continues to fund these upgrades in  
   both the fiscal year 2001 budget and the FYDP, the committee believes   
   that such navigational and passenger safety improvements should be      
   expedited. Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $20.0   
   million to accelerate upgrades of the TAWS, TCAS, cockpit voice         
   recorders, flight data recorders, and predictive windshear radars on    
   passenger-carrying aircraft. Additionally, the committee expects the    
   secretaries of the military departments to report to the congressional  
   defense committees by February 1, 2001, on the passenger and navigation 
   safety upgrade status and plans for each of its passenger-carrying      
   aircraft. This report should identify which aircraft need to be equipped
   with TAWS, TCAS, cockpit voice recorders, flight data recorders, and    
   predictive wind shear radars.                                           
           C 130 modifications                                                     

      The budget request contained $91.5 million for C 130 modifications   
   but included no funds for the carry-on situation awareness data link    
   (SADL) or the AN/APN 242 for the Air National Guard's (ANG) C 130 fleet.
      The carry-on SADL provides the ANG's C 130 aircraft fleet with an    
   all-weather, secure, jam-resistant, and low-cost data link using        
   commercial-off-the-shelf enhanced position location reporting system    
   radios. The committee understands that, without the carry-on SADL, the  
   ANG's C 130 transport and rescue aircraft will be incompatible with the 
   Air Force's Air Expeditionary Force packages, and notes that the Chief  
   of the ANG has identified the C 130 carry-on SADL among his unfunded    
   requirements in fiscal year 2001. Consequently, the committee recommends
   an increase of $6.0 million to procure carry-on SADLs for the ANG's C , 
   EC , HC , and MC 130 aircraft fleets.                                   
      The AN/APN 242 is a weather and navigation radar that replaces the   
   1950's-era AN/APN 59 radar currently installed on the ANG's C 130       
   aircraft fleet. The committee understands that the AN/APN 59, in        
   addition to being obsolete, has a mean-time-between-failure (MTBF) rate 
   of 40 to 100 hours and is costly to maintain. The committee also        
   understands that the AN/APN 242 radar has significantly improved        
   performance capabilities, a projected MTBF rate of 1800 hours, and that 
   maintenance cost savings associated with the AN/APN 59's replacement    
   will pay for the AN/APN 242's acquisition within five years. To improve 
   C 130 mission capability and reduce maintenance costs, the committee    
   recommends an increase of $10.0 million for AN/APN 242 radars for the   
   ANG's C 130 fleet.                                                      
      In total, the committee recommends $107.5 million, an increase of    
   $16.0 million, for C 130 modifications.                                 
           Compass call block 30/35 mission crew simulator (MCS)                   

      The budget request contained $1.4 million for C 130 post-production  
   support, but included no funds for a Compass Call block 30/35 MCS. The  
   EC 130H Compass Call is used to disrupt enemy command and control       
   communications, and the block 30/35 MCS would provide aircrew training  
   for the current block 30 and planned block 35 aircraft configurations.  
      The committee understands that the current EC 130H mission simulator 
   is an obsolete, block 20 configuration which limits training            
   effectiveness for block 30- and 35-configured Compass Call aircraft due 
   to its inability to generate sensitive mission scenarios typical of     
   actual flying missions. The committee notes that training in actual     
   block 30-configured EC 130H aircraft is expensive and for this reason   
   the Air Force Chief of Staff has identified the Compass Call block 30/35
   MCS among his top unfunded readiness requirements in fiscal year 2001.  
      Because the committee believes that a state-of-the-art simulator is  
   required for this high-demand, low-density aircraft, it recommends $25.1
   million, an increase of $23.7 million, to procure a Compass Call block  
   30/35 MCS.                                                              
           C 135 modifications                                                     

      The budget request contained $328.2 million for C 135 modifications  
   but included no funds for reengining KC 135E aerial refueling aircraft  
   or for the KC 135 carry-on situation awareness data link (SADL) for the 
   Air National Guard (ANG).                                               
      The committee remains a strong supporter of the KC 135 reengining    
   program and understands that reengined KC 135s are capable of shorter   
   take-offs, operating with higher gross weights, meeting or exceeding all
   noise and pollution standards, and offloading more fuel. The committee  
   notes that the Chief of the Air National Guard has identified reengining
   of the KC 135E among his unfunded requirements in fiscal year 2001. The 
   committee recommends an increase of $52.0 million for two KC 135E       
   reengining kits.                                                        
      The KC 135 carry-on SADL provides the ANG's KC 135 tanker aircraft   
   fleet with an all-weather, secure, jam-resistant, and low-cost data link
   using commercial-off-the-shelf enhanced position location reporting     
   system radios. The committee understands that without the KC 135        
   carry-on SADL, ANG tanker aircraft will be incompatible with the Air    
   Force's Air Expeditionary Force packages. The committee notes that the  
   Chief of the Air National Guard has identified the KC 135 carry-on SADL 
   among his unfunded requirements in fiscal year 2001. The committee      
   recommends an increase of $6.0 million to procure additional SADLs for  
   the ANG's tanker fleet.                                                 
      In total, the committee recommends $386.2 million, an increase of    
   $58.0 million, for C 135 modifications.                                 
           C 17                                                                    

      The budget request contained $2,211.9 million to procure 12 C 17     
   aircraft and $266.8 million for advance procurement of 15 aircraft in   
   fiscal year 2002 but included no funds for an additional weapon system  
   trainer (WST) at the C 17 training base or for a maintenance training   
   system (MTS) for the Air National Guard (ANG).                          
      The committee understands that the C 17 training base currently has  
   three WSTs, but it needs a fourth system to accommodate the increased   
   pilot production anticipated in fiscal year 2004 when additional        
   aircraft and pilots are projected to arrive. The committee notes that   
   the Air Force Chief of Staff has identified an additional C 17 WST among
   his top unfunded readiness requirements in fiscal year 2001. In order to
   ensure that the C 17 training base will have sufficient capacity to meet
   required pilot production levels, the committee recommends an increase  
   of $14.9 million for procurement of an additional WST.                  
      The C 17 MTS is designed to qualify personnel to maintain the C 17   
   aircraft. In its report on H.R. 1401 (H. Rept. 106 162), the committee  
   recommended an increase of                                              

                    $3.5 million for advance procurement of long-lead items for   
          the MTS. The committee understands that the ANG unit that will receive C
          17 aircraft in fiscal year 2003 requires an MTS for initial             
          qualification of its maintenance personnel prior to the arrival of the  
          aircraft but notes that the Department of the Air Force has still not   
          budgeted for this system. Therefore, consistent with its prior actions  
          and to deliver a maintenance training capability on schedule, the       
          committee recommends an increase of $11.0 million for the MTS.          
      In total, the committee recommends $2,237.8 million for the C 17, an 
   increase of $25.9 million.                                              
           C 17 reverse-affiliate units                                            

      The committee notes that the Air Force is retiring its aging C 141   
   aircraft fleet and replacing it with the C 17, which was recently combat
   proven in Operation Allied Force, to meet the Department of Defense's   
   airlift mobility requirements. The committee also notes the Air Force's 
   increasing reliance on, and importance of, Air Force Reserve Command    
   (AFRC) units to accomplish the airlift mission and that several reserve 
   units are scheduled to begin retiring their C 141 aircraft in fiscal    
   year 2003 without a designated follow-on mission identified. In light of
   the current AFRC pilot and technician recruiting and retention          
   shortfalls, the committee is concerned that the Secretary of the Air    
   Force has yet to make a time-sensitive determination of a follow-on     
   mission for those AFRC units with retiring C 141 aircraft.              
      Accordingly, the committee urges the Secretary of the Air Force to   
   designate a mission for the AFRC units affected by the retirement of the
   C 141, especially those units with a joint-service requirement, and     
   requests the Secretary to strongly consider the designation of a        
   reverse-affiliate C 17 unit at bases where one of these units is        
   located. A C 17 reverse-affiliate unit would permit the AFRC to continue
   to utilize existing aircrew and maintenance personnel expertise in its  
   operations and maintenance responsibilities for AFRC-assigned C 17      
   aircraft, while also providing mission-ready aircraft that could be     
   flown by active duty Air Force aircrews.                                
           Defense airborne reconnaissance program (DARP), line 56                 

      The budget request contained $165.5 million for various RC 135 and U 
   2 aircraft modifications but included no funds for RC 135 training      
   aircraft, an updated C 135 operational flight trainer (OFT II), RC 135  
   global air traffic management (GATM) upgrades, or the theater airborne  
   warning system (TAWS) for the RC 135 Rivet Joint (RJ).                  
      The committee notes that the theater and functional                  
   commanders-in-chief (CINCs) have repeatedly testified that their        
   intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance (ISR) requirements,      
   particularly those supported by ISR aircraft such as the RC 135 and U 2,
   are not currently satisfied due to the limited number of these          
   platforms. The committee understands that the Air Force does not have a 
   dedicated RC 135 aircrew training aircraft and that this deficiency     
   contributes to the limited number of aircraft available to meet CINC    
   requirements. To increase the availability of RC 135 mission aircraft to
   the CINCs, the committee recommends an increase of $44.0 million to     
   modify two C 135 aircraft into an RC 135 training aircraft              
   configuration.                                                          
      The C 135 operational flight trainer (OFT I) is the aircraft         
   simulation training device for the RC , OC , WC , and TC 135 pilots. The
   committee understands that OFT I is obsolete due to its outdated engine 
   and aircraft avionics configurations and that OFT II would train        
   aircrews to operate the re-engined and updated-avionics-configured C 135
   model aircraft. The committee notes that the Air Force Chief of Staff   
   has included the procurement of OFT II among his top five unfunded      
   requirements in fiscal year 2001 and recommends an increase of $9.0     
   million, of which $6.5 million is for an OFT II and $2.5 million is to  
   equip this OFT II with motion simulation.                               
      RC 135 GATM upgrades include: interference resistant navigational    
   receivers, global positioning system upgrades, a traffic collision and  
   avoidance system, radios to permit reduced vertical separation between  
   aircraft during Atlantic Ocean transit, cockpit voice recorders, and    
   flight management system upgrades. The committee understands that,      
   without these upgrades, RC 135 aircraft will be restricted from flying  
   the most direct and fuel-efficient ocean routes and altitudes, will be  
   subject to critical landing-phase navigational radio interference, and  
   will not be equipped with the Secretary of Defense-directed safety      
   modifications until after fiscal year 2005. To meet these vital needs,  
   the committee notes that the Air Force Chief of Staff has included RC   
   135 GATM upgrades among his unfunded requirements for fiscal year 2001, 
   and consequently, recommends an increase of $28.4 million for this      
   purpose.                                                                
      The TAWS significantly improves the accuracy of ballistic missile    
   warning on RC 135 RJ, a tactical reconnaissance aircraft. In its report 
   on H.R. 1401 (H. Rept. 106 162), the committee recommended an increase  
   of $17.3 million for the RC 135 RJ TAWS and believes that continued     
   integration of these suites is critical to tactical missile defense     
   warning. Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $10.0       
   million for continued procurement and installation of TAWS suites on the
   RC 135 RJ aircraft.                                                     
      To consolidate RC 135 modifications in DARP, line 56, and U 2        
   modifications in DARP, line 80, the committee recommends a transfer of  
   the $5.1 million budgeted for RC 135 aircraft modifications in DARP,    
   line 80 into this budget line; and a transfer of the $18.3 million      
   budgeted for U 2 aircraft modifications in this line into DARP, line 80.
   This transfer results in a $13.2 million decrease to this line and an   
   increase of $13.2 million in DARP, line 80.                             
      In total, the committee recommends $243.7 million for DARP, line 56, 
   an increase of $78.2 million for RC 135 modifications.                  
      Finally, the committee is concerned about the Department of the Air  
   Force's budget plan for the RC 135's joint signals intelligence avionics
   family (JSAF) upgrades and notes that the request would budget for a    
   single JSAF suite for the RC 135 but additional suites are not planned  
   until fiscal year 2005. Without full and continuous funding for this    
   upgrade, the committee understands the first system, if installed onto  
   the RC 135, would result in a unique RC 135 aircraft configuration which
   would increase unit support costs for that aircraft. Accordingly, the   
   committee believes the new JSAF system should continue development and  
   testing in the RC 135 systems integration laboratory and on the U 2     
   aircraft until the Department of the Air Force budgets to upgrade all 16
   RC 135 aircraft.                                                        
           Defense airborne reconnaissance program (DARP), line 80                 

      The budget request contained $98.4 million in DARP, line 80, for     
   various U 2 and RC 135 aircraft modifications, of which $1.8 million was
   included for senior year electro-optic reconnaissance system (SYERS)    
   sensor spares and $17.0 million was included for a joint signals        
   intelligence avionics family (JSAF) suite for the U 2. However, the     
   budget request did not include any funds for additional U 2ST aircraft, 
   a two-seat trainer version of the single-seat U 2S reconnaissance       
   aircraft.                                                               
      SYERS is an electro-optic camera system that provides real-time      
   imagery to national decision makers and tactical forces. The committee  
   understands that the budget request underfunds initial deployment spares
   for the SYERS upgrade by $3.0 million and, accordingly, recommends an   
   increase of this amount.                                                
      The JSAF provides an upgraded information collection capability for  
   the U 2S. The committee understands that the budget request is          
   insufficient to procure an entire JSAF suite and required spares and    
   cabling. Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $4.0      
   million for this purpose.                                               
      The committee understands that there are only four U 2STs and that   
   without an additional U 2ST, the U 2S pilot production rate does not    
   meet requirements to resolve an existing pilot shortage. The committee  
   notes that the Air Force Chief of Staff has included an additional U 2ST
   among his top five unfunded requirements in fiscal year 2001 and,       
   accordingly, recommends an increase of $10.0 million to convert a U 2S  
   into a U 2ST aircraft.                                                  
      Including transfers between DARP lines 56 and 80 discussed elsewhere 
   in this report, the committee recommends $128.6 million, an increase of 
   $30.2 million, for U 2 modifications.                                   
            15 modifications                                                       

      The budget request contained $258.2 million for F 15 modifications,  
   of which $37.3 million was included for modification kits that convert  
   the F100 engine to the F100 220E configuration. However, the budget     
   request included no funds for F 15 Bofers launchers (BOL) countermeasure
   dispenser systems for the Air National Guard's (ANG) F 15A and B        
   aircraft, which would significantly improve its survivability.          
      Conversion kits for the F 15's F100 engine, also known as ``E-kits,''
   provide increased thrust, greater reliability, better fuel efficiency,  
   and reduced operations and maintenance costs. The committee understands 
   that, without the E-kit modification, ANG's F 15A/B fleet will be       
   increasingly costly to operate and maintain, less safe, and have        
   diminished availability to respond to the Air Force's Air Expeditionary 
   Force contingency operations. Accordingly, the committee recommends an  
   increase of $70.0 million for E-kits to accelerate the conversion of the
   ANG's F 15A/B aircraft engines to the F100 220E configuration.          
      The committee understands that the Air Force's test of a BOL         
   countermeasures dispenser system on the F 15 aircraft revealed that this
   system provided a dramatic increase in the aircraft's chaff and flare   
   capacity and a new preemptive expendable capability. The committee also 
   understands that the Air Combat Command has identified                  

                    an urgent requirement for a preemptive chaff and flare        
          capability on the F 15, and notes that the Chief of the Air National    
          Guard has included integration of such capability on F 15A and B        
          aircraft among his unfunded requirements in fiscal year 2001.           
      Consequently, the committee recommends an increase of $30.0 million  
   to integrate the BOL countermeasure dispenser system on the ANG's F 15A 
   and B aircraft. The committee also recommends $68.9 million, an increase
   of $7.6 million, in PE 27134F for F 15 operational systems development  
   to complete foreign comparative test activities for integration of this 
   system on all F 15 aircraft, as reflected in Title II of this report.   
      In total, the committee recommends $358.2 million, an increase of    
   $100.0 million for F 15 modifications.                                  
      Additionally, the committee notes that the Air Force modifies its F  
   15 fleet with a series of individual modifications rather than through a
   comprehensive block upgrade approach, such as the B 2 block modification
   upgrade program, in which several modifications are accomplished at one 
   time. Since the committee believes that an F 15 block upgrade program   
   would be more efficient, reduce cost, increase aircraft availability,   
   and increase readiness through a reduction in the number of different F 
   15 configurations, it strongly encourages the Secretary of the Air Force
   to implement an F 15 block upgrade program beginning with the Air       
   Force's fiscal year 2002 budget request, and expects the Secretary to   
   report to the congressional defense committees his plan to implement    
   such a block upgrade program.                                           
            15E                                                                    

      The budget request contained no funds for procurement of F 15E       
   aircraft. The F 15E is a two-seat, missionized-cockpit, dual-role       
   fighter that retains an air-to-air capability and adds the systems      
   necessary to meet the requirement for an all-weather, deep penetration, 
   day/night air-to-surface attack aircraft.                               
      The committee notes that the Air Force plans to operate its inventory
   of 218 F 15Es until 2030, and further notes that the F 15E fleet has    
   recently experienced very high operational tempos. The committee        
   believes, therefore, that additional attrition reserve aircraft should  
   be procured.                                                            
      Consequently, the committee recommends an increase of $149.8 million 
   for two F 15E aircraft.                                                 
            16 modifications                                                       

      The budget request contained $248.8 million for various F 16         
   modifications, of which $6.0 million was included to procure 29 ALE 50  
   towed decoy launcher pylons. However, the request included no funds for 
   the LITENING II precision attack targeting system (PATS) or for airborne
   video solid-state recorder systems (AVSRs).                             
      The committee understands that Air National Guard (ANG) F 16 units   
   equipped with the F 16C block 25 and 30 aircraft have an immediate      
   shortfall in precision strike capability. The committee notes that the  
   Chief of the Air National Guard has identified procurement of additional
   LITENING II PATS as his number one unfunded requirement in fiscal year  
   2001. This system, which consists of a third-generation forward-looking 
   infrared and a laser spot tracker, will allow ANG block 25 and 30 F 16s 
   to participate in future Air Expeditionary Force contingency operations.
   The committee notes that the ANG has a requirement for 160 LITENING II  
   PATSs, but only 56 have been funded.                                    
      The committee believes the integration of ANG F 16s into precision   
   strike operations is essential to the Total Force concept and,          
   therefore, recommends an increase of $25.0 million to procure 17        
   additional systems.                                                     
      The ALE 50 towed decoy pylon enables F 16C aircraft to carry the ALE 
   50, a radio-frequency repeater which is used to decoy an incoming threat
   missile away from the aircraft. The committee understands that the ALE  
   50 was one of the most effective countermeasure devices used during     
   Operation Allied Force and that it is credited with saving several      
   aircraft. Also, the committee notes that the Air Force Chief of Staff   
   has identified procurement of the ALE 50 towed decoy pylon among his    
   unfunded modernization requirements in fiscal year 2001.                
      Consequently, the committee recommends $18.3 million, an increase of 
   $12.3 million, to accelerate the production of 111 additional ALE 50    
   towed decoy pylons.                                                     
      The AVSR is a commercial off-the-shelf replacement for the F 16's    
   existing mechanical airborne video tape recorders which, the committee  
   understands, are difficult to maintain and have low reliability. The    
   committee also understands that the AVSR will provide a dramatic        
   improvement in mean time between failure, has no moving parts which can 
   break or wear out, requires no scheduled maintenance and will save an   
   estimated $80 million in life-cycle costs compared to the F 16's current
   system.                                                                 
      Therefore, to improve reliability and reduce F 16 airborne video tape
   recorder ownership costs, the committee recommends an increase of $12.0 
   million for the AVSR.                                                   
      In total, the committee recommends $298.1 million for F 16           
   modifications, an increase of $49.3 million.                            
            16 improved avionics intermediate shop (IAIS)                          

      The budget request contained $25.5 million for F 16 post production  
   support, of which $5.0 million was included for one IAIS system.        
      The F 16 IAIS system is a mobile test station used to diagnose and   
   repair F 16 avionics problems at deployed locations. Because the F 16   
   IAIS uses fewer people and requires less cargo space for transit than   
   the existing avionics intermediate shop, deployments of F 16 units which
   have the IAIS require less airlift support.                             
      The committee understands that 63 F 16 IAISs are required but notes  
   that only 48 have been--or are planned to be--procured in the future    
   years defense program. The committee notes that the Air Force Chief of  
   Staff has identified additional IAISs among his unfunded requirements in
   fiscal year 2001.                                                       
      Therefore, the committee recommends $49.5 million, an increase of    
   $24.0 million for five additional F 16 IAIS systems, including two for  
   active, two for Air National Guard, and one for Air Force Reserve units.
            16C                                                                    

      The budget request contained no funds for the procurement of F 16C   
   aircraft, the primary multi-mission fighter aircraft of the Air Force.  
      The committee notes its continuing strong support for the F 16C      
   program and that Congress provided an increase of $24.0 million in      
   fiscal year 2000 for advance procurement of additional aircraft in      
   fiscal year 2001. Finally, the committee notes that the Department of   
   the Air Force planned to procure 20 additional aircraft (10 each in     
   fiscal years 2002 and 2003) but has subsequently revised its plan and   
   now intends to procure six aircraft in fiscal year 2003 and seven in    
   each of fiscal years 2004 and 2005.                                     
      Therefore, consistent with its previous actions, and noting that both
   the Air Force Chief of Staff and the Chief of the Air National Guard    
   have identified additional F 16C aircraft among their top unfunded      
   requirements in fiscal year 2001, the committee recommends an increase  
   of $51.7 million and expects that the Department will combine these     
   funds with the $24.0 million appropriated for advance procurement in    
   fiscal year 2000 for to procure three F 16C block 50/52 aircraft.       
      The committee observes that the Senate Committee on Appropriations   
   report on H.R. 2521 (S. Rept. 102 154) stated, ``the Committee directs  
   that F 16 aircraft scheduled to be delivered to the Air Force during    
   fiscal year 1992 be turned over to those Air National Guard F 16's units
   which served in Operation Desert Storm.'' The committee further observes
   that the statement of the managers accompanying the conference report on
   H.R. 2521 (H. Rept. 102 328) stated, ``The Committee of Conference      
   directs the Air Force to initiate, immediately in the first quarter of  
   fiscal year 1992, the modernization process for those Air National Guard
   F 16 units that deployed to Operation Desert Storm, in priority over any
   nondeploying unit, leading to equipping these deploying units with      
   updated F 16 aircraft. Units with the Close Air Support (CAS) mission   
   will be equipped with Block 30 aircraft.'' The committee notes that the 
   Air Force complied with the aforementioned directives but subsequently  
   reversed that action when it removed the block 30 aircraft of the 174th 
   Fighter Wing and replaced them with less capable block 25 aircraft.     
      Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of the Air Force to   
   assign F 16 block 40, or later model F 16 aircraft, to Air National     
   Guard units whose capabilities have been downgraded as a result of the  
   substitution of older block aircraft when F 16C block 50/52 aircraft    
   procured in fiscal year 2001 are delivered to the Air Force.            
            8C joint surveillance and target attack radar system (STARS)           

      The budget request contained no funds for advance procurement to     
   continue E 8C Joint STARS aircraft production.                          
      The E 8C Joint STARS aircraft provides near real-time surveillance   
   and targeting information on moving and stationary ground targets,      
   enabling battlefield commanders to quickly make and execute engagement  
   decisions. Although its situational awareness value to commanders has   
   prompted the Joint Requirements Oversight Council (JROC) to validate a  
   requirement for 19 aircraft, the Department of the Air Force has        
   budgeted only for 15.                                                   
      While the committee is encouraged that the Department has funded the 
   15th Joint STARS aircraft in its budget request, it remains concerned   
   that, despite the JROC-validated requirement for 19 aircraft, the       
   Department plans to shut down the E 8C production line after this       
   aircraft is produced. These ``low-density, high demand'' aircraft are   
   among the most sought-after assets by the regional commanders-in-chief  
   for a range                                                             

                    of reconnaissance and surveillance operations and have been   
          combat proven in the recent Operation Allied Force.                     
      Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $40.0 million for 
   advance procurement of a 16th E 8C Joint STARS aircraft.                
           Lightweight environmentally sealed parachute assembly (LESPA)           

      The budget request contained $28.2 million for other aircraft        
   modifications but included no funds for the LESPA.                      
      Due to its longer repack cycle and extended service life, the        
   committee continues to believe that the Department of the Air Force will
   realize substantial life cycle cost savings with LESPA, compared to     
   existing parachutes, and has previously recommended procurement of      
   LESPAs for the Navy's P 3 and E 2 aircraft.                             
      Consistent with its previous actions to reduce ownership costs, the  
   committee recommends $35.2 million for other aircraft modifications, an 
   increase of $7.0 million for LESPAs to replace existing parachutes in C 
   130, C 141, C 5 and KC 135 aircraft.                                    
           Predator                                                                

      The budget request contained $22.1 million for procurement of the    
   Predator unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) system.                          
      The committee understands that the Air Force is experiencing         
   vanishing vendor problems with some of the current hardware in the      
   Predator ground station and that there is a requirement to control      
   multiple Predator aircraft simultaneously from a single ground station. 
   The committee is also aware that there are required air vehicle         
   reliability and maintainability upgrades that have not been funded.     
      Consequently, the committee recommends $34.1 million for the         
   Predator, an increase of $12.0 million for upgrading the current ground 
   stations with commercial hardware, for integrating the capability to    
   control multiple UAVs simultaneously and for improving air vehicle      
   reliability and maintainability.                                        
      Finally, the committee is aware that a jointly funded effort between 
   the contractor and the National Aeronautics and Space Administration has
   developed a turbo-prop variant of the Predator to be followed by a      
   jet-powered variant. Both of these Predator-B variants use the current  
   Predator ground station, avionics, datalink, and control software but   
   provide major performance improvements over the current aircraft,       
   including a maximum speed in excess of 200 knots and a service ceiling  
   to 45,000 feet. While the current Predator has clearly proven its       
   military worth, given these performance improvements, a Predator-B would
   appear to satisfy many niche missions for which the current vehicle is  
   not well-suited. The committee believes that a Predator-B would be a    
   valuable addition to the Predator fleet and that a mix of Predator-A and
   -B aircraft would cost effectively satisfy all Predator mission         
   requirements.                                                           
      Therefore, the committee requests the Secretary of the Air Force to  
   conduct an assessment of the utility of a Predator-B aircraft, including
   the benefits or problems operating a mixed Predator fleet. The committee
   further requests the Secretary report his findings to the congressional 
   defense and intelligence committees concurrent with the submission of   
   the fiscal year 2002 budget request.                                    
           T 3A modifications                                                      

      The budget request contained $1.9 million for T 3A aircraft          
   modifications.                                                          
      The committee notes that the Department of the Air Force has removed 
   the T 3A from service for screening prospective pilot candidates prior  
   to entry into undergraduate pilot training. Consequently, the committee 
   recommends no funding for T 3A modifications, a decrease of $1.9        
   million.                                                                
                             AMMUNITION PROCUREMENT, AIR FORCE                    

                                          OVERVIEW                                

      The budget request contained $638.8 million for Ammunition           
   Procurement, Air Force for fiscal year 2001. The committee recommends   
   authorization of $638.8 million for fiscal year 2001.                   
      The committee recommends approval of the request except for those    
   programs adjusted in the following table. Unless otherwise specified,   
   adjustments are without prejudice and based on affordability            
   considerations.                                                         

[Graphic Image Not Available]

[Graphic Image Not Available]

                               MISSILE PROCUREMENT, AIR FORCE                     

                                          OVERVIEW                                

      The budget request contained $3,061.7 million for Missile            
   Procurement, Air Force for fiscal year 2001. The committee recommends   
   authorization of $3,046.7 million for fiscal year 2001.                 
      The committee recommends approval of the request except for those    
   programs adjusted in the following table. Unless otherwise specified,   
   adjustments are without prejudice and based on affordability            
   considerations.                                                         

[Graphic Image Not Available]

[Graphic Image Not Available]

[Graphic Image Not Available]


                                  ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST                       

           AGM 65 modifications                                                    

      The budget request contained $2.0 million to convert 200 AGM 65G     
   missiles to the AGM 65K configuration.                                  
      The AGM 65 is a precision guided tactical missile employed on the F  
   16 and A 10 aircraft. The ``G'' configuration has an infrared target    
   seeker that can be upgraded to the ``K'' configuration, which uses an   
   updated electro-optical (EO) seeker. The ``B'' configuration has an     
   obsolete EO target seeker that can be upgraded to the ``H''             
   configuration, which also uses an updated EO seeker. Since the committee
   understands that over 5300 AGM 65s were fired in Operation Desert Storm 
   and over 800 in Operation Allied Force, it believes that the current    
   upgrade rate can neither meet future operational requirements nor       
   provide sufficient missiles for training.                               
      Consistent with its prior year actions in adding funds for these     
   upgrades, the committee recommends $7.0 million, an increase of $5.0    
   million, for conversion to both the AGM 65H and K configurations, of    
   which some missiles should be procured for Air National Guard pilot     
   training.                                                               
           Medium launch vehicle (MLV)                                             

   The budget request contained $55.9 million for MLV launch operations.   

      The committee notes that the MLV is used for Global Positioning      
   System (GPS) satellite launch operations and that, due to the           
   restructuring of the GPS program, GPS launches have been delayed.       
   Consequently, the committee believes that the budget request contains   
   funds in excess of MLV program requirements. Therefore, the committee   
   recommends $45.9 million for MLV, a reduction of $10.0 million.         
           Titan                                                                   

      The budget request contained $469.7 million for the Titan launch     
   vehicle and launch operations.                                          
      The committee notes that the management contingency funding request  
   for the Titan program is substantially larger than that of other        
   programs of comparable maturity and believes that the budget request    
   contains funds in excess of requirements. Therefore, the committee      
   recommends $459.7 million, a reduction of $10.0 million.                
                                OTHER PROCUREMENT, AIR FORCE                      

                                          OVERVIEW                                

      The budget request contained $7,699.1 million for Other Procurement, 
   Air Force for fiscal year 2001. The committee recommends authorization  
   of $7,869.9 million for fiscal year 2001.                               
      The committee recommends approval of the request except for those    
   programs adjusted in the following table. Unless otherwise specified,   
   adjustments are without prejudice and based on affordability            
   considerations.                                                         

[Graphic Image Not Available]

[Graphic Image Not Available]

[Graphic Image Not Available]

[Graphic Image Not Available]

[Graphic Image Not Available]

                                  ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST                       

           Automatic data processing equipment (ADPE)                              

      The budget request contained $74.8 million for ADPE but included no  
   funds for the spare parts production and re-procurement system (SPARES),
   a web-based, industry-standard electronic storage and management system.
      The committee understands that SPARES has enabled parts procurement  
   times to be reduced from 90 to 15 days and field maintenance response   
   times to be reduced from 14 days to only a few hours. The committee     
   continues to consider these figures impressive as it did when           
   recommending increased funding for SPARES in its report on H.R. 1401 (H.
   Rept. 106 162) for fiscal year 2000.                                    
      Therefore, consistent with its prior actions, the committee          
   recommends $84.8 million, an increase of $10.0 million, to continue     
   procurement of the SPARES.                                              
           AN/FPS 117 radar beacon replacement                                     

      The budget request contained $54.4 million for communications        
   electronics modifications but included no funds for replacement of      
   beacons on AN/FPS 117 radars. The AN/FPS 117 is a minimally attended,   
   long-range radar system used to provide air defense and air traffic     
   control in the Arctic regions of Canada and Alaska.                     
      The committee understands that the AN/FPS 117's beacons, which       
   provide identification friend or foe information to military air defense
   controllers as well as altitude and aircraft identification to civilian 
   air traffic controllers, are increasingly unsupportable due to          
   out-of-production parts and do not meet Federal Aviation Administration 
   regulations for air traffic control.                                    
      The committee believes these radars should not be allowed to         
   deteriorate and, therefore recommends $69.4 million, an increase of     
   $15.0 million, to begin a program for integration, testing and          
   replacement of AN/FPS 117 radar beacons.                                
           Eagle vision                                                            

      The budget request included no funds for procuring the processing    
   hardware necessary to complete the Eagle Vision 4 imagery system.       
      Eagle Vision is a ground station that receives and processes imagery 
   from commercial remote sensing satellites. The committee fully supports 
   the Eagle Vision commercial imagery initiative, which has provided      
   unique, unclassified imagery support to meet theater and service        
   requirements that, due to higher priorities, cannot be met by other     
   technical means. The committee believes that this initiative needs to be
   fully funded to continue such support.                                  
      Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $5.0 million for  
   completing the Eagle Vision 4 processor installation.                   
           Rivet joint mission trainer (RJMT)                                      


      The budget request contained $12.8 million for RC 135 Defense Aerial 
   Reconnaissance Program procurement but included no funds to provide a   
   forward-deployed training capability for the RJMT, the primary RC 135   
   Rivet Joint (RJ) ground training simulator.                             
      The RC 135 RJ is a tactical reconnaissance aircraft that provides    
   real-time intelligence to combat forces. The committee understands that 
   the procurement of an enhanced field exportable training system (EFETS) 
   would improve training and readiness by allowing deployed RC 135 RJ     
   crewmembers to use existing post-mission ground data processing         
   equipment to function as an RJMT. Since procurement of an additional    
   RJMT for deployed locations would not be required, the committee further
   understands that the EFETS would save the Air Force $27.4 million and   
   notes that the Air Force Chief of Staff has included $15.5 million for  
   the EFETS among his top five unfunded requirements for fiscal year 2001.
      Consequently, the committee recommends $28.3 million, an increase of 
   $15.5 million for this purpose.                                         
           Senior scout                                                            

      The budget request contained $5.5 million for procurement of         
   intelligence communications equipment, including $2.0 million for       
   procurement of spares and replacement equipment for the Senior Scout    
   tactical reconnaissance aircraft.                                       
      The committee is pleased that the Air Force has decided to retain the
   Senior Scout reconnaissance capability to augment the high demand/low   
   density airborne intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance (ISR)   
   fleets in the reserve component. However, the committee is disturbed    
   that the Air Force has not added funding to upgrade the Senior Scout to 
   more effectively interoperate with other ISR aircraft and, more         
   importantly, the combat aircraft it supports.                           
      Therefore, the committee recommends $13.7 million for intelligence   
   communications equipment, an increase of $8.2 million for Senior Scout  
   collection and dissemination upgrades and for the addition of a         
   deployable ground data reduction system.                                
                      Situation awareness data link (SADL) gateway for the theater 
           air control system (TACS)                                               
      The budget request contained $15.4 million for TACS improvement but  
   included no funds to initiate a program for the SADL gateway for the Air
   National Guard's (ANG) TACS.                                            
      The SADL gateway for the ANG's TACS would use                        
   commercial-off-the-shelf enhanced position location reporting system    
   radios, a laptop-sized computer, and an integrated software package to  
   provide datalink-equipped ground assets with friend or foe track        
   identification when an aircraft's transponder is not operating. This    
   capability would enable ANG TACS participants on the ground to view the 
   entire air battle picture. The committee understands that this system   
   would help prevent battlefield fratricide and notes that the Chief of   
   the Air National Guard has identified the SADL gateway for the ANG's    
   TACS among his unfunded requirements in fiscal year 2001.               
      Consequently, the committee recommends $19.8 million, an increase of 
   $4.4 million, to initiate a SADL gateway program for the ANG's TACS.    
           Supply asset tracking system (SATS)                                     

      The budget request contained $15.1 million for mechanized material   
   handling equipment but included no funds for SATS.                      
      SATS provides the capability to quickly and accurately identify and  
   locate personnel, equipment and supplies through the use of commercial  
   automated information technology. The committee understands that this   
   system enhances productivity, shortens inventory cycles, and allows     
   real-time inventory updates.                                            
      The committee notes that Congress has provided additional funds for  
   SATS installation over the past two years and accordingly, recommends   
   $27.1 million, an increase of $12.0 million, to continue the            
   installation of this system at Air Force bases worldwide.               
                                 PROCUREMENT, DEFENSE-WIDE                        

                                          OVERVIEW                                

      The budget request contained $2,275.3 million for Procurement,       
   Defense-Wide for fiscal year 2001. The committee recommends             
   authorization of $2,309.1 million for fiscal year 2001.                 
      The committee recommends approval of the request except for those    
   programs adjusted in the following table. Unless otherwise specified,   
   adjustments are without prejudice and based on affordability            
   considerations.                                                         

[Graphic Image Not Available]

[Graphic Image Not Available]

[Graphic Image Not Available]

[Graphic Image Not Available]

                                 ITEMS OF  SPECIAL INTEREST                       

           Automated document conversion system (ADCS)                             

   The budget request contained no funds for ADCS.                         

      The committee recognizes that the ADCS program continues to perform a
   critical role in the attainment of the Department's goal for achieving a
   digitally integrated, paperless environment by 2002. Although the ADCS  
   is the Department's single most productive program in converting the    
   vast remaining inventories of legacy engineering drawings into more     
   useful computerized formats, the committee understands that, a          
   significant conversion backlog remains in each service.                 
      Therefore, in order to reduce this backlog, the committee recommends 
   an increase of $40.0 million to continue the ADCS program.              
           Counternarcotics discreet operations radio (CONDOR)                     

      The budget request contained no funds for the CONDOR, a mobile       
   communications system that allows encrypted as well as non-encrypted    
   transmissions in a single device and includes a net broadcast capability
   for one-to-many communications similar to handheld radios. CONDOR       
   addresses the Department of Defense's requirement to have secure and    
   net-mode mobile communications in a device that resembles a normal      
   cellular telephone while reducing the Department's need to maintain     
   unique expensive wireless networks.                                     
      The committee understands that NSA has procured a small number of    
   these devices; however, additional devices are required. Therefore, the 
   committee recommends an increase of $6.0 million for additional CONDOR  
   procurement.                                                            
           Patriot advanced capability 3 (PAC 3)                                   

      The budget request contained $365.5 million for acquisition of the   
   PAC 3 system and 40 PAC 3 missiles. The PAC 3 system is the only theater
   missile defense (TMD) system nearing operational deployment that is     
   capable of defeating current sophisticated ballistic missile threats.   
      The committee notes that the Director of the Ballistic Missile       
   Defense Organization has identified facilitization of the PAC 3         
   production line and additional procurement of PAC 3 missiles as unfunded
   requirements in fiscal year 2001. The committee believes that additional
   funds would provide both manufacturing efficiencies prior to full rate  
   production of the PAC 3 as well as inventory growth to meet emerging    
   threats.                                                                
      Because of the near-term importance of the PAC 3 for TMD, the        
   committee recommends $430.7 million, an increase of $35.2 million for   
   procurement of eight additional PAC 3 missiles and $30.0 million for    
   additional facilitization of the PAC 3 production line.                 
           Portable intelligence collection and relay capability (PICRC)           


      The budget request contained $32.3 million for special operations    
   forces (SOF) intelligence systems but included no funds for the PICRC.  
      The PICRC integrates commercial-off-the-shelf mapping and display    
   software, desktop computers, hand-held computing devices, and wireless  
   communications to enable SOF operators to employ high-resolution imagery
   for precision navigation, annotate real-time visual observations, and   
   relay information to command elements.                                  
      The committee understands that this system would significantly       
   enhance SOF capabilities to accurately collect, quickly report, and     
   promptly act upon real-time intelligence data. Consequently, the        
   committee recommends $38.3 million, an increase of $6.0 million, for    
   procurement of PICRC systems.                                           
                     CHEMICAL AGENTS AND MUNITIONS DESTRUCTION, DEFENSE           

                                          OVERVIEW                                

      The budget request contained no funds for Chemical Agents and        
   Munitions Destruction, Defense for fiscal year 2001. The committee      
   recommends authorization of $877.1 million for fiscal year 2001.        
      The committee recommends approval of the request except for those    
   programs adjusted in the following table. Unless otherwise specified,   
   adjustments are without prejudice and based on affordability            
   considerations.                                                         

[Graphic Image Not Available]

                                  ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST                       

           Chemical agents and munitions destruction                               

      As described elsewhere in this report, the committee recommends      
   transferring the budget request of $1,003.5 million for Chemical Agents 
   and Munitions Destruction, Army (CAMD, A) to Chemical Agents and        
   Munitions Destruction, Defense (CAMD, D), and recommends a total of     
   $877.1 million for the program.                                         
      The committee notes the progress during the last fiscal year in the  
   continuing effort to dispose of the U.S. stockpile of lethal chemical   
   agents and munitions and of chemical warfare related materiel, while    
   ensuring maximum protection of the public, personnel involved in the    
   destruction and the environment. Nearly 20 percent of the original      
   stockpile of 31,495 tons of chemical agents has been destroyed and 90   
   percent of the stockpile is under contract for destruction.             
      The committee continues to be concerned about total cost of the      
   chemical agents and munitions destruction program (currently estimated  
   at $14.9 billion). Section 141 of the National Defense Authorization Act
   for Fiscal Year 2000 (Public Law 106 65) included several measures to   
   increase the flexibility of the program with respect to the disposition 
   of chemical stockpile destruction facilities and the destruction of     
   non-stockpile chemical agents, munitions or related materials in these  
   facilities. The provision required the Secretary of Defense to assess   
   the program and report to the Congress by March 1, 2000, the measures   
   taken, or planned to be taken, under existing law and recommendations   
   for additional legislation to reduce significantly program costs and to 
   meet U.S. obligations under the CWC. The section further provided for a 
   review and assessment by the Comptroller General of the United States of
   program execution and financial management for each element of the      
   program. The committee intends to use these reports as the basis for    
   further review of the program later this year.                          
      The committee continues to believe that, in order to ensure the      
   maximum protection of the public, personnel involved in the destruction 
   of the stockpile, and the environment, the Department should proceed    
   with destruction of the stockpile as rapidly as is technically and      
   programmatically feasible. Therefore, the committee recommends that the 
   Secretary of Defense carry out the chemical agents and munitions        
   destruction program in accordance with the following priorities:        
      Execution of the baseline chemical stockpile disposal project and the
   alternative technologies project at those sites selected and approved   
   for use of those technologies; and                                      
      Preparation for pilot testing of those ACWA technologies which have  
   the greatest likelihood of implementation and, if implemented, of       
   meeting the destruction goals established by the CWC.                   
           Chemical stockpile disposal project                                     

      The budget request for the chemical agents and munitions destruction 
   program included $105.1 million in procurement and $483.6 million in    
   operations and maintenance funding for the chemical stockpile disposal  
   project. The committee recommends the budget request for the chemical   
   stockpile disposal project.                                             
           Chemical stockpile emergency preparedness project (CSEPP)               

      The budget request for the chemical agents and munitions destruction 
   program included $600,000 in procurement funds for minor replacement    
   equipment and $66.7 million for CSEPP operations and maintenance.       
      The committee notes that funds provided for CSEPP in fiscal years    
   1999 and 2000 were subject to reductions of approximately 9 percent and 
   8 percent, respectively, as a pro-rata share of reductions to the CAMD, 
   A account. Because of the potential impact of such reductions on the    
   safety of those living and working near or on the chemical stockpile    
   storage and destruction sites, the committee directs that funding for   
   CSEPP shall be at the requested level unless otherwise specifically     
   noted.                                                                  
      Accordingly, the committee recommends a total of $600,000 in CAMD, D 
   Procurement, and $66.7 million in CAMD, D Operations and Maintenance,   
   for CSEPP, as a Congressional special interest item.                    
           Alternative technologies and approaches project                         

      The budget request for the chemical agents and munitions destruction 
   program included $135.2 million for development of alternative          
   technologies and approaches for the disposal of bulk chemical agents    
   stored at Aberdeen Proving Ground, Maryland, and Newport, Indiana. The  
   committee recommends the budget request for the alternative technologies
   and approaches project.                                                 
           Non-stockpile chemical materiel project                                 

      The budget request for the chemical agents and munitions destruction 
   program included $60.2 million in research and development, $16.2       
   million in procurement, and $47.5 million in operations and maintenance 
   funds for the non-stockpile chemical materiel project.                  
      The committee notes that the Army has destroyed a large portion of   
   its existing non-stockpile chemical warfare materiel and that           
   approximately 1,400 non-stockpile chemical munitions are currently in   
   storage awaiting destruction. However, because of technical issues, cost
   increases, and delays in obtaining state permits, program officials are 
   considering alternate disposal methods, including the use of chemical   
   stockpile disposal facilities.                                          
      The committee is aware that an independent assessment of the         
   non-stockpile project recommends seeking appropriate environmental      
   permit language to allow destruction of non-stockpile materiel at the   
   chemical stockpile disposal facilities. The assessment also recommends  
   examination of the schedule and cost risks of the non-stockpile project 
   to quantify the potential program risks, ultimate costs, and time to    
   complete the project. The committee believes that these issues must be  
   addressed and serious consideration given to destruction of             
   non-stockpile chemical materiel in stockpile                            

                    disposal facilities before proceeding further with development
          and acquisition of integrated transportable treatment systems for       
          non-stockpile chemical materiel.                                        
      Accordingly, the committee recommends a total of $47.5 million for   
   the non-stockpile chemical materiel project, a decrease of $60.2 million
   for non-stockpile chemical materiel project research and development and
   a decrease of $16.2 million for non-stockpile chemical materiel project 
   procurement.                                                            
           Chemical agent identification sets                                      

      The committee notes that approximately 10,000 chemical agent         
   identification sets (CAIS) and components, which were used to train     
   soldiers in defensive responses to a chemical attack, are in storage    
   awaiting destruction, and that the Army's baseline approach for treating
   and disposing of CAIS has been to develop a mobile treatment system in  
   the non-stockpile chemical materiel project. The committee has reviewed 
   the National Research Council (NRC)'s report ``Disposal of Chemical     
   Agent Identification Sets,'' which evaluates the Army's 1998 report to  
   Congress on alternative approaches for the treatment and disposal of    
   CAIS. The NRC recommends that the Army reconsider its interpretation of 
   CAIS as chemical warfare materiel under section 1512 of Title 50, United
   States Code, evaluate the technical feasibility of non-incineration     
   technologies for CAIS disposal, insure the active involvement of public 
   and other stakeholder groups CAIS project decision, and consider the    
   potential use of chemical stockpile destruction facilities for CAIS     
   disposal.                                                               
      The committee expects the Secretary of the Army to address the       
   Council's recommendations in the next annual status report on the       
   disposal of chemical weapons and materiel.                              
           Assembled chemical weapons assessment (ACWA)                            

      The budget request for chemical agents and munitions destruction     
   contains $79.0 million for ACWA research and development, including     
   $50.0 million for engineering design studies for three additional       
   alternative technologies to be demonstrated in accordance with the      
   statement of managers that accompanied the conference report on H.R.    
   2561 (H. Rept. 106 371).                                                
      The committee has reviewed the progress in the ACWA program to       
   identify and demonstrate not less than two alternatives to the baseline 
   incineration process in accordance with Title VIII, section 8065 of the 
   Omnibus Consolidated Appropriations Act, 1997 (Public Law 104 208) and  
   to conduct evaluations of three additional alternative technologies.    
      The committee notes the NRC's ``Review and Evaluation of Alternative 
   Technologies for Demilitarization of Assembled Chemical Weapons'' dated 
   August 1999, which concluded that the primary alternative technologies  
   can decompose the chemical agents of concern with the required          
   destruction efficiencies; however, testing, verification, and           
   integration beyond the 1999 demonstration phase would be necessary. The 
   NRC also concluded that an extraordinary commitment of resources would  
   be required to complete destruction of the assembled chemical weapons   
   stockpile (using any of the ACWA technology packages) in time to meet   
   the current deadline established by the CWC.                            
      The committee notes that the NRC's ``Supplemental Review,'' dated    
   March 2000, of the three technologies from the 1999 demonstration       
   concluded that, while the two hydrolysis-based technologies showed      
   promise, none of the technology packages was ready for integrated pilot 
   programming, and the tests were not conducted for a sufficient period of
   time to demonstrate reliability and long-term operations. The committee 
   notes that the two hydrolysis-based technologies are currently in the   
   engineering design studies phase and that a site-specific Environmental 
   Impact Statement (EIS), which includes both the baseline incineration   
   and hydrolysis options, is being submitted for the Pueblo, Colorado,    
   chemical stockpile destruction facility in accordance with the National 
   Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). A NEPA record of decision is expected  
   in May 2001, approximately 15 months from the date the EIS was filed.   
      The committee notes that contract awards for demonstration of the    
   three additional alternative technologies were made in February 2000 and
   a report to Congress of the results of the demonstration is planned for 
   March 2001. Based on this schedule and noting the concerns raised by the
   NRC regarding the need for testing, verification, and integration beyond
   the demonstration phase, the committee believes there is no requirement 
   to begin preliminary engineering design studies for the three additional
   alternatives during fiscal year 2001.                                   
      Accordingly, the committee recommends $29.0 million for ACWA program 
   research and development, a decrease of $50.0 million.                  
                                   LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS                         

                        SUBTITLE A--AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS               

                      SECTIONS 101 107--AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS           

      These sections would authorize the recommended fiscal year 2001      
   funding levels for all procurement accounts.                            
                                 SUBTITLE B--ARMY PROGRAMS                        

                        SECTION 111--MULTIYEAR PROCUREMENT AUTHORITY              

      This section would authorize the Secretary of the Army to enter into 
   multiyear procurement (MYP) contracts for the M2A3 Bradley Fighting     
   Vehicle in fiscal year 2001 and the UH 60 Blackhawk and Navy CH 60      
   Knighthawk utility helicopters, as the Department of the Navy's         
   executive agent, in fiscal year 2002. This section would also prohibit  
   the Secretary of the Army from executing a M2A3 Bradley MYP contract    
   until a successful completion of the vehicle's initial operational test 
   and evaluation and certification by the Secretary to the congressional  
   defense committees that the vehicle met all of its required test        
   parameters.                                                             
               SECTION 112--INCREASE IN LIMITATION ON NUMBER OF BUNKER DEFEAT     
                         MUNITIONS THAT MAY BE ACQUIRED                           
      This section would amend section 116 of the National Defense         
   Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1995 (Public Law 103 337) to increase 
   the number of bunker defeat munitions that may be acquired by the Army  
   from 6,000 contingency rounds to 8,500 contingency rounds.              
            SECTION 113--ARMAMENT RETOOLING AND MANUFACTURING SUPPORT INITIATIVE  

      This section would modify section 193 of the Armament Retooling and  
   Manufacturing Support (ARMS) Act of 1992 (Public Law 102 484) by        
   extending the initiative through fiscal year 2002. The provision would  
   also expand the purposes of the ARMS Act beyond the current facilities  
   identified in Section 193 to include the Army manufacturing arsenals.   
   Finally, the provision would modify Section 194 of the ARMS Act to allow
   the Secretary of the Army to enter into long term facilities use        
   contracts and accept non-monetary consideration in lieu of rental       
   payments for use of facilities. The provision would require that the    
   Secretary of the Army provide a report to the Congressional defense     
   committees by July 1, 2001, on the implementation of the arsenal        
   contracts provided by the ARMS Act authority.                           
                                 SUBTITLE C--NAVY PROGRAMS                        

                           SECTION 121--SUBMARINE FORCE STRUCTURE                 

      This section would prohibit the retirement of any Los Angeles class  
   nuclear powered attack submarine with less than 30 years of active      
   commissioned service. This section would also require the President to  
   report to Congress on the submarine force structure required to support 
   the national military strategy and the acquisition and overhaul         
   requirements necessary to achieve and maintain such a force.            
    Section 122--Virginia Class Submarine Program                          

      This section would authorize the Secretary of the Navy to enter into 
   a contract for the procurement of five Virginia class submarines during 
   fiscal years 2003 through 2006.                                         
              SECTION 123--RETENTION OF CONFIGURATION OF CERTAIN NAVAL RESERVE    
                                    FRIGATES                                      
      This provision would require the Secretary of the Navy to configure  
   and equip the Naval Reserve FFG 7 Flight I and II frigates remaining in 
   active service with the complete organic weapon system for these vessels
   as specified in the Navy's Operational Requirements Document and retain 
   these frigates in their current locations.                              
           SECTION 124--EXTENSION OF MULTIYEAR PROCUREMENT AUTHORITY FOR ARLEIGH  
                             BURKE CLASS DESTROYERS                               

      This section would authorize an extension of the existing multiyear  
   procurement contract for the DDG 51 destroyer program through fiscal    
   year 2005. The section would authorize the procurement of three ships   
   per year through fiscal year 2001 and the procurement of up to three    
   ships per year from fiscal year 2002 through 2005.                      
                               SUBTITLE D--AIR FORCE PROGRAMS                     

               SECTION 131--ANNUAL REPORT ON OPERATIONAL STATUS OF B 2 BOMBER     

      This section would repeal section 112 of the National Defense        
   Authorization Act for Fiscal Years 1990 and 1991 (Public Law 101 89).   
   This section would further require the Secretary of Defense to submit an
   annual report on the B 2 bomber that would include assessments related  
   to B 2 capabilities; technologies needed to enhance B 2 capabilities and
   the adequacy of technology investments to enhance these capabilities;   
   and the consistency of such technology investments with the Air Force   
   bomber roadmap and the report of the 1998 Long Range Airpower panel     
   submitted pursuant to the requirements of the Department of Defense     
   Appropriations Act, 1998 (Public Law 105 56).                           
                                 SUBTITLE E--JOINT PROGRAMS                       

             SECTION 141--STUDY OF PRODUCTION ALTERNATIVES FOR THE JOINT STRIKE   
                                 FIGHTER PROGRAM                                  
      This section would direct the Secretary of Defense to submit a report
   to Congress providing the results of a study of production alternatives 
   for the Joint Strike Fighter aircraft program and the effects on the    
   tactical fighter aircraft industrial base of each alternative           
   considered.                                                             

           TITLE II--RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST, AND EVALUATION                  

                                          OVERVIEW                                

      The budget request contained $37,862.4 million for research,         
   development, test, and evaluation (RDT&E), representing a decrease of   
   $426.7 million to the amount provided for fiscal year 2000. The         
   committee recommends $39,309.2 million, an increase of $1,446.8 million 
   from the budget request.                                                
      The committee notes that the fiscal year 2001 request for RDT&E      
   funding represents the first increase in the budget request for RDT&E   
   funding by the Administration in five years. Although this request      
   approaches the level of funding provided by Congress in recent years, a 
   number of important priorities are identified by the services as        
   unfunded or underfunded. The committee has placed its emphasis on       
   recommending increases to the request, where appropriate, to address the
   highest unfunded priorities identified by each of the military service  
   chiefs, the Ballistic Missile Defense Organization, the Special         
   Operations Command, and other defense agencies prevented by funding     
   constraints from investing in needed advanced technology.               
      The committee remains concerned that the Department of Defense       
   continues to place higher priority on the allocation of budgetary       
   resources to research and development activities of some defense        
   agencies than on those of the military services. The committee believes 
   that the Department has not provided sufficient justification to support
   imbalances in funding levels between the defense agencies and the       
   military services, and, therefore, recommends correcting these          
   imbalances by maintaining funding of several defense agencies at the    
   levels originally projected by the Department for fiscal year 2001 in   
   the budget estimates provided to Congress one year ago.                 
      The budget request contained $7,543.2 million for defense science and
   technology, including all defense-wide and military service funding for 
   basic research, applied research, and advanced development. The         
   committee notes that this amount represents a decrease of $853.3 million
   from the amount provided in fiscal year 2000. As outlined elsewhere in  
   this report, the committee continues to be disturbed by the growing     
   number of military service research and development programs that have  
   been reduced or eliminated as a result of insufficient research and     
   development funding, and is particularly concerned with the low level of
   science and technology funding. The committee views defense science and 
   technology investment as critical to maintaining U.S. military          
   technological superiority in the face of growing and changing threats to
   national security interests around the world.                           
      While the budget request for RDT&E activities represents a           
   significant reversal in the five-year trend of decline experienced by   
   the services, the committee believes that many important programs have  
   already experienced unnecessary cost and schedule growth as a direct    
   result of unjustified funding constraints. The committee strongly       
   recommends that the Secretary of Defense thoroughly review the          
   Department's modernization investment strategy to ensure proper balance 
   between the services and defense-wide agencies, and between legacy      
   systems and the technological advances critical to the future           
   superiority of the nation's military forces.                            

[Graphic Image Not Available]

                                         ARMY RDT&E                               

                                          OVERVIEW                                

      The budget request contained $5,260.3 million for Army RDT&E. The    
   committee recommends authorization of $5,500.2 million, an increase of  
   $239.9 million.                                                         
      The committee recommendations for the fiscal year 2000 Army RDT&E    
   program are identified in the table below. Major changes to the Army    
   request are discussed following the table.                              

[Graphic Image Not Available]

[Graphic Image Not Available]

[Graphic Image Not Available]

[Graphic Image Not Available]

[Graphic Image Not Available]

[Graphic Image Not Available]

[Graphic Image Not Available]

[Graphic Image Not Available]


                                  ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST                       

           Advanced artillery systems                                              

      The budget request contained $355.3 million in PE 63854A for         
   artillery systems, and $23.2 million in PE 63635M for ground combat     
   support systems, including $12.1 million for the lightweight 155mm towed
   howitzer.                                                               
      The committee notes that the Army and Marine Corps have identified a 
   need for lighter, more lethal, more mobile, and strategically more      
   deployable artillery systems to support their complementary forces. The 
   committee further notes the joint Army-Marine Corps program with the    
   United Kingdom to develop a new lightweight 155mm towed howitzer as a   
   replacement for the aging and operationally deficient M198 towed        
   howitzer for both the Marine Corps and the Army. The committee is aware 
   that the lightweight 155mm towed howitzer has already been successfully 
   transported by the MV 22 Osprey to demonstrate its ability to be rapidly
   transported on the battlefield. The committee notes that the lightweight
   155mm howitzer will incorporate a modern fire-control system, not       
   available in the M198, which will allow the howitzer to be emplaced     
   within two minutes, and immediately fired with greatly increased        
   accuracy.                                                               
      The committee also notes the Army's highest priority effort, the     
   procurement of a medium weight brigade force and supports this effort to
   develop a capability to rapidly and appropriately respond to global     
   threats. The Army has confirmed a requirement for a highly capable fire 
   support for this new force but must rely initially on the towed M198    
   howitzer until the lightweight 155mm development is complete.           
      The committee supports the rapid fielding of the lightweight 155mm   
   towed howitzer for both the new Army medium weight brigades and for the 
   Marine Corps, and is aware that the Marine Corps has stated a need to   
   conduct additional testing with the United Kingdom and the Army to      
   address at-sea environment concerns. The committee recommends an        
   increase of $3.2 million in PE 63635M for the lightweight 155mm         
   howitzer.                                                               
      The committee recommends that the Secretary of the Army expedite     
   development of the fire control system for the lightweight 155mm towed  
   howitzer, within available funds, so that it will be incorporated from  
   the beginning of lightweight 155mm production.                          
           Advanced battery technology                                             

      The budget request contained $23.9 million in PE 62705A for          
   electronics and electronic devices.                                     
      The committee notes that the Army and other services have identified 
   a steady growth in requirements for affordable higher performance energy
   storage devices. The committee also notes that industrial development   
   efforts are maturing a wide array of new battery technologies, including
   bi-polar wafer cell nickel-metal hydride technology. This emerging power
   supply technology offers significant improvements in storage/weight and 
   discharge characteristics that are needed to meet emerging defense      
   needs.                                                                  
      The committee notes that the Army is the designated executive agent  
   for development of power supply technologies and recommends $23.9       
   million in PE 62705A for electronics and electronic devices, of which   
   $1.0 million shall be available for development of bi-polar wafer cell  
   nickel-metal hydride technology.                                        
           Aircrew coordination training                                           

      The budget request contained $3.1 million in PE 63007A for manpower, 
   personnel, and training, but included no funding for aircrew            
   coordination training (ACT).                                            
      The committee notes with concern the adverse trend in the Army       
   aviation safety record and strongly supports efforts such as the ACT    
   program to enhance flight safety. The committee recommends $6.1 million 
   in PE 63007A, an increase of $3.0 million for aircrew coordination      
   training.                                                               
           Apache Longbow focused modernization program                            

      The budget request contained $95.8 million in PE 23744A for aircraft 
   modification and product improvement, but included no funds for a       
   focused Apache Longbow modernization program.                           
      The committee is aware that despite the significant capability of the
   Apache Longbow, some component systems within the Apache fleet have not 
   been modernized as part of the Longbow program. Several of these        
   systems, based on older technology, are responsible for escalating      
   operation and maintenance costs, and reduced overall aircraft           
   performance.                                                            
      The committee recommends an increase of $18.4 million in PE 23744A   
   for a focused Apache Longbow modernization effort as part of the Army's 
   aviation modernization program.                                         
           Army tactical unmanned aerial vehicles                                  

      The budget request contained $29.4 million in PE 35204A for tactical 
   unmanned aerial vehicles (TUAV).                                        
      The committee notes that the Army just completed a successful        
   competitive selection for an off-the-shelf TUAV. The committee notes    
   that the Army will place increasing reliance on its TUAV and needs to   
   field the best possible system including sensors.                       
      The committee recommends $33.4 million in PE 35204A, an increase of  
   $4.0 million for preplanned product improvements and sensor development.
           Breacher system                                                         

      The budget request contained no funds in PE 64649A or for the        
   procurement of the Breacher system.                                     
      The Breacher, an M 1 Abrams tank chassis-based vehicle, will be used 
   by combat engineers to clear minefields and complex obstacles on the    
   forward edge of the battlefield. This vehicle is designed to replace    
   several other existing breaching systems and provides increased         
   capability to maneuver with the armor forces it supports.               
      Although the committee understands that the Breacher was terminated  
   to fund Army transformation priorities, the committee notes that this   
   system is the second highest unfunded modernization requirement         
   identified by the Army Chief of Staff in fiscal year 2001.              
      The committee believes that termination of the Breacher was          
   shortsighted, and therefore recommends an increase of $59.6 million in  
   PE 64649A to complete engineering and manufacturing development and     
   $20.0 million in procurement to begin production line facilitization.   
           Chinook helicopter modification and improvement                         

      The budget request contained $95.8 million in PE 23744A for aircraft 
   modification and product improvement programs, including $37.2 million  
   for other CH 47F Chinook improved cargo helicopter (ICH), but included  
   no funds for the CH 47D Chinook helicopter product improvements.        
      The committee notes that the CH 47F Chinook improved cargo helicopter
   program will upgrade engines, airframe and avionics of approximately 300
   CH 47D Chinook helicopters. The committee is aware that the Army plans  
   to protect helicopters, including the ICH, from the serious threat posed
   by infrared guided missiles by acquiring the Advanced Threat Infrared   
   Countermeasures/Common Missile Warning System (ATIRCM/CMWS) that        
   includes portions of the existing joint service ALE 47 programmable     
   countermeasure dispenser. However, the committee is aware that the      
   ATIRCM/CMWS development is delayed and the system may not be available  
   for several years. The committee believes it is unsatisfactory for the  
   Army to delay procurement of the proven ALE 47 countermeasure system    
   while awaiting ATIRCM/CMWS.                                             
      Therefore, the committee directs the Army to include the ALE 47      
   programmable countermeasure dispensers as part of the ICH program. The  
   committee supports the ICH program; however, the committee also notes   
   that many CH 47D models require additional product improvement to       
   address aging and part obsolescence issues that threaten near-term      
   flight worthiness. The committee directs the Secretary of the Army to   
   assess the need to establish a funded Chinook product improvement       
   program and report the results of the assessment including levels of    
   funding required to the congressional defense committees with the       
   submission of the fiscal year 2002 budget request.                      
           Comanche                                                                

   The budget request contained $614.0 million in PE 64223A for Comanche.  

      The committee notes that the Comanche remains the Army's highest     
   aviation modernization priority, and that the Secretary of the Army has 
   requested an additional $48.2 million over last year's forecast in order
   to accelerate Comanche development. The committee notes that the        
   Department of Defense has recently reviewed the Comanche program and    
   determined that the program has successfully achieved all program exit  
   criteria required before entry into engineering and manufacturing       

                    development (EMD). The committee is aware, however, that final
          approval for EMD is pending while the Army assesses out-year acquisition
          funding for Comanche.                                                   
      The committee supports Comanche and strongly endorses the commitment 
   made by the Army to accelerate this program. While total out-year       
   procurement for major programs is an important issue, the committee     
   believes the Army has made every effort to accelerate this program      
   within the inadequate modernization funding allowed by the Department of
   Defense, and strongly recommends that the Secretary of Defense grant    
   immediate approval for Comanche's entry into EMD. This program          
   represents the only viable solution to meet the requirement for a       
   stealthy, rapidly deployable, and highly capable armed reconnaissance   
   aircraft to support the Army's recently approved aviation modernization 
   plan. The committee believes the requirement and the urgency for the    
   Comanche has been more than adequately justified and entry into the EMD 
   phase of the program should not be delayed pending discussions of the   
   total planned procurement or annual rate.                               
      The committee recommends the budget request, and supports earliest   
   possible entry into EMD.                                                
           Combat identification dismounted soldier (CIDDS)                        

   The budget request contained $5.4 million in PE 64817A for CIDDS.       

      The committee is aware that CIDDS will allow an individual soldier to
   identify quickly friendly forces and thus reduce the incidence of       
   fratricide.                                                             
      The committee continues to support strongly all efforts to reduce    
   fratricide and, therefore, to enhance the capability of the dismounted  
   soldier to positively identify a target as friend or foe, recommends    
   $10.4 million in PE 64817A, an increase of $5.0 million.                
           Combustion-driven eye-safe self-powered laser                           

      The budget request contained $20.5 million in PE 62709A for night    
   vision technology, but included no funds for the combustion-driven      
   eye-safe self-powered laser.                                            
      The committee notes that the combustion-driven eye-safe self-powered 
   laser offers the potential to field a three-dimensional identification  
   friend or foe system capable of identifying aircraft and vehicle threat 
   systems in real-time.                                                   
      The committee recommends $25.5 million in PE 62709A, an increase of  
   $5.0 million for the combustion-driven eye-safe self-powered laser.     
           Common ground station                                                   

      The budget request contained $17.9 million in PE 64770A for continued
   development of the Army's Joint Surveillance and Target Attack Radar    
   System (Joint STARS) Common Ground Station, including $2.0 million to   
   develop the Army's Distributed Common Ground Station (DCGS-A). The      
   budget request also contained $5.9 million for development of a         
   wide-band data link to provide connectivity to the Joint STARS next     
   generation capability.                                                  
      The committee notes that the DCGS A effort duplicates that being     
   conducted within the Army's Tactical Exploitation of National           
   Capabilities program. Further, the committee notes that the Air Force   
   has not determined the next generation Joint STARS data link and will   
   not do so until at least fiscal year 2002. Therefore, the committee     
   believes it premature for the Army to begin design or development work  
   for such communications connectivity.                                   
      For these reasons, the committee recommends a decrease of $7.9       
   million in this PE 64770A to the DCGS A program.                        
           Communications and networking technologies                              

      The budget request contained $49.3 million in PE 64805A for          
   communications, command and control engineering and manufacturing       
   development.                                                            
      The committee notes that communications and networking technologies  
   are critical to command and control, precision strike, intelligence     
   dissemination, logistics and day-to-day business operations throughout  
   the joint commands, military services and supporting defense agencies.  
   The committee recognizes that the most advanced technological           
   developments in these areas are emerging from commercial industry and   
   are driven by the rapid evolution of the commercial markets. The        
   committee believes that the Department must capitalize on the rapid     
   progress being made in the commercial sector and identify, assess, adapt
   and integrate state-of-the-art commercial communications and networking 
   technologies to achieve the goal of Information Superiority established 
   by the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff in Joint Vision 2010. The  
   committee also believes that there are significant gains to be made by  
   leveraging information technology developments from the commercial      
   sector for the benefit of government users, through cooperative research
   and development of technologies that promise significant gains in both  
   civil and military capabilities, and through training government        
   personnel in these rapidly evolving technologies.                       
      Therefore, the committee recommends $62.3 million in PE 64805A, an   
   increase of $13.0 million to accelerate on-going programs for the       
   development and application of commercial information technologies for  
   defense purposes and to foster cooperative and complementary information
   technology research and development programs. The committee recommends  
   that the Secretary of the Army work with the Assistant Secretary of     
   Defense (Command, Control, Communications, Computers and Intelligence)  
   to insure the applicability of the increased program to the overall     
   Defense communications architecture.                                    
           Defense manufacturing technology                                        

      The budget request contained a total of $149.1 million for the       
   manufacturing technology (ManTech) program, including $29.3 million in  
   PE 78045A, $59.6 million in PE 78011N, $53.1 million in PE 78011F, and  
   $7.1 million in PE 78011S.                                              
      The committee notes the progress by the Joint Defense Manufacturing  
   Technology Panel (JDMTP) in developing an overarching strategy for the  
   ManTech program that focuses on defense-essential requirements, involves
   prospective users of the technology, ensures prioritization of projects,
   and plans for transition of ManTech projects to the ultimate user of the
   technology. The committee also notes the progress toward achieving      
   congressional guidelines on program funding levels, particularly in the 
   Army. The total budget request for Department of Defense ManTech        
   represents an increase of $16.0 million above the previous year, and the
   five-year ManTech plan projects an 11 percent increase through fiscal   
   year 2005, with the Army program increasing $71.2 million and stable    
   budget projections for the Navy, Air Force, and Defense Logistics       
   Agency. The positive funding trend will permit the establishment of new 
   ManTech initiatives in critical defense technologies.                   
      The committee notes the increasing use of thick composite structures 
   in rotary wing aircraft and other applications by all the military      
   departments and encourages increased emphasis on the development of     
   advanced manufacturing technologies for such composite structures.      
      The committee supports a continuing program in munitions             
   manufacturing technology and expects that munitions manufacturing       
   technology projects will compete for funding on an equal basis with     
   other manufacturing technologies.                                       
      The committee also notes that the Army, Navy, and Air Force are      
   developing methods to accelerate insertion of emerging                  
   microelectromechanical systems (MEMS) technology into tactical systems  
   to meet precision navigation and guidance requirements. The objective of
   the initiative is to develop and demonstrate low cost manufacturing     
   processes for emerging MEMS technologies that will enable the production
   of affordable MEMS-based inertial sensors, accelerometers and gyroscopes
   for tactical weapons. The committee directs the Secretary of the Defense
   to establish a Tri-Service initiative for the development of affordable 
   MEMS manufacturing technology, and recommends that the funding for the  
   program be provided in the Army's ManTech program.                      
      The committee recommends $39.3 million in PE 78045A for the Army's   
   manufacturing technology program, an increase of $ 10.0 million. The    
   committee recommends $69.6 million in PE 78011N, an increase of $10.0   
   million for the Navy's ManTech program. As noted elsewhere in this      
   report, the committee has recommended an increase of $4.5 million in PE 
   78011F for the development of manufacturing technology for specialty    
   aerospace metals.                                                       
           Emergency preparedness training                                         

      The budget request contained no funds for emergency preparedness     
   training research and development.                                      
      The committee notes the progress in development of advanced          
   distributed learning programs for chemical and biological preparedness  
   and consequence management response training for the Army's designated  
   Civil Support Teams and other elements of the Reserve Components.       
      The committee recommends a $3.0 million in PE 23610A to continue the 
   development for selected Reserve Component forces of training programs  
   for response to and management of the consequences of potential         
   terrorism involving weapons of mass destruction.                        
           Future combat system                                                    


      The budget request contained $148.1 million in PE 63005A for combat  
   vehicle and automotive advanced technology, including funding for       
   efforts supporting the future combat system (FCS).                      
      The committee is aware that the Army has begun the process, through  
   the FCS initiative, to transform the Army into a more strategically     
   responsive force that is dominant at every point across the full        
   spectrum of operations. The committee notes that the cornerstone of this
   aggressive transformation effort would begin in fiscal year 2001 with   
   the partnership between the Army and the Defense Advanced Research      
   Projects Agency (DARPA) to incorporate the most promising, new, reaching
   technologies into a family of future combat systems.                    
      The committee notes that, while DARPA has ongoing work in many       
   technology areas, these efforts have not been focused on solving Army   
   identified problems or advancing technologies applicable to the future  
   combat system. The committee believes that DARPA should dedicate more   
   funding to the Army FCS program and other high priority requirements    
   identified by the services.                                             
      The committee strongly supports the future combat system development 
   and notes that there is an urgent requirement to provide additional     
   funding at the program onset to allow a more inclusive and robust       
   concept definition phase that will enable as many participants as       
   possible to explore innovative solutions for the future combat system.  
   The committee is also aware that additional efforts focused on          
   technology development in the areas such as robotics, precision weapons,
   active protection and signature control are needed.                     
      Therefore the committee recommends an increase of $46.0 million in PE
   63005A for the future combat system.                                    
      The committee notes that the joint United States-United Kingdom      
   Future Scout and Cavalry System (FSCS) program is developing leap-ahead 
   technology for future ground systems. Both nations are contributing     
   funding and technology to a program regarded as an excellent example of 
   cooperation between allies and the Army has indicated that it needs the 
   technology from FSCS to support development of the Future Combat System.
      The committee is disturbed by the Army's elimination of funding for  
   the FSCS engineering manufacturing development phase. The committee     
   believes that the FSCS is an essential collaborative program that should
   continue in order to develop and demonstrate key technologies on which  
   to build the family of future combat vehicles. The committee believes   
   that industry should be encouraged to continue its significant private  
   venture funding and that will only occur if the FSCS consortia can      
   identify a firm connection between FSCS and FCS. The committee therefore
   directs the Secretary of the Army to report to the congressional defense
   committees on how the Army will sustain the joint FSCS program to       
   develop and demonstrate key technologies applicable to the future family
   of combat systems, no later than December 31, 2000.                     
           Future rotorcraft technologies                                          

      The budget request contained $31.1 million in PE 62211A for aviation 
   advanced technology, but included no funds to support the initiative to 
   focus technology for the future generation of rotorcraft.               
      The committee notes that despite a clear need for modern, efficient, 
   capable rotorcraft, no focused program exists to develop the enabling   
   technologies for more efficient, affordable rotorcraft in the future.   
      The committee recommends $33.1 million in PE 62211A, an increase of  
   $2.0 million for future rotorcraft technologies and directs the         
   Secretary of the Army to establish a focused program to develop         
   technologies critical for the future rotorcraft.                        
           Guardrail common sensor                                                 

      The budget request contained $95.8 million in PE 23744A for aircraft 
   modifications and product improvement programs, including $11.3 million 
   for continued development and modification of the Army's Guardrail      
   Common Sensor aircraft and ground stations.                             
      The committee notes that the Guardrail System 2 was recently         
   delivered to the Army after nearly ten years of modification.           
   Unfortunately, this system was returned without upgrades to permit the  
   dissemination of tactical intelligence information via the Tactical     
   Information Broadcast Service (TIBS). TIBS is the baseline for the      
   Integrated Broadcast Service that is the DOD-mandated worldwide tactical
   intelligence dissemination service.                                     
      The committee recommends an increase of $2.0 million in PE 23744A to 
   install the TIBS capability in the final Guardrail system.              
           Helmet mounted infrared sensor development                              

      The budget request contained $33.3 million in PE 63710A for night    
   vision technology.                                                      
      The committee is aware that the Army has initiated development of a  
   prototype helmet mounted infrared sensor system to support the          
   warfighter that has been demonstrated to significantly improve          
   situational awareness in all weather/environmental conditions. This     
   technology has direct applicability to Department of Defense and        
   civilian firefighting personnel and increases safety and effectiveness  
   for firefighting in smoke filled environments as well as for search and 
   rescue.                                                                 
      The committee recommends $37.1 million in PE 63710A, an increase of  
   $3.8 million for helmet mounted infrared sensor development.            
           High-energy laser test facility                                         

      The budget request contained $14.5 million in PE 65605A for the      
   Department of Defense (DOD) high-energy laser system test facility      
   (HELSTF).                                                               
      The committee notes the recent release of the congressionally        
   directed DOD high-energy laser master plan and identification of a need 
   for increased investment in solid-state laser technology. The committee 
   is aware that HELSTF has contributed significantly to the development of
   high-power lasers, and will continue to provide unique capabilities for 
   research, development, test and evaluation of high-power laser systems. 
      The committee supports the DOD high-energy laser master plan and the 
   selection of the Army as lead in solid-state laser development and      
   recommends $19.5 million in PE 65605A, an increase of $5.0 million for  
   HELSTF.                                                                 
           Hypersonic wind tunnels                                                 

      The budget request contained $47.2 million in PE 62303A for missile  
   technology, but included no funds for modernization of the hypersonic   
   wind tunnels at the Aero-optics Evaluation Center (AOEC)                
      The committee notes that upgrading the hypersonic wind tunnel        
   diagnostics and instrumentation will provide enhanced testing           
   capabilities for key ballistic missile defense programs, including Navy 
   Area Defense, the Atmospheric Interceptor Technology project, and the   
   Army's scramjet technology program.                                     
      The committee recommends an increase of $1.0 million in PE 62303A to 
   upgrade hypersonic wind tunnels.                                        
           Integrated inertial measurement unit-geo-positioning system             

      The budget request contained $47.2 million in PE 62303A for missile  
   technology, including funds for integrated guidance systems.            
      The committee notes that the development of a highly integrated,     
   jam-proof, micro-electromechanical systems (MEMS) based inertial        
   measuring unit-geo positioning system (IMU GPS) is critical to achieving
   the goal of affordable precision fire and forget weapons. The most      
   demanding application for this capability is the 155mm projectile for   
   Army and Navy applications. The committee is aware that: (1) recent Army
   flight tests have demonstrated significant progress and shown that the  
   goal is achievable and (2) a development plan has been established to   
   produce a suitable system in approximately three years. The committee   
   further notes that this program also offers potentially significant cost
   growth and technical problem solutions to Navy fire support programs,   
   and the use of IMU GPS systems by both the Army and Navy could result in
   billions of dollars of savings for the Department of Defense.           
      Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $4.0 million in PE
   62303A for continued development of an integrated IMU-GPS.              
           Land information warfare activity                                       

      The budget request contained $8.1 million in PE 33140A for the       
   information systems security program.                                   
      The committee notes that the Army's land information warfare activity
   (LIWA) continues to develop a state-of-the-art capability for           
   information security and analysis, and that the Department of Defense   
   (DOD) has recently acknowledged the importance of this new capability to
   DOD information assurance efforts.                                      
      The committee supports the Department of Defense efforts to establish
   such capability, and supports completion of the LIWA, including tests of
   that capability for Army and other entities to ensure that this         
   potential capability is thoroughly evaluated.                           

      Therefore, the committee recommends $11.9 million, an increase of    
   $3.8 million in PE 33140A for continued development and enhancement of  
   the Army's land information warfare activity.                           
           Medical errors reduction research                                       

      The budget request contained $15.8 million in PE 62716A for human    
   factors engineering technology, but included no funds for the medical   
   errors reduction research program (MERRP).                              
      The committee notes that MEERP is an extension of the previous       
   emergency teams coordination (MEDTEAMS) program to reduce medical errors
   in operating rooms, intensive care units and other hospital activities  
   and will expand that effort from the emergency department to advanced   
   life support protocols.                                                 
      The committee recommends $19.5 million in PE 62716A, an increase of  
   $3.7 million for MERRP.                                                 
           Mobile tactical high energy laser                                       

      The budget request contained $12.6 million in PE 63308A for Army     
   missile defense systems, but included no funds for mobile tactical high 
   energy laser development.                                               
      The committee is aware that the Army has determined a need for a     
   mobile directed energy air defense system. The committee understands    
   that one alternate being explored is the evolution of the stationary    
   tactical high energy laser (THEL) being developed for Israel. A mobile  
   THEL for the U.S. Army would require further development of key elements
   such as solid-state laser development, compact power sources, and a     
   lightweight acquisition, tracking and beam direction system.            
      The committee recommends $17.6 million in PE 63308A, an increase of  
   $5.0 million for mobile tactical high energy laser development.         
           National automotive center-university innovative research               

      The budget request contained $148.1 million in PE 63005A for combat  
   vehicle and automotive advanced technology.                             
      The committee is aware that the national automotive center (NAC) has 
   supported efforts by various universities to perform research in a      
   number of innovative technologies to solve current ground vehicle       
   problems and pioneer a new generation of lighter, more efficient ground 
   vehicles. Areas of innovation include propulsion and power sources,     
   ultra lightweight structures and advanced materials, supported by       
   innovative modeling and simulation.                                     
      The committee supports efforts of the NAC to take advantage of       
   university expertise and recommends an increase of $3.0 million in PE   
   63005A for NAC-university innovative research.                          
           Passive millimeter wave camera                                          

      The budget request contained $20.7 million in PE 62120A for sensors  
   and electronic survivability, but included no funds for the passive     
   millimeter wave camera.                                                 
      The committee is aware that passive millimeter wave camera technology
   offers a weather-penetrating alternative to shorter wavelength infrared 
   thermal imaging cameras.                                                
      The committee recommends $24.7 million in PE 62120A, an increase of  
   $4.0 million for passive millimeter wave camera development.            
           Real-time heart rate variability                                        

      The budget request contained $75.7 million in PE 62787A for medical  
   technology, but included no funds for real-time heart rate variability. 
      The committee notes that heart rate variability technology offers the
   potential for enhancing assessment of disease and trauma. This          
   technology provides the capability for emergency response personnel in  
   trauma environments to detect injury severity, physiological stress and 
   potential for survival.                                                 
      The committee supports development of real-time heart rate           
   variability technology to enhance trauma victim survivability, and      
   recommends an increase of $5.0 million in PE 62787A for real-time heart 
   rate variability technology.                                            
           Semi-automated imagery processor                                        

      The budget request contained $57.4 million in PE 64766A for Tactical 
   Exploitation of National Capabilities, including development of the     
   semi-automated imagery processor (SAIP).                                
      The SAIP will provide the Department's limited number of imagery     
   analysts with an automated target recognition assistance capability,    
   which will greatly improve their productivity. Accordingly, the         
   committee recommends $60.4 million in PE 64766A, an increase of $3.0    
   million, for continued development and fielding of the SAIP.            
           Starstreak                                                              

      The budget request contained $28.8 million in PE 63003A for aviation 
   advanced technology, but included no funds to complete flight test of   
   the Starstreak missile.                                                 
      The committee continues to support the requirement for Starstreak    
   testing mandated by in the Defense Appropriations Act, 1999 (Public Law 
   105 262) that required an Apache Longbow side-by-side test between the  
   Starstreak missile and the Stinger missile. The committee notes the Army
   has announced its intention to begin the tests and that the Ministry of 
   Defense of the United Kingdom is providing the Starstreak missiles for  
   testing.                                                                
      The committee recommends $28.8 million in PE 63003A, the budget      
   request, and recommends initiation of the planned side-by-side testing. 
           Surveillance control data link (SCDL)                                   

      The budget request contained $17.9 million in PE 64770A for          
   improvements to the Joint Surveillance and Target Attack Radar System   
   (Joint STARS) ground stations, but no funds were included for the Joint 
   STARS SCDL System Improvement Program (SIP).                            
      The committee notes the proven success of the Joint STARS system in  
   both Operations Desert Storm and Joint Endeavor. A key feature of Joint 
   STARS is the secure, encrypted, anti-jam SCDL. The SCDL links the Air   
   Force's E 8 Joint STARS aircraft to the Army's Joint STARS common ground
   stations (CGS), enabling real-time data transfer of radar imagery       
   intelligence data and command and control information between the       
   aircraft and ground stations.                                           
      The committee has provided increases for phases one and two of the   
   three-phrase SIP in prior years. These phases eliminated CGS common data
   terminal (CDT) obsolete parts and updated older circuit boards with     
   state-of-the-art, software-based array boards, resulting in an increased
   data transfer rate while reducing component cost, size, weight, and     
   power requirements. The committee understands that the Army requires    
   funds to complete phase three of the SCDL SIP, which would further      
   improve interoperability through performance testing of the CDT.        
      Based on the increased reliability and improved performance of       
   earlier SIP upgrades, the committee recommends an increase of $4.0      
   million in PE 64770A to complete the SCDL SIP phase three engineering   
   effort.                                                                 
           Thermal fluid based combat feeding system                               

      The budget request contained $13.6 million in PE 63747A for soldier  
   support and survivability, and included $3.4 million for food and food  
   systems.                                                                
      The committee notes that a modern central heat unit co-generation    
   kitchen has been developed to replace the existing field kitchen. The   
   committee is aware that this kitchen uses diesel type fuel rather than  
   the more flammable gasoline that has been the primary source of the     
   longstanding fire hazards in existing field kitchens.                   
      The committee supports rapid introduction of this modern, safer      
   kitchen, and recommends $15.1 million in PE 63747A, an increase of $1.5 
   million for fabrication and field testing of the thermal fluid based    
   combat feeding system.                                                  
           Trajectory correctable munitions                                        

      The budget request contained $29.7 million in PE 63004A for weapons  
   and munitions advanced technology.                                      
      The committee notes that the United States and Sweden have entered   
   into a Memorandum of Understanding to demonstrate a 155mm trajectory    
   correctable munition (TCM), which employs a new technology to achieve   
   precision indirect fire support. The committee also notes that          
   development of this munition is on schedule and recent firing tests have
   successfully demonstrated achievement of key milestones.                
      The committee recommends $37.2 million in PE 63004A, an increase of  
   $7.5 million, and urges the Department of Defense to complete testing of
   the TCM round.                                                          
           Volumetrically controlled manufacturing technology                      

      The budget request contained $75.7 million in PE 62787A for medical  
   technology applied research.                                            
      The committee recalls that the Defense Appropriations Act, 1997      
   (Public Law 105 56) provided $2.5 million in PE 62787A for the          
   development of a prototype artificial hip using multidimensional,       
   volumetrically controlled manufacturing of synthetic materials. The     
   appropriation supported the first phase of a two-year, two-phase project
   to develop an optimized hip stem for orthopedic implants that would     
   address the structural failure of implants in current use.              
      In the statement of managers which accompanied the conference report 
   on S. 1059 (H. Rept. 106 301), the conferees stated that they were      
   encouraged by the progress made in the program at the U.S. Army Medical 
   Research and Materiel Command and the establishment of a mathematical   
   foundation for advancing synthetic material development from            
   two-dimensional processes to real-time, three-dimensional manufacturing.
   The process has the potential to eliminate the current mode of failure  
   of conventional composite materials, namely delamination and            
   polymer-fiber interface breakdown, and has potential applications in    
   aerospace and other manufacturing.                                      
      The committee recommends an increase of $5.0 million in PE 62787A to 
   continue the program for development of multi-dimensional volumetrically
   controlled manufacturing technology at the U.S. Army Medical Research   
   and Material Command.                                                   

                                         NAVY RDT&E                               

                                          OVERVIEW                                

      The budget request contained $8,476.7 million for Navy RDT&E. The    
   committee recommends authorization of $8,834.5 million, an increase of  
   $357.8 million.                                                         
      The committee recommendations for the fiscal year 2000 Navy RDT&E    
   program are identified in the table below. Major changes to the Navy    
   request are discussed following the table.                              

[Graphic Image Not Available]

[Graphic Image Not Available]

[Graphic Image Not Available]

[Graphic Image Not Available]

[Graphic Image Not Available]

[Graphic Image Not Available]

[Graphic Image Not Available]

[Graphic Image Not Available]

[Graphic Image Not Available]

[Graphic Image Not Available]

                                  ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST                       

           Advanced amphibious assault vehicle                                     

      The budget request contained $138.0 million in PE 63611M for the     
   Marine Corps Advanced Amphibious Assault Vehicles (AAAV).               
      The AAAV is one of the highest priority Marine Corps modernization   
   programs and is essential to the Marine Corps' ability to implement its 
   operational maneuver from the sea doctrine.                             
      The committee believes that an additional engineering manufacturing  
   development AAAV test vehicle would significantly enhance reliability   
   testing, software maturation and other efforts designed to reduce       
   life-cycle costs. Therefore, the committee recommends $165.5 million, an
   increase of $27.5 million in PE 63611M for this purpose.                
           Advanced anti-radiation guided missile                                  

      The budget request contained $21.4 million in PE25601N for           
   operational systems development of improvements to the High-Speed       
   Anti-Radiation Missile (HARM) system, including $9.0 million to continue
   the Advanced Anti-Radiation Guided Missile (AARGM) project.             
      The AARGM project is a Phase III Small Business Innovative Research  
   (SBIR) program to develop and demonstrate a dual-mode guidance section  
   on a HARM airframe. Program objectives are to demonstrate an effective, 
   affordable, and lethal suppression of enemy air defense (SEAD)          
   capability against mobile, relocatable, or fixed air defense threats in 
   the presence of potential air defense radar emitter shutdown or other   
   anti-radiation missile countermeasures.                                 
      The AARGM technology demonstration program is an outgrowth of a Phase
   I and Phase II competitive SBIR program, which successfully demonstrated
   the feasibility of a dual-mode seeker to address anti-radiation missile 
   countermeasures. The dual-mode technology under development in the AARGM
   program has demonstrated high potential to solve the problem of target  
   radar ``shut-down'' not only for HARM, the primary SEAD weapon, but also
   for application in other missile airframes. The committee notes the     
   progress made in the program and the delivery of advanced ARRGM seeker  
   hardware for development test and evaluation at the Naval Air Weapons   
   Center, China Lake, California. The committee also notes the application
   of AARGM technology being considered in the Quick Bolt advanced concept 
   technology demonstration.                                               
      The committee recommends a $26.4 million in PE 25601N, an increase of
   $5.0 million to continue risk reduction, test, and other field          
   activities to prepare for a potential Milestone II decision to enter    
   engineering and manufacturing development. The committee directs the    
   Secretary of the Navy to report to the congressional defense committees 
   on the results of the developmental testing of the ARRGM seeker and the 
   Navy's plans for further development of the AARGM with the submission of
   the fiscal year 2002 budget request.                                    
           Advanced deployable system                                              

      The budget request contained $20.7 million in PE 64784N for the      
   advanced deployable system (ADS). The ADS is a surveillance system for  
   use in littoral waters and restricted waterways that can be rapidly     
   deployed in time of crisis to provide a submarine detection and tracking
   capability to U.S. Naval forces.                                        
      The committee notes the ADS program is transitioning to the          
   engineering and manufacturing development phase and has consistently met
   or exceeded schedule and cost milestones. The committee supports        
   leveraging the early success of the ADS program by accelerating the     
   development of enhanced capabilities for the system.                    
      Accordingly, the committee recommends $30.7 million in PE 64784N, an 
   increase of $10.0 million, for the ADS to accelerate the development of 
   advanced, long-life sensors for trip-wire arrays, increased mine        
   detection capabilities, and enhanced automation.                        
           Advanced technology demonstrations and fleet battle experiments         

      The budget request contained $76.3 million in PE 63792N for the      
   Navy's advanced technology transition program to demonstrate            
   technologies that could significantly improve the warfighting           
   capabilities of the fleet and joint forces and provide the opportunity  
   to identify and move emerging technologies quickly and efficiently from 
   the laboratory to the fleet.                                            
      The committee notes the role of the Navy Warfare Development Command 
   in developing Navy operational concepts and doctrine, identifying       
   required operational capabilities, focusing research and development    
   issues, maturing innovative concepts in naval, joint, and coalition     
   warfare for evaluation in fleet battle experiments, and designing,      
   planning, and evaluating the experiments. The committee is aware that   
   fleet battle experiments have provided a test bed for validation of Navy
   doctrine and operational concepts, assessment of innovative technologies
   and concepts, and identification of some of the operational, tactical,  
   and technical challenges that will be faced by the fleet in the future. 
      The committee also notes the role that the Navy's science and        
   technology program performs by focusing on the long-term objective of   
   enabling future naval capabilities, science and technology developments 
   that are critical to ensuring naval superiority, and the demonstration  
   of affordable technology for transition to the fleet. The committee     
   encourages the Office of Naval Research, the Navy Secretariat, and the  
   Office of the Chief of Naval Operations to facilitate this strategy by  
   ensuring a close working relationship between the Office of Naval       
   Research, the Navy Warfare Development Command, and the numbered fleets.
      Elsewhere in this report the committee notes the Navy's progress in  
   concept evaluation of a littoral warfare fast patrol craft and the      
   significant advances in logistics support, surveillance, communications 
   and fire support that such a craft could provide for naval forces in    
   littoral environments, and recommends increased funding for prototype   
   craft that would permit demonstration of the operational concept in     
   fleet battle experiments and other exercises.                           

      The committee notes recommendations from the Defense Science Board   
   for improvements in tactical mobility and intratheater lift and         
   recommendations for demonstration of high speed, fast shuttle sealift   
   and advanced amphibious capabilities for movement of forces and         
   logistical support within the theater and of other capabilities in      
   future fleet battle experiments. The committee encourages the Navy to   
   support such activities from available funds.                           
           Advanced waterjet propulsor                                             

      The budget request contained $244.4 million for in PE 63513N for     
   shipboard systems component development, but included no funds for      
   advanced water jet technology.                                          
      The committee report on H. R. 1401 (H. Rept. 106 162) noted proposals
   for a quarter-scale at-sea demonstration and cavitation tunnel testing  
   of an advanced waterjet propulsor (AWJ 21) to validate critical         
   performance criteria and potential application of the propulsor to the  
   DD 21 land attack destroyer or other naval ships. The report urged the  
   Secretary of the Navy to assess the requirement for further development,
   demonstration, and evaluation of advanced waterjet propulsor technology 
   and to provide recommendations regarding the demonstration, a program   
   execution plan, and Navy funding for the program.                       
      On December 1, 1999, the Secretary reported that the Navy's AWJ 21   
   technology demonstration plan had developed hydrodynamic performance    
   prediction and critical performance measurement capabilities for        
   advanced waterjet concepts, and that the knowledge and capability       
   generated will be provided to both DD 21 industry teams determining the 
   suitability of the AWJ 21 for use on DD 21. The report stated that a    
   separate Navy-funded advanced waterjet development and large-scale      
   demonstration program would be inappropriate because it could be viewed 
   as Government endorsement of a specific propulsor solution and          
   subverting the DD 21 acquisition strategy (in which the industry team is
   given full responsibility for recommending a total ship design for the  
   DD 21). The report stated further that development of the AWJ 21 system 
   by the DD 21 program is dependent upon a decision by the winning DD 21  
   industry team to include the AWJ 21 propulsion concept in their design. 
   The report concluded that there is currently no Navy operational        
   requirement that requires the use of an advanced waterjet propulsor and 
   recommended no further development of advanced waterjet technology at   
   this time.                                                              
      Accordingly, the committee encourages the Navy to ensure that        
   advanced water jet technology is given all appropriate consideration.   
           Aircraft survivability study                                            

      The budget request contained $7.5 million in PE 63216N for aircraft  
   survivability demonstration and validation.                             
      The committee is aware that the population of aircrew and passengers 
   permitted on board military aircraft includes both female and male      
   personnel, and is concerned about the ability of crash protective       
   seating systems to provide adequate protection to occupants of lighter  
   weight and smaller stature.                                             
      The committee recommends an increase of $500,000 in PE 63216N to     
   determine and assess the potential for increased injury risk to female  
   operators and passengers in the Navy's helicopter fleet.                
           Aviation depot maintenance technology                                   

      The budget request contained $62.2 million in PE 63721N for          
   environmental protection.                                               
      The committee notes that new environmentally friendly repair         
   processes are being developed that offer significant productivity       
   improvements and potential cost savings. To this end, Congress provided 
   increased funding in fiscal years 1999 and 2000 for the development and 
   demonstration of aviation depot maintenance technologies that will      
   significantly reduce maintenance and repair costs and reduce or         
   eliminate hazardous waste and pollution products.                       
      The committees recommends $63.9 million in PE 63721N, an increase of 
   $1.75 million to continue the program for demonstration of advanced     
   maintenance technologies for application of tungsten carbide coatings to
   aircraft landing gear and hydraulic components.                         
           Aviation modernization plan                                             

      The committee notes recent reports that the Office of the Chief of   
   Naval Operations is considering a major revision of naval aviation plans
   which would remove aircraft from inventory, cancel future aircraft      
   systems concepts, and reconfigure the carrier air wing in order to      
   develop an affordable modernization plan for naval aviation. The reports
   indicate that the recommendations contained in the ``Common Vision for  
   Naval Aviation'' would be implemented beginning with the Navy's budget  
   request for fiscal year 2002. The committee understands that the        
   following alternatives are being considered:                            
       (1) Replacement of the EA 6B Prowler electronic warfare aircraft by 
   2010 with an electronic warfare aircraft follow-on;                     
    (2) Retirement of the F 14 Tomcat strike-fighter aircraft by 2008;     

       (3) Service life extension of the C 2 Grayhound Tracker carrier     
   onboard delivery aircraft;                                              
       (4) Retirement of the S 3B Viking antisubmarine warfare aircraft by 
   2008 and its mission replacement by a combination of P 3C Orion maritime
   patrol aircraft and SH 60R Seahawk multi-mission helicopter;            
       (5) Replacement of the S 3B Viking in its tanker role by F/A 18E/F  
   fighter aircraft with a aircraft refueling capability;                  
    (6) Service life extension of the P 3C Orion maritime patrol aircraft; 

       (7) Service life extension of the EP 3E Aries electronic            
   surveillance aircraft;                                                  
       (8) Cancellation of the concept of a common support aircraft that   
   would combine the mission of the E 2C Hawkeye airborne early warning    
   aircraft with the missions of the S 3 Viking and C 2 Greyhound aircraft;
       (9) Delay introduction of a multi-mission maritime aircraft to      
   replace the P 3C Orion and EP 3E Aries to no later than 2015; and       
       (10) Reduction of the number of strike aircraft in a carrier air    
   wing from 56 to 50.                                                     
      The committee commends the Navy for its initiative in developing a   
   long-term plan for naval aviation that attempts to meet the challenges  
   of affordability and effectiveness in a budget constrained environment. 
   The committee recognizes the issues of current and future operational   
   requirements, current force capabilities, personnel, training, research 
   and development, procurement, logistics, and estimated funding available
   that must be considered in developing such a plan. The committee notes  
   that the Navy's plan is not complete and was not available during the   
   committee's review of the budget request.                               
      The committee urges the Secretary of the Navy to provide information 
   on the Navy's revised aviation modernization plan to the congressional  
   defense committees at the earliest opportunity to ensure adequate       
   opportunity for oversight review of this important initiative prior to  
   receipt of the budget request for fiscal year 2002.                     
           Battle force tactical trainer (BFTT)                                    

      The budget request contained $27.1 million in PE 24571N for          
   consolidated training systems development, including $4.1 million for   
   development of the surface tactical team trainer (Battle Force Tactical 
   Training program).                                                      
      The committee notes that the BFTT system provides the Navy with an   
   effective embedded training capability on many of the Navy's surface    
   ships, permitting realistic unit level team training and coordinated    
   training among ships in port, and providing commanders the ability to   
   conduct coordinated realistic, high stress, combat system training when 
   afloat. The Navy is converting BFTT to a Windows NT TM personal computer
   (PC)-based environment that will extend the BFTT simulation to          
   shore-based facilities at the training commands to provide more         
   realistic combat system team and individual training at these           
   facilities, as well as providing the opportunity for expansion and      
   upgrade of the capabilities of the BFTT system.                         
      The committee recommends an increase of $5.0 million in PE 24571N to 
   accelerate the conversion and upgrade of the BFTT system to a Windows NT
   TM/PC-based environment.                                                
           Beartrap                                                                

      The budget request contained $19.7 million in PE 63254N for          
   anti-submarine warfare (ASW) systems development, including $5.3 million
   for Project Beartrap.                                                   
      The budget request for Beartrap supports hardware and software       
   development for the rapid prototyping of advanced capability acoustic   
   and non-acoustic ASW sensors, as well as data collection and analysis   
   for threat assessment and environmental characterization. The committee 
   notes the progress being made in the evaluation and development of the  
   phenomena of nonlinear dynamics and stochastic resonance (NDSR) for     
   acoustic, magnetic, and other ASW sensor and signal processing          
   applications. The committee also notes the Navy's progress in developing
   a comprehensive and focused strategy for acoustic, and non-acoustic     
   environmental data collection, analysis and dissemination, and plans for
   continued implementation of the strategy to meet the Navy's             

                    needs in environmental data bases, modeling for new systems   
          research and development, and environmental inputs to tactical decision 
          aids.                                                                   
      The committee recommends $24.7 million in PE 63254N, an increase of  
   $5.0 million for Project Beartrap to continue the development,          
   demonstration, and evaluation of NDSR technology for ASW applications   
   and to continue the Beartrap environmental characterization program.    
           C 2 eight-blade composite propeller system                              

      The budget request contained $51.0 million in PE 25633N for          
   improvements in operational Navy aviation and aviation support systems. 
      The committee notes that the Navy is seeking solutions to operational
   limitations encountered with the propeller system used on E 2C and C 2A 
   aircraft. The current propeller system incorporates technology developed
   in the 1950s and the 1960s, is difficult and expensive to maintain, and 
   is no longer in production. The committee report on H.R. 1119 (H. Rept. 
   105 132) directed the initiation of development and demonstration of an 
   eight-blade composite propeller for E 2C and C 2A aircraft. The Navy    
   subsequently began a program for design, development, test, and         
   production of the propeller system. The committee notes that the program
   includes flight and ground test of the new propeller system for the E 2 
   aircraft, but includes only ground tests for the new propeller on the C 
   2 aircraft.                                                             
      The committee recommends $57.0 million in PE 25633N, an increase of  
   $6.0 million to flight test the new propeller system on the C 2 aircraft
   sequentially with the E 2 flight test program.                          
           Common command and decision system                                      

      The budget request contained $119.3 million in PE 63658N for         
   continued development of the Navy's cooperative engagement capability   
   (CEC), and $33.0 million in PE 63582N for combat systems integration    
   demonstration and validation, including $8.7 million for common command 
   and decision systems development.                                       
      The committee notes the Navy's progress in resolving interoperability
   issues between CEC and Navy ship self-defense (SSD) combat systems and  
   preparations for the CEC operational evaluation in May 2001. The        
   committee anticipates that successful completion of the evaluation will 
   provide the basis for widespread deployment of CEC to the fleet and for 
   joint purposes as well.                                                 
      The committee also notes that the Navy initiated engineering studies 
   in fiscal year 1999 for a common command and decision (CC&D) system that
   would be a preplanned product improvement (P3I) to the Aegis weapons    
   systems and the Mark 2 ship self defense system and would replace the   
   command and decision capability presently in these systems with a common
   computer architecture. Such an architecture would reduce future combat  
   systems life-cycle costs, enable the fielding of new or modified combat 
   systems capabilities more quickly and at a lower cost, enhance system   
   interoperability, and eliminate the redundant, conflicting processing   
   that is inherent in these systems. The Navy has stated that the CC&D is 
   a critical step toward resolving long-term interoperability problems.   
   Congress provided an increase of $30.0 million for the program in fiscal
   year 2000. The Navy's program plan includes $91.2 million in addition to
   this year's request through fiscal year 2005. The Navy has projected a  
   notional program schedule that would begin engineering and manufacturing
   development in March 2002 and achieve initial operational capability for
   the CC&D system in September 2008. The committee notes that the Chief of
   Naval Operations has identified a $43 million unfunded requirement to   
   accelerate the ability to begin engineering and manufacturing           
   development by one year.                                                
      The committee supports the CC&D system program objectives that have  
   been identified by the Navy. The committee notes that the CC&D          
   development program is at an early stage, the program schedule is       
   notional, and operational requirements are being refined. The committee 
   also notes Navy plans to evaluate a proposed new approach to cooperative
   engagement capability data processing and transmission (the Tactical    
   Component Network (TCN)), which could conserve CEC communications       
   bandwidth and provide for a wider, more efficient CEC network.          
      The committee encourages the Navy to seek technology insertion       
   opportunities that will improve the interoperability of Navy combat     
   systems and CEC's capabilities for naval and joint forces and to provide
   the required funding as a part of the Navy's core budget program. The   
   committee directs the Secretary of the Navy to report to the            
   congressional defense committees on the Navy's program plan and funding 
   for the CC&D P3I program and for insertion of advanced technology in the
   CEC/SSD integrated combat system with the submission of the fiscal year 
   2002 budget request.                                                    
      The committee recommends $119.3 million in PE 63658N for continued   
   development of the Navy's CEC and $33.0 million in PE 63582N to continue
   combat systems integration demonstration and validation.                
           Common towed array                                                      

      The budget request contained $113.3 million in PE 63561N for advanced
   submarine systems development, including $4.5 million for the           
   development of advanced towed array technology for submarines and       
   surface ships.                                                          
      The committee notes the Navy's operational requirement for           
   improvements in critical undersea warfare combat systems technologies   
   needed in the littoral regions of the world. The committee also notes   
   that the Navy's advanced towed array technology program is making       
   considerable progress in developing multiple-line and fiber optic       
   affordable towed array technology that could result in high gain,       
   volumetric towed arrays with significantly improved performance for     
   submarine and surface ship sonar systems                                
      The committee recommends $123.5 million in PE 63561N, an increase of 
   $10.2 million to accelerate the development and demonstration of        
   advanced towed array systems for surface ship and submarine             
   anti-submarine warfare tactical and strategic surveillance.             
           Composite advanced sail development                                     

      The budget request contained $113.3 million in PE 63561N for advanced
   submarine systems development, including $5.7 million for               
   hydrodynamics/hydroacoustics and completion of the advanced submarine   
   sail development project.                                               
      The committee notes that the Navy's technology insertion plan for the
   Virginia class submarine includes installation of an advanced sail made 
   of steel on the seventh Virginia class ship. The committee also notes   
   the development of a quarter-scale advanced submarine sail made of      
   composite materials for the Navy's large scale vehicle and the conduct  
   of submersion tests at the Navy's Idaho test range in which the         
   composite sail exceeded the Navy's performance expectations.            
      The committee supports the advanced submarine technology insertion   
   program for the Virginia class submarine and directs the Secretary of   
   the Navy to report to the congressional defense committees on the Navy's
   plan for further development of a composite advanced sail for the       
   submarine with the submission of the fiscal year 2002 budget request.   
           CVNX aircraft carrier design product modeling                           

      The budget request contained $149.0 million in PE 63512N for carrier 
   systems development.                                                    
      The committee notes that all new classes of Navy ships, such as the  
   Virginia-class submarine, the DD 22 land attack destroyer, and the LPD  
   17 amphibious transport dock, are being designed using electronic three 
   dimensional product models to take advantage of the inherent design,    
   production and life cycle maintenance cost savings offered by these     
   modern design tools.                                                    
      The committee also notes that design data for the Nimitz-class       
   nuclear aircraft carriers, upon which design work began in the 1950's,  
   remains largely in non-electronic form. Conversion of aircraft carrier  
   design data into an electronic format was difficult to justify when Navy
   plans previously called for a complete change in designs following      
   completion of CVN 77.                                                   
      The committee notes, however, that the Navy has adopted an           
   evolutionary design approach for future carriers, beginning with the CVN
   77 as a transition ship and retains the Nimitz-class hull form largely  
   unchanged through at least CVNX 2. Therefore, the committee believes    
   that it now may be cost-effective to convert Nimitz-class design data   
   and to develop future nuclear aircraft design data utilizing electronic,
   three-dimensional product models to reap the design, production, and    
   life cycle maintenance cost savings offered by this approach. The       
   committee is aware that development of a nuclear aircraft carrier design
   product model may take several years and could be undertaken as part of 
   the planned design efforts for CVN 77, CVNX 1, and CVNX 2.              
      The committee directs the Secretary of the Navy to conduct an        
   assessment of the cost-effectiveness of developing an aircraft carrier  
   design product model for the CVNX and report the results of the         
   assessment, together with plans and funding requirements for development
   of such a model to the congressional defense committees with the        
   submission of the fiscal year 2002 budget request.                      
      The committee recommends $149.0 million in PE 63512N, including $5.0 
   million to begin development of an aircraft carrier design product model
   for the CVNX.                                                           
           Distributed engineering plant                                           


      The committee supports continued integration of high performance     
   computers for Navy Sea Systems Command (NAVSEA)'s multi-functional test 
   control center and distributed engineering plant (DEP) operations with  
   the Joint Forces Command's Joint Interoperability Training Center and   
   other military organizations and activities, academia, and industry in  
   the Hampton Roads region. The committee notes that cooperation and      
   sharing of computer resources among joint forces and the military       
   services, academia, and industry in the region could result in lower    
   costs and improved capabilities for analysis, design, modeling and      
   simulation, which would be reflected in major combat systems            
   developments, such as the cooperative engagement capability and the CVN 
   77 and CVN X aircraft carriers.                                         
      The committee is aware of the multi-functional test control center at
   NAVSEA Dam Neck and its interface with major Atlantic test and training 
   ranges used for joint operations and training. The committee also notes 
   that the Hampton Roads network access point at NAVSEA Dam Neck provides 
   transcontinental connectivity to other development, test and evaluation,
   acquisition, and training activities and an improved analytical and     
   information exchange capability.                                        
      The committee encourages the Navy to continue to capitalize on       
   government-sponsored high performance computing and high speed network  
   programs, such as the National Science Foundation's Partnership for     
   Advanced Computing Infrastructure, the East Coast Communication's       
   Network, and the Department of Defense high performance computing       
   modernization program, in developing improved capabilities for analysis,
   design, modeling and simulation, combat systems integration, training,  
   test and evaluation.                                                    
           Distributed marine environment forecast system                          

      The budget request contained $60.3 million in PE 62435N for applied  
   research in oceanographic and atmospheric technology, including $12.0   
   million for ocean and atmospheric prediction.                           
      The committee notes the long established need for a distributed      
   forecast system in the marine environment, which combines ocean and     
   atmospheric models with common database access and common tools to      
   provide the capability for prediction of local and future weather and   
   sea conditions and their potential effects on fleet and other           
   operations. The committee also notes the potential for building upon    
   oceanographic and atmospheric models and data from the Department of    
   Defense, National Air and Space Administration, National Oceanographic  
   and Atmospheric Administration, and Environmental Protection Agency to  
   integrate these resources into a distributed marine environment forecast
   system.                                                                 
      The committee recommends an increase of $2.0 million in PE 62435N to 
   establish an applied research program for development and demonstration 
   of a distributed marine environment forecast system.                    
           DP 2 thrust vectoring system proof-of-concept demonstration             

      The budget request contained $39.7 million in PE 63217N for air      
   systems and weapons advanced technology development, but included no    
   funds for continuation of the DP 2 thrust vectoring system proof of     
   concept demonstration.                                                  
      DP 2 is a proof-of-concept program to demonstrate the use of thrust  
   vector control to achieve vertical takeoff and conventional takeoff     
   capabilities in a one-half scale flight test vehicle. The technology    
   offers the potential for a low cost, medium range aircraft of advanced  
   composite construction.                                                 
      The committee notes the progress being made in the DP 2 program in   
   the design and fabrication of large, precise composite structures and in
   the potential for the use of small models to demonstrate and confirm    
   complex aeronautical guidance and control laws for the DP 2 system prior
   to entering the flight test phase. The committee also notes that        
   technical issues regarding strength of materials, engineering design,   
   the development and test of an automated control system, and other      
   safety of flight issues must be resolved before the program can proceed 
   to the flight test phase.                                               
      The committee recommends $49.2 million in PE 63217N, an increase of  
   $9.5 million to continue the DP 2 development program leading to a      
   proof-of-concept demonstration of a one-half scale flight test vehicle. 
   The committee directs the Secretary of the Navy to provide an assessment
   of the program progress and plans and funding requirements for          
   completion of the flight-test demonstration to the congressional defense
   committees with the submission of the fiscal year 2002 budget request.  
           Dry chemical fire suppressant                                           

      The committee notes that the Navy's initial tests of a gelled, dry   
   chemical fire suppressant agent in a self-contained fire extinguishing  
   system, which is reportedly non-toxic and has a long shelf life, have   
   successfully demonstrated the effectiveness of the material for fire    
   fighting. The Naval Research Laboratory report of its test of           
   alternative fire suppressant technologies, dated July 1999, indicated   
   the agent's high level of effectiveness and its potential for performing
   better than clean agent fire suppressant systems in current use aboard  
   Navy ships, and encouraged further research on the agent. The committee 
   encourages the Navy to conduct comprehensive field tests of the         
   suppressant and, if the tests are successful, to consider deployment of 
   the fire suppressant system to the fleet.                               
           E2 C2 rotordome and control surface improvements                        

      The budget request contained $18.7 million in PE 24152N for E 2      
   squadron operational systems development.                               
      The committee notes that the rotordome and control surfaces on the   
   Navy's E2 C2 Hawkeye aircraft have been experiencing problems due to    
   structural damage from water absorption and excessive wear and that the 
   Navy's plans to extend the service life of these aircraft require a new 
   retrofit design to eliminate costly maintenance and downtime.           
      The committee recommends $20.7 million in PE 24152N, an increase of  
   $2.0 million to develop composite retrofit options to improve the       
   serviceability and performance of the E2 C2 Hawkeye.                    
           Extended range guided munition                                          

      The budget request contained $143.0 million in PE 63795N for land    
   attack technology, including $39.1 million for development of the       
   extended range guided munition (ERGM).                                  
      The committee notes that the Navy's core program for near-term       
   improvements in naval surface fire support (NSFS) includes upgrading the
   existing 5-inch 54-caliber Mk 45 gun on its cruisers and destroyers to  
   fire a new extended-range guided munition (ERGM) with nearly five times 
   the range of current 5-inch projectile. Both the 5-inch 62-caliber Mk 45
   Mod 4 gun and the ERGM projectile were to have achieved initial         
   operational capability in fiscal year 2001. The first Mk 45 Mod 4 gun   
   was installed in the USS Winston Church (DDG 81) on schedule in 1999.   
   However, technical challenges and the contractor's relocation of the    
   ERGM development activity have delayed the ERGM development program an  
   estimated three years to 2004 and doubled the program cost.             
      The committee notes ERGM's key role in the NSFS program and the need 
   for a long-range (63 nautical mile) guided, gun-fired projectile to     
   achieve the approved operational requirements for support of ground     
   forces ashore. The committee also notes that the global positioning     
   system/inertial measuring unit (GPS/IMU) guidance and control technology
   being developed for ERGM will establish a baseline for future advanced  
   guided projectiles for the DD 21 land attack destroyer and for other    
   weapons systems.                                                        
      The committee has closely monitored the ERGM program since its       
   inception and has supported the baseline development program and        
   accelerated development and integration of microelectromechanical system
   (MEMS)-based GPS/INS into ERGM. The committee has encouraged close      
   cooperation between the Navy and Army guided munitions research and     
   development communities in order to achieve risk reduction in their     
   respective guided projectile development programs and maximum           
   commonality and economies of scale in production.                       
      The committee notes the detailed reviews of the ERGM program by the  
   Assistant Secretary of the Navy (Research, Development, and Acquisition)
   and the contractor; program management changes and risk reduction       
   measures taken; and program rebaseline and other measures under         
   consideration that might encourage program competition. The committee   
   believes that the technical goals of the program are challenging, but   
   achievable.                                                             
      The committee recommends $39.1 million in PE 63795N, the budget      
   request, to continue the ERGM development program. The committee directs
   the Secretary of the Navy to report to the congressional defense        
   committees on the revised program baseline, risk reduction measures, and
   measures to foster competition in the ERGM program no later than        
   November 1, 2000.                                                       
            18                                                                     

      The budget request contained $248.1 million in PE 24136N for         
   continued development of capabilities for the F/A 18 aircraft.          

      The committee has supported the Shared Airborne Reconnaissance Pod   
   (SHARP) efforts to provide the F/A 18 aircraft with an enhanced tactical
   reconnaissance capability that will also be applicable to other combat  
   aircraft. The committee notes the recent successful demonstration of the
   SHARP risk-mitigation project for the F 14 Tactical Airborne            
   Reconnaissance Podded System that was employed by the battle group      
   U.S.S. John F. Kennedy. This demonstration clearly indicated the force  
   multiplying capability provided by a real-time imagery system supports  
   continuation of this effort.                                            
      The committee is concerned, however, that the funding requested for  
   SHARP is insufficient to support completion of sensors for an initial   
   operational capability (IOC) in fiscal year 2003. The committee notes   
   that this shortfall in funding results in an increase in cost of        
   tactical reconnaissance support by extending use of the less capable F  
   14 Tactical Air Reconnaissance Pod (TARPS). The committee is also aware 
   that emerging technology is being developed to replace existing         
   mechanical focal plane shutters with a solid-state shutter to further   
   increase SHARP camera performance and reliability. However, the         
   committee is concerned that the current program is insufficiently funded
   to ensure a fiscal year 2003 SHARP fleet deployment.                    
      Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $18.0 million in  
   PE 24136N for the development of the SHARP F 18 tactical reconnaissance 
   capability to maintain the SHARP IOC.                                   
                      Fielded system obsolescence, technology insertion and        
           technology refreshment                                                  
      The committee notes the increasing reliance upon                     
   commercial-off-the-shelf in Department of Defense systems and the rapid 
   obsolescence of technology and exponential increases in capability in   
   subsequent generations that are common characteristics of the           
   commercial-off-the-shelf (COTS) industry. The committee believes that   
   management of COTS in Defense systems is a major effort that must be    
   recognized, quantified and separately addressed as an integral part of  
   the procurement process. To this end, the committee recommends that all 
   programs within DOD with high COTS content should include a management  
   plan that addresses the costs associated with sustaining the military   
   capability of the systems in a COTS environment. The plan should clearly
   distinguish the costs associated with sustaining current performance    
   requirements through technology refreshment and meeting increased       
   performance requirements through the technology insertion process.      
      The committee believes that institution of such a planning process in
   the Department would provide Congress with the information necessary to 
   evaluate the merits of COTS products in DOD applications based on a true
   and accurate representation of operational requirements and total       
   ownership costs. Based on ongoing work in technology refreshment and    
   technology insertion by the Department of the Navy as represented by the
   Acoustic Rapid COTS Insertion (A RCI) program, the committee believes   
   that a pilot program to address these issues should be established      
   within the Navy.                                                        
      The committee recommends that the Secretary of the Navy provide a    
   report on the Navy's plan for such a program that would address the     
   issues of technology refresh and technology insertion in legacy and     
   developmental programs with the submission of the fiscal year 2002      
   budget request.                                                         
           Fleet health technology and occupational lung disease                   

      The budget request contained $10.1 million in PE 63706N for medical  
   development, including $4.8 million for the fleet health technology     
   program.                                                                
      The Navy's medical development program supports advanced medical care
   and health protection from hazardous occupational and operational       
   exposure to Navy and Marine Corps personnel in operational theaters. The
   committee notes that the budget request would reduce funding for the    
   fleet health technology program approximately $5.7 million less than the
   fiscal year 2001 estimate that was provided in the fiscal year 2000     
   request. The committee is disturbed with this reduction in the priority 
   given to the medical care and occupational health and safety of Navy and
   Marine Corps personnel.                                                 
      The committee also notes that concerns have been raised that naval   
   personnel diagnosed with sarcoidosis, may have suffered from other lung 
   diseases related to exposure to occupational hazards during their       
   military service. A study by the National Institute of Occupational     
   Safety and Health (NIOSH) has provided an assessment of the incidence of
   sarcoidosis among Navy enlisted personnel and suggests a relationship of
   sarcoidosis with assignment aboard aircraft carriers. The Navy Surgeon  
   General has indicated that correlation of the results of the NIOSH study
   with a pathologic review of tissue samples at the Armed Forces Institute
   of Pathology taken from naval personnel during the 1960s and 1970s,     
   would be relevant to resolving the concerns regarding sarcoidosis and   
   other lung diseases. The Navy Surgeon General also indicated that       
   collaboration with the multi-center study of sarcoidosis etiology,      
   natural history, and treatment currently being considered by the        
   National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute, should be considered.        
      The committee directs the Secretary of the Navy, in coordination with
   the Secretary of Veterans Affairs and the Director of the Armed Forces  
   Institute of Pathology, to establish an occupational lung disease       
   assessment program to determine if naval personnel with lung disease due
   to other causes may have been misdiagnosed with sarcoidosis and if the  
   incidence of sarcoidosis or other lung disease could be attributable to 
   service aboard Navy ships. The program should also consider             
   collaboration with the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute's      
   sarcoidosis etiology study. The Secretary of the Navy shall report the  
   plan for the study and any initial study results to the congressional   
   defense committees no later than March 21, 2001.                        
      The committee recommends $13.1 million in PE 63706N, an increase of  
   $3.0 million, including $500,000 for the conduct of the occupational    
   lung disease assessment discussed above. To offset the recommended      
   increase, the committee recommends a reduction of $3.0 million in PE    
   63513N.                                                                 
           Flight worthy transparent armor system                                  

      The budget request contained $7.5 million in PE 63216N for aircraft  
   survivability demonstration and validation.                             
      The committee recommends an increase of $2.0 million in PE 63216N for
   the development of a flight worthy transparent armor system for the AH  
   1Z light attack helicopter and V 22 tilt-rotor aircraft that could be   
   migrated to other platforms as well.                                    
           High mobility artillery rocket system (HIMARS)                          

      The budget request contained no funds for the High Mobility Artillery
   Rocket System (HIMARS). The HIMARS is an Army-developed, Family of      
   Medium Tactical Vehicle (FMTV)-mounted multiple launch rocket system.   
   The committee understands that the Marine Corps currently lacks an      
   all-weather, continuously available, long-range fire support system     
   capable of prosecuting a Marine Expeditionary Force (MEF) and Marine    
   Ground Combat Element's (CGE) deep strike mission and counter fire      
   battle. The committee also understands that the existing prototype      
   HIMARS has the potential to fulfill the MEF and CGE mission             
   requirements. The committee notes that the Commandant of the Marine     
   Corps has identified a $17.3 million unfunded requirement for the       
   procurement of two HIMARS systems for evaluation and a system design    
   study to address integrating the HIMARS launcher onto the Marine Corps' 
   Medium Tactical Vehicle Replacement truck in fiscal year 2001.          
      The committee believes that evaluation of this weapon system as a    
   deep strike alternative capability for Marine expeditionary forces is   
   important, and, therefore, recommends $17.3 million in PE 63635M to     
   procure two HIMARS systems for this purpose.                            
           High performance sigma-delta waveform generator                         

      The budget request contained $26.0 million in PE 62270N for applied  
   research in electronic warfare technology.                              
      The committee notes that the Office of Naval Research has been       
   developing semi-conductor and super-conducting technology for the       
   implementation of a Sigma-Delta Waveform Generator. This activity has   
   included development of high speed gallium arsenide and/or Josephson    
   Junction circuits to implement a highly linear, flexible, digital       
   waveform generator for next generation Navy systems. The advanced       
   semi-conductor and super-conducting circuits being developed will enable
   higher levels of performance required to detect small targets in clutter
   and to perform multiple radio frequency functions.                      
      The committee recommends an $29.0 million in PE 62270N, an increase  
   of $3.0 million to continue the program for development of              
   super-conducting wave form generator technology.                        
           Hybrid fiberoptic/wireless communication technology                     

      The budget request contained $79.9 million in PE 62232N for applied  
   research in communications, command and control, intelligence, and      
   surveillance.                                                           
      The committee notes the progress made in development and             
   demonstration of the technology for hybrid fiber optic wireless         
   communications systems, and believes that the application of this       
   technology to shipboard communications will provide increased mobility  
   and security while reducing the effects of frequency interference.      
      The committee recommends an increase of $2.5 million in PE 62232N to 
   continue the development of hybrid fiberoptic/wireless communication    
   system technology. The                                                  

                     committee directs the Secretary of the Navy to assess the    
          progress in the program and the potential for incorporation of the      
          technology in the Navy's core science and technology program and to     
          report the results of that assessment to the congressional defense      
          committees with the submission of the fiscal year 2002 budget request.  
           Hybrid light detection and ranging (LIDAR)/radar technology             

      The budget request contained $76.3 million in PE 63792N for advanced 
   technology demonstration and transition.                                
      The committee recommends an increase of $3.0 million in PE 63792N to 
   continue the development and further demonstration of hybrid LIDAR/radar
   technology in the Claymore Marine advanced technology demonstration.    
           Hyperspectral research                                                  

      The budget request contained $79.9 million in PE 62232N for applied  
   research in communications, command and control, intelligence, and      
   surveillance technology.                                                
      The committee notes that hyperspectral sensor systems provide the    
   capability to detect and identify targets that are not discernible with 
   conventional sensors by exploiting the spectral signature of both the   
   target and the environment. The Naval Research Laboratory has conducted 
   extensive research into the use of hyperspectral technology to provide a
   surveillance sensor that is capable of finding difficult military       
   targets in clutter-rich environments. The laboratory has made excellent 
   progress in developing hyperspectral technology and has conducted       
   successful testing on board Navy intelligence collection aircraft.      
      The committee recommends an increase of $5.0 million in PE 62232N to 
   continue the Navy's development, integration, and testing of            
   hyperspectral sensors with other sensors.                               
           Insensitive munitions                                                   

      The budget request contained $28.6 million in PE 63609N for          
   conventional munitions demonstration and validation, including $3.2     
   million for insensitive munitions advanced development; and $7.5 million
   in PE 63216N for aviation survivability, including $1.8 million for     
   aircraft and ordnance safety.                                           
      The committee notes that insensitive munitions reduce the severity of
   cook-off and bullet/fragment impact reactions, and minimize the         
   probability for sympathetic detonation (both in normal storage and in   
   use) without compromising combat performance, and are recognized as a   
   critical technology requirement in the design of new weapons systems.   
   The committee also notes that, despite the Navy's requirements for      
   insensitive munitions, nearly all Navy munitions require a wavier to be 
   carried aboard ships. The committee notes that the Navy is the lead     
   service for the development of insensitive munition technology and that 
   the budget request would reduce insensitive munition technology         
   development funding almost $6.0 million below the amount provided in    
   fiscal year 2000 as well as the average program level of the past       
   several years. In view of joint requirements and the Navy's requirements
   for insensitive munitions, the committee believes that the Navy needs to
   assign a high priority to the insensitive munitions program and directs 
   the Secretary of the Navy to address this issue in the fiscal year 2002 
   budget request.                                                         
           Integrated aviation life support systems                                

      The budget request contained $17.5 million in PE 64264N for aircrew  
   systems engineering and manufacturing development, including $8.9       
   million for development of aviation life support systems.               
      The committee notes progress in development of the two-part,         
   tri-service modular helmet, the advanced visionics helmet system for    
   day/night, all-weather sight display, and the helicopter aircrew        
   integrated life support system. The committee also notes that the       
   current program, which develops the helicopter life support system and  
   helmet systems separately, could result in an overall aviation life     
   support system that is geared to the lowest performing component. The   
   committee believes that integrated development of these systems will    
   result in an aviation life support system that provides optimal         
   performance, greater tactical advantage, and improved aircrew safety.   
      Accordingly, the committee recommends $25.5 million in PE 64264N, an 
   increase of $8.0 million for continued development and flight evaluation
   of an integrated aviation life-support system that includes the         
   tri-service modular flight helmet, the advanced visionics helmet system,
   and the helicopter aircrew integrated life support system.              
           Integrated semiconductor bridge based fuze                              

      The budget request contained $38.0 million in PE 62111N for applied  
   research in air and surface launched weapons technology.                
      The committee notes the progress that has been made in the           
   development of semi-conductor bridges as electrical initiators for      
   explosives and their potential for replacing conventional hot bridgewire
   devices with significant reductions in size, weight, power and cost. The
   coupling of semiconductor bridge devices with microelectromechanical    
   systems technology in initiation and safe/arm components offers the     
   opportunity for the development of electromechanical fuzes with superior
   accuracy and reliability, reduced power consumption and weight, and     
   lower cost.                                                             
      The committee recommends an increase of $1.5 million in PE 62111N to 
   initiate a proof-of-concept development and demonstration of an         
   integrated semiconductor bridge based fuze for potential use in air and 
   surface launched weapons systems.                                       
                      Intermediate modulus carbon fiber and ultra-high thermal     
           conductivity graphite fibers                                            
      The budget request contained $68.1 million in PE 62234N for applied  
   research in materials and radio frequency/electro-optics/infrared       
   electronics technology and $72.8 million in PE 62102F for materials     
   applied research, including $44.1 million for materials for structures, 
   propulsion, and subsystems.                                             
      The committee notes that the joint strike fighter (JSF), the F/A     
   18E/F strike fighter, the V 22 tilt-rotor aircraft, the joint           
   air-to-surface standoff missile, and many other advanced aviation and   
   weapons systems use composite structures which have carbon fiber as a   
   major component. The committee is aware of proposals for the use of     
   intermediate modulus carbon fiber materials as an alternative to the    
   carbon fiber that could result in as much as a 50 percent reduction in  
   the cost of raw materials used in these weapons systems.                
      The committee also notes initial progress in the evaluation and      
   qualification of ultra-high thermal conductivity graphite fiber         
   materials for critical spacecraft requirements related to               
   countermeasures and spacecraft protection, high energy/thermal loading, 
   very large antennas, high-efficiency solar collectors, and other        
   applications.                                                           
      The committee believes that the Department of Defense should place   
   priority on the development of procedures for qualifying new materials  
   for potential use in military systems that could result in lower costs  
   while maintaining system performance requirements. The committee        
   supports continued validation of design methods, material performance in
   various service environments, and the capability of the materials to    
   manage thermal loads generated by electronics.                          
      The committee recommends an increase of $2.0 million in PE 62234N for
   evaluation of new, lower cost, commercially available carbon fibers for 
   JSF and other Navy aircraft and missile applications and $2.0 million in
   PE 62102F to continue the program for evaluation and qualification of   
   ultra-high thermal conductivity graphite materials for critical         
   spacecraft requirements.                                                
           Joint forces command operational testbed                                

      The budget request contained $113.1 million in PE 35204N for tactical
   unmanned aerial vehicles, but included no funds for the Joint Forces    
   Command unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) joint operational testbed.        
      Congress previously provided funds for two Predator unmanned aerial  
   vehicles and a tactical control system (TCS) ground station to support  
   development of TCS and UAV operational employment procedures. The       
   committee notes that the joint tactical UAV program office (JPO) was    
   disestablished. The committee further notes that the Joint Forces       
   Command has responsibility for oversight of joint operational testing   
   and evaluation of weapons systems, a function previously conducted by   
   the UAVJPO for specific UAV systems.                                    
      The committee supports the efforts of the Joint Forces Command and   
   recommends an increase of $1.0 million in PE 35204N for the Joint Forces
   Command UAV testbed. The committee directs the Secretary of the Navy to 
   transfer the two Predator UAVs and TCS ground station to the Joint      
   Forces Command for use by the joint operational UAV testbed.            
           Joint helmet mounted cueing system                                      

      The budget request contained $248.1 million in PE 24136N for         
   operational systems development for F/A18 naval strike fighter aircraft,
   including $3.3 million to continue development of the joint helmet      
   mounted cueing system, digital communications systems, and positive     
   identification system.                                                  

      The committee notes that the joint helmet mounted cueing system, when
   combined with state of the art missile systems currently in development,
   provides a significant improvement in air to air combat survivability.  
   The committee is also aware that this improved capability is essential  
   to the success of the Navy's F/A 18 E/F strike fighter aircraft         
   currently being deployed.                                               
      The committee recommends an increase of $8.0 million in PE 24136N for
   continued development of the joint helmet mounted cueing system for the 
   F/A 18C/D fighter.                                                      
           Joint tactical combat training system                                   

      The budget request contained $27.1 million in PE 24571N for          
   consolidated training systems development, including $7.8 million for   
   development of the Joint Tactical Combat Training Systems (JTCTS).      
      The JTCTS is a joint Air Force/Navy program for the development of   
   fixed, transportable, and mobile range instrumentation for shore-based  
   tactical aircrew training and for deployable, at-sea naval expeditionary
   force training. The statement of managers that accompanied the          
   conference report on H.R. 4103 (H. Rept. 105 746) directed the          
   Department of Defense to conduct a technical evaluation to compare the  
   capabilities, performance, and costs of competing system approaches to  
   JTCTS, and to identify the best technical solution with the best value  
   for meeting the Department's operational training requirement. In       
   November 1999, the Undersecretary of Defense (Acquisition and           
   Technology) reported that after completion of the technical evaluation  
   and a thorough analysis, the JTCTS was determined to be the system of   
   choice to meet the joint training requirement.                          
      The committee recommends an increase of $8.0 million in PE 24571N to 
   accelerate the development and fielding of JTCTS for fleet and fixed    
   range support of Navy and Air Force tactical air combat training.       
           Lightweight environmentally sealed parachute assembly (LESPA)           

      The budget request contained $7.5 million in PE 63216N for aircraft  
   survivability demonstration and validation.                             
      The committee recommends an increase of $2.0 million in PE 63216N to 
   continue the application of lightweight environmentally sealed parachute
   assembly (LESPA) sealing technology for use on existing and planned     
   parachutes for Navy ejection seats.                                     
           Littoral support fast patrol craft                                      

      The budget request contained $76.3 million in PE 63792N for advanced 
   technology transition.                                                  
      The committee notes that the Office of Naval Research (ONR) has      
   evaluated initial results of the concept evaluation of a littoral       
   warfare fast patrol craft and is favorably impressed with the potential 
   for such a system. The committee continues to believe that such a craft 
   could provide significant advances in logistics support, surveillance,  
   communications and fire support capabilities for naval forces in        
   littoral environments.                                                  
      Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $22.0 million in  
   PE 63792N to develop a prototype for demonstrating the operational      
   concepts of a littoral support fast patrol craft.                       
           Location of global positioning systems (GPS) jammers                    

      The budget request contained $97.3 million in PE 64270N for          
   electronic warfare development but included no funds to continue        
   development and demonstration of a state-of-the-art precision           
   surveillance and targeting system for location of global positioning    
   systems jammers (LOCO GPSI).                                            
      The committee notes that the Navy has developed a prototype LOCO GPSI
   airborne detection system, capable of rapid, precision location sources 
   for GPS interference. In the committee report on H.R. 1401 (H. Rept. 106
   162), the committee recommended an increase of $6.0 million to continue 
   development and evaluation of the LOCO GPSI system and directed the Navy
   to assess its operational requirement.                                  
      Consistent with its past action, the committee recommends $103.3     
   million in PE 64270N, an increase of $6.0 million, to complete advanced 
   development for the LOCO GPSI system, provide two additional sensor     
   systems, and to complete system testing.                                
           Malaria deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) vaccine                             

      The budget request contained $10.1 million in PE 63706N for advanced 
   medical technology development.                                         
      The committee notes the outstanding achievement by the military      
   medical research community in collaboration with the pharmaceutical     
   industry in developing DNA vaccines for complex multistage pathogens and
   for multiple pathogens of military importance. This collaboration has   
   resulted in the promising development of an effective recombinant       
   protein malaria vaccine of unprecedented efficacy. Successful completion
   of the development will result in a cost-effective means of controlling 
   malaria, the most important infectious threat to ground troops and to   
   third-world populations.                                                
      Of the funds authorized for PE 63706N, the committee recommends $1.5 
   million to continue development of the recombinant protein malaria      
   vaccine, and recommends that the Secretary of the Navy accelerate the   
   development of this technology in the fiscal year 2002 budget request.  
           Manned reconnaissance systems                                           

      The budget request contained $27.5 million in PE 35207N for manned   
   reconnaissance systems, including $25.3 million for development of the  
   shared airborne reconnaissance pod (SHARP).                             
      The committee continues its support for the SHARP program to increase
   dramatically real-time tactical reconnaissance capabilities. The        
   committee is aware of developmental EO framing processing techniques    
   that will provide for real-time precision strike targeting and          
   solid-state shutter technology that will greatly reduce operational     
   costs and improve camera performance.                                   
      The committee recommends an increase of $5.0 million in PE 35207N for
   long-range optical sensor technology and $3.0 million for development of
   a solid-state shutter mechanism that can be retrofitted on currently    
   fielded framing array cameras.                                          
           Marine corps dragon warrior UAV                                         

      The budget request contained no funds in PE 35204M for Marine Corps  
   close range tactical unmanned aerial vehicles (UAV).                    
      The committee notes that the Marine Corps Warfighting Laboratory     
   (MCWL) is developing the Dragon Warrior, a low cost, small UAV that     
   combines the speed of a fixed wing UAV with some operational            
   characteristics of a rotary wing UAV. The committee notes that Dragon   
   Warrior would carry a variety of payloads that are currently being      
   examined by the MCWL to provide the Marine Corps with a highly, flexible
   close range reconnaissance capability that will enlarge the area of     
   influence of a small expeditionary force.                               
      The committee recommends $5.0 million in PE 35204M, an increase of   
   $5.0 million for Dragon Warrior.                                        
           Marine mammal research                                                  

      The budget request contained $381.1 million in PE 61153N for the     
   Navy's defense research sciences program, but included no funds for     
   marine mammal research.                                                 
      The committee notes recent activities involving potential interaction
   of Navy tactical sonar operations with cetaceans in littoral waters of  
   the Atlantic Ocean near the Bahamas. The committee believes that the    
   Navy should place a priority on gaining an increased understanding of   
   the reaction of marine mammals to tactical sonar and other underwater   
   sounds that are characteristic of naval operations.                     
      The committee recommends $381.9 million in PE 61153N, an increase of 
   $750,000 for the Navy's cooperative marine mammal research program.     
           Maritime technology (MARITECH) program                                  

      The budget request contains $9.4 million in PE 78730N for the        
   Maritime Technology (MARITECH) program. The request also contained      
   $244.4 million in PE 63513N for shipboard system component development  
   and $46.9 million in PE 63564N for ship preliminary design and          
   feasibility studies.                                                    
      The committee notes that the Defense Advanced Research Projects      
   Agency (DARPA) initiated the MARITECH program in 1994 to enhance the    
   commercial viability of U.S. shipbuilding and preserve the defense      
   industrial shipbuilding base. An independent study of the economic      
   impact of the program concluded that the Navy shipbuilding industrial   
   base experienced considerable productivity improvements and cost savings
   from the application of technologies developed in the MARITECH program. 
   In fiscal year 1999 the program was moved to the Department of the Navy 
   and a five-                                                             

                    year, $20 million per year, Navy MARITECH Advanced            
          Shipbuilding Enterprise (ASE) was established to build upon the progress
          made by the original DARPA program.                                     
      The committee believes that the success of the original MARITECH     
   program was the result of the application of innovative management and  
   technologies, and stable funding throughout the five-years of the       
   program. The committee believes that the reduction in the budget request
   for the ASE breaks the paradigm established in the original program and 
   will adversely affect the program objective of assisting the Nation's   
   shipbuilding industry in achieving significant reductions in the cost   
   and time required for commercial and Navy ship construction, conversion,
   and repair. The committee believes that all Navy shipbuilding programs  
   will benefit from the MARITECH ASE and should share in funding the      
   program.                                                                
      Accordingly, the committee recommends $15.4 million in PE 78730N, an 
   increase of $6.0 million to fully fund the MARITECH program. The        
   committee further recommends a decrease of $3.0 million each in PE      
   63513N and PE 63564N.                                                   
           Mobile electronic warfare support system                                

      The budget request contained $96.2 million in PE 26313M, and included
   $449,000 for improvements to the Marine Corps' mobile electronic warfare
   support system (MEWSS).                                                 
      The committee notes that the Marine Corps' MEWSS tactical            
   reconnaissance system is a cooperative effort with the Army's ground    
   based common sensor (GBCS) program. The GBCS program was terminated and 
   all residual equipment was transferred to the Marine Corps for use in   
   the MEWSS. However, no funds were included in the budget request to     
   transfer and integrate GBCS components into the MEWSS vehicles or to    
   maintain the limited rate initial production items.                     
      The committee recommends $104.7 million in PE 26313M, an increase of 
   $8.5 million for the specific purposes of transferring, integrating and 
   maintaining the equipment gained from GBCS.                             
           Mobile integrated diagnostic and data analysis system (MIDDAS)          

      The budget request contained $5.3 million in PE 64771N for medical   
   development.                                                            
      The committee understands that the Navy has no trauma management     
   tools to aid medical personnel in monitoring and analyzing wounded      
   patient medical data on a real-time basis in the field. The committee   
   further understands that the Navy has made significant progress in the  
   development of the MIDDAS to provide such a capability but that         
   additional resources are required to complete this effort.              
      Accordingly, the committee recommends $7.3 million in PE 64771N for  
   medical development, an increase of $2.0 million to accelerate          
   development of the MIDDAS and demonstrate its ability to interface with 
   communications and medical data systems.                                
           Multi-function radar/volume search radar and the Navy's radar roadmap   

      The budget request contained a total of $305.3 million in PE 64300N  
   for total ship systems engineering and manufacturing development for the
   DD 21 land attack destroyer, including $69.6 million for the            
   multi-function radar (MFR) for ship defense and $57.5 million for the   
   volume search radar (VSR) for air search and track.                     
      The committee report on H.R. 1401 (H. Rept. 106 162) expressed       
   concern that significant radar upgrades are required to meet the        
   objective capabilities of the Navy theater wide (NTW) system. The report
   also noted that radar upgrades for TMD need to be thoroughly integrated 
   with continued radar improvements required for fleet defense,           
   development of the cooperative engagement capability (CEC), and         
   development of next generation Navy destroyers and cruisers. The report 
   called for a clearly defined roadmap of radar requirements and          
   technology to identify the best approaches for meeting the overlapping  
   requirements of fleet defense and TMD.                                  
      The committee notes the Navy's submission of the Surface Navy Radar  
   Roadmap Study as an interim report on the Navy's radar roadmap. The     
   study states that a series of time-phased radar development decisions   
   must be made to support varying surface ship acquisitions:              
      (1) Immediate decisions to be made regarding the radar suite         
   configuration for new ships including DD 21 and the CVN 77 aircraft     
   carrier.                                                                
      (2) Near term decision on the radar configuration for the initial    
   phase (Block I) of the NTW program.                                     
      (3) Near- to mid-term decisions (2 3 years) for Block II of the NTW  
   program and for improvement in self-defense capabilities of ships now in
   service.                                                                
      (4) Radar technologies to be developed for the next-generation air   
   dominance/theater ballistic missile defense (TBMD) cruiser that would   
   reach the fleet in 2015.                                                
      The plan provides a strategy to reduce the large number of redundant,
   obsolescing radars currently in the fleet to a small number of radars   
   common across multiple ship classes. The plan confirms the need for:    
      (1) A radar suite composed of MFR and VSR for ships whose radar      
   requirements are limited to self-defense and air control.               
      (2) A next generation radar suite, either derived from MFR/VSR, or   
   perhaps involving one additional radar, for ships with TBMD and area    
   anti-air warfare requirements.                                          
      The committee expresses concern that a clearly defined and funded    
   radar roadmap is necessary to ensure the necessary upgrades to legacy   
   radar systems and the development of new radar systems. The committee   
   awaits Secretary of the Navy approval of the radar roadmap, delivery to 
   the congressional defense committees, and incorporation of the approved 
   program in the fiscal year 2002 budget request.                         
           Multipurpose processor                                                  

      The budget request contained $34.8 million in PE 64503N for submarine
   systems equipment development, including $28.2 million for submarine    
   sonar improvements.                                                     
      The committee notes that that the Acoustic Rapid                     
   Commercial-Off-the-Shelf Insertion (A RCI) program has provided a       
   tremendous improvement in sonar processing capabilities through the     
   application of a cost-effective multipurpose acoustic signal processing 
   technology and the advanced process build software development          
   initiative. The committee continues to support incorporation of this    
   advanced multipurpose signal processing technology into the Navy's      
   acoustic surveillance and intelligence systems.                         
      Accordingly, the committee recommends $49.8 million in PE 64503N, an 
   increase of $15.0 million, to support the accelerated development and   
   extension of common acoustic processing capabilities for undersea       
   warfare applications through the use of the multipurpose processor.     
           Naval space surveillance                                                

      The budget request contained $2.0 million in PE 35927N for the Navy  
   Space Surveillance network life extension activities.                   
      The committee notes that the budget request for the fiscal year 2001 
   included a request for design concept activities that were provided in  
   fiscal year 2000. Therefore, the committee recommends $1.4 million in PE
   35927N, a decrease of $600,000.                                         
           Navy mine countermeasures program                                       

      The budget request contained a total of $647.3 million for the       
   Department of the Navy mine countermeasures program, including $334.9   
   million for research, development, test and evaluation, $118.4 million  
   for procurement, and $177.4 million for operations and maintenance.     
      The committee has reviewed the U.S. Naval Mine Warfare Plan and the  
   Department of the Navy's mine countermeasures (MCM) program for fiscal  
   year 2001. The plan highlights mine warfare as a core competency of the 
   naval services and near-, mid-, and long-term measures to ensure the    
   continued readiness of the Navy's dedicated force of 26 MCM ships and   
   the development and fielding of organic MCM systems in the fleet.       
      The committee notes that the increased funding levels provided for   
   the MCM program through fiscal year 2005 will allow deployment of the   
   programmed organic MCM capability to a carrier battle group in 2005, as 
   well as continued modernization of dedicated MCM forces. The committee  
   also notes that the Navy is establishing a capstone requirements        
   document for a MCM system of systems that will baseline current         
   requirements and identify shortfalls in existing MCM systems. Because   
   the deployment of advanced MCM systems to the fleet will require new    
   tactics, techniques, and procedures for their employment, the committee 
   recommends that the Secretary of the Navy consider the establishment of 
   a Mine Warfare Battle Laboratory to accelerate the introduction of new  
   technologies and concepts of operations for both MCM forces.            
      The committee is aware that the Navy has begun an analysis of        
   alternatives for replacement of the USS INCHON (MCS 12) MCM support ship
   and a second analysis of alternatives for a future MCM(X) ship for the  
   dedicated MCM fleet. The committee notes that technical problems        
   encountered with the development of the shallow water assault breaching 
   system (SABRE) and the Army's cancellation of the MDBU``GrizzlyMDBU''   
   combat breaching vehicle program severely impacts the development of the
   Navy and Marines in-stride assault mine-clearing capability. The        
   committee directs the Secretary of the Navy to provide to the           
   congressional defense committees the revisions to the MCM plan          

                    and programs that address these issues with the submission of 
          the fiscal year 2002 budget request.                                    
           Advanced sensors for mine countermeasures and oceanography              

      The budget request contained $60.3 million in PE 62435N for          
   oceanographic and atmospheric technology, including $22.6 million for   
   applied research in natural and environmental influences on MCM systems 
   and littoral oceanography.                                              
      The committee notes significant progress in the development of       
   advanced underwater chemical, optical, and physical sensors and sensor  
   systems for mine countermeasures and other underwater sensor            
   applications, including the successful test of an underwater mass       
   spectrometer for detection and mapping of trace quantities of volatile  
   organic compounds that might be associated with underwater mines,       
   chemical or biological agents, or hazardous wastes. The committee also  
   notes the development of a small spectrophotometric and fluormetric     
   analysis system for detection of trace elements underwater and of a     
   high-speed, high resolution laser line scanner for three-dimensional    
   mapping sea floor topography, both of which have potential application  
   for mine countermeasures and other purposes.                            
      The committee recommends an increase of $6.0 million in PE 62435N to 
   continue the development and demonstration of advanced underwater       
   chemical, optical, and physical sensors and sensor systems for mine     
   countermeasures and other applications.                                 
           AN/AQS 20/X mine hunting sonar                                          

      The budget request contained $47.3 million in PE 64373N for airborne 
   mine countermeasures engineering and manufacturing development,         
   including $14.9 million to continue development of the AN/AQS 20/X      
   helicopter-towed, mine hunting sonar system.                            
      The AN/AQS 20/X will be the common mine hunting sonar system for the 
   submersible AN/WLD 1 Remote Minehunting System (RMS) and the CH 60S     
   airborne mine countermeasures (AMCM) helicopter that will provide the   
   primary organic mine counter-measures capabilities for the fleet. The   
   committee notes the progress that has been made in the development of   
   the AN/AQS 20/X mine hunting sonar and the Navy's decision in fiscal    
   year 1999 to add an electro-optical sensor to the system's mine         
   detection, localization and classification capabilities. The committee  
   also notes that incorporating current state-of-the-art,                 
   commercial-off-the-shelf (COTS) processor technology in the AN/AQS 20/X 
   would significantly improve system performance, eliminate obsolescent   
   components dating from the early 1990s, permit any system to operate    
   from either the AMCM helicopter or the RMS, and significantly upgrade   
   computer-aided detection and classification of mines and mine-like      
   objects.                                                                
      Accordingly, the committee recommends $64.3 million in PE 64373N, an 
   increase of $17.0 million for incorporation of COTS processor technology
   in the AN/AQS 20/X mine hunting sonar.                                  
                      Synthetic aperture sonar development for long-term mine      
           reconnaissance system                                                   
      The budget request contained $97.9 million in PE 63502N for          
   demonstration and validation of surface and shallow water mine          
   countermeasures, including $26.1 million for development of unmanned    
   underwater vehicles (UUV).                                              
      The committee notes that the Navy developed the near-term mine       
   reconnaissance system (NMRS) as a single operational prototype mine     
   hunting UUV system, which is capable of mine detection, classification, 
   and localization, and is launched and recovered from an SSN 688 class   
   submarine. Employing forward- and side-scanning sonar systems, the      
   AN/BLQ 11 long-term mine reconnaissance system (LMRS) will replace the  
   limited capability provided by the NMRS with a submarine launched and   
   recoverable, autonomous capability that will have increased endurance,  
   reliability, and search rate, and will provide the fleet a greatly      
   improved capability to conduct clandestine mine reconnaissance. The     
   committee also notes that the Chief of Naval Operations has identified  
   the development of a synthetic aperture sonar capability for the LMRS as
   an unfunded requirement in fiscal year 2001.                            
      The committee recommends $103.4 million in PE 63502N, including $5.5 
   million for development of a synthetic aperture sonar capability for the
   LMRS.                                                                   
           Naval modeling and simulation                                           

      The budget request contained $9.1 million in PE 38601N for naval     
   modeling and simulation.                                                
      The committee notes recent advances in modeling and simulation for   
   command, control, communications, computers, intelligence, surveillance 
   and reconnaissance (C4ISR) systems. These advances demonstrate the use  
   of efficient systems engineering and business practices and leverage and
   promote simulation based acquisition applied to the assessment,         
   planning, testing, and technology insertion for C4ISR systems. The      
   committee also notes progress in modeling and simulation systems        
   engineering initiatives that aid operations analysis, engineering       
   assessment, and additional efforts directed at understanding model      
   development, fidelity, accuracy, and simulation efficiencies and their  
   effects on tradeoff analyses involving C4ISR systems. The committee     
   supports the development and understanding of new modeling and          
   simulation tools that will assist in more effective decision-making and 
   in the design of C4ISR systems and information architectures.           
      Accordingly, the committee recommends $12.1 million in PE 38601N, an 
   increase of $3.0 million to continue initiatives for the development of 
   improvements in C4ISR modeling and simulation.                          
           New composite materials for aircraft canopies                           

      The budget request contained $21.1 million in PE 62122N for applied  
   research in aircraft technology.                                        
      The committee notes that aircraft windscreens and canopies are made  
   of relatively soft materials, which can degrade over time, resulting in 
   significant replacement costs. The committee is aware of proposals for  
   the use of nano-composite materials that combine the ultraviolet        
   stability, hardness and abrasion resistance of glass and the durability 
   and adhesion of a plastic coating, offering significant improvements    
   over conventional coating materials. The committee believes that the    
   successful development and demonstration of the use of such materials on
   canopies and windscreens could significantly reduce operations and      
   maintenance cost for the armed services.                                
      The committee recommend $23.1 million in PE 62122N, an increase of   
   $2.0 million for applied research and development of nano-composite hard
   coat materials for aircraft windscreens and canopies.                   
           Optical correlation technology for automatic target recognition         

      The budget request contained $28.6 million in PE 63609N for          
   conventional munitions demonstration and validation.                    
      The committee notes the progress in the development and demonstration
   of optical correlation technology to enhance target discrimination and  
   aim point selection for next-generation weapon system seekers.          
      The committee recommends $33.6 million in PE 63609N, an increase of  
   $5.0 million to continue the program for development and demonstration  
   of miniature, rugged optical correlators for automatic target           
   recognition and improved aim point selection for the Navy's Standard    
   Missile.                                                                
           Optically multiplexed wideband radar beam-forming array                 

      The budget request contained $79.9 million in PE 62232N for applied  
   research in communications, command, control, intelligence,             
   surveillance, and reconnaissance technology, including $17.6 million for
   radar technology.                                                       
      The committee notes that Congress provided a total of $4.0 million in
   fiscal year 2000 to initiate a cooperative program for research,        
   development, and demonstration of a prototype optically multiplexed,    
   wideband, radar beam-forming array that uses optical wavelength-division
   multiplexing (WDM). The committee also notes that the use of optical WDM
   is expected to reduce hardware complexity and system cost in a wideband 
   electronically-steered active radar antenna that has high instantaneous 
   bandwidth and the resolution necessary for theater ballistic missile    
   defense and ship self defense in a littoral environment.                
      The committee recommends an increase of $3.0 million in PE 62232N to 
   continue the program for development and demonstration of an optically  
   multiplexed wideband radar beam-forming array.                          
           P 3 modernization program                                               

      The budget request contained $2.9 million in PE 64221N for the P 3   
   maritime patrol aircraft modernization program, which provides upgrades 
   to the aircraft's systems in order to enhance its surface and subsurface
   tracking and classification capabilities.                               
      The committee continues to note the increasing demands placed by the 
   major theater commanders on the P 3 for intelligence and surveillance   
   missions in maritime, regional, and littoral operations. The committee  
   also notes the Navy's cancellation of the sustained readiness program   
   for the P 3 and the postponement of previous plans to initiate an       
   analysis of alternatives for a replacement maritime patrol aircraft.    
   Yet, the                                                                

                    Navy's Integrated Submarine Warfare Roadmap cites the need for
          improvements in P 3 capabilities that are critical to near-term         
          anti-submarine warfare operational capabilities. The committee report on
          H.R. 1401 (H. Rept. 106 162) expressed the belief that increased        
          priority must be given to the maintenance of a robust, continuing       
          research and development to sustain current P 3 capabilities and support
          introduction of new capabilities and recommended that the Secretary of  
          the Navy review the fiscal year 2001 budget request for the P 3 to      
          ensure that it follows the program priorities established in the        
          roadmap.                                                                
      The committee is concerned that the Navy is not taking the steps     
   necessary to maintain the P 3 fleet and support the introduction of new 
   operational capabilities that may be required in the future. The        
   committee is aware of the need for the Navy to balance its competing    
   program priorities among available funds, but believes that there is a  
   systemic problem in the Navy in which insufficient attention is given to
   funding for the sustainment, technology refreshment, and improvement of 
   legacy systems that are expected to remain in service and have no       
   programmed replacement. The average age of the P 3 fleet is over 20     
   years, and the aircraft and its weapons systems are expected to remain  
   in service until after 2020. The aircraft electrical system was designed
   for analog equipment and has become less compatible with modern digital 
   equipment as technology has advanced. As expressed in previous reports, 
   the committee believes that additional funding is required for combat   
   systems development and integration of commercial-off-the-shelf signal  
   processing technology to ensure that the P 3 provides the advanced      
   anti-submarine warfare, anti-surface warfare, and surveillance          
   capabilities that are required by the fleet.                            
      Therefore, the committee recommends $7.8 million in PE 64221N, an    
   increase of $1.9 million for the design, demonstration, and testing of a
   new electrical system and an increase of $3.0 million for advanced      
   concept systems development. The committee directs the Secretary of the 
   Navy to report on the Navy's plans for sustaining the operational       
   capabilities of the P 3 and for development of a replacement aircraft to
   the congressional defense committees with the fiscal year 2002 budget   
   request.                                                                
           P 3 special mission squadron sensor upgrade                             

      The budget request contained $ 27.5 million in PE 35207N for manned  
   reconnaissance systems research and development, including $2.2 million 
   for special mission P 3 reconnaissance squadrons.                       
      The committee notes the increased operational requirements placed on 
   the P 3 special mission reconnaissance squadrons by the major combatant 
   commanders and the need for improvements in aircraft sensors            
   capabilities identified by the Chief of Naval Operations as an unfunded 
   requirements in fiscal year 2001.                                       
      The committee recommends an increase of $2.6 million in PE 35207N to 
   accelerate the development of three sensor upgrades for special mission 
   P 3 aircraft squadrons.                                                 
           Parametric airborne dipping sonar                                       

      The budget request contained $58.3 million in PE 63747N for undersea 
   warfare advanced technology development and $69.9 million in PE 64216N  
   for the multi-mission helicopter upgrade program, but included no funds 
   for the parametric airborne dipping sonar (PADS).                       
      The committee notes that the Navy's advanced technology demonstration
   of a prototype PADS has indicated the significant potential of          
   parametric sonar technology against both mine-like and submarine targets
   in littoral waters. The results of the Navy's at-sea test of PADS       
   indicated that the essential goals of the PADS demonstration had been   
   met and suggest PADS potential for mine detection. The Secretary of the 
   Navy's evaluation report, dated January 1999, stated that the PADS      
   technology merits further pursuit and that the Navy intended to continue
   demonstration of parametric sonar technology. The committee is aware    
   that the Navy plans at-sea tests of the PADS prototype against submarine
   targets later this summer. Pending the successful completion of those   
   tests, the committee directs the Secretary of the Navy to report to the 
   congressional defense committees on the Navy's plan for further         
   development of the PADS system with the submission of the fiscal 2002   
   budget request.                                                         
      The committee recommends no additional funds for PADS in PE 63747N   
   and PE 64216N and awaits recommendations from the Secretary of the Navy 
   regarding the program.                                                  
           Power node control centers                                              

      The budget request contained $37.4 million in PE 63508N for advanced 
   development of surface ship and submarine hull, mechanical, and         
   engineering advanced technology.                                        
      The committee notes the progress made in the development and         
   demonstration of power node control centers for integrated switching,   
   conversion, distribution, and control of electrical power aboard naval  
   vessels. The committee is aware of other new electric power distribution
   and propulsion system architectures that can be automatically           
   reconfigured to maintain the combat readiness of the shipboard          
   navigation, communication, and weapons systems following accidental or  
   hostile damage. The committee also notes the Navy's plans for the       
   application of power node control centers in integrated power systems   
   for the DD 21 land attack destroyer and other ships.                    
      The committee recommends an increase of $3.0 million in PE 63508N to 
   continue the development and demonstration of power node control centers
   and other flexible power distribution architectures and their           
   application in integrated power systems.                                
           Project M                                                               

      The budget request contained $37.4 million in PE 63508N for advanced 
   development of surface ship and submarine hull, mechanical, and         
   engineering advanced technology, but contained no funds to continue     
   Project M development of advanced machinery quieting technology.        
      The committee notes the initial reports of successful testing of     
   Project M quieting technology installed in the one-quarter scale        
   submarine at the Navy's acoustic test range, and believes that the      
   technology is ready for transition from the Navy's science and          
   technology base to potential applications in Navy propulsion and other  
   machinery systems. The committee is aware that an issue of the potential
   magnetic signature of the technology must be resolved as a part of any  
   transition to ship board applications.                                  
      The committee recommends an increase of $3.0 million in PE 63508N to 
   transition Project M technology for Navy systems applications. The      
   committee directs the Secretary of the Navy to report to the            
   congressional defense committees on the Navy's plan for transition of   
   the technology with the submission of the fiscal year 2002 budget       
   request.                                                                
           Radio frequency integration and testing environment                     

      The budget request contained $270.3 million in PE 65864N for test and
   evaluation support.                                                     
      The committee notes that the proliferation of antennas and radio     
   frequency emitters on board Navy ships results in potentially severe    
   electromagnetic interference among communications and sensor systems,   
   which compete for bandwidth in the electromagnetic spectrum, unless     
   careful attention is given to electromagnetic compatibility. While      
   research and development continues to pursue the use of common aperture 
   antenna arrays to reduce shipboard ``antenna farms'', the requirement to
   resolve potential electromagnetic compatibility issues can only grow as 
   demands for communications channels and bandwidth increase and new      
   sensors which use the electromagnetic spectrum are deployed to counter  
   new threats.                                                            
      The committee believes that the requirement may exist for a testing  
   environment for radio frequency integration and ship electronic         
   interoperability that would address the electromagnetic compatibility of
   ships in the demanding radio frequency environment of modern, joint     
   littoral warfare. Such a testing environment would provide the          
   capability for instrumented electronic testing for ship-based equipment 
   to identify and resolve electromagnetic interference problems, before   
   the deployment of the equipment to the fleet. The committee believes    
   that a fully instrumented, electromagnetic simulation environment,      
   similar to that currently used in aircraft and telecommunications system
   testing, would be re-configurable for different ship classes and capable
   of participating in distributed interactive simulations. This capability
   could enable fleet analysis, technology evaluation, and development of  
   new tactics, techniques, and procedures.                                
      The committee directs the Secretary of the Navy, in coordination with
   the Director of Operational Test and Evaluation, to conduct an          
   assessment and provide recommendations on requirements for              
   electromagnetic compatibility testing of ship-based equipment and the   
   potential need to establish a radio frequency integration and ship      
   interoperability testing environment. The committee further directs the 
   Secretary to submit the results of the assessment and any               
   recommendations to the congressional defense committees with the        
   submission of the fiscal year 2002 budget request.                      
      The committee recommends $270.3 million, the budget request, in PE   
   65864N for Navy test and evaluation support.                            
           Remote precision gun                                                    


      The budget request contained $ 54.7 million in PE 63640M for Marine  
   Corps advanced technology demonstrations, but included no funds for the 
   remote precision gun.                                                   
      The committee is aware that a remotely operated precision gun        
   platform is being developed to reduce risk to personnel under a variety 
   of conditions. The committee notes that this remote fire system allows  
   the operator to remain out of the line of fire and eliminates human     
   error in aiming and firing a weapon.                                    
      The committee recommends $55.7 million in PE63640M, an increase of   
   $1.0 million for completion of development of the remote precision gun  
   aiming platform for military applications.                              
           S 3B surveillance system upgrade program                                

      The budget request contained $455,000 in PE 64217N for engineering   
   and manufacturing development for the S 3 weapons system improvement    
   program.                                                                
      The committee notes that the objective of the S 3B surveillance      
   system upgrade program is the integration of off-the-shelf radar,       
   electro-optic, and infrared sensors; electronic support measures; and   
   tactical data links to demonstrate an enhanced stand-off capability for 
   this systems that could be achieved with low risk and at relatively low 
   cost.                                                                   
      The committee strongly supports efforts to improve Navy battle group 
   operations and, therefore, recommends $12.5 million in PE 64217N, an    
   increase of $12.0 million to continue the S 3B surveillance system      
   upgrade prototype demonstration program.                                
           Ship service fuel cell program                                          

      The budget request contained $37.4 million in PE 63508N for surface  
   ship and submarine hull, mechanical, and electrical advanced technology 
   development, including $17.6 million for advanced electrical systems.   
      The committee notes the progress in the Navy's marine fuel cell      
   program in the development of advanced ship service fuel cell power     
   systems as affordable, alternative electrical sources for ship service  
   power and the potential use of such systems in the DD 21 land attack    
   destroyer program and for other ship service power applications. The    
   committee notes program emphasis on leveraging commercial fuel cell     
   technology and solving Navy issues such as operation in salt-laden air, 
   shipboard shock and vibration, and reforming diesel and other common    
   naval fuels for use in fuel cells systems.                              
      The committee recommends an increase of $2.8 million in PE 63508N to 
   accelerate the on-going Phase II program for development and            
   demonstration of a molten carbonate ship service fuel cell power system.
           Silicon carbide and gallium nitride semiconductor substrates            

      The budget request contained $68.1 million in PE 62234N for applied  
   research in materials, electronics and computer technology.             
      The committee is aware that silicon carbide and gallium nitride are  
   wide band-gap semiconductor materials with unique physical and          
   electrical properties, which make possible the fabrication of a         
   next-generation of microelectronic devices that will be capable of      
   operating in radiation environments and at high temperatures, high      
   voltages, high power levels, and microwave frequencies. These           
   capabilities will enable a wide range of applications in military and   
   commercial systems such as advanced radars, power systems, sensors and  
   satellite communications. The committee continues to support the        
   development of silicon carbide and gallium nitride materials and        
   encourages the establishment of partnerships with industry to exploit   
   the technology for commercial uses.                                     
      The committee recommends an increase of $5.0 million in PE 62234N for
   the continued development of silicon carbide and gallium nitride        
   semiconductor materials and microelectronic applications.               
           Single flux quantum electronics                                         

      The budget request contained $68.1 million in PE 62234N for applied  
   research in materials and radio frequency/electro-optics/infrared       
   electronics technology.                                                 
      The committee notes the steady progress in laboratory demonstration  
   of single flux quantum electronics and the potential of this technology 
   for applications in high-speed military electronic systems and the      
   processing of high-speed electronic signals. The committee notes that   
   the development of the technology can be accelerated to take single flux
   quantum electronics from the present stage of component demonstration in
   the laboratory to the development of integrated modules that demonstrate
   key functions needed for specific military electronics applications,    
   including analog to digital conversion of very high-speed electronic    
   signals.                                                                
      Accordingly, the committee recommends $3.0 million in PE 62234N for  
   the initial two-year phase of a program for the development and         
   demonstration of single flux quantum electronic technology for military 
   applications.                                                           
           SSGN Conversion                                                         

      The budget request contained $34.8 M in PE 63559N to initiate the    
   option for converting Ohio class Trident ballistic missile submarines   
   (SSBN), currently scheduled for retirement, to a conventional cruise    
   missile submarine (SSGN) configuration.                                 
      The committee understands that the Department of Defense is assessing
   alternatives to maintain the nuclear attack submarine (SSN) force at the
   minimum force level of 55 SSNs, as recommended in the recent submarine  
   force requirements study approved by the Joint Chiefs of Staff. The     
   committee notes that the Secretary of Defense directed the addition of  
   $1.1 billion spread across the future years defense plan (FYDP) to      
   sustain the 55 SSN structure by refueling four additional SSN 688s. The 
   committee notes that the Secretary directed that conversion of up to    
   four Trident SSBNs to an SSGN configuration be considered as an         
   alternative to SSN refueling to maintain the 55 SSN force.              
      In the statement of managers which accompanied the conference report 
   on S.1059 (H. Rept. 106 301), the conferees directed the Secretary to   
   initiate arms control studies and cost and operational effectiveness    
   analysis required to provide the basis for a defense acquisition        
   milestone decision to proceed with the SSBN-to-SSGN conversion program. 
   The committee notes that significant arms control issues relating to the
   Trident SSBN to SSGN conversion remain unresolved and that the cost and 
   operational effectiveness assessment of the SSGN conversion is          
   incomplete.                                                             
      The committee notes that the Navy's notional plan for an SSGN        
   conversion program would begin refueling and conversion of the first    
   SSBN in fiscal year 2003. The notional schedule includes a Milestone 0  
   review by the Defense Acquisition Board late in fiscal year 2000,       
   preliminary design and risk reduction studies in fiscal year 2001, a    
   Milestone I/II decision to begin engineering and manufacturing          
   development in fiscal year 2002, and initial operational capability for 
   the first SSGN in fiscal year 2007. The committee notes, however, that  
   the Navy budget projection for fiscal years 2002 through 2005 contains  
   no additional funds for the program.                                    
      Senior Navy officials have confirmed that the budget request of $34.8
   million is sufficient only to sustain the option for a version of the   
   SSGN accountable under Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (START), and that
   $260 million is required in fiscal year 2001 to retain the option for a 
   treaty-compliant SSGN conversion. The Navy estimates the cost of        
   converting four SSBNs to START-accountable SSGNs at $1.3 billion and the
   cost of conversion to START-compliant SSGNs at $3.4 billion. Either of  
   these two versions of SSGNs would require an additional $1.1 billion for
   refueling if SSGN conversion is conducted in addition to SSN refueling. 
      Navy officials acknowledged that the budget request is predicated on 
   indications from the Administration that future START negotiations might
   include discussion of a change to the START protocol which would exempt 
   non-treaty compliant SSGNs from START accountability. The committee is  
   concerned that the proposed START-accountable SSGN acquisition strategy,
   dependent on successful resolution of START negotiations including a new
   protocol allowing special consideration of SSGNs, does not support the  
   Navy's stated requirements to initiate design immediately in fiscal year
   2001 to support a fiscal year 2002 milestone decision to begin the      
   program.                                                                
      Navy officials indicated that the converted SSBNs, although          
   possessing unique operational capabilities, would not satisfy the       
   mission capabilities required of nuclear attack submarines, and further 
   indicated that an SSGN conversion program would affect the submarine    
   industrial base and the schedule for the Virginia class SSN             
   construction.                                                           
      The committee expresses deep concern for the initiation of additional
   major program acquisition programs not currently in the Navy's outyear  
   planning budgets. These new efforts threaten the funding available for  
   Navy aircraft modernization and ship construction programs through the  
   end of the FYDP and beyond, and are, (as noted elsewhere in this        
   report), resulting in consideration of significant changes in           
   modernization and procurement programs required to maintain essential   
   Navy capabilities and core competencies. The funding required for Navy  
   core programs and the cost of the SSGN conversion program, even if the  
   arms control and cost and operational effectiveness issues can be       
   resolved, will severely impact the Navy's future budget projections. The
   committee also notes that a development strategy for preserving the SSGN
   conversion option that is based on the assumption of a willingness to   
   negotiate an exception to START could, if the negotiations were not     
   successful, have a significant impact on the U.S. strategic nuclear     
   force levels under START II and an unacceptable impact under proposed   
   START III limits.                                                       
      The committee recommends $34.8 M in PE 63559N, the budget request for
   the SSGN conversion program. The committee directs the Secretary of     
   Defense to provide                                                      

                    the congressional defense committees with an approved         
          acquisition strategy and program plan for the SSBN SSGN conversion that 
          identifies program funding and schedule, which addresses a milestone    
          schedule for resolution of the arms control issues and a decision as to 
          whether the SSGN shall be START-accountable or START compliant, with the
          submission of the fiscal year 2002 budget request.                      
           Submarine sonar dome window                                             

      The budget request contained $207.1 million in PE 64558N for the     
   Virginia class SSN program.                                             
      The committee notes the Navy's progress in the application for       
   submarine sonar domes and windows of an advanced glass-reinforced       
   plastic and rubber structural acoustic sandwich material system, which  
   was originally developed for surface ship sonar domes and windows. The  
   committee understands that at-sea testing of a quarter-scale submarine  
   sonar dome indicates potentially significant improvements in sonar      
   performance and sonar dome durability for the VIRGINIA class SSN and    
   that system manufacturing costs for this dome should be reduced compared
   to the current sonar dome.                                              
      The committee recommends $209.1 million in PE 64558N for Virginia    
   class SSN engineering and manufacturing development, an increase of $2.0
   million to continue the program for fabrication of a full-scale sonar   
   dome using the advanced acoustic sandwich material system for further   
   evaluation and testing.                                                 
           Supply chain management and development best practices                  

      The budget request contained $949,000 in PE 65804N for technical     
   information services that support cooperative advanced technology       
   initiatives between the Navy and U.S. industry with the goals of        
   improving affordability and reducing life cycle costs of new and        
   modernized Navy systems.                                                
      The committee notes that technology advances by the Defense Advanced 
   Research Projects Agency, other military services, and other government 
   agencies provide the Navy with an opportunity to leverage research and  
   development investments that could lead to radical improvements in the  
   affordability and effectiveness of Navy systems. Similarly, technology  
   and production and business practices developed by industry can also    
   contribute to the development of more effective and affordable defense  
   systems. With a growing reliance on industry as the integrator of ships 
   and other weapon systems, the understanding and promotion of new        
   technologies and the adoption of best business practices between        
   government and industry can result in significant improvements in       
   operational effectiveness and affordability over the life cycle of      
   systems. The committee notes, however, that logistical support and      
   supply activities are often brought into the development cycle at late  
   stages and are, as a result, not able to influence the development of   
   the system at a time when the adoption of improvements in management and
   business practices could have the greatest effect on the system life    
   cycle.                                                                  
      The committee strongly supports coordination and involvement by the  
   materiel developer, the user, the logistical support chain, government, 
   and industry in the development of new systems and the modernization of 
   existing systems. The committee believes that there is much to be gained
   from the development and adoption of best business practices in the     
   materiel and systems development life cycle from its initial stages     
   through research and development, acquisition and fielding, and support 
   of the systems in the field, and in facilitating the exchange of        
   information and technology between industry and government for this     
   purpose.                                                                
      Accordingly, the committee recommends $ 4.9 million in PE 65804N, an 
   increase of $4.0 million to establish a program that will facilitate the
   development and adoption of logistical best business and management     
   practices among government and industry that are involved in the        
   development, acquisition, and support of defense systems.               
           Surface ship torpedo defense                                            

      The budget request included no funds for continuation of the Navy's  
   joint surface ship torpedo defense program with the United Kingdom.     
      The committee recommends $8.4 million in PE 63506N to continue the   
   joint collaborative surface ship torpedo defense program with the United
   Kingdom for upgrades to the SLQ 25A torpedo countermeasures capability  
   and development and integration of promising soft kill and hard kill    
   countermeasures.                                                        
           Tactical unmanned aerial vehicles                                       

      The budget request contained $113.1 million in PE 35204N for tactical
   unmanned aerial vehicles, but included no funding to continue           
   development of the multi-function self-aligned gate (MSAG).             
      The committee is aware that the MSAG technology successfully         
   demonstrated ability to transmit and receive full-motion video and      
   communication. This new form of antenna, with no moving parts, offers   
   reduced life-cycle costs and enables production of light, conformal,    
   multi-beam antennas for tactical unmanned aerial vehicles (TUAV) and    
   associated systems.                                                     
      The committee recommends an increase of $7.0 million in PE 35204N to 
   construct and test a line-of-sight array for the tactical control system
   for the UAV.                                                            
           Vacuum electronics                                                      

      The budget request contained $68.1 million in PE 62234N for applied  
   research in materials and radio frequency, electro-optics, and infrared 
   electronics technology, including $10.0 million for applied research in 
   vacuum electronics.                                                     
      The committee is aware of the potential need for increased funding   
   levels for vacuum technology research and development in order to       
   support the development of advanced high power vacuum tubes for Navy    
   radar and other applications that cannot be met with current solid state
   devices. In the committee report on H.R. 1402 (H. Rept. 106 162), the   
   committee noted its support for continuation of a robust vacuum         
   electronics research and development program within the Department of   
   Defense (DOD) and other federal agencies. The committee directed the    
   Secretary of the Navy to assess DOD's requirements for advanced vacuum  
   electronics technology and to report the results of that assessment and 
   the long-term funding plan for the vacuum electronics program.          
      The committee notes that the Secretary's interim report to the       
   congressional defense committees, dated March 7, 2000, states that an   
   ongoing assessment of vacuum electronics and solid state technologies   
   and applications will lead to the development of a long-term investment 
   strategy and roadmap for future vacuum electronics and solid state      
   technology activities. The results of the assessment will be reported to
   the congressional defense committees with the fiscal year 2002          
   President's budget request. In the interim, the Department of the Navy  
   intends to continue its current investment level in vacuum electronics. 
      The committee recommends $10.0 million in PE 62234N for applied      
   research in vacuum electronics technology and awaits the Secretary's    
   final report and recommendations for the long-term vacuum technology    
   program with the fiscal year 2002 budget request.                       
           Vectored thrust ducted propeller compound helicopter demonstration      

      The budget request contained $76.3 million in PE 63792N for advanced 
   technology transition, including the vectored thrust ducted propeller   
   (VTDP) compound helicopter advanced technology demonstration project,   
   and $13.2 million in PE 64212N for development of the CH 60S airborne   
   mine counter measures helicopter.                                       
      The committee notes that the Navy has placed a high priority on the  
   development of an organic airborne mine countermeasures capability and  
   the demonstration of a variant of the CH 60 helicopter for the towed    
   airborne mine counter measures (AMCM) missions. As a back-up technology,
   the Navy plans an advanced technology demonstration (ATD) of the VTDP   
   compound helicopter to demonstrate and assess the helicopter's towed    
   AMCM capability, other multi-mission capabilities, and life cycle cost  
   effectiveness.                                                          
      The committee notes reports by Navy officials that early results from
   CH-60 land- and sea-based tow tests indicate that the helicopter should 
   be able to perform the towed AMCM mission and that the final phase of   
   the tow test will begin in late fiscal year 2000. Following integration 
   of AMCM systems and sensors on the CH 60S helicopter, the Navy plans    
   initial operational capability of the helicopter in its organic AMCM    
   role in fiscal year 2005.                                               
      The committee report on H.R. 1401 (H. Rept. 106 162) directed the    
   Secretary of the Navy to assess the requirements, schedule, and cost of 
   conducting the ATD for the VTDP compound helicopter. The Secretary's    
   report, dated March 2000, states that the requirement to demonstrate the
   potential value of this back-up technology for the AMCM mission and     
   other multi-mission applications remains unchanged, and that the Navy   
   has programmed the funds required through fiscal year 2002 to complete  
   the demonstration, including $11.3 million in fiscal year 2001. The     
   Department plans to begin a two-phased ATD in the third quarter of      
   fiscal year 2000, contingent upon successful completion of VTDP ground  
   test, and to complete flight testing in fiscal year 2004. The report    
   also indicated delays in completion of the ground test are being        
   assessed for their effect on project cost, schedule, and risk. The      
   Secretary's report concludes that the Department                        

                    will proceed with the ATD as planned and will advise the      
          Congressional defense committees regarding any significant information  
          that would affect the project's progress.                               
      The committee intends to monitor closely the Navy's progress in      
   development of the CH 60S helicopter for the AMCM mission and progress  
   in the VTDP compound helicopter ATD. The committee recommends $11.3     
   million, the requested amount, in PE 63792N for continuation of the VTDP
   compound helicopter demonstration project.                              
           Virtual test bed for advanced electrical ship systems                   

      The budget request contained $37.4 million in PE 63508N for advanced 
   development of surface ship and submarine hull, mechanical, and         
   engineering advanced technology.                                        
      The committee continues to support the development and application of
   technologies that will lead to lower cost designs for future naval      
   ships. The committee notes the progress that has been made in the       
   development of a virtual, distributed test bed that supports the        
   integration of power electronics into ship systems. As a part of the    
   Navy's program leading to the development of an all-electric ship, the  
   virtual test bed provides a virtual test laboratory of new software and 
   hardware modeling tools for shipboard machinery design, and allows      
   government and industry ship designers to evaluate machinery            
   alternatives in a virtual prototype before committing to full-scale     
   development.                                                            
      The committee recommends an increase of $3.0 million in PE 63508N to 
   continue the development and application of the virtual test bed for the
   design and evaluation of advanced shipboard electrical power system     
   concepts and designs.                                                   
                                      AIR FORCE RDT&E                             

                                          OVERVIEW                                

      The budget request contained $13,685.6 million for Air Force RDT&E.  
   The committee recommends authorization of $13,677.1 million, a decrease 
   of $8.5 million.                                                        
      The committee recommendations for the fiscal year 2000 Air Force     
   RDT&E program are identified in the table below. Major changes to the   
   Air Force request are discussed following the table and in the          
   classified annex to this report.                                        

[Graphic Image Not Available]

[Graphic Image Not Available]

[Graphic Image Not Available]

[Graphic Image Not Available]

[Graphic Image Not Available]

[Graphic Image Not Available]

[Graphic Image Not Available]

[Graphic Image Not Available]

[Graphic Image Not Available]

[Graphic Image Not Available]

                                  ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST                       

           21st century affordable aircraft thrust demonstration project           

      The budget request contained $13.2 million in PE 63245F for flight   
   vehicle performance and supportability technologies but included no     
   funds for the 21st century affordable aircraft thrust demonstration     
   project, a unique, science and technology approach to legacy aircraft   
   modernization which provides an integrated, life-cycle focus for key    
   technologies that support acquisition affordability processes.          
      The committee is increasingly concerned with the rising operations   
   and support costs for the services' aging inventory of fighter and      
   attack aircraft and believes that such rising costs have the potential  
   to adversely impact the budgets required to both modernize and maintain 
   future operational readiness. To address this concern, the committee    
   understands that the Air Force Research Laboratory completed a fiscal   
   year 1999 study which determined that near-term advanced technology,    
   when coupled with innovative acquisition, design, production and support
   processes, could produce a new and more capable F 15C aircraft. The     
   committee also understands that the aircraft's 20-year life cycle cost, 
   including acquisition, would be dramatically less that the projected    
   cost of both upgrading and sustaining the existing F 15C fleet.         
      In an effort to reduce rising operations and support costs, the      
   committee recommends $69.2 million in PE 63245F, an increase of $56.0   
   million to begin construction of two demonstration aircraft consistent  
   with the Air Force Research Laboratory's fiscal year 1999 study and     
   believes that lessons learned and data collected from this project will 
   be applicable to aircraft of all services.                              
           Aging landing gear life extension                                       

      The budget request contained $14.2 million in PE 65011F for RDT&E For
   Aging Aircraft.                                                         
      The committee notes the increasing incidence of Class A aviation     
   mishaps attributable to landing gear failure, as well as rising Mission 
   Incapable rates for high priority aircraft such as the KC 135 and C 130 
   due to limited availability of replacement landing gear components. The 
   committee is aware that the Air Force is working to develop improved    
   components and advanced inspection and overhaul equipment to address a  
   number of aging problems for the current inventories of U.S. aircraft.  
   However, the limited funds available in the RDT&E For Aging Aircraft    
   program are insufficient to support the promising goals of the Aging    
   Landing Gear Life Extension (ALGLE) program.                            
      The committee recommends $26.2 million in PE65011F, an increase of   
   $12.0 million for acceleration of the ALGLE program.                    
           Airborne laser                                                          

      The budget request contained $148.6 million in PE 63319F for the     
   Airborne Laser (ABL) program.                                           

      The committee is disturbed that the budget request represents a      
   reduction of $92.4 million compared to the funding level projected in   
   the fiscal year 2000 budget request. The committee understands that this
   reduction will delay the first lethal test against a missile by two     
   years, from fiscal year 2003 to fiscal year 2005. The committee further 
   understands that the Air Force reduced ABL funding throughout the future
   years defense plan by approximately fifty percent, a decrease that would
   delay initial operational capability by five years or more. The         
   committee notes that, prior to these funding decreases, the program was 
   on schedule, meeting costs and technical milestones.                    
      The committee also notes that the Air Force justified the proposed   
   reductions on the basis that the service has higher priorities. The     
   committee is aware that the ABL is an important part of the ballistic   
   missile defense architecture developed by the Ballistic Missile Defense 
   Organization (BMDO), yet the changes to the ABL budget profile and the  
   program delays that would result were not coordinated in any way with   
   the Director of the BMDO.                                               
      The committee continues to believe that ballistic missile defense    
   remains a very high priority and that the challenge of meeting rapidly  
   evolving missile threats requires an integrated approach. Therefore, the
   committee recommends a provision (section 235) to establish a new       
   program element within defense-wide research and development for the ABL
   program. The committee strongly recommends that the Secretary of Defense
   realign resources throughout the future years defense program to assure 
   that the BMDO can manage the ABL program to achieve timely development  
   and testing.                                                            
      The committee directs the Secretary of Defense to establish the      
   Director of BMDO as the ABL program acquisition executive through       
   development and operational testing, at which time the committee would  
   support a recommendation by the Secretary of Defense to transfer        
   procurement responsibilities to the Air Force. The committee understands
   that the Department of the Air Force has executed this program since its
   inception and directs the Director of BMDO assure that the Department of
   the Air Force continue to execute program management during ABL         
   development and operational testing. The committee further understands  
   that the Air Force will provide ABL training and that Air Force         
   personnel will operate the ABL system when deployed.                    
      The committee recommends no funds in PE 63319F, a decrease of $148.6 
   million, and $231.0 million in a new PE 63XXXC, an increase of $82.4    
   million and transfer of all funding for ABL.                            
           Airborne reconnaissance systems                                         

      The budget request contained $136.9 million in PE 35206F for airborne
   reconnaissance systems.                                                 
      The committee notes that the joint signals intelligence (SIGINT)     
   avionics family (JSAF) under development, consisting of a low-band      
   subsystem (LBSS) and high band subsystem (HBSS), has applications in    
   several intelligence collection platforms. The committee notes that the 
   joint airborne SIGINT architecture (JASA) provides future SIGINT        
   payloads, such as JSAF, with a standard architecture, thereby providing 
   the potential for reducing costs through use of commercial off-the-shelf
   technologies. The committee fully supports the research and development 
   of this program in order to determine if the JASA potential can be      
   realized. However, the committee is concerned that procurement of JSAF  
   is not properly funded and sequenced to preclude adverse effects on     
   intelligence collection operations. Furthermore, the committee is aware 
   that the emerging commercial silicon germanium (SiGe) technology may    
   offer significant size, weight, performance, and cost advantages over   
   existing technology, and believes it may well be beneficially applied to
   the JSAF requirements. The committee strongly recommends rapid          
   development of SiGe technology for appropriate applications.            
      Therefore, the committee recommends $136.9 million in PE 35206F.     
   Further, the committee makes specific procurement funding modifications 
   elsewhere in this report to better support both the continued           
   development of the JSAF and operational SIGINT capabilities already     
   fielded.                                                                
           Air Force/National Reconnaissance Office (NRO) partnership              

      The budget request contained $3.4 million in PE 63856F for the Air   
   Force/National Reconnaissance Office Partnership.                       
      The committee understands that $2.0 million of the funding requested 
   would be used for studies and analysis of synergies between the Air     
   Force and the NRO. The committee notes that the Assistant Secretary of  
   the Air Force, Space, also serves as the director of the NRO. The       
   committee believes that coordination between the two organizations is   
   inherently institutionalized, and should be a matter of routine.        
      The committee recommends $1.4 million in PE 63856F, a reduction of   
   $2.0 million.                                                           
           Air Force science and technology                                        

      The budget request contained $1,291.3 million for Air Force science  
   and technology (S&T) funding, including $206.1 million for basic        
   research, $590.3 for applied research, and $494.9 for advanced          
   technology development.                                                 
      The committee notes that the total request for Air Force S&T         
   represents a decrease from the amount provided for fiscal year 2000, and
   a third consecutive year of decline for this critical area of           
   modernization investment. The Air Force has shown modest improvement in 
   this area by increasing the fiscal year 2001 S&T request above the      
   forecasted level. However, the committee remains concerned that Air     
   Force modernization investments still reflect a much higher priority on 
   near-term modernization and sustainment of legacy systems than on       
   sustaining adequate levels of investment in S&T to enable future        
   modernization.                                                          
      The committee is aware that the Air Force is designated as the lead  
   service for a number of technology areas including aerospace propulsion,
   flight vehicle technology, and space systems development, and that many 
   Army, Navy, and Marine Corps acquisition programs depend on adequate    
   levels of S&T funding being sustained in these areas. The committee is  
   also aware that the Department of Defense has recently taken action to  
   correct the unacceptable decline in the Air Force funding for aerospace 
   propulsion and fully supports the revitalized emphasis in this important
   technology area.                                                        
      To correct the investment imbalances caused by the Air Force         
   prioritization of legacy system sustainment and near term modernization,
   the committee recommends an increase of $77.2 million for Air Force     
   science and technology as described in the following adjustments to the 
   specific programs. Elsewhere in this report, the committee provides     
   support for special materials development including an increase of $2.0 
   million in PE 62102F for intermediate modulus carbon fiber and          
   ultra-high thermal conductivity graphite materials.                     
            Aerospace propulsion                                                    

      The budget request contained $116.3 million in PE 62203F for         
   aerospace propulsion applied research, $38.0 million in PE 62111N for   
   air and surface launched weapons technology, and $24.3 million in PE    
   63302F for space and missile rocket propulsion technology.              
      The committee notes the numerous advances in Integrated High         
   Performance Turbine Engine Technology (IHPTET) and Integrated High      
   Performance Rocket Propulsion Technology (IHPRPT) achieved over the past
   several years. The IHPRPT initiative has enabled the services to pursue 
   needed advances in liquid and solid propulsion research for small       
   missile projects such as the lightweight, low cost SPIKE infantry guided
   missile project and the solid fuel ramjet deep strike missile. Programs 
   that benefit from IHPTET include F 22 Raptor and Joint Strike Fighter   
   advanced turbine engines, all current turbine engine aircraft programs, 
   and numerous strategic and tactical missile systems.                    
      The committee also notes important technology advances in the area of
   magnetic bearing cooling turbine designs that offer significant         
   improvements in operational readiness and safety of the KC 135 and C 130
   aircraft fleets. The magnetic bearing provides near frictionless bearing
   capability resulting in dramatically reduced lifecycle costs and        
   improved mission capable rates.                                         
      The committee notes that many space launch vehicles, both planned and
   currently under development, will transition from traditional propulsion
   systems to high-pressure systems that use liquid oxygen and kerosene.   
   The committee notes that this rocket fuel is both more energetic than   
   hydrogen fuels and is environmentally friendly. The committee is        
   concerned, however, that the research and development test              
   infrastructure is inadequate to validate the performance of new         
   high-energy propulsion technologies in a timely manner and believes that
   additional funding is needed to reinforce this effort. The committee    
   believes that such upgrades would also support a wide range of IPHRPT   
   programs.                                                               
      The committee recommends an increase of $6.0 million in PE 62203F,   
   and an increase of $4.0 million in PE 62111N for acceleration of        
   advanced aerospace propulsion initiatives associated with the IHPTET and
   IPHRPT programs. The committee further recommends an increase of $23.7  
   million in PE 63302F for new technology insertion into existing large   
   propulsion test facilities to test new high-energy propulsion systems.  
            Aircrew laser eye protection                                            

      The budget request contained $12.5 million in PE 63231F for crew     
   systems and personnel protection technology, including $1.3 million for 
   aircrew laser eye protection.                                           
      The committee has consistently supported the Department of Defense's 
   efforts to enhance aircraft crewmember protection systems. The committee
   is aware of the                                                         

                    ongoing efforts to develop both laser eye protection in both  
          the near-infrared and visible light portions of the spectrum. The       
          committee notes the exceptional future battlefield benefit of providing 
          maximum protection in the visible spectrum urges the continued          
          development of these initiatives and encourages them to be viewed as a  
          high priority.                                                          
      The committee recommends $14.5 million in PE 63231F, an increase of  
   $2.0 million to address visible spectrum technologies and development.  
            Ballistic missile technology                                            

      The budget request contained no funds in PE 63311F for the ballistic 
   missile technology (BMT) program.                                       
      The committee notes that both the Navy Trident D 5 submarine launched
   ballistic missile and the Air Force Minuteman III land-based            
   intercontinental ballistic missile are aging, will require continuing   
   efforts to assure their operational viability, and will eventually need 
   to be replaced. The committee also notes that current defense planning  
   guidance directs the Air Force and Navy to apply common technologies and
   components to meet requirements for ballistic missile sustainment and   
   upgrades. The committee is aware that the Navy and Air Force are        
   actively seeking to avoid duplication of missile technology development 
   efforts. If adequately funded, BMT is the Air Force program in which    
   these efforts will be pursued. The committee also believes that the BMT 
   program could support a number of other on-going technology developments
   with potential to meet important military needs, including the          
   demonstration of a portable Global Positioning System range safety      
   system and technologies relevant to the destruction of hardened and     
   deeply buried targets.                                                  
      The committee believes these efforts offer significant contributions 
   to Air Force missile programs and is concerned with the lack of support 
   for the BMT program. The committee, therefore, recommends $12.0 million 
   in PE 63311F, an increase of $12.0 million.                             
            Combat identification                                                   

      The budget request contained $13.7 million in PE 63203F for target   
   attack and recognition technology.                                      
      The committee notes the importance placed by the military services on
   pursuing technological advances to improve rapid combat identification  
   of friendly and opposing forces, and is disturbed by recent Air Force   
   funding reductions in this area. All-weather positive target            
   identification at long stand-off ranges was specifically cited as a     
   limiting factor during operations in Kosovo.                            
      The committee recommends an increase of $2.0 million in PE 63203F for
   acceleration of combat identification development.                      
            Composite affordability initiative                                      

      The budget request contained $48.8 million in PE 62201F for aerospace
   flight dynamics, including $1.8 million for concepts and initiatives to 
   reduce manufacturing cost.                                              
      The committee is aware of a number of technologies being developed   
   under the Composite Affordability Initiative (CAI) program, including 3D
   weaving technology. This technology offers the potential for improved   
   performance and cost reduction in applications such as future military  
   aircraft unitized structures and lightweight civil aircraft.            
      The committee supports the CAI program and recommends an increase of 
   $1.0 million in PE 62201F for 3D weaving technology.                    
            Low cost launch technology                                              

      The budget request contained $24.3 million in PE 63302F for          
   development of space and missile rocket propulsion, but included no     
   funds for low cost launch technology.                                   
      The committee is aware of a number of technologies and concepts that 
   offer the potential to reduce launch costs dramatically, including      
   Scorpius, which utilizes simplified processes and technologies to       
   achieve streamlined, low cost launch and has successfully demonstrated  
   launch capabilities. The committee believes that continued research in  
   this area is important to the long-term viability of the U.S. launch    
   industry and that those technologies that have demonstrated success     
   deserve priority. The committee believes that the Air Force, as the     
   service primarily responsible for meeting national security launch      
   needs, should manage this effort rather than the Ballistic Missile      
   Defense Organization.                                                   
      The committee recommends an increase of $10.0 million in PE 63302F,  
   for low cost launch technologies including Scorpius.                    
            Miniature satellite threat reporting system                             

      The budget request contained $97.3 million in PE 63401F for advanced 
   spacecraft technology, of which $1.1 million is for space systems       
   protection.                                                             
      The miniature satellite threat reporting system (MSTRS) program is   
   developing technologies for a variety of space platforms to provide     
   warning against ground-based, broadband radio frequency threats to      
   satellites and to help protect against interference, intrusion, jamming,
   and unauthorized use of U.S. satellites. Prior year funding has         
   supported miniaturization of the technology, preparations for a test    
   flight of MSTRS technology in fiscal year 2001, and a year-long         
   demonstration of these technologies starting in fiscal year 2004. The   
   committee continues to believe that MSTRS is an important effort given  
   the increasing reliance of U.S. military forces on space assets and the 
   potential vulnerability of these assets to evolving threats.            
      The committee understands that additional funding is needed to       
   accommodate the 2001 flight test and to complete miniaturization.       
   Therefore the committee recommends $102.3 million in PE 63401F, an      
   increase of $5.0 million for further development of MSTRS technology.   
            Specialty aerospace metals                                              

      The budget request contained $72.8 million for PE 62102F for applied 
   research and $21.7 million in PE 63112F for advanced development of     
   materials technologies for aerospace systems and $53.1 million in PE    
   78011F for the Air Force's manufacturing technology program.            
      The committee notes the continuing need for advances in special      
   aerospace metals and metal alloys for aircraft and space vehicle        
   structures, propulsion, components, and weapon systems. Both the Navy   
   and the Air Force are seeking access to materials that are lightweight, 
   high strength, high performance, and capable of withstanding the        
   stressing environments that are experienced by aerospace systems, and   
   for the development and optimization of manufacturing processes for     
   these materials.                                                        
      The committee recommends increases of $5.25 million in PE 62102F,    
   $5.25 million in PE 63112F, and $4.5 million in PE 78011F to establish  
   an integrated program for the development and demonstration of special  
   aerospace materials and materials manufacturing processes, and          
   encourages the Secretary of the Air Force to establish a continuing     
   program for special aerospace metals and alloys as an integral part of  
   the Air Force's science and technology and manufacturing technology     
   programs. The committee requests the Secretary to assess Air Force      
   requirements for advanced special aerospace metals and alloys and to    
   report to the congressional defense committees on the Air Force's plan  
   for meeting those requirements with the submission of the fiscal year   
   2002 budget request.                                                    
            Upper atmospheric and astronomical research                             

      The budget request contained $206.1 million in PE 61102F for Air     
   Force basic research, but included no funding for proposed enhancements 
   to upper atmospheric and astronomical research activities.              
      The committee understands that completion and testing of a proposed  
   thirty-six reflector telescope would support Air Force relevant space   
   research and efforts to increase fundamental understanding of the upper 
   atmosphere. The committee supports this effort and recommends $209.1    
   million in PE 61102F, an increase of $3.0 million for upper atmospheric 
   and astronomical research.                                              
           Advanced message-oriented data security module (AMODSM)                 

      The budget request contained $12.6 million in PE 64735F for combat   
   training range development but included no funds to integrate AMODSM    
   units in the Nellis Air Combat Training System (NACTS) or the Tyndall   
   Range Expansion (TRE). Additionally, the budget request contained $398.5
   million for in the procurement miscellaneous production charges and     
   $26.0 million for combat training ranges but included no funds for      
   procurement of AMODSM units.                                            
      Both the NACTS and the TRE are used to train aircrews for combat and 
   are configured with instrumentation to determine aerial combat outcomes.
   AMODSM units provide encrypted fly-out information for the advanced     
   medium-range air-to-air missile (AMRAAM), the primary                   
   beyond-visual-range air-to-air weapon for Air Force, Navy and Marine    
   Corps fighter and attack aircraft, and enable aircrews to determine     
   AMRAAM training mission results at the NACTS and TRE. The committee     
   believes that AMOSM                                                     

                    units are required for training at the NACTS and TRE and      
          recommended an increase for this purpose in its report on H.R. 1401 (H. 
          Rept. 106 162) for fiscal year 2000.                                    
      To complete the AMODSM unit integration effort on the NACTS and TRE, 
   the committee recommends $16.6 million in PE 64735F, an increase of $4.0
   million. Additionally, the committee recommends $399.5 million in       
   miscellaneous production charges, an increase of $1.0 million, to begin 
   procurement of AMODSM units for aircraft installation; and $27.0 million
   for combat training ranges, an increase of $1.0 million, for procurement
   of ground-based AMODSM equipment at the NACTS and TRE. The committee    
   expects these additional funds to be expeditiously obligated in order to
   achieve AMODSM operational capability at the earliest possible date.    
           B 1B link 16 data link                                                  

      The budget request contained $168.1 million in PE 64226F for B 1B    
   bomber modernization but included no funds for B 1B Link 16             
   connectivity.                                                           
      The committee believes that upgraded data links are needed for the B 
   1B that can provide real-time information to B 1B flight crews to       
   improve their situational and threat awareness and their ability to plan
   and execute missions. The committee notes that the Air Force Chief of   
   Staff has identified the B 1B Link 16 data link as one of his unfunded  
   priorities for fiscal year 2001.                                        
      Therefore, the committee recommends $178.1 million in PE 64226F, an  
   increase of $10.0 million for the B 1B Link 16 data link.               
           B 2 upgrades                                                            

      The budget request contained $48.3 million in PE 64240F for continued
   development of technologies to enhance the capabilities of the B 2      
   bomber.                                                                 
      The committee continues to accept the conclusion of the 1998 Long    
   Range Air Power panel that additional investments are required for the B
   2 to reach its full operational potential. The committee notes that the 
   Air Force has identified a number of technologies that would enhance B 2
   capabilities, including development of a bomb rack assembly with        
   communications interfaces, development of a 500-pound variant of the    
   Joint Direct Attack Munition (JDAM), improvements in B 2 connectivity,  
   and upgrades of B 2 data displays. Development of the smart bomb rack   
   and the smaller JDAM will improve the B 2's operational flexibility by  
   allowing it to carry larger payloads of all-weather near-precision      
   munitions. The committee notes that the Air Force Chief of Staff has    
   identified development of the smart bomb rack assembly as an unfunded   
   requirement in fiscal year 2001 and recommends an increase of $56.0     
   million for development of the smart bomb rack assembly for the B 2     
   bomber.                                                                 
      The committee notes the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal
   Year 2000 (Public Law 106 65) added funds for Link 16 integration with  
   the B 2. The committee notes that this datalink in conjunction with a   
   center instrument display (CID) capable of augmenting the current       
   display system will enhance the situational awareness of B 2 aircrews   
   and B 2 mission effectiveness. Therefore, the committee also recommends 
   an increase of $38.0 million for Link 16 integration and development of 
   the CID.                                                                
      In total, the committee recommends $142.3 million in PE 64240F, an   
   increase of $94.0 million for B 2 upgrades.                             
           B 52 modified miniature receive terminals configuration                 

      The budget request contained $15.3 million in PE 33131F for research 
   and development on the minimum essential emergency communications       
   network (MEECN), of which $2.7 million was for improvements for aircraft
   very low frequency/low frequency (VLF/LF) communications.               
      The committee notes that B 52 bombers have not been equipped with    
   modified VLF/LF miniature receive terminals (MMRT) that provide high    
   data rate capability and that modification of existing miniature receive
   terminals has been directed by the Joint Staff. This capability is      
   critical for timely reception of emergency action messages by           
   nuclear-capable bombers.                                                
      The committee recommends $20.3 million in PE 33131F, an increase of  
   $5.0 million to modify the B 52 miniature receive terminals to the MMRT 
   configuration with high data rate capabilities.                         
           Defense reconnaissance support program                                  

      The budget requested contained $45.1 million in PE 35159F for various
   projects within the defense reconnaissance support program (DSRP).      
      The committee recommends $38.0 million in PE35159F, a decrease of    
   $7.1 million. This reduction is taken without prejudice.                
           Discoverer II                                                           

      The budget request contained $97.3 million in PE63401F, including    
   $54.2 million for Discoverer II, and $182.2 million in PE 63762E for    
   sensor and guidance technology, including $40.1 million for Discoverer  
   II. The request also contained additional funding in a classified       
   program element for the design and development of the Discoverer II     
   space-based moving target indicator (MTI) demonstration project.        
      The committee remains supportive of the Discoverer II demonstration  
   and believes that space-based radar has the potential to meet identified
   military requirements. However, the committee believes that the         
   capabilities promised by space-based radar are valuable only if the     
   capability is developed and deployed at affordable cost, and that cost  
   discipline will be key to success for Discover II. The committee also   
   notes that the Department of Defense has yet to provide a concept of    
   operations that achieves synergies between space and airborne MTI assets
   and other national and tactical sensor assets, and believes that the    
   ultimate value of the program cannot be determined without this         
   definition.                                                             
      Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense to provide 
   a report to the congressional defense and intelligence committees, by   
   February 15, 2001 describing the Discoverer II concept of operations as 
   defined, as of that date and a firm cost estimate for the two-satellite 
   demonstration program that will provide a benchmark by which the        
   committees can judge the cost of the technologies.                      
           Eagle vision                                                            

      The budget request included no funds to improve the Eagle Vision     
   imagery ground station's capability to receive and process new          
   commercial imagery sources.                                             
      The committee notes the recent successful launch and initial         
   operations of the Ikonos II commercial imagery satellite. The committee 
   also notes that two other U.S. commercial companies are about to launch 
   their own high-resolution imagery satellites. Currently, the Eagle      
   Vision ground station is designed to receive and process relatively     
   low-resolution imagery from Canadian and French commercial satellites.  
   It is, however, not able to process imagery from the higher resolution  
   U.S. systems that are either in or soon to be in orbit.                 
      Therefore, the committee recommends $4.5 million in PE 27277F, an    
   increase of $4.5 million, for the purpose of integrating into the Eagle 
   Vision ground stations a receive and processing functionality necessary 
   to exploit current and future U.S. commercial satellite imaging systems.
           Electronic warfare development                                          

      The budget request contained $58.2 million in PE 64270F for          
   electronic warfare (EW) development, but included no funds for the PLAID
   technology program. The budget request also included $4.0 million for   
   the miniature air-launched decoy (MALD) program, which, the committee   
   notes, only partially funds its transition from the advanced concept    
   technology demonstration (ACTD) to the engineering and manufacturing    
   development (EMD) phase.                                                
      The PLAID technology program will enhance aircrew situational        
   awareness by providing accurate ground emitter location and             
   identification. The improved situational awareness resulting from this  
   technology will help combat pilots to effectively avoid radar-guided    
   surface-to-air missiles. In its report on H.R. 1401 (H.Rept. 106 162)   
   for fiscal year 2000, the committee recommended an increase of $13.7    
   million for PLAID, and understands that recent test reports indicate    
   that PLAID technology has been remarkably successful. Further, the      
   committee notes that PLAID technology has been identified as critical   
   for the joint strike fighter, unmanned aerial vehicles, and suppression 
   of enemy air defense platforms. Consequently, the committee recommends  
   an increase of $17.7 million, to continue the PLAID technology          
   development.                                                            
      The MALD is a low-cost decoy intended to stimulate enemy integrated  
   air defense systems to enable pilots to either avoid or target these    
   systems. The committee understands that the Air Force Operational Test  
   and Evaluation Center recently evaluated the MALD and found it to be    
   potentially both operationally effective and suitable with tactically   
   significant capabilities for the Air Force. Encouraged by these results,
   the committee believes that the MALD should complete its ACTD effort and
   transition to EMD in fiscal year 2001. Accordingly, the committee       
   recommends an increase of $7.0 million to increase the MALD's           
   suitability for operational use.                                        
      In total, the committee recommends $82.9 million, an increase of     
   $24.7 million, for EW development.                                      

           Extended range cruise missile (ERCM)                                    

      The budget request contained no funds for either the conventional    
   air-launched cruise missile (CALCM) or for the ERCM, a proposed         
   replacement for this weapon.                                            
      The committee recalls that as a result of CALCM combat expenditures  
   between 1991 and 1999 that substantially reduced inventory, Congress    
   required the Secretary of the Air Force to report on CALCM replacement  
   options in Section 132 of the National Defense Authorization for Fiscal 
   Year 2000 (P.L. 106 65). The committee notes that this report detailed  
   the Air Force's need for an ERCM that would meet the requirement to     
   quickly increase the inventory of cruise missiles and provide an        
   extended-range missile capability to protect the Air Force's aging      
   bomber force. The committee also notes that the Air Force Chief of Staff
   has included the start of an ERCM program among his top 20 unfunded     
   requirements for fiscal year 2001.                                      
      Consequently, the committee recommends $86.1 million in PE 64XXXF to 
   begin an ERCM program and expects the Department of the Air Force to    
   both employ fair and open competitive practices and to fund fully a     
   618-unit program in its fiscal year 2002 and future years defense       
   program. If the Department of the Air Force proposes to pursue an       
   acquisition strategy using other than full and open competition, the    
   Secretary of the Air Force shall inform the congressional defense       
   committees the rationale and justification therefore at least 30 days   
   prior to obligating any funds.                                          
      Additionally, the committee understands that the currently planned   
   ERCM program does not include missiles configured with a penetration    
   warhead. If the Department of the Air Force subsequently opts to include
   a penetration warhead as part of the ERCM program, the Director of      
   Defense Research and Engineering shall report to the congressional      
   defense committees, 30 days prior to the obligation of funds for such a 
   warhead, his independent assessment of penetration warhead improvements 
   necessary for the ERCM to defeat the full spectrum of those targets     
   identified by a Joint Requirements Oversight Council-approved           
   requirement.                                                            
           Global hawk unmanned aerial vehicle                                     

      The budget request included $109.2 million in PE 35205F for endurance
   unmanned aerial vehicles (UAV), including $103.2 million for continued  
   development of the Global Hawk UAV.                                     
      The committee supports the Global Hawk and believes that it has the  
   potential for providing intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance   
   support to military customers, complementing the current U 2 operations.
      The committee notes that due to a crash of the one air vehicle, and a
   runway accident of another, there are no electro-optic/infra-red (EO/IR)
   sensors to continue test and evaluation of the UAV. The committee       
   believes it is important to procure sensor sets to replace those lost to
   the accidents. Further, the committee is aware of unobligated and       
   unexpended funding from prior year funds provided for endurance UAV that
   could be used to purchase these sensors and continue the Global Hawk    
   engineering and development in fiscal year 2001.                        
      Therefore, the committee recommends $109.2 million in PE 35205F for  
   endurance unmanned aerial vehicles (UAV), of which $12.0 million is for 
   the purchase of two EO/IR sensors for the Global Hawk aircraft.         
           Hyperspectral imagery system                                            

      The budget request contained $9.8 million in PE 27247F for Air Force 
   tactical exploitation of national capabilities (TENCAP) projects.       
      The committee recalls Congress provided additional funding in fiscal 
   year 2000 for continuing development of a hyper-spectral sensor for     
   application on Navy P 3 and Air Force unmanned aerial vehicles (UAV).   
   The committee is aware that this initiative has resulted in a joint     
   effort to integrate and demonstrate a real-time hyper-spectral sensor on
   a Predator UAV. The committee notes that no funding was provided in the 
   budget request to continue this effort through demonstration. The       
   committee believes that a hyper-spectral sensor will significantly      
   mitigate the problems of detecting and targeting camouflaged targets    
   that has hampered aerial targeting in past operations.                  
      Therefore, the committee recommends $13.8 million in PE 27247F, an   
   increase of $4.0 million to continue this demonstration with the goal of
   producing an operational real-time hyper-spectral sensing system on UAVs
   and other intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance aircraft.       
           Integrated broadcast service                                            

      The budget request included $24.5 million in PE 63850F for           
   development of the Integrated Broadcast Service (IBS). The request also 
   included $15.1 million in operation and maintenance, Navy, for operating
   the legacy systems, including the Tactical Information Broadcast Service
   (TIBS), the TRAP Data Dissemination System (TDDS), the Tactical         
   Reconnaissance Information Exchange System (TRIXS), the Tactical Digital
   Information Exchange System (TADIXS B) and the Near-real-time           
   Dissemination (NRTD) System.                                            
      The committee has been very supportive of the IBS program since its  
   inception in fiscal year 1995. IBS was to result in a coordinated       
   broadcast capability and the termination of the legacy systems,         
   providing better support to real-time users of intelligence. This goal  
   clearly has not been achieved, and the committee is extremely           
   disappointed with the Department's progress toward IBS. The original    
   program schedule provided for the legacy systems to be integrated into  
   an initial IBS functionality in the 2000 time frame. The current        
   schedule now shows such a capability in 2007. Further, there has been no
   progress in terminating any or all of the legacy systems. In fact, some 
   of the legacy systems have actually been modified to increase their     
   capabilities. It is clear that the program managers have had no         
   intention of terminating these systems. In preparation of the fiscal    
   year 2001 budget markup, the committee drafted legislation to direct the
   Department to terminate all legacy broadcast systems on a date certain. 
   However, the committee decided to rescind the provision, allowing the   
   Assistant Secretary of Defense (Command, Control, Communications and    
   Intelligence) (ASD(C3I)) to be responsible for commitments to the       
   Congress to move forward with IBS.                                      
      The committee notes that the IBS executive agent has been moved from 
   the Navy to the Air Force. However, the budget request for IBS had been 
   submitted before this change. Therefore, all operation and maintenance  
   funding should be transferred to the Air Force in accordance with the   
   transfer of management responsibility.                                  
      The committee is aware that the Department of Defense has tentatively
   decided to proceed with IBS in a phased spiral-development approach     
   beginning with an ``increment one'' that uses the current, or slightly  
   modified, TIBS message set as the baseline. This will allow the         
   Department to baseline the IBS program using an existing program, and   
   improve on it, rather than begin wholly anew. The committee supports    
   this approach and expects the ASD(C3I) personally will oversee its      
   progress and the most expedient retirement of all other legacy systems. 
      Finally, the IBS contract was terminated for non-performance prior to
   the beginning of fiscal year 2000. The committee understands that,      
   accordingly, there are funds available from previous congressional      
   appropriations. Further, the committee believes the current request for 
   program office personnel and funding is far in excess of need.          
   Therefore, the committee recommends $15.8 million, a decrease of $8.7   
   million in PE 63850F for IBS. Further, the committee recommends a       
   transfer of $15 million from operation and maintenance, Navy, to        
   operation and maintenance, Air Force.                                   
           Joint ejection seat program                                             

      The budget request contained $14.8 million in PE 64706F for life     
   support systems, including $10.9 million for ejection seat development, 
   but included no funds for standardized cockpit and crew seats.          
      The committee notes the serious shortage of ejection seat            
   manufacturers available to meet U.S. aircraft ejection seat requirements
   and fully supports the Joint Ejection Seat Program (JESP). The goal of  
   this joint program is to distribute equally, JESP funds among viable    
   ejection seat producers to enable them to compete for Air Force and Navy
   requirements, including the Joint Strike Fighter (JSF) program. However,
   the committee is aware that ejection seat development efforts are       
   currently being conducted, that assists only one of the potential       
   competitors in preparing to meet these requirements. Although well      
   intentioned, these ongoing projects result in unfairly disadvantaging   
   other potential competitors during this highly sensitive period         
   immediately prior to selection of the ejection seat producer for the    
   JSF. The committee notes that the Department of Defense is making every 
   effort to ensure that the JSF program is closely monitored and that the 
   enormous implications to the fighter aircraft industrial base are       
   completely understood and taken into account prior to the planned       
   ``winner take all'' selection for development and production of JSF.    
   However, the committee is concerned that similar precautions are not in 
   place to prevent a potential imbalance to the competitive playing field 
   for selection of the JSF ejection seat. In order to protect the JSF     
   program from potentially damaging program delays due to unfair          
   competition claims, the committee recommends that no funds other than   
   that included in the JESP be allowed for ejection seat development      
   efforts involving producers identified as potential JSF ejection seat   
   competitors .                                                           
      Thus, the committee recommends a decrease of $10.9 million in PE     
   64706F for all Air Force ejection seat development efforts. The         
   committee directs the Secretary of                                      

                    Defense to conduct a thorough assessment of all development   
          work for fighter aircraft ejection seats within the Department to ensure
          that no funding is provided which unfairly benefits any potential       
          competitor prior to a full and open competitive selection for the       
          ejection seat for JSF. The Secretary shall provide the results of this  
          assessment to the congressional defense committees with the submission  
          of the fiscal year 2002 budget request.                                 
      The committee is also aware of Air Force efforts previously supported
   in PE 64706F to develop standardized cockpit and crew seats to protect  
   aircrew members and passengers against crash loads up to 1.6 times the  
   force of gravity. The committee notes that these efforts are separate   
   from ejection seat development and recommends an increase of $4.0       
   million in PE 64706F for continued development and testing of           
   standardized cockpit and crew seats.                                    
           Joint strike fighter                                                    

      The budget request contained $856.6 million for the Joint Strike     
   Fighter (JSF) program, including $129.5 million in PE 63800F, $299.5    
   million in PE 64800F, $131.6 million in PE 63800N, and $296.0 million in
   PE 64800N.                                                              
      The committee notes that $261.1 million of the total funds requested 
   for JSF are intended to support completion of the demonstration and     
   validation phase of the program and a ``winner take all'' selection of  
   one of two competing approaches for entry into engineering and          
   manufacturing development (EMD). The remaining $595.5 million will      
   support award of an EMD contract to the winning competitor.             
      The committee understands that the JSF program is attempting to      
   integrate a significant number of challenging new technologies into one 
   joint service multi-purpose aircraft for the Air Force, Marine Corps,   
   Navy, and United Kingdom to replace a number of aging fighter and attack
   aircraft fleets. The committee believes that, in light of the program's 
   scope and technological advances, the Secretary of Defense should take  
   all necessary measures to ensure that the JSF program's critical        
   technologies are sufficiently mature before entry into the EMD phase.   
   Consequently, the committee recommends a provision (Section 213) that   
   would limit the JSF program's approval to proceed beyond the            
   demonstration and validation phase until the Secretary of Defense       
   certifies to the congressional defense committees that the technological
   maturity of the JSF program's key technologies is sufficient to warrant 
   its entry into EMD stage.                                               
      The Committee continues to express concern for the stability of the  
   fighter aircraft industrial base and notes that the JSF program         
   represents the only new fighter aircraft acquisition program proposed by
   the Department of Defense during the next three decades. Accordingly,   
   the committee recommends a provision (Section 141) that would direct the
   Secretary of Defense to submit a report to Congress providing the       
   results of a study of production alternatives for the JSF and the       
   effects on the tactical fighter aircraft industrial base of each        
   alternative considered.                                                 
      Additionally, while the Department is currently reviewing the planned
   JSF ``winner take all'' strategy to ensure that aircraft industrial base
   concerns are addressed, the committee notes that no specific concern has
   been stated with respect to the future stability of the fighter aircraft
   engine industrial base. The committee supports continuation of the JSF  
   alternate engine program (AEP) as directed in section 211 of the        
   National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1998 (P.L. 105 85)   
   and recommends that the Department specifically address measures to     
   ensure the health of the fighter aircraft engine industrial base in any 
   proposed restructure of the acquisition program for JSF.                
      The committee also notes that the JSF AEP, as currently funded, will 
   not be capable of completing development and flight qualification of the
   alternate engine until after award of lot five of the JSF production    
   program. In order to reduce risk to JSF production and aircraft         
   fielding, the Committee supports acceleration of AEP development to     
   ensure that the alternative engine completes configuration compatibility
   for the JSF airframe.                                                   
      The committee recommends $299.5 million in PE 64800F, $131.6 million 
   in PE 63800N, and $296.0 million in PE 64800N, the requested amounts.   
   The committee also recommends $144.5 million in PE 63800F, an increase  
   of $15.0 million, to accelerate the JSF AEP.                            
           Military strategic and tactical relay (MILSTAR)                         

      The budget request contained $236.8 million in PE 64479F for         
   development of the Military Strategic and Tactical Relay (MILSTAR)      
   communications satellite, including $14.2 million for the automated     
   communications management.                                              
      The committee understands that demand for military satellite         
   communications continues to rise and that the efficient use of military 
   satellite communications resources remains a priority. The committee    
   believes that web-based satellite communications management technologies
   that utilize the Secret Internet Protocol Router Network, such as the   
   Satellite Planning Information Network (SPIN), have the potential to    
   greatly expand flexibility in the use of satellite communications,      
   improve insight into system status, balance communications loads, and   
   provide superior connectivity during wartime or humanitarian operations.
   The committee believes that the use of common standards will allow such 
   efforts to improve utilization of legacy systems, such as MILSTAR, as   
   well the effectiveness of next generation communications satellites,    
   including the Advanced Extremely High Frequency system. Therefore, the  
   committee recommends an increase of $5.0 million in PE 64479F for       
   development of new technologies, such as SPIN, to improve the automated 
   management and command and control of communications satellites.        
      The committee notes that the MILSTAR budget request represents an    
   $11.0 million increase over the level forecast in the fiscal year 2000  
   budget submission. Although this increase is intended to fund           
   engineering change orders, the committee does not believe that adequate 
   justification has been provided for the full increase requested.        
   Therefore, the committee recommends a decrease of $4.0 million in PE    
   64479F.                                                                 
      Overall, the committee recommends $237.8 million in PE 64479F, an    
   increase of $1.0 million.                                               
           Mobile approach control system                                          

      The budget request contained $15.9M in PE 35114F for development of  
   the Mobile Approach Control System (MACS).                              
      MACS is the Air Force replacement for the Air National Guard MPN 14K 
   and Active Force TPN 19 mobile and tactical approach control facilities.
   These facilities enable expeditionary operations by providing safe      
   launch and recovery for combat air operations in all weather conditions 
   at deployed airfields. These facilities are also the primary means by   
   which the Air National Guard trains its force of air traffic controllers
   and maintenance personnel to meet their wartime commitments.            
      The committee is aware of the deplorable condition of the current    
   systems and that the schedule for the program to replace these systems  
   is unacceptably late. Several, if not all, Air National Guard and Active
   units with the current antiquated equipment will be forced to           
   discontinue operations over the next several years until replacement    
   equipment is in place. The committee is also aware that the current MACS
   acquisition strategy, a combination of Air Force and Navy acquisition   
   efforts, will place the first operational units into service in 2004.   
   The committee is concerned with the operationally unacceptable position 
   this imposes on the Air National Guard forces and the limitations placed
   on their ability to train and operate.                                  
      Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of the Air Force, as  
   lead service for the MACS program, to restructure its MACS acquisition  
   strategy to initiate low-rate initial production (LRIP) at the earliest 
   opportunity, but not later than fiscal year 2002, and to include        
   necessary funds to support LRIP and appropriate modifications in the    
   fiscal year 2002 and beyond budget requests.                            
           Multi-link antenna system                                               

      The budget request contained no funding in PE 35207F for manned      
   reconnaissance systems including exploitation technologies for RC 135   
   aircraft.                                                               
      The Congress provided funds for development and evaluation of the    
   Multi-function, self-aligned gate (MSAG) active array antenna technology
   on the RC 135 aircraft in fiscal year 2000. The conferees were convinced
   that the MSAG technology, now called Multi-link Active System (MLAS) has
   the potential for satisfying several RC 135 antenna deficiencies, and   
   also has the potential for reducing the size and number of antennas for 
   many other applications. In fact, the committee is aware that the       
   Department of Defense has determined that the potential for this        
   technology merited funding through an advanced concept technology       
   demonstration.                                                          
      The committee is aware that the budget request was insufficient to   
   complete the fabrication, installation and evaluation of an MLAS antenna
   on an RC 135. Therefore, the committee recommends $2.0 million in       
   PE35207F for this purpose.                                              
           Satellite control network                                               

      The budget request contained $58.6 million in PE 35110F for satellite
   control network research and development, and $39.1 million for         
   satellite control network procurement.                                  
      The satellite control network is a global system of control centers, 
   remote tracking stations, and communications required to control        
   satellites in orbit. The committee understands that telemetry and       
   command data rates need to be improved and supports the modernization of
   the current system, which is inefficient and increasingly difficult to  

                    support. The committee believes that current technology can   
          meet these improvement needs, but is concerned, however, that the       
          current Air Force program fails to adequately leverage opportunities    
          offered by commercial technology to reduce the cost of modernizing and  
          operating the network.                                                  
      The committee recommends the requested amount for PE 35110F and      
   directs that $1.5 million shall be available to the Space Battlelab to  
   evaluate the utility of commercial antennae networks for satellite      
   control. The committee directs the Secretary of the Air Force to provide
   to the congressional defense committee, by February 15, 2001, a report  
   on satellite control network modernization, including possible          
   architectures, the command and control interface between the satellite  
   control network and satellite operations centers, the roles that        
   commercial technology and services might play, a description of         
   commercial technology demonstrations that would be useful, and          
   operational, manpower, cost and schedule implications associated with   
   the architectures.                                                      
           Small smart munitions                                                   

      The budget request contained $1.2 million in PE 64618F for continued 
   development of the joint direct attack munition (JDAM) but included no  
   funds for the 500-pound variant of the JDAM. The budget request also    
   contained $8.9 million in PE 64602F for Air Force armament development, 
   but included no funds for miniaturized munitions capability (MMC).      
      The committee is supportive of Department of Defense efforts to      
   increase future weapons load-outs and combat effectiveness for bomber   
   and other ground attack aircraft. The committee believes that           
   development of a 500-pound JDAM variant and a 250-pound MMC are         
   important in this regard.                                               
      The committee notes that the B 2 bomber, when deployed with a smart  
   bomb rack assembly, will be able to carry up to 80 500-pound JDAMs for  
   near-precision delivery against individual targets or target sets and   
   that the Air Force Chief of Staff has identified development of the     
   500-pound JDAM as an unfunded requirement in fiscal year 2001. The      
   committee believes that this development should proceed rapidly and will
   serve as a strong foundation for follow-on MMC technologies. Therefore, 
   the committee recommends $26.2 million in PE 64618F, an increase of     
   $25.0 million for development of the 500-pound JDAM.                    
      The committee notes that the February 2000 interim report of the     
   Secretary of the Air Force and Secretary of the Navy on MMC, prepared in
   response to a requirement in the committee report on H.R. 1401 (H. Rept.
   106 62), did not include consideration of development of a 250-pound    
   MMC. However, the committee has been informed that there are relatively 
   mature MMC technologies which offer considerable potential capability   
   against both fixed and mobile targets and can support an initial        
   operational capability (IOC) sooner than fiscal year 2007, the currently
   planned date. Accordingly, the committee recommends $23.9 million in PE 
   64602F, an increase of $15.0 million to accelerate development of a     
   250-pound MMC variant.                                                  
      The committee directs the Secretary of the Air Force and the         
   Secretary of the Navy to submit a final report on the MMC analysis of   
   alternatives to the congressional defense committees with the fiscal    
   year 2002 budget request. The report shall include a review of all 26   
   government and industry MMC concepts noted in the interim report,       
   specific analysis of the technical feasibility of a future-250 pound MMC
   variant, and funding requirements associated with a fiscal year 2007 IOC
   as well as accelerated IOCs for 250-pound MMC variants.                 
           Space-based infrared system-high (SBIRS-High)                           

      The budget request contained $569.2 million in PE 64441F for         
   engineering and manufacturing development of the space-based infrared   
   system-high (SBIRS-High) program, including $162.1 million for          
   geosynchronous SBIRS-High satellites.                                   
      The committee notes that the ground control segment to support the   
   SBIRS-High satellites has been delayed due to difficulty in developing  
   and integrating the computer codes needed to manage the data flow from  
   both SBIRS-High and the Defense Satellite Program early warning         
   satellites. While concerned with these delays, the committee has been   
   informed that the ground control segment will be operational in time to 
   support the scheduled launch of the first SBIRS-High satellite into a   
   highly elliptical orbit in fiscal year 2001. The committee further      
   understands that the delays, while delaying the development of follow-on
   upgrades of the ground control segment, will not impact the scheduled   
   fiscal year 2004 launch of the first geosynchronous SBIRS-High          
   satellite.                                                              
      The committee notes that SBIRS-High capabilities will be essential to
   achieving the required levels of confidence in the performance of the   
   national missile defense system and continues to support the deployment 
   of SBIRS-High satellites without delay. Consequently, the committee     
   directs the Secretary of Defense to provide written notification to the 
   congressional defense committees of any proposed change to the currently
   established milestones for the SBIRS-High program prior to approval of  
   those changes.                                                          
   The committee recommends $569.2 million for SBIRS-High.                 

           Space-based infrared system-low (SBIRS-Low)                             

      The budget request contained $241.0 million in PE 64442F for research
   and development on the space-based infrared system-low (SBIRS-Low)      
   system.                                                                 
      The committee notes that Section 231 of the National Defense         
   Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2000 (Public Law 106 65) establishes  
   ballistic missile defense as the primary mission of SBIRS-Low and that  
   SBIRS-Low will be critical to achieving advanced national missile       
   defense (NMD) and theater missile defense (TMD) capabilities.           
      The committee further notes that Section 231 also directs that the   
   Director of the Ballistic Missile Defense Organization (BMDO) will have 
   authority to approve or disapprove any changes to the baseline SBIRS-Low
   schedule, budget and system level technical requirements. The committee 
   has been informed that BMDO and the NMD lead system integrator have not 
   been sufficiently consulted with by the Air Force and the SBIRS         
   contractor to assure that missile defense requirements are effectively  
   reflected in the SBIRS Low development process. The committee           
   understands that the Secretary of the Air Force acknowledges these      
   concerns and has testified that he recommends moving SBIRS-Low program  
   management from the Air Force to BMDO. Senior BMDO officials have       
   confirmed to the committee that BMDO management would ensure appropriate
   interaction between the NMD and SBIRS-Low programs. Therefore, the      
   committee recommends a provision (section 212) that would transfer      
   management authority for the SBIRS-Low program from the Air Force to the
   Ballistic Missile Defense Organization.                                 
      The committee concurs with views expressed by senior DOD officials   
   that the primary SBIRS Low mission is ballistic missile defense. The    
   committee, however, believes that the director of BMDO, in coordination 
   with other defense agencies, should afford appropriate priority to      
   ancillary SBIRS Low requirements in battlespace characterization and    
   technical intelligence, to the extent that they do not increase         
   technical or schedule risk to the primary SBIRS Low mission. The        
   committee believes that the intelligence community and other            
   organizations that seek to add technical capabilities to the SBIRS Low  
   system to meet those ancillary requirements must provide the resources  
   needed to do so.                                                        
      Consistent with the transfer of ABL management authority, the        
   committee recommends no funds in PE 64442F, a decrease of $241.0 million
   and an increase of $241.0 million in PE 63871C, the national missile    
   defense program. The committee understands that the Air Force would     
   remain the executive agent for the SBIRS-Low development program and    
   would retain operational control of the system when deployed.           
           Spacelift range system                                                  

      The budget request contained $53.7 million in PE 35182F for research 
   and development for the spacelift range system.                         
      The Air Force spacelift range system program funds modernization for 
   the Eastern Range at Cape Canaveral, Florida, and the Western Range at  
   Vandenberg Air Force Base, California. This is accomplished through the 
   Range Standardization and Automation (RSA) project, which funds         
   long-term upgrades, and the Space Lift Range System contract, which     
   supports short-term system integration and engineering and              
   recapitalization priorities.                                            
      The Air Force continues to subsidize heavily the commercial launch   
   industry at the Eastern and Western Ranges, even though commercial      
   launches and other government launches now far outnumber Air Force      
   launches. The subsidy results from Air Force funding of the             
   modernization, management, and operation of the launch ranges, while    
   recovering only about five percent of direct incremental costs and none 
   of the indirect support costs of a commercial launch.                   
      The committee believes that the funding burden of modernizing,       
   managing and operating the spacelift ranges should be shared more       
   equitably by the range users. Such an arrangement would more accurately 
   reflect the costs and benefits to each of the users and allow the Air   
   Force to meet its legitimate priorities more fully. At the same time,   
   the committee recognizes that the Air Force must be responsible for     
   sustaining the ranges until satisfactory alternative funding and        
   management arrangements that meet civil, national security and          
   commercial requirements can be established.                             
      The committee notes that the February 2000 report of the interagency 
   working group on ``The Future Management and Use of the U.S. Space      
   Launch Bases and Ranges'' supports maximizing the use of ``non-federal''
   funding sources ``for the continued maintenance and modernization'' of  
   the launch bases and ranges. The report also points to restrictions     
   imposed by in the Commercial Space Launch Act (Public Law 98 575) that  
   limit reimbursement to the Air Force for costs incurred in supporting   
   commercial launch activities and the Air Force ability to accept        
   privately financed range improvements. Therefore, the committee directs 
   the Secretary of Defense, with appropriate consultation with other      
   federal and state officials and private industry, to identify the legal 
   impediments to such non-federal funding of range improvements and       
   maintenance, and the changes required to eliminate these impediments.   
   The Secretary shall submit a report on his findings to the House        
   Committee on Armed Services and the Senate Committee on Armed Services  
   by January 15, 2001.                                                    
      The committee understands that the flight termination system in use  
   at both the Vandenberg Air Force Base and Cape Canaveral test ranges is 
   obsolescent, expensive to maintain, unreliable, subject to unintentional
   signal interference during flight missions, and unable to preclude      
   inadvertent flight termination. The committee recommends an increase of 
   $700,000 in PE 35182F to initiate a study for a new flight termination  
   system.                                                                 
      The committee also endorses an effort to develop a space launch      
   operations complex at the Vandenberg test range to improve space launch 
   operations through improved communications and better integration of    
   launch system technologies. The committee recommends an increase of $5.5
   million in PE 35182F for this purpose. The committee expects that this  
   effort will become a public-private partnership in the future.          
      Overall, the committee recommends $59.9 million in PE 35182F, an     
   increase of $6.2 million for the spacelift range system.                
           U 2 senior year electro-optic system polarimetry                        

      The budget request included $27.5 million in PE 35202F for Dragon U 2
   reconnaissance aircraft.                                                
      The committee notes that the use of a polarization technique on the U
   2 Senior Year Electro-optic System (SYERS) will provide the ability to  
   discern military targets hidden under camouflage or concealed in dense  
   vegetation. The committee believes the SYERS polarization processor will
   provide a force multiplying effect.                                     
      Therefore, the committee recommends $31.5 million in PE 35202F, an   
   increase of $4.0 million for this purpose.                              

                                     DEFENSE WIDE RDT&E                           

                                          OVERVIEW                                

      The budget request contained $10,238.2 million for Defense Agencies  
   RDT&E. The committee recommends authorization of $11,077.8 million, an  
   increase of $839.5 million.                                             
      The committee recommendations for the fiscal year 2000 Defense       
   Agencies RDT&E program are identified in the table below. Major changes 
   to the Defense Agencies request are discussed following the table.      

[Graphic Image Not Available]

[Graphic Image Not Available]

[Graphic Image Not Available]

[Graphic Image Not Available]

[Graphic Image Not Available]

[Graphic Image Not Available]

[Graphic Image Not Available]

[Graphic Image Not Available]

                                  ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST                       

           Advanced sensor applications program                                    

      The budget request contained $15.5 million in PE 63714D8Z for the    
   advanced sensor applications program.                                   
      The committee recommends $25.0 million in PE 63714D8Z, an increase of
   $9.5 million for the program. Details of the recommendations are        
   contained in the classified annex.                                      
           Ballistic missile defense (BMD)                                         

      The budget request contained $4,490.6 million for the programs of the
   Ballistic Missile Defense Organization (BMDO), of which $3,737.6 was for
   research and development, $444.0 was for procurement, and $103.5 million
   was for military construction.                                          
      The committee notes a succession of BMD test successes that provides 
   considerable confidence that hit-to-kill technology is fundamentally    
   sound. The Patriot Advanced Capability-3 (PAC 3), Theater High Altitude 
   Area Defense (THAAD), and National Missile Defense programs all         
   conducted highly successful tests that demonstrated substantial degrees 
   of system maturity and the potential for more rapid progress.           
      The committee also notes that the BMDO budget request represents a   
   substantial increase compared over the fiscal year 2000 request and the 
   funding level anticipated for fiscal year 2001 in last year's budget    
   request. The committee is gratified that this request would more fully  
   fund ballistic missile requirements than in the past. The committee     
   believes that the urgent need to meet substantial and growing ballistic 
   missile threats and demonstrated technical progress fully justifies     
   these increases.                                                        
      However, the committee remains deeply concerned about the pace and   
   direction of BMD programs on a number of grounds:                       
      (1) The committee notes that the Director of BMDO identified $1.0    
   billion in additional funding for BMD programs for fiscal year 2001 that
   would reduce risk, speed deployment schedules, and provide greater      
   capability. The committee continues to believe that BMD programs remain 
   seriously underfunded.                                                  
      (2) Major BMD programs such as Navy Theater Wide and THAAD are not   
   adequately funded throughout the future years defense program to achieve
   timely operational capability.                                          
      (3) Funding for advanced BMD technologies has declined dramatically  
   to a level that cannot support next generation BMD systems. The         
   committee believes that such funding is critical to prevent the         
   obsolescence of systems now being developed and to meet more demanding  
   threats in the future.                                                  
      (4) The commitment to BMD by the services to service-funded BMD      
   programs remains highly suspect. The committee notes that the Air Force 
   budget request would reduce funding for the Airborne Laser by 50 percent
   over the future years defense program.                                  
      (5) Deployed missile defenses are not adequate to meet identified    
   threats. The missile threat from North Korea is particularly stressing  
   for deployed U.S. systems.                                              
      (6) Deployment timelines for key systems may fail to meet expected   
   threats, particularly new ballistic missile developments in North Korea 
   and Iran.                                                               
      (7) The President has not committed to deployment of NMD, in spite of
   the fact that the Secretary of Defense has stated that the threat       
   justifies such a deployment.                                            
      The committee believes that ballistic missile defense remains a very 
   high priority and urges the Department of Defense to commit the funds   
   needed to achieving timely deployment of systems that will defeat       
   current and future ballistic missile threats.                           
      Overall, the committee recommends $5,245.8 million for BMDO including
   an increase of $283.2 million and transfers of $472.0 million.          
            Advanced technology development                                         

      The budget request contained $93.2 million in PE 63173C for advanced 
   ballistic missile defense technologies. The committee remains concerned 
   that the Ballistic Missile Defense Organization (BMDO) technology       
   efforts are insufficiently funded to keep pace with expected threats,   
   and strongly recommends that the Director of BMDO identify funds        
   throughout the future year defense program to support a technology      
   development effort capable of doing so.                                 
      The budget request included $19.4 million in project 1281 for        
   atmospheric interceptor technology (AIT). The AIT program develops      
   advanced interceptor technologies to support the theater high-altitude  
   area defense (THAAD), Navy theater wide (NTW), and Patriot advanced     
   capability-3 configuration 3 (PAC 3) missile defense systems. This      
   effort is needed to keep pace with rapidly evolving ballistic missile   
   threats. The committee recommends an increase of $20.0 million in       
   project 1281 for this effort. The budget request also included $18.9    
   million in project 1282 for exoatmospheric interceptor technology (EIT).
   This effort is key to keeping pace with evolving long-range missile     
   threats. The committee recommends an increase of $5.0 million in project
   1282 for development of advanced sensors that will enhance NMD, NTW, and
   THAAD capabilities.                                                     
      The committee notes that the Director of BMDO identified funding to  
   develop robust adaptive algorithms needed to counter evolving and       
   off-nominal ballistic missile threats as an unfunded priority. The      
   committee recommends an increase of $4.0 million to initiate this       
   effort.                                                                 
      The committee recommends the $122.2 million in PE 63173C, an increase
   of $29.0 million for advanced technology development.                   
            Liquid surrogate target                                                 

      The budget request contained $270.7 million in PE 63874C ballistic   
   missile defense (BMD) technical operations, including $49.1 million was 
   for BMD targets, but contained no funds for liquid surrogate targets.   

      The committee notes that many of the operational targets for the     
   airborne laser (ABL) will be liquid-fueled theater ballistic missiles   
   and the ABL program has a validated requirement for a liquid surrogate  
   target. The committee also understands that the Ballistic Missile       
   Defense Organization (BMDO) has concluded that development of a liquid  
   surrogate target will be required to support other BMD programs by      
   emulating threat missiles in their boost and ascent phases.             
      Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $9.0 million in PE
   63874C for the development of a liquid surrogate target.                
            National missile defense (NMD)                                          

      The budget request contained $1,740.2 million in PE 63871C for       
   national missile defense research and development, $74.5 million for NMD
   procurement, and $101.6 million for NMD military construction.          
      The committee notes that the Director of the Ballistic Missile       
   Defense Organization (BMDO) provided an accounting of unfunded BMDO     
   priorities that included additional NMD risk reduction activities. The  
   committee continues to believe that NMD remains one of the highest      
   defense priorities.                                                     
      Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $ 85.0 million in 
   PE 63871C for additional kill vehicle emulators to reduce risk during   
   integration and assembly of kill vehicles, in-flight interceptor        
   communications system modem development to reduce schedule risk, site   
   activation teams to provide required support at potential deployment    
   sites, an additional target booster to reduce schedule risk in the event
   of target problems, and additional development of the test and training 
   evaluation center to enhance system test and evaluation capabilities. To
   further reduce risk, the committee also encourages the Director of BMDO 
   to maximize the use of test launches of ballistic missiles to analyze   
   and advance the NMD battle management, command, control, and            
   communications system.                                                  
      The committee notes that BMDO has planned an evolutionary deployment 
   of NMD capabilities to address long-range missile threats. The committee
   believes that a new radar technology proposal may offer improved        
   capabilities to discriminate warheads from sophisticated offensive      
   countermeasures that may be deployed in the future. The committee       
   recommends that the director of BMDO fully assess future NMD radar      
   requirements; all radar technologies and architectures relevant to the  
   NMD program beyond fiscal year 2005; and technical risk, schedule and   
   cost implications associated with those technologies and architectures. 
   The committee also recommends that the director of BMDO assure the use  
   of all appropriate competitive procedures in the development and        
   acquisition of NMD radars. The committee directs the director of BMDO,  
   if he determines that the development and acquisition of NMD radars     
   should not be competed, to provide a report to the congressional defense
   committees detailing the justification for that determination not later 
   than 30 days prior to the proposed initiation of any noncompetitive     
   effort.                                                                 
      As noted elsewhere in this report, the committee also recommends that
   the budget request for the space-based infrared system--low (SBIRS Low),
   $241.0 million, be transferred from PE 64442F to PE 63871C. The         
   committee believes that this transfer will provide needed focus and     
   management efficiencies that will allow more rapid maturation of both   
   SBIRS Low and NMD capabilities. Overall, the Committee recommends       
   $2,066.3 million in PE 63871C for NMD research and development. The     
   committee also recommends $74.5 million for NMD procurement and $101.6  
   million for NMD military construction.                                  
            Navy theater wide                                                       

      The budget request contained $382.7 million in PE 63868C for the Navy
   theater wide (NTW) missile defense system.                              
      The committee is concerned that the NTW deployment schedule is both  
   inadequate to meet expected threats and inadequately funded. The current
   NTW schedule provides for a four missile contingency Block I capability 
   by fiscal year 2006, a limited capability on two dedicated missile      
   defense ships by fiscal year 2008, and a full Block I capability by     
   2010. However, the committee understands that NTW Block I will only     
   defend against very limited numbers of unsophisticated missile threats. 
   Further, the committee notes that funding for even this limited         
   capability is not programmed through the future years defense plan, and 
   that no timeline has been laid out for development and deployment of NTW
   Block II, which will be capable of defense against larger numbers of    
   more sophisticated threats.                                             
      The committee understands that NTW will be tested a number of times  
   in fiscal year 2001, and that the budget request fully supports these   
   tests. The committee expects that if these tests meet with substantial  
   success that funds will be identified and programmed to provide for     
   rapid development and timely NTW deployment.                            
      The committee believes that an effort is needed to provide greater   
   NTW capability earlier than planned and notes the support of the        
   Director of the Ballistic Missile Defense Organization for that research
   and development on an advanced technology kill vehicle. Therefore, the  
   committee recommends an increase of $15.0 million in PE 63868C to       
   support this effort.                                                    
      The committee also understands that the Navy has considered an X band
   high power discriminator and modifications to the current SPY 1 radar to
   meet ballistic missile defense radar needs for NTW. However, the        
   committee believes that a new radar technology approach may offer       
   improved capabilities in the 2010 timeframe. The committee understands  
   that this new approach would take advantage of new algorithms and beam  
   steering technology to achieve improved capabilities to discriminate    
   warheads from sophisticated offensive countermeasures that may be       
   deployed in the future.                                                 
      Therefore, the committee directs the director of BMDO to assess NTW  
   radar requirements and technologies and architectures relevant to the   
   NTW program, and provide a report on his assessment to the congressional
   defense committees by February 15, 2001. The report should include      
   consideration of expected threats, and technical risk, schedule and cost
   implications associated with those technologies and architectures.      
      The committee also recommends an increase of $10.0 million in PE     
   63868C to initiate a demonstration of the alternative radar approach.   
      Overall, the committee recommends $407.7 in PE 63868C for research   
   and development of the Navy theater wide system.                        
            Russian-American cooperative national missile defense                   

      The committee notes that representatives of the government of Russia 
   have expressed concern that deployment of a U.S. national missile       
   defense (NMD) would undermine the effectiveness of the Russian deterrent
   forces and existing arms control agreements. The committee is also aware
   of ongoing discussions between the U.S. and Russian governments related 
   to U.S. plans for deployment of an NMD system.                          
      The committee believes that these discussions are important and that 
   additional confidence building measures are warranted to assure the     
   Russian government that NMD deployment does not threaten Russian        
   interests. One such measure could include discussions and eventual      
   development of a joint U.S.-Russian national missile defense system that
   could defend both nations from a range of missile threats.              
      The committee encourages the Administration to continue the          
   discussions with Russia to explore this possibility. The committee      
   directs the Director of the Ballistic Missile Defense Organization      
   (BMDO) to examine this concept and provide a report to the congressional
   defense committees by January 15, 2001. The report should include       
   consideration of possible architectures, technical merits and           
   challenges, and potential cost, effectiveness, technology transfer      
   risks, and areas of technical cooperation related to a joint            
   U.S.-Russian national missile defense effort.                           
            Support technology                                                      

      The budget request contained $37.7 million in PE 62173C for ballistic
   missile defense support technologies.                                   
      The committee remains concerned that funding for innovative ballistic
   missile technology projects is insufficient to support Ballistic Missile
   Defense Organization's (BMDO) future needs. The committee strongly      
   recommends that the Director of the Ballistic Missile Defense           
   Organization (BMDO) to identify funds throughout the future year defense
   program sufficient to support a technology program that hedges against  
   rapidly evolving missile threats.                                       
      The committee also understands that BMDO has identified wideband gap 
   electronic materials for high speed and high temperature device         
   operation as a high priority that is insufficiently funded. The         
   committee notes that significant progress has been made in the          
   development of these materials and believes that additional research    
   offers the opportunity for further progress.                            
      The committee recommends $47.7 million in PE 62173C, an increase     
   $10.0 million for the continuation of wide-band gap materials research. 
            Wide bandwidth information infrastructure                               

      The budget request contained $270.7 million in PE 63874C for         
   ballistic missile defense technical operations.                         
      The committee understands that the Ballistic Missile Defense         
   Organization (BMDO) is using recent advances in wide band information   
   technology to enhance operational efficiency and improve the test       
   infrastructure. BMDO's efforts have linked geographically dispersed     
   radar and missile hardware-in-the-loop test facilities to improve the   
   ground testing of theater missile defense systems and increase the      
   probability of successful flight tests. The committee believes that the 
   use of this technology can be                                           

                    expanded into other critical areas, including battle          
          management, command, control, communications, and intelligence.         
      Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $15.0 million in  
   PE 63874C to continue the development of a wide bandwidth information   
   infrastructure for BMDO.                                                
           Chemical-biological defense program                                     

      The budget request contained $835.8 million for the chemical         
   biological defense (CBD) program, including $361.9 million in research, 
   development, test and evaluation, and $473.9 million in procurement. The
   budget request also contained $162.1 million in PE 62383E for the       
   Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency biological warfare applied    
   research program.                                                       
      In order to insure an integrated CBD program within the Department of
   Defense (DOD), section 1703 of the National Defense Authorization Act   
   for Fiscal Year 1994 (Public Law 103-160) mandated the coordination and 
   integration of all DOD CBD programs and the funding of these programs in
   a defense-wide account, separate from the accounts of the military      
   departments. The committee notes that funding for the DOD program has   
   grown significantly from $387.8 million in fiscal year 1996, and is     
   projected to continue at an average of $876 million per year through    
   fiscal year 2005.                                                       
      The committee has reviewed the Department's Chemical and Biological  
   Defense Program Annual Report to Congress, dated March 2000, and notes  
   that the oversight and management of the program continue to mature. The
   report details the considerable progress made in improving cooperation  
   among the military departments and the jointness of CBD research,       
   development, and procurement since the establishment of the consolidated
   program, but indicates a number of issues with regard to                
   chemical-biological medical defense, logistics, readiness, and training.
   As addressed elsewhere in this report, the committee intends to examine 
   these issues in greater detail during upcoming oversight hearings.      
      The committee also notes a growing tendency to fund individual CBD   
   projects directly within the budget accounts of the military services.  
   The committee emphasizes that this practice violates the intent and     
   purpose of Congress in establishing the consolidated program.           
            Chemical and biological defense program initiatives                     

      The committee believes that the Department of Defense has established
   a robust chemical and biological defense research and development       
   program that focuses on meeting joint and service unique operational    
   requirements for medical and non-medical chemical and biological defense
   in the areas of contamination avoidance, battle management, collective  
   protection, decontamination, and individual protection. The committee   
   recognizes the challenges faced by the medical chemical and biological  
   defense program in the development of medical prophylaxes,              
   pretreatments, and therapies necessary to protect personnel from the    
   toxic or lethal effects of exposure to chemical or biological agents.   
   The committee notes the development and fielding of a number of medical 
   countermeasures that improve individual medical protection, treatment,  
   and diagnoses. The committee also notes technical and procedural        
   shortcomings in the development, licensing, and production of vaccines  
   and drugs that require both short-term and long-term solutions. The     
   committee continues to monitor closely the Department's policy for the  
   development and production of vaccines against anthrax and for          
   vaccination of members of the armed forces who might be exposed to      
   anthrax.                                                                
      The committee continues to support initiatives for research,         
   development, and demonstration of advanced chemical and biological      
   defense technologies and systems. The committee directs that these      
   initiatives compete for funding within the appropriate program elements 
   of the joint chemical and biological defense program and the DARPA      
   biological defense program on the basis of technical merit and the      
   anticipated ability of the technology or system to meet joint and       
   service unique needs.                                                   
      The committee recommends increases of $3.0 million in PE 61384BP and 
   $5.0 million in PE 62384BP for research, development, and demonstration 
   of advanced chemical and biological defense technology, systems, and    
   capabilities for contamination avoidance, battle management, collective 
   protection, decontamination, and individual protection.                 
            Optical computing device materials for chemical sensors                 

      The committee recommends an increase of $1.5 million in PE 61384BP to
   continue the basic research program in organic and inorganic optical    
   computing device materials for use in standoff sensors for detection and
   identification of chemical agents.                                      
           Commercial off-the-shelf-receiver development                           

      The budget request included $95.7 million in PE 35885G for           
   development of tactical cryptologic systems.                            
      The committee is concerned about the lack of a true commercial       
   off-the-shelf (COTS) signals intelligence (SIGINT) receiver that is     
   based on open-architecture standards established by the American        
   National Standards Institute (ANSI) and the Versa Module Europa (VME)   
   backplane. The Department of Defense has stated that all future signals 
   intelligence systems will be COTS based. However, most SIGINT           
   developments the Department is currently pursuing are based wholly, or  
   in part, on custom approaches that are not ``interchangeable'' at the   
   circuit board level. The committee is further concerned that these      
   customized approaches do not encourage competitors for U.S. signal      
   intelligence systems to utilize the COTS marketplace, thereby forcing   
   more expensive solutions.                                               
      The committee is aware of a small business development that has      
   produced a true COTS receiver solution for several Defense Cryptologic  
   Program needs. The committee notes that this solution is cost-effective 
   and based completely on ANSI and VME standards, thereby allowing true   
   ``plug and play'' use between systems. The committee also notes that the
   Joint SIGINT Avionics Program Office has sought to use this technology  
   as a commercial replacement for one of its custom applications. However,
   there is no funding in the budget request to pursue or procure this     
   commercial solution.                                                    
      The committee is aware of other innovative small business development
   using emerging commercial silicon germanium technology and supports     
   rapid application of this leading-edge commercial technology for defense
   applications.                                                           
      Therefore, the committee recommends $97.7 million in PE 35885G, an   
   increase of $1.0 million for development of COTS VME receiver technology
   for SIGINT applications, and an increase of $1.0 million for development
   of commercial silicon germanium integrated circuits for defense and     
   intelligence applications.                                              
           Competitive sustainment demonstration                                   

      The budget request contained $23.1 million in PE 63712S for generic  
   logistic research and development technology demonstrations.            
      The committee notes that an increasing portion of the defense budget 
   is being used to support and manage large inventories of older weapons  
   systems. The committee believes that costs associated with logistics and
   maintenance must be reduced in order to free resources to develop and   
   procure modern systems. Leveraging the best practices of commercial     
   industry in logistics and maintenance planning and management could     
   permit the Department of Defense to reduce these costs in weapons and   
   supporting systems. The committee notes the establishment by the Defense
   Logistics Agency of a sustainment demonstration program that pursues    
   dramatic reductions in sustainment costs and improvements in logistics  
   efficiency.                                                             
      The committee recommends $26.1 million in PE 63712S, an increase of  
   $3.0 million to continue the competitive sustainment demonstration      
   program.                                                                
           Complex systems design                                                  

      The budget request contained $10.8 million in PE 63704D8Z for special
   technical support, but included no funds for complex systems design.    
      The committee notes that the effort to develop an integrated digital 
   environment for complex systems design has made significant progress,   
   and is ahead of schedule. This development is critical to improving the 
   acquisition process and minimizing life-cycle costs of future weapons   
   systems.                                                                
      The committee recommends $15.8 million in PE 63704D8Z, an increase of
   $5.0 million for complex systems design.                                
           Computational fluid dynamics and finite element analysis                

      The Department of Defense university research initiative supports    
   basic research in a wide range of scientific and engineering disciplines
   that are relevant to maintaining the superiority of U.S. military       
   technology such research contributes to the education of scientists and 
   engineers in disciplines critical to defense needs, and helps build and 
   maintain the infrastructure needed to improve the quality of defense    
   research performed at universities.                                     
      The committee notes the increased reliance in defense research,      
   development, and acquisition on the use of computer modeling and        
   simulation and the testing of system and component scale models to      
   evaluate system concepts, technology, and design. The ability to extend 
   the results of such modeling, simulation, and testing to the development
   and fabrication of full-scale operational systems which can then be     
   expected to operate in accordance with the test results of the system   
   scale model places a premium on advances                                

                    in the development and application of finite element analysis 
          and computational fluid dynamics. The committee believes that the       
          application of such capabilities to real-world problems associated with 
          analysis of advanced structures and materials will provide an effective 
          vehicle for research, education of scientists and engineers, and        
          establishment of the infrastructure required to insure future U.S.      
          capabilities in these disciplines.                                      
      The committee encourages the Secretary of Defense to place increased 
   emphasis in the university research initiative on the development of    
   advanced capabilities in finite element analysis and computational fluid
   dynamics.                                                               
           Computer network security                                               

      The budget request contained $164.0 million in PE 63755D8Z for the   
   High Performance Computing Modernization Program (HPCMP).               
      The committee understands that the Department of Defense's HPCMP is  
   the primary source of Department of Defense computer system upgrades and
   enhancements and that the HPCMP specifically supports needed computer   
   system modernization for defense laboratories as well.                  
      The committee strongly supports the HPCMP, but expresses concern that
   the programs charter does not highlight efforts to address the          
   increasing security threat to computer systems.                         
      The committee recommends authorization of $164.0 million, the budget 
   request, in PE 63755D8Z for HPCMP and strongly urges the DOD to work    
   with industry and basic research organizations to ensure that computer  
   modernization efforts include the latest state-of-the-art computer      
   network security and access assurance capabilities.                     
           CV 22 Osprey radar improvements                                         

      The budget request contained $133.5 million in PE 116404BB for       
   special operations tactical systems development.                        
      The committee is aware that the covert, all-weather, nap-of-the-earth
   operations that are characteristic of the special operations command    
   make stealth and terrain avoidance imperative. The committee notes that 
   low probability of intercept/ low probability of detection (LPI/LPD)    
   radar and terrain following/terrain avoidance (TF/TA) capability are    
   essential to safe and successful CV 22 Osprey operation.                
      The committee recommends an increase of $9.2 million in PE 116404BB  
   for LPI/LPD radar and terrain avoidance improvements.                   
           Defense agency science and technology funding                           

      The budget request contained $7,543.2 million for defense science and
   technology, including all defense-wide and military service funding for 
   basic research, applied research, and advanced development.             
      The committee notes that this amount represents a decrease of $853.3 
   million from the amount provided in fiscal year 2000. As outlined       
   elsewhere in this report, the committee continues to be disturbed by the
   growing number of military service research and development programs    
   that have been reduced or eliminated as a result of insufficient        
   research and development funding, and is particularly concerned with the
   low level of science and technology funding. The committee views defense
   science and technology investments as critical to maintaining U.S.      
   military technological superiority in the face of growing and changing  
   threats to national security interests around the world.                
      As expressed in previous reports, the committee is also concerned by 
   the Department's continuing trend of placing higher priority on defense 
   agency research and development programs at the expense of the already  
   inadequate service research and development budgets. The committee      
   believes that the Department has not provided sufficient justification  
   to support these imbalances in funding levels between defense agencies  
   and the services, and, therefore, recommends correcting these imbalances
   by maintaining funding of several defense agencies at the levels        
   projected by the Department for fiscal year 2001.                       
      Accordingly, the committee recommends the following adjustments and, 
   except as noted, decreases are made without prejudice:                  
            Biological warfare defense                                              

      The budget request contained $162.1 million in PE 62382E for applied 
   research in biological warfare defense, including $10.0 million for     
   applied research in consequence management information systems.         
      The committee supports the progress being made in the Defense        
   Advanced Research Projects Agency's biological warfare defense program  
   in research in medical countermeasures, advanced diagnostics, sensors   
   for the detection of biological and chemical warfare agents, and        
   decontamination. The committee also notes on-going efforts within the   
   chemical-biological defense program as noted elsewhere in this report to
   transition technologies developed in the DARPA program to the military  
   services and other agencies for exploitation and further development.   
      The committee report on H.R. 1401 (H. Rept. 106 162) expressed the   
   belief that DARPA's consequence management project did not meet the high
   risk, high payoff, breakthrough concepts and technology criteria        
   normally associated with DARPA programs and directed transfer of the    
   program to the DOD chemical and biological defense program following    
   completion of the prototype phase. In reviewing the project after       
   another year has passed, the committee maintains its original view.     
      Accordingly, the committee recommends $142.1 million in PE 62383E for
   the DARPA biological warfare defense program, a decrease of $20.0       
   million for the DARPA consequence management project.                   
            Computing systems and communications technology                         

      The budget request contained $376.6 million in PE 62301E for applied 
   research in computing systems and communications technology.            
      The committee recommends $331.6 million, a decrease of $45.0 million 
   in PE 62301E.                                                           
            Extensible information systems                                          

      The budget request contained $69.3 million in PE 62302E for applied  
   research in extensible information systems.                             
      The committee recommends $49.3 million in PE 62302E, a decrease of   
   $20.0 million.                                                          
            Nuclear sustainment and counter-proliferation technologies              

      The budget request contained $230.9 million in PE 62715BR for applied
   research in nuclear sustainment and counterproliferation technologies.  
      The committee recommends a decrease of $20.0 million in PE 62715 BR  
   for nuclear sustainment and counter-proliferation technologies.         
           Defense experimental program to stimulate competitive research          

      The budget request contained $9.9 million in PE 61114D8Z for the     
   defense experimental program to stimulate competitive research          
   (DEPSCoR).                                                              
      The committee is aware that the DEPSCoR program provides funding that
   enables broader university participation in national defense research.  
      The committee supports DEPSCoR and notes that the Department of      
   Defense has acknowledged the importance of the program by requesting    
   funding under a separate program element line in the budget request, and
   recommends $19.9 million in PE 61114D8Z, an increase of $10.0 million   
   for DEPSCoR.                                                            
           Facial recognition technology                                           

      The budget request contained $41.3 million for DOD combating         
   terrorism technology support (CTTS) in PE 63122D8Z.                     
      The CTTS is an interagency program for development and demonstration 
   of surveillance, physical security, and infrastructure protection       
   technology. The committee supports use of advanced technology to control
   access to critical facilities and is aware of the Department's          
   examination of biometric access control technology, including the use of
   authentication software and the principal component method of facial    
   recognition.                                                            
      The committee recommends $45.3 million in PE 63122D8Z, an increase of
   $4.0 million for continued development of facial recognition technology.
           High definition displays for military applications                      

      The budget request contained $31.8 million in PE 62708E for applied  
   research in high definition displays.                                   
      The committee notes that many Department of Defense systems utilize  
   the display of visual and graphical information and are therefore       
   dependent on high definition display production capability. Major       
   components of the program are the development of technologies for       
   advanced flexible emissive displays, development of equipment and       
   components required to manufacture advanced display technologies, and   
   prototyping display systems for system evaluation. The program is       
   designed to establish a domestic                                        

                    capability for the manufacture of components necessary for    
          high-resolution military displays.                                      
      The committee notes the efforts by the Department of Defense and the 
   Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) to develop advanced   
   high definition display technologies for military applications and to   
   establish a domestic production base for these displays. However,       
   despite the Department's investment and the strength of the commercial  
   display industry, the number of suppliers of military-qualified displays
   has declined. The committee notes the efforts by the Department to form 
   a Joint Display Acquisition Working Group and proposals to form a       
   permanent Display Overarching Integrated Process Team to address these  
   issues. The committee is concerned, however, that the budget request    
   indicates no funding for the DARPA high definition display program      
   beyond fiscal year 2001.                                                
      The committee believes that the Department must renew efforts to     
   define a comprehensive strategy for development and acquisition of high 
   definition display technology and for maintaining a domestic high       
   definition display infrastructure capable of supporting the requirements
   of the military services and defense agencies. The committee believes   
   that the strategy should include appropriate funding levels for the     
   development of advanced high definition display and display             
   manufacturing technology, and should build on prior Department efforts  
   to ensure that this technology becomes reliably and widely available to 
   all Services.                                                           
      The committee directs the Secretary of Defense to develop a strategy 
   for meeting the Department's requirements for advanced high definition  
   displays that addresses the issues raised above, and to report the      
   proposed strategy and budget requirements to the congressional defense  
   committees with the submission of the fiscal year 2002 budget request.  
           High energy laser research and development                              

      The committee notes that the March 2000 DOD laser master plan        
   mandated by section 251 of the National Defense Authorization Act for   
   Fiscal Year 2000 (Public Law 106-65) will facilitate better coordination
   between service high energy laser (HEL) programs and will enable the    
   Department of Defense to direct a more coherent and more effective      
   investment strategy for all future high energy laser development. The   
   committee believes that the management structure recommended in the plan
   represents a substantial improvement over the current situation, where  
   such coordination is virtually absent. The committee believes that high 
   energy lasers hold considerable promise for weapons applications sooner 
   than widely anticipated, and believes that these efforts deserve greater
   attention and priority than they have received in the past.             
            Defense-wide high energy laser development                              

      The budget request contained no funds in PE 61108D8Z, PE 62890D8Z, or
   PE 63921D8Z for HEL research development.                               
      The committee notes that the Department of Defense has established   
   program elements 61108D8Z, 62890D8Z, and 63921D8Z through which it will 
   manage HEL development investments. The committee understands that $5.7 
   million in fiscal year 2000 funds were made available for these program 
   elements to initiate these efforts.                                     
      The committee believes that the establishment of these program       
   elements will provide the Department of Defense with an effective       
   management tool that can reinforce HEL developments managed and funded  
   by the services and the Ballistic Missile Defense Organization. The     
   committee recommends a provision (section 211), described elsewhere in  
   this report, to reinforce and provide additional structure to this      
   effort. The committee notes that this provision would require the       
   Secretary of Defense and the Administrator of the National Nuclear      
   Security Administration (NNSA) to conclude a memorandum of agreement to 
   conduct joint high energy laser research.                               
      The committee recommends $10.0 million in 61108D8Z to support basic  
   research in high energy lasers, and $25.0 million in PE 62890D8Z, to    
   support heat capacity laser development being conducted by the Army and 
   other HEL applied research. The committee further recommends that of    
   these funds, $10.0 million may be made available for high energy laser  
   research and development pursued jointly with the NNSA.                 
            Free electron laser                                                     

      The budget request contained $38.0 million in PE 62111N for applied  
   research in electronic warfare technology, but included funds for free  
   electron laser development.                                             
      The committee notes the Navy's support for a proposal to upgrade the 
   Department of Energy's free electron laser demonstration facility for   
   applied research in the potential use of tunable free electron lasers as
   countermeasures against anti-ship missiles and anti-aircraft missile    
   infrared seekers.                                                       
      The committee recommends an increase of $5.0 million in PE 62111N to 
   continue the demonstration facility upgrade program.                    
            Solid state laser                                                       

      The budget request contained $1.0 million in PE 62307A for research  
   and development of high power lasers for tactical weapons systems. The  
   committee is aware that the Army, in cooperation with Lawrence Livermore
   National Laboratory, has developed a prototype ten kilowatt solid state 
   heat capacity glass laser that has been tested successfully. The        
   committee understands that the Army plans to develop a 100 kilowatt     
   demonstration laser that could be mounted on Army vehicles for weapons  
   applications depending on the availability of funds.                    
      The committee believes that this technology has reached a state of   
   maturity that supports such a demonstration, and if successful, has     
   significant potential in air defense, missile defense, and other weapons
   applications. Therefore, the committee recommends $11.0 million in PE   
   62307A, an increase of $10.0 million, for the Army's solid state laser  
   demonstrator.                                                           
      The committee strongly encourages the Secretary of the Army to       
   provide funds for this initiative in the fiscal year 2002 budget request
   and throughout the future years defense plan.                           
           Information technology, superiority and assurance                       

      The budget request contained a total of $19,913.7 million for the    
   Defense information technology program: including $2,456.3 million for  
   information technology research, development, test, and evaluation, and 
   $1,233.6 million for information assurance.                             
      The budget request for information technology research and           
   development represents an increase of $472.2 million, while the budget  
   request for information assurance contains an increase of $95.2 million.
      The committee notes that the goal of the ``National Plan for         
   Information Protection, Version 1.0,'' dated January 2000, is to        
   establish a full operational capability by 2003 to defend the United    
   States against deliberate attacks aimed at disrupting national critical 
   infrastructures, such as communications, banking, electric power. Key   
   elements of the plan include establishing the Federal government as a   
   model for infrastructure protection; the development of public-private  
   partnerships to defend our national infrastructures; meeting the        
   nation's needs for skilled information technology personnel; and        
   ensuring a robust and comprehensive critical infrastructure protection  
   research and development program.                                       
      The committee notes that the Department of Defense has a major role  
   in information protection, accounting for approximately $450 million of 
   the $606 million in research and development that is specifically       
   contained in the President's request for the National Plan. The         
   committee is aware of other ongoing information systems security and    
   critical infrastructure protection activities that are part of the      
   Department's information assurance program.                             
      The committee notes that Joint Vision 2010, the capstone document for
   joint forces, emphasizes information superiority and information        
   technology as key enablers for joint operations by U.S. forces. The     
   committee also notes that the globalization of information systems and  
   networks has created a new dimension for warfare in which the dependence
   of U.S. Forces upon advanced information technology and information     
   systems is both an advantage and vulnerability.                         
      The committee notes that considerable progress has been made in the  
   program to achieve information superiority, provide information         
   assurance, and protect critical defense infrastructure. The committee   
   recognizes, however, that additional work is required, particularly in  
   the areas of operations-other-than-war or asymmetrical conflict. The    
   committee believes that the Secretary of Defense must continue to assign
   a high priority to resolving critical shortcomings in the Department's  
   information technology program.                                         
      The committee report on H.R. 1401 (H. Rept. 106-162) directed the    
   Assistant Secretary of Defense to provide a comprehensive report to the 
   congressional defense and intelligence committees on the Department of  
   Defense's information superiority program. The report by the Assistant  
   Secretary of Defense (Command, Control, Communications, and             
   Intelligence) (ASD C3I) cites the need to focus more attention and to   
   accelerate efforts on the following:                                    
       (1) Information assurance to better protect information and         
   information processes;                                                  
       (2) Establishing the connectivity and interoperability needed in the
   global information grid;                                                

       (3) Collection and analysis capabilities and end-to-end integration 
   of communications and intelligence systems;                             
       (4) Education, training, and retention of information technology    
   professionals;                                                          
       (5) Removal of legal impediments to protecting information and      
   information processes; and,                                             
       (6) Implementation of electronic commerce and electronic business   
   practices within the Department.                                        
      To address these issues the committee recommends the budget request  
   for information technology research, development, test, and evaluation. 
   The committee directs the Secretary of Defense to assess shortfalls in  
   the information technology program and to report his findings and       
   recommendations to the congressional defense committees by November 1,  
   2000.                                                                   
           Interference with global positioning system                             

      The committee notes that section 1062 of the National Defense        
   Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2000 (Public Law 106 65) provided for 
   an interagency review and assessment and report to Congress and the     
   President on the progress made in implementation of national spectrum   
   planning, the reallocation of Federal Government spectrum to non-Federal
   use, and the implications of such reallocations to the affected federal 
   agencies. The report would also include which would include the effect  
   of the reallocation on critical military and intelligence capabilities, 
   civil space programs, and other Federal government systems used to      
   protect public safety.                                                  
      The committee notes the potential interference to the communications 
   frequency bands used by the global positioning system (GPS) due to the  
   emergence of new telecommunications and information technologies that   
   could aversely affect GPS use in both military and civilian sectors. As 
   a part of the Department of Defense contribution to the interagency     
   review and assessment, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense to
   identify potential interference with the GPS frequency bands as one of  
   the issues that should be addressed in the assessment. The Secretary    
   shall coordinate with the Assistant Secretary of Commerce and Chairman  
   of the Federal Communications Commission in developing the technical    
   information, support, and assistance necessary to address this issue and
   to begin the development of appropriate regulations and enforcement     
   procedures to protect the delivery of GPS signals during peacetime.     
           MC 130 autonomous landing guidance system                               

      The budget request contained $133.5 million in PE 116404BB for       
   special operations tactical systems development but included no funds   
   for the autonomous landing guidance (ALG) system for the MC 130         
   aircraft.                                                               
      The MC 130 aircraft provides night and all-weather infiltration and  
   extraction of special operations forces (SOF) personnel and equipment,  
   as well as military re-supply operations, in hostile areas. To          
   accomplish this mission, the committee understands that the ALG system  
   will provide SOF MC 130 pilots with a precision approach system that    
   enhances their ability to land under adverse weather conditions. Since  
   the committee also understands that the ALG system may have application 
   to other aircraft such as the C 130X and the C 17, it believes that both
   the ALG system's MC 130 flight tests and its engineering and            
   manufacturing development (EMD) should be accelerated.                  
      Consequently, the committee recommends an increase of $5.0 million in
   PE 116404BB to accelerate the ALG system's flight tests, EMD and        
   installation on the MC 130.                                             
           Medical free electron laser                                             

      The budget request contained $15.0 million in PE 62227D8Z for medical
   free electron laser (MFEL) technology.                                  
      The committee is aware of the progress made by the medical free      
   electron laser program. The committee notes that recent accomplishments 
   include a new method of treating chemical burns, controlling sepsis, the
   development of artificial cartilage for injured joints, non-thermal     
   cutting of bone, tissue welding and delivery of drugs through the skin. 
   These new health care technologies are not only cost effective but also 
   address key health care issues important both to military personnel and 
   the general population.                                                 
      The committee commends the Department of Defense for requesting      
   sufficient funding for the MFEL to maintain the merit-based program's   
   continued research momentum and recommends $15.0 million. The committee 
   supports the MFEL program and encourages the Department of Defense to   
   sustain this level of funding.                                          
           Microelectromechanical systems sensor development                       

      The budget request contained $253.6 million in PE 61103D8Z for the   
   Department of Defense university research initiative.                   
      The committee continues its support for and recommends funding for   
   research and development in microelectromechanical systems (MEMS) and   
   applications of MEMS technology in precision weapons guidance and       
   control, reconfigurable antenna elements, and a variety of other        
   applications.                                                           
      The committee recommends $263.1 million in PE 61103D8Z, including an 
   increase of $9.5 million for basic research in MEMS sensors for         
   radionuclide detection and ordnance monitoring.                         
           National imagery and mapping agency                                     

      The budget request contained $75.0 million in PE 35102BQ for the     
   National Imagery and Mapping Agency's (NIMA) to conduct research and    
   development of imagery and geospatial exploitation tools and for the    
   National Technology Alliance (NTA).                                     
      The committee is concerned that the variety of current synthetic     
   aperture radar (SAR) imaging systems, including the Joint Surveillance, 
   Target and Attack Radar System (JSTARS), the U 2 Advanced SAR System    
   (ASARS) and unmanned aerial vehicles have limited to no capability to   
   image moving targets. The committee notes that the Air Force Research   
   Laboratory in Rome, New York, has been developing the Multi-Platform    
   Target Exploitation Processing capability that will allow SAR imaging of
   moving targets. However, no funds were included in the budget request to
   field such a capability, which, the committee is convinced, will result 
   in significant new capabilities for SAR-equipped platforms.             
      Further, the committee notes that the NTA has proven its ability to  
   rapidly apply commercial technology to defense applications, reducing   
   cost and increasing systems performance. The committee also notes that  
   the NTA has been a very effective means of leveraging commercial        
   technology to solve intelligence community technical problems.          
      The committee is aware that the airborne geographic synthetic        
   aperture radar GeoSAR) is being developed to provide a dual band        
   interferometric radar that is able to provide the military high         
   resolution, three-dimensional maps of the earth, above, through and     
   below the vegetation canopy.                                            
      Therefore, the committee recommends $97.0 million in PE 35102BQ, an  
   increase of $22.0 million, $4.0 million for continuing the Rome         
   Laboratory moving target exploitation effort, and $3.0 million for the  
   NTA to continue national imagery and mapping agency viewer development  
   and $15.0 million for GeoSAR.                                           
           Requirement for ``designated laboratory''                               

      The committee notes that section 2, paragraph (18) of Senate         
   Executive Resolution 75 providing the advice and consent of the Senate  
   to the ratification of the Chemical Weapons Convention (CWC),           
   established the condition that the President certify to the Senate that 
   no sample collected in the United States pursuant to the Convention will
   be transferred for analysis to any laboratory outside the United States.
   In its verification annex, the CWC requires that samples for off-site   
   analysis be analyzed in at least two ``designated laboratories,'' i.e.  
   laboratories that have been ``designated'' for such testing by the      
   Organization for Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW). The Army's     
   Edgewood Forensic Science Laboratory is currently the only U.S.         
   designated laboratory. The committee notes that establishment of a      
   second designated laboratory within the United States is necessary in   
   order to fulfill U.S. ratification commitments, as well as the          
   requirements imposed by the Senate.                                     
      The committee requests that the Secretary of Defense report to the   
   congressional defense committees with the submission of the fiscal year 
   2002 budget request, the Department of Defense position, actions, and   
   funding requirements relative to establishment of a second designated   
   laboratory.                                                             
           Science and technology affordability initiative                         

      The committee is aware of the Department's ``Defense Science and     
   Technology Strategy 2000'' and notes the potential for significant      
   savings in defense systems ownership cost savings associated with       
   science and technology investments. The committee agrees that science   
   and technology advancements can contribute to the affordability of both 
   current and future systems, and supports the Department's emphasis in   
   this area as one of its top five priorities.                            
      Further, the committee is aware that each service has a current      
   program of emphasis in this area. Anticipated Army science and          
   technology investments focus a great deal of attention to reduced       
   logistical requirements for improved deployability and maneuverability. 
   Air Force plans anticipate targeted investments to facilitate the       
   fielding                                                                

                    of a more lean and efficient expeditionary force. The Navy has
          embraced a concept called Total Cost of Ownership as one of its twelve  
          Future Naval Capabilities. Two initiatives, Shipboard Integration       
          Logistics System (SILS) and a proposed knowledge-based diagnostic and   
          maintenance system, offer significant potential cost savings during the 
          operation and maintenance of naval assets.                              
      The committee urges further development of these proposals and       
   supports the budget request. The committee directs the Secretary of     
   Defense to provide the congressional defense committees by March 1,     
   2001, a report on the manner in which the science and technology program
   addresses total life cycle costs of weapons systems. The report shall   
   include a description and assessment of the programs, associated funding
   requirements, and related policy initiatives.                           
           Special operations tactical video system                                

      The budget request contained $3.0 million in PE 116405BB for Special 
   Operations Forces (SOF) intelligence system developments, including     
   $100,000 for continued development of the Special Operations Tactical   
   Video System (SOTVS).                                                   
      The committee notes that no commercial solution to the SOF underwater
   camera requirements exists, and that a dedicated research and           
   development program is necessary to satisfy this critical mission       
   requirement. Therefore, the committee is dismayed that the budget       
   request is insufficient to develop and procure a replacement for the    
   aging cameras currently in the inventory.                               
      The committee recommends $5.0 million in PE116405BB, an increase of  
   $2.0 million to expedite the development of the SOTVS camera.           
           Tactical and support aircraft noise reduction                           

      The committee notes problems with increasing levels of noise         
   pollution associated with aircraft operations ashore and afloat and the 
   potential physical and environmental hazards posed by high frequency and
   intensity noise and vibration to aircrew, ground support personnel, and 
   those residing and working in the vicinity of active aviation           
   operations. The committee also notes the impact of high noise and       
   vibration levels experienced in tactical aircraft on aircraft structural
   fatigue.                                                                
      The committee is concerned that the Department of Defense has not    
   given adequate attention to noise reduction as an essential element of  
   the tactical aircraft modernization program. The committee directs the  
   Secretary of Defense, in coordination with the Director of the National 
   Aeronautical and Space Administration, to assess requirements for       
   establishment of an aviation noise and vibration reduction research and 
   development program that will lead to reduction in noise associated with
   tactical and support aircraft operations. The committee further directs 
   the Secretary to report to the congressional defense committees by March
   1, 2001, the status of funding and plans for noise reduction in tactical
   and support aircraft and for the reduction of sound pressure levels that
   can cause vibration problems and structural fatigue.                    
           Texas regional institute for environmental studies                      

      The budget request contained $51.4 million in PE 63716D8Z for the    
   strategic environmental research program, but included no funds for the 
   ongoing Texas regional institute for environmental studies (TRIES)      
   program                                                                 
      The committee recommends $51.4 million in PE 63716D8Z for the        
   strategic environmental research program, including $3.0 million for the
   TRIES computer-based land management model and to collaborate with      
   Brooks Air Force Base San Antonio, Texas for potential application of   
   environmental technologies.                                             
           Thermionics for space power systems                                     

      The budget request contained $230.9 million in PE 62715BR for applied
   research in nuclear sustainment and counterproliferation technologies,  
   but included no funds to continue the program for development of        
   thermionic power conversion technology.                                 
      The committee notes that the Air Force and the National Aeronautics  
   and Space Administration have identified potential applications for     
   large capacity (40 100 kilowatt) nuclear space power systems having long
   lifetimes. The committee also notes the progress being made in the      
   advanced thermionics program to develop technologies for making         
   thermionics a more viable power conversion option for space power       
   systems, demonstrate highly reliable thermionic power converters capable
   of providing high output power per unit mass, and design of thermionic  
   system concepts. The committee further notes that the program supports  
   the Defense technology area plan for space platforms.                   
      The committee directs the Secretary of Defense to assess the progress
   being made in the advanced thermionics program, the potential for       
   incorporation of the program in the Department of Defense core science  
   and technology program, and anticipated requirements for thermionic     
   power conversion systems. The Secretary shall report the results of the 
   assessment and plans for continuation of the program to the             
   congressional defense committees with the submission of the fiscal year 
   2002 budget request.                                                    
      The committee recommends an increase of $3.0 million in PE 62715BR to
   continue the development of advanced thermionics power conversion       
   technology.                                                             
           TRICARE encounter data system                                           

      The budget request included $12.0 million in PE 65013D8Z for         
   information technology development.                                     
      The committee is concerned that no funds were included to accelerate 
   the development and deployment of the TRICARE encounter data system     
   (TEDS), a key system for improving the efficiency of the TRICARE claims 
   processing system.                                                      
      The committee recommends $15.6 million in PE 65013D8Z, an increase of
   $3.6 million to complete development of TEDS.                           
           Ultra-wideband radar                                                    

      The budget request contained $116.4 million in PE 63750D8Z for       
   advanced concept technology demonstrations, but included no funds to    
   demonstrate ultra-wideband, single-cycle radar and communications.      
      The committee is aware that recent unanticipated technology          
   breakthroughs in radio frequency electronics have resulted in           
   applications for radar and communications. The committee notes that     
   ultra-wideband, single cycle technology is now ready for demonstration  
   of wall penetrating radar capability.                                   
      The committee recommends $117.4 million in PE 63750D8Z, an increase  
   of $1.0 million for radar vision demonstration.                         

                          OPERATIONAL TEST AND EVALUATION, DEFENSE                

                                          OVERVIEW                                

      The budget request contained $201.6 million for Operational Test and 
   Evaluation, Defense. The committee recommends authorization of $219.6   
   million, an increase of $18.0 million.                                  
      The committee recommendations for the fiscal year 2000 Operational   
   Test and Evaluation, Defense programs are identified in the table below.
   Major changes to the Operational Test and Evaluation request are        
   discussed following the table.                                          

[Graphic Image Not Available]

                                  ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST                       

           Central test and evaluation investment program                          

      The budget request contained $121.4 million in PE 64940D8Z for       
   Central Test and Evaluation Investment Program (CTEIP).                 
      The committee notes that the objective of the CTEIP is to fund       
   critically needed, high priority, test and evaluation capabilities for  
   joint and multi-service system test requirements. The Department of     
   Defense recently disbanded the office of the Director, Test, Systems    
   Engineering and Evaluation, formerly responsible for CTEIP as an element
   of the Department's developmental test and evaluation (DT&E) program,   
   and transferred responsibility for the CTEIP to the Director,           
   Operational Test and Evaluation (DOT&E). The committee notes that the   
   first CTEIP budget request under the DOT&E management represents a      
   decrease in funding for this important program.                         
      The committee expresses concern that while the Department's decreased
   request for CTEIP indicates that less funding is required, the military 
   services are, at the same time, identifying an alarming increase in     
   critically needed test facility upgrades and instrumentation            
   modernization. The committee believes that the combination of declining 
   research, development, test and evaluation (RDT&E) budgets and an       
   increasing number of test facility sustainment issues is largely        
   responsible for the decline in utilization of service operated test     
   facilities. The committee is also aware of test and evaluation (T&E)    
   community concerns that the continued decline in utilization of these   
   T&E facilities is a primary cause of the underfunded status of these    
   facilities within the service budget requests and, therefore, a direct  
   cause of the higher testing costs assessed to test program customers.   
      The committee is aware that the Department is reviewing this critical
   test facility sustainment issue, but believes that decreases in the     
   CTEIP are premature and do not address the importance of the growing    
   list of proposed test facility and range modernization efforts. The     
   committee notes that the Army Chief of Staff has identified a high      
   priority unfunded requirement in fiscal year 2001 for $26.0 million of  
   test and evaluation upgrades. The committee also notes that the Air     
   Force is conducting a propulsion wind tunnel (PWT) upgrade program to   
   modernize the primary wind tunnel facilities used for transonic and     
   supersonic testing of major propulsion development programs including F 
   22 and the Joint Strike Fighter. Additional funds for the PWT program   
   would enhance structural test monitoring and data analysis and enable   
   Air Force test facilities to increase and enhance turbine engine test   
   capability. The committee is also aware of an innovative new technology,
   Laser Induced Surface Improvement (LISI), which would have far reaching 
   joint service benefits. A multi-service cooperative program             
   incorporating the LISI technology would cut test time and costs, as well
   as reduce long term maintenance and material construction costs through 
   the use of new laser surfacing technologies synergistically applied to  
   several Air Force, Navy, and Army assets vulnerable to corrosion and    
   abrasion. The committee believes LISI is a project with a limitless     
   potential for the military and eventually for private sector use, and is
   a worthy candidate for funding under CTEIP.                             
      The committee believes that many of the service test facility        
   modernization proposals such as digital video data collection and       
   similar instrumentation upgrade efforts would support establishment of  
   uniform test data collection for all service-run T&E facilities.        
      The committee is disturbed by the Department's inability to ensure   
   sufficient funds necessary to sustain T&E facilities, as well as the    
   many worthy test facility upgrades identified by the services. The      
   committee is aware that the Department is conducting an assessment of   
   various funding methods, to include consideration of working capital    
   funding and other T&E customer cost-sharing alternatives in order to    
   ensure adequate sustainment funding for T&E facilities. The committee   
   expresses strong congressional interest in this issue and directs the   
   Secretary of Defense to report any recommended change to current funding
   procedures for these facilities prior to including them in future budget
   requests.                                                               
      The committee recommends $139.4 million, an increase of $18.0 million
   to address additional T&E facility upgrade proposals within the CTEIP   
   and supports this program as an appropriate method of ensuring          
   coordinated investments to support joint requirements for T&E facility  
   upgrades and capability sustainment efforts.                            

                                   LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS                         

                        SUBTITLE A--AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS               

                        SECTION 201--AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS              

      This section would authorize Research, Development, Testing and      
   Evaluation (RDT&E) funding for fiscal year 2000.                        
                     SECTION 202--AMOUNT FOR BASIC AND APPLIED RESEARCH           

      This section would specify the amount authorized for fiscal year 2000
   for technology base programs.                                           
              SUBTITLE B--PROGRAM REQUIREMENTS, RESTRICTIONS, AND LIMITATIONS     

                           SECTION 211--HIGH ENERGY LASER PROGRAMS                

      This section would authorize funds for high energy laser (HEL)       
   research and development; require a designated senior civilian official 
   in the Office of the Secretary of Defense (OSD) to carry out            
   responsibilities for coordinating, prioritizing, planning, programming, 
   and oversight of HEL programs, establish appropriate policy to guide    
   funding of OSD, services and Ballistic Missile Defense Organization     
   (BMDO) HEL programs; state a sense of Congress concerning funding levels
   for HEL research and development; require the establishment of a        
   memorandum of agreement between the Secretary of Defense and the        
   Administrator of the National Nuclear Security Administration to conduct
   joint laser research programs; and establish certain reporting          
   requirements.                                                           
      The committee notes that the High Energy Laser Executive Review Panel
   (HELERP) prepared the laser master plan mandated by section 251 of the  
   National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2000 (Public Law     
   106-65). This report identifies many of the technical challenges in     
   maturing laser technologies for weapons applications and establishes a  
   High Energy Laser Board of Directors, chaired by the Under Secretary of 
   Defense for Acquisition, Technology and Logistics, to oversee and       
   approve HEL science and technology investments. The committee believes  
   that this organization represents a significant advance over the past,  
   in which laser development activities proceeded within the services with
   little or no coordination.                                              
      However, the committee remains concerned that the management         
   structure established by the HELERP may not vest sufficient authority in
   the Office of the Secretary of Defense to assure that service and BMDO  
   HEL programs are fully coordinated. The committee is also concerned that
   this structure and the funding mechanisms established in the laser      
   master plan will not be adequate to encourage the services to invest    
   scarce resources in a potentially revolutionary capability. Section 211 
   would define the authorities of a designated OSD official to assure that
   HEL programs within the Department of Defense are adequately funded and 
   coordinated. The committee also believes that requiring OSD funding to  
   support service--and BMDO--funded HEL programs at a level no greater    
   than that provided by the service or BMDO will maximize the relevance of
   OSD efforts to service and BMD requirements and incentivize appropriate 
   investment in these technologies.                                       
                 SECTION 212--MANAGEMENT OF SPACE-BASED INFRARED SYSTEM-LOW       

      This section would require the Secretary of Defense to assign program
   management authority for the Space-Based Infrared System-Low to the     
   Director of the Ballistic Missile Defense Organization.                 
                              SECTION 213--JOINT STRIKE FIGHTER                   

      This section would limit the Joint Strike Fighter (JSF) program's    
   approval to proceed beyond the demonstration and validation phase until 
   the Secretary of Defense certifies to the congressional defense         
   committees that the technological maturity of the JSF program's key     
   technologies is sufficient to warrant its entry into the engineering and
   manufacturing development (EMD) stage.                                  
                           SUBTITLE C--BALLISTIC MISSILE DEFENSE                  

                          SECTION 231--FUNDING FOR FISCAL YEAR 2001               

      The section would authorize appropriations for research and          
   development for National Missile Defense for fiscal year 2001.          
           SECTION 232--SENSE OF CONGRESS CONCERNING COMMITMENT TO DEPLOY NATIONAL
                                 MISSILE DEFENSE                                  
      This section would make certain findings and express the sense of    
   Congress that the enactment of the National Missile Defense Act of 1999 
   (Public Law 106 38) entails a commitment to deploy a national missile   
   defense.                                                                
      The committee believes that integrated flight tests to date          
   demonstrate the feasibility of the National Missile Defense (NMD)       
   technology under development. Integrated Flight Test-3 (IFT 3) confirmed
   the ability of the exoatmospheric kill vehicle (EKV) to discriminate a  
   warhead from other objects. IFT 4, notwithstanding the fact that the EKV
   missed the target because of failure of EKV sensors, confirmed the      
   ability of the NMD battle management, command and control system, early 
   warning sensors, and radar to provide engagement information to the kill
   vehicle as a functioning system of systems. The committee recognizes    
   that much test and evaluation remains to be done, but believes that the 
   tests to date provide confidence that NMD system technologies are       
   feasible.                                                               
      The committee believes that the North Korean development of          
   long-range missiles capable of reaching the continental United States is
   sufficiently mature that a commitment to a firm deployment schedule is  
   warranted. The committee notes that the September 1999 threat assessment
   by the National Intelligence Council states that Iran could test an ICBM
   by the latter half of this decade. The committee further notes that the 
   Secretary of Defense shares the view that ``the threat threshold has    
   been crossed.''                                                         
      The committee notes that the National Missile Defense Act of 1999    
   (Public Law 106 38) established that it is the policy of the United     
   States to deploy an NMD system as soon as technically possible. The     
   committee remains baffled by Administration statements to the effect    
   that, while the policy of the United States is to deploy a national     
   missile defense, no decision has been made to deploy such a defense. The
   committee believes that the establishment of any policy incurs an       
   inherent commitment to execute it.                                      
            SECTION 233--REPORTS ON BALLISTIC MISSILE THREAT POSED BY NORTH KOREA 

      This section would require the President to issue, within two weeks  
   of the next test of a long-range ballistic missile by North Korea or 60 
   days after the date of enactment, a report to assess the North Korean   
   missile threat, the U.S. capability to defend against that threat,      
   proliferation threats, steps the U.S. will take to reduce the threat    
   while the nation is vulnerable, and the viability of testing other BMD  
   systems against targets with flight characteristics similar to those of 
   long range North Korean missiles.                                       
      The committee believes that if North Korea should test a long-range  
   missile, the Department of Defense should quickly revise threat         
   assessments and rapidly put into place actions to reduce the increased  
   vulnerability that are assessed as result of the test.                  
           SECTION 234--PLAN TO MODIFY BALLISTIC MISSILE DEFENSE ARCHITECTURE TO  
               COVER INTERMEDIATE-RANGE BALLISTIC MISSILE THREATS                 
      This section would require the Director of Ballistic Missile Defense 
   Organization to develop a plan to address threats posed by ballistic    
   missiles of 2500 to 4000 kilometers in range.                           
      The committee notes that the National Missile Defense system under   
   development will defend the United States from intercontinental range   
   ballistic missiles, and theater missile defense systems under           
   development will provide effective defense for U.S. forces and allies   
   from ballistic missiles with ranges out to approximately 2000           
   kilometers. The committee notes that, according to public reports, Iran 
   is developing an intermediate range ballistic missile with a range well 
   in excess of 2000 kilometers, capable of striking virtually all of      
   Europe. The committee believes that the evolution of this threat must be
   addressed in BMD architecture and technology development.               
           SECTION 235--DESIGNATION OF AIRBORNE LASER PROGRAM AS A PROGRAM ELEMENT
                      OF BALLISTIC MISSILE DEFENSE PROGRAM                        
      This section would establish a new program element in the Ballistic  
   Missile Defense Organization (BMDO) for the airborne laser.             
      The committee notes that Airborne Laser (ABL) is a key element of    
   BMDO architectures. The committee notes that the Air Force drastically  
   reduced funding and delayed ABL testing and deployment schedules by as  
   much as seven years. The committee further notes that the Air Force did 
   so without consulting BMDO and without consideration of the impact on   
   the BMD architecture developed by BMDO or requirements for upper and    
   lower tier BMD systems. To properly coordinate the elements of the BMD  
   architecture and BMD technology development, the committee believes that
   ABL is more effectively managed and funded by BMDO.                     
                                 SUBTITLE D--OTHER MATTERS                        

            SECTION 241--RECOGNITION OF THOSE INDIVIDUALS INSTRUMENTAL TO NAVAL   
RESEARCH EFFORTS DURING THE PERIOD FROM BEFORE WORLD WAR II THROUGH THE END OF THE
                                    COLD WAR                                      
      This provision would recognize those individuals instrumental in the 
   establishment and conduct of oceanographic and scientific research      
   partnerships between the Federal Government and academic institutions   
   during the period beginning before World War II and continuing through  
   the end of the Cold War, support efforts by the Secretary of the Navy   
   and the Chief of Naval Research to honor those individuals, and express 
   appreciation for the ongoing efforts of the Office of Naval Research to 
   support oceanographic and scientific research and the development of    
   researchers in scientific fields related to the missions of the Navy and
   the Marine Corps.                                                       

           TITLE III--OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE                                   

                                          OVERVIEW                                

      The budget request for fiscal year 2001 for operation and maintenance
   represents an increase in spending of just $3.0 billion over spending   
   levels authorized and appropriated for fiscal year 2000. Increasing fuel
   prices account for $1.2 billion of that increase, and the remaining     
   represents inflation assumptions of about one percent. Despite the      
   Administration's reported funding increase, the reality of the budget   
   request is that there are little if any real increases. The committee is
   concerned that current budget estimates project a decrease in operation 
   and maintenance funding for critical readiness needs for fiscal year    
   2002.                                                                   
      Despite increased funding by Congress for readiness, the budget      
   request for fiscal year 2001 falls well short of addressing many of the 
   military services' current and future readiness requirements.           
   Compounding the problem, the budget request does not adequately take    
   into account the current and future financial impacts on equipment,     
   training, and facilities being created by the high pace of unscheduled  
   contingency operations around the world. The committee remains deeply   
   concerned that the continued underfunding of key readiness and quality  
   of life accounts, coupled with a continued high pace of operations, will
   exacerbate readiness and personnel retention concerns. For example, in  
   spite of the addition by Congress of $858.4 million to the real property
   maintenance and repair accounts of the four military services in fiscal 
   year 2000, the chiefs' fiscal year 2000 unfunded priorities list still  
   identifies a real property and repair shortfall of over $1.03 billion.  
   Despite a Congressional increase last year of $135.0 million for spare  
   parts, the services unfunded priorities list nonetheless identifies a   
   shortfall in spare parts funding of $250.0 million in fiscal year 2001. 
   As a further example, Congress increased the budget request for ship    
   depot maintenance by $25.0 million last year, yet this year's unfunded  
   priorities list reflects a shortfall in fiscal year 2001 of $182.3      
   million.                                                                
      In an effort to obtain a more accurate and detailed assessment of    
   current and near-term readiness, the committee conducted a series of    
   hearings. The evidence received during the hearings was of an           
   overextended force struggling to maintain acceptable readiness levels in
   an environment of declining human and budgetary resources. The committee
   continues to hear significant complaints about lack of spare parts,     
   aging equipment, decaying infrastructure and growing equipment and      
   facilities' backlogs and the difficulties of conducting quality training
   and operational deployments with significant personnel shortages.       
      The committee continues to believe that DOD must continue to take    
   steps to reduce costs in non-readiness related accounts. At the same    
   time, DOD must provide more aggressive oversight of the military        
   department's proposals to reduce costs through contracting out and      
   privatization. As an example, the Department of the Navy has proposed   
   the contracting out of a major portion of its communications            
   requirements without including any documentation for this proposed      
   five-year, $10.0 billion program. Proposals of this magnitude may have  
   serious budgetary consequences for other DOD programs. The committee    
   fully supports well developed and justified programs that will reduce   
   costs; but, at a time when readiness shortfalls are growing almost      
   exponentially, the committee does not believe that poorly developed and 
   uncoordinated new programs, or that funding for administrative and      
   support activities, such as headquarters management, should be          
   increasing. Consistent with past practice, the committee has identified 
   spending that does not directly support military readiness and has      
   reprioritized it into areas that will. In making decisions on how best  
   to apply resources to address readiness problems, the committee relied  
   heavily on lessons learned during extensive oversight hearings and on   
   the unfunded priorities lists provided by the service chiefs.           

[Graphic Image Not Available]

[Graphic Image Not Available]

[Graphic Image Not Available]

[Graphic Image Not Available]

[Graphic Image Not Available]

[Graphic Image Not Available]

[Graphic Image Not Available]

[Graphic Image Not Available]

[Graphic Image Not Available]

[Graphic Image Not Available]

[Graphic Image Not Available]

[Graphic Image Not Available]

[Graphic Image Not Available]

[Graphic Image Not Available]

[Graphic Image Not Available]

[Graphic Image Not Available]

[Graphic Image Not Available]

[Graphic Image Not Available]

[Graphic Image Not Available]

[Graphic Image Not Available]

[Graphic Image Not Available]

[Graphic Image Not Available]

[Graphic Image Not Available]

[Graphic Image Not Available]

[Graphic Image Not Available]

[Graphic Image Not Available]

[Graphic Image Not Available]

[Graphic Image Not Available]


                                 ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST                        

                                  BUDGET REQUEST INCREASES                        

                                 CRITICAL READINESS ACCOUNTS                      

      The committee continues to place a high priority on addressing       
   funding shortfalls for critical readiness accounts. Accordingly, the    
   committee recommends an increase of approximately $1.4 billion to       
   support a number of underfunded readiness accounts. Although the        
   committee has significantly increased funding above the budget request  
   in key readiness accounts by just under $10.0 billion during the past   
   six years, this has not been sufficient to significantly improve        
   readiness across the military services. The committee recommendations   
   emphasize problems highlighted throughout extensive hearings and have   
   been guided by the shortfalls identified by the service chiefs.         
           Depot maintenance                                                       

      The committee notes that operational tempo is at an all-time high and
   that aging military equipment is approaching a point beyond its useful  
   service life. As a consequence of the aging of significant elements of  
   the services' combat equipment, the maintenance of such equipment is    
   increasingly difficult, time consuming, and expensive. The committee    
   recommends an increase of $461.1 million for depot maintenance to       
   address the added requirements of aging combat equipment as follows:    

          [Dollars in millions]                                                   

  Army                                                                    

 $125.0                                                                  

  Navy (Air)                                                              

 30.0                                                                    

  Navy (Sea)                                                              

 204.3                                                                   

  Marine Corps                                                            

 22.0                                                                    

  Marine Corps Reserve                                                    

 2.0                                                                     

  Air Force                                                               

 77.8                                                                    


           Real property maintenance                                               

      The committee continues to note that shortfalls in real property     
   maintenance accounts remain among the principal unfunded requirement    
   identified by the service chiefs. To address the backlog of facility    
   maintenance, the committee recommends an increase of $660.0 million as  
   follows:                                                                

          [Dollars in millions]                                                   



          Army                           $280.36



          Navy                           162.17



          Marine Corps                   38.320



          Marine Corps Reserve           3.11



          Air Force                      176.04


           Miscellaneous unfunded requirements                                     

      The committee recommends an increase of $403.992 million in funding  
   for miscellaneous unfunded readiness-related requirements identified by 
   the service chiefs and the committee:                                   

          [Dollars in millions]                                                   



          Army                           $136.152



          Army Reserve                   12.0



          Army National Guard            24.0



          Navy                           44.74



          Marine Corps                   75.8



          Marine Corps Reserve           8.2



          Air Force                      67.1



          Air National Guard             6.0


           Mobility enhancement funding                                            

      The committee recommends an increase of $25.0 million to improve the 
   deployment and mobility of military forces and supplies through         
   investment in en route infrastructure. These funds are provided to the  
   United States Transportation Command Mobility Enhancement Fund (MEF),   
   which was established to address strategic mobility shortcomings that   
   were apparent during the conduct of Operation Desert Shield and         
   Operation Desert Storm. The committee believes that these funds will    
   improve the ability of the military services to respond to future       
   contingencies.                                                          
           Training accounts                                                       

      The committee continues to focus its attention on the training       
   accounts of the military services. In hearings this year, the committee 
   continued to hear reports that insufficient funding has been a          
   contributing factor in the decline in the quality of training provided  
   our combat forces. Shortages of equipment, parts, decaying              
   infrastructure, and personnel shortages were identified as serious      
   problems. The committee believes that training equipment and base       
   facilities at many of the established training ranges is in urgent need 
   of both repair and upgrade.                                             
      Therefore, based on shortfalls identified by the military services,  
   the committee recommends an increase of $153.3 million as follows:      

          [Dollars in millions]                                                   

 Army:                                                                   

  Training Range Modernization                                            

 $76.0                                                                   

  Training Area Environmental Management                                  

 32.0                                                                    

  Institutional Training                                                  

 15.0                                                                    

  Specialized Skill Training                                              

 15.0                                                                    

 Marine Corps:                                                           

  Institutional Training                                                  

 4.0                                                                     

 Marine Corps Reserve:                                                   

  Training Center Improvements                                            

 1.2                                                                     

 Air Force:                                                              

  LD/HD Flight Crew Training                                              

 5.1                                                                     

  Institutional Training                                                  

 5.0                                                                     


                                 ARMY COLD WEATHER CLOTHING                       

      The committee is aware of unbudgeted requirements for the reserve    
   components for the Extended Cold Weather Clothing System (ECWCS), which 
   is designed to provide protection during cold and wet weather. The      
   committee notes, for example, that the Army National Guard has equipped 
   only 25 percent of its forces with this clothing. The committee believes
   ECWCS is a significant contributor to the combat readiness of the       
   individual soldier. Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of  
   funding for ECWCS as follows:                                           

          [Dollars in millions]                                                   

  Army National Guard                                                     

 $24.0                                                                   

  Army Reserve                                                            

 12.0                                                                    

  Air National Guard                                                      

 6.0                                                                     


                                 BUDGET REQUEST REDUCTIONS                        

                                CIVILIAN PERSONNEL REDUCTIONS                     

      The committee understands that in order to determine civilian        
   personnel requirements for the budget request, the Department of Defense
   relied on actual fiscal year 1999 personnel levels and the estimated    
   personnel levels the Department would have on hand at the end of fiscal 
   year 2000 to forecast civilian personnel levels for fiscal year 2001.   
   The committee notes that the Department was unable to estimate          
   accurately the fiscal year 2000 end strength prior to the submission of 
   the budget request. The committee further notes the General Accounting  
   Office (GAO) has determined that the Department will employ fewer       
   civilian personnel at the beginning of fiscal year 2001 than are assumed
   in the budget request. Therefore, the committee recommends decreases in 
   funding as follows:                                                     

          [Dollars in millions]                                                   

  Navy                                                                    

 $49.6                                                                   

  Defense Agencies                                                        

 0.9                                                                     


                            EXCESS FOREIGN CURRENCIES REDUCTIONS                  

      Since the submission of the budget request, the U.S. dollar has      
   increased in value compared to various foreign currencies. As a result, 
   the committee believes that the                                         

                    budget request is overstated. In addition, the committee      
          understands that the Defense Foreign Currency Fluctuation Account       
          already contains a balance of over $600.0 million to be used in the     
          event that unfavorable currency fluctuations develop. The committee     
          believes the requested amount is, therefore, in excess of the needs of  
          the Department and recommends the following reductions:                 

          [Dollars in millions]                                                   

  Army                                                                    

 $150.0                                                                  

  Navy                                                                    

 30.0                                                                    

  Marine Corps                                                            

 2.2                                                                     

  Air Force                                                               

 37.7                                                                    

  Defense Agencies                                                        

 10.1                                                                    


                                   HEADQUARTERS REDUCTIONS                        

      As discussed elsewhere in this report, the Department has failed to  
   comply with the reductions in headquarters personnel mandated by section
   921 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2000      
   (Public Law 106 65). Therefore, the committee recommends decreases in   
   funding for headquarters activities as follows:                         

          [Dollars in millions]                                                   



          Army                           $27.086



          Navy                           13.340



          Air Force                      12.200



          Special Operations Command                1.682



          Office, Secretary of Defense                4.446



          The Joint Staff                0.552



          Defense Agencies               12.586


                          JOINT CHIEFS OF STAFF TRAINING EXERCISES                

      The committee continues to be concerned with the increasing pace of  
   operations throughout the military services and believes that           
   requirements for Joint Chiefs of Staff (JCS) training exercises are     
   levied against units already overextended with operational deployments, 
   home station training exercises, and training exercises at the services'
   major combat training centers. The committee questions whether the      
   benefits of the current scope of JCS exercises exceeds the costs to     
   military units otherwise experiencing the effects of high operational   
   tempo. Therefore, the committee recommends a reduction for participation
   in JCS exercises as follows:                                            

          [Dollars in millions]                                                   



          Army                           $11.000



          Navy                           1.014



          Air Force                      12.200



          Joint Chiefs of Staff                32.914


                              OTHER ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST                     

                     ACCOUNTABILITY OF OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE FUNDING          

      The committee is alarmed by recent reports regarding the movement    
   within the military services of large amounts of funds authorized and   
   appropriated for operation and maintenance (O&M) accounts. The committee
   notes recent reports by the General Accounting Office (GAO) indicate the
   Department of Defense (DOD) redirected funds within O&M readiness       
   accounts by almost $43.0 billion between fiscal years 1994 and 1998.    
   These changes to the original intent specified by Congress included     
   transfers into, as well as out, of several accounts considered critical 
   to readiness. Although these transferred funds were subsequently used   
   for shortfalls in other O&M accounts, the committee is especially       
   concerned about the underexecution of funding provided by Congress in   
   the readiness critical accounts. The committee notes that over the      
   five-year period assessed by GAO, the Department of the Navy            
   underexecuted by $1.2 billion the ship depot maintenance portion, and   
   that the Department of the Air Force underexecuted by $988.4 million    
   support of primary combat forces. The Department of the Army, over just 
   the past two years, underexecuted by $579.9 million its support of      
   combat divisions. Although the committee understands that the unexecuted
   funds were applied to other requirements, the committee believes that   
   movements of funds intended for critical readiness accounts will have a 
   severe impact on the ability of the services to maintain readiness at   
   acceptable levels.                                                      
                                    ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES                          

                                     FINES AND PENALTIES                          

      The committee supports the goal of the Department of Defense (DOD)   
   environmental quality program to transition from a reactive,            
   compliance-driven focus to a more proactive goal-oriented approach. The 
   committee is concerned, however, with the Department of the Army's      
   effort to achieve this goal. The committee notes that the Army          
   continually receives a disproportional number of environmental          
   non-compliance assessments, and that the Army pays the majority of fines
   and penalties levied against DOD. The committee further notes, of the   
   total DOD fines and penalties paid in fiscal years 1997, 1998, and 1999,
   the Army's portion was 97, 53, and 87 percent, respectively. The        
   committee believes that the Secretary of the Army must place greater    
   emphasis on efforts to achieve environmental compliance and to achieve  
   DOD's goals within the environmental quality program.                   
                            NAVY ENVIRONMENTAL LEADERSHIP PROGRAM                 

      The committee continues to support the Chief of Naval Operation's    
   Navy Environmental Leadership Program (NELP) and believes that while    
   there have been numerous programmatic successes in NELP, many of which  
   are being implemented throughout the Navy, budget constraints have      
   prevented NELP from reaching its full potential in providing solutions  
   to priority Navy environmental problems. Current requirements include   
   pollution prevention technologies, implementation of Green Energy       
   Management initiatives, and development of a regional prototype for     
   hazardous waste management. To support improved environmental           
   stewardship efforts, the committee recommends an increase of $5.0       
   million for the NELP. The committee strongly believes that this increase
   in funds would permit a cost-effective leveraging of ongoing efforts to 
   meet urgent Navy environmental requirements.                            
                                    INTELLIGENCE ISSUES                           

                                 CRYPTOLOGIC SKILLS TRAINING                      

      The budget request contained $1.3 million in operation and           
   maintenance, Army, for conducting cryptologic and language skills       
   training at the U.S. Army Intelligence Center (USAIC).                  
      The committee is aware of a unique Korean language training program  
   developed in-house at the USAIC. The committee believes this            
   computer-based tool has the potential of providing critical language    
   maintenance training for many language specialists, and it believes this
   effort should be expanded to other languages.                           
      Consequently, the committee recommends $5.3 million in operation and 
   maintenance, Army, an increase of $4.0 million, for continued           
   development of this language training program into the service's seven  
   core language requirements. The committee also recommends that this     
   program be provided to the other services for language training         
   maintenance.                                                            
                              DEFENSE FOREIGN LANGUAGE PROGRAM                    

      The budget request contained $61.9 million in operation and          
   maintenance, Army, for the Defense Language Institute (DLI)             
      The committee is supportive of DLI training efforts to provide high  
   quality linguists for the growing requirement of many agencies and      
   services but believes that its language laboratories are in need of     
   technical upgrades, to include new equipment and access to the internet.
   The committee is aware of local area Marine Corps self-help efforts that
   have done similar upgrades very cost effectively. The committee believes
   the Army should utilize the Marine Corps self-help assistance to upgrade
   the DLI language laboratories                                           
      Further, the committee is aware of an unfunded DLI initiative to     
   provide better language training by issuing laptop computers to         
   students. These computers would be used to provide language laboratory  
   access to on-line language training materials, allow ``after hours''    
   access from the institute's dormitories, and access to ``live''         
   world-wide foreign training materials. The committee believes this is a 
   worthwhile effort that should be properly funded                        
      Therefore, the committee recommends $64.9 million in operation and   
   maintenance, Army, an increase of $3.0 million, for the Defense Foreign 
   Language                                                                

                    Program. Of this amount, $1.0 million is for self-help upgrade
          of the language laboratories and $2.0 million is for the laptop computer
          initiative.                                                             
                              DISTRIBUTED COMMON GROUND SYSTEM                    

      The committee understands that the Air Force is currently operating  
   with a waiver to utilize communications for the Air Force's Distributed 
   Common Ground Systems (DCGS) reachback operations that are provided in  
   whole or part by national agencies within the National Foreign          
   Intelligence Program. The committee further understands that this       
   arrangement has allowed the DCGS to have access to wideband             
   communications at very inexpensive rates, and accordingly, that the Air 
   Force is seeking a permanent waiver to continue this arrangement.       
      However, the committee has learned that the Assistant Secretary of   
   Defense (Command, Control, Communications and Intelligence) has directed
   that all continental United States DCGS long-haul communications are to 
   be procured through the Defense Information Systems Agency (DISA). The  
   committee understands that this will increase the Air Force's           
   communications costs by a factor of 16 and that this cost increase is   
   unfunded in the fiscal year 2001 request. The committee finds this      
   increase incomprehensible and notes that such direction is not in accord
   with congressional efforts to create an interoperable, networked        
   Intelligence Community communications environment.                      
      Therefore, the committee directs the Assistant Secretary of Defense  
   (Command, Control, Communications, and Intelligence) to provide the     
   defense and intelligence committees a report that clearly identifies the
   costs, the rationale for the cost differences and the benefits versus   
   drawbacks of providing DCGS communications through the national partner 
   or the DISA. Further, this report is to provide the rationale for       
   approval of the current temporary waiver and the Assistant Secretary's  
   decision for a permanent waiver. The committee directs that no DCGS     
   funding authorized for appropriation in this act be obligated or        
   expended by DISA, or transferred through DISA, for procurement or lease 
   of DCGS communications until this report is provided.                   
                               EAGLE VISION COMMERCIAL IMAGERY                    

      The budget request contained $10.0 million for the National Imagery  
   and Mapping Agency (NIMA) to purchase commercial data.                  
      The committee notes the successful Air Force operation of the Eagle  
   Vision commercial imagery ground station, which has resulted in timely, 
   unclassified imagery support to the theater commanders-in-chief (CINCs).
   Much of this imagery has been unique and could not be provided by other 
   technical means due to higher priorities. The committee believes that   
   there are insufficient funds to meet the CINCs' commercial image and    
   mapping needs and, therefore, recommends $16.0 million, an increase of  
   $6.0 million, for purchasing Eagle Vision commercial imagery.           
                                INTEGRATED BROADCAST SERVICE                      

      The budget request contained $15.1 million in operations and         
   maintenance, Navy, for the Integrated Broadcast Service (IBS).          
      The committee notes that, subsequent to the submission of the budget 
   request to Congress, the IBS executive agent was changed from the Navy  
   to the Air Force. Therefore, the committee recommends a transfer of     
   $15.1 million from operation and maintenance, Navy, to operation and    
   maintenance, Air Force.                                                 
                          RC 135 AND U 2 OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE               

      The budget request contained a total of $373.1 million for operations
   and maintenance of the RC 135 and U 2 aircraft fleets.                  
      The committee is concerned that funding for many Intelligence        
   Community programs, including intelligence surveillance and             
   reconnaissance (ISR) aircraft are regularly transferred from the        
   programs for which funds were authorized and appropriated to fund       
   shortfalls in other programs, often not related to ISR requirements. The
   committee understands the theater and functional Commanders in Chief    
   have stated that their number one shortfall is in ISR aircraft and      
   systems. The committee is concerned that transferring funding,          
   particularly operation and maintenance funding, from ISR aircraft to    
   fund non-intelligence programs exacerbates the CINCs' ISR shortfalls.   
      Therefore the committee directs that the RC 135 and U 2 programs be  
   designated as congressional interest items.                             
                           MORALE, WELFARE, AND RECREATION ISSUES                 

                               ARMED FORCES RECREATION CENTERS                    

      The committee notes that the Army operates, on behalf of all military
   personnel, several popular recreational facilities known collectively as
   Armed Forces Recreation Centers (AFRC). These facilities provide much   
   needed recreation opportunities to service members and their families at
   a reasonable cost, and the committee has consistently supported these   
   important programs. The committee is aware that access to AFRC          
   facilities is not limited to active duty, reserve, and retired service  
   members, but is also available to a broad array of other personnel,     
   including many with no military service. The committee believes that    
   such a relatively unrestricted access policy suggests that honorably    
   discharged veterans could be accommodated by these facilities. The      
   committee directs the Secretary of Defense to review the categories of  
   personnel with AFRC privileges to determine whether those categories    
   should be broadened to include honorably discharged veterans, and to    
   report his findings and any recommendations to the Senate Committee on  
   Armed Services and the House Committee on Armed Services by January 31, 
   2001.                                                                   
                                      LODGING PROGRAMS                            

      The committee is aware of a recent change in lodging policy by the   
   Department of Defense (DOD) that all permanent change of station travel 
   be considered as official travel for the purposes of on-base lodging.   
   The committee notes this change in policy will cost Army Morale,        
   Welfare, and Recreation (MWR) programs alone over $14.0 million         
   annually. The committee is also concerned that this action essentially  
   donates approximately $75.0 million soldier dollars invested in bricks  
   and mortar lodging facilities to appropriated fund accounts. In the     
   course of attempting to determine the policy reason underpinning the    
   regulatory change, the committee learned that the files documenting the 
   reason for this decision could not be found. DOD officials were thus    
   forced to speculate as to the actual policy rationale used, but most    
   often have cited consistency among the military services as the reason. 
   The committee believes that a shift of this magnitude should be the     
   subject of open debate, rather than a seemingly arbitrary decision      
   apparently made in the name of consistency. The committee, therefore,   
   directs the Secretary of Defense to review this change in policy,       
   detailing the reasons for the change, and to submit a plan to hold      
   harmless Army and Marine Corps MWR by this action to the Senate         
   Committee on Armed Services and the House Committee on Armed Services by
   January 31, 2001.                                                       
                     NONAPPROPRIATED FUND SUPPORT OF OFFICIAL ACTIVITIES          

      The committee is pleased to note that the service secretaries have at
   last begun to provide nonappropriated fund activities with the minimum  
   established standard of appropriated fund support. The committee expects
   this trend to continue. In that regard, the committee heard testimony   
   that some nonappropriated fund category C activities, which are         
   generally expected to be self-sustaining, have become essential elements
   of command programs on some installations. An example of this phenomenon
   is the club system, which is generally prohibited from receiving        
   appropriated fund support, but which is frequently used for official    
   functions and training sessions. The committee notes that previous      
   criticism of club management practices resulted in stringent            
   restrictions on the amount of appropriated fund support for these       
   activities. The committee is concerned that the restrictions are too    
   rigorous, and that category C activities of all types are unduly        
   penalized as a result. The committee directs the Secretary of Defense to
   review the support that category C activities provide to official       
   activities without reimbursement and report his findings and any        
   recommendations to the Senate Committee on Armed Services and the House 
   Committee on Armed Services by March 31, 2001.                          
                                        OTHER ISSUES                              

                                 ARMY APPRENTICESHIP PROGRAM                      

      The committee is concerned that the Department of the Army has paid  
   little attention to sustaining critical readiness workforce skills at   
   Army depots. The committee heard testimony that the majority of skilled 
   workers at these depots will be eligible to retire by fiscal year 2005, 
   and that there is no plan to fill these jobs. Many of these workers are 
   highly proficient craftsmen, possessing skills that take years to       
   develop under careful supervision. The committee believes that the Army 
   should establish a program to hire and train new workers equally capable
   of repairing complex Army vehicles and                                  

                    weapons systems. The committee understands that the Secretary 
          of the Navy operates a successful apprenticeship program in its         
          shipyards to address a similar shortfall in the Navy.                   
      The committee therefore directs the Secretary of the Army to         
   establish an apprenticeship program for Army maintenance depots to      
   address these critical needs and report to the Senate Committee on Armed
   Services and the House Committee on Armed Services by January 31, 2001, 
   on his plans to implement this program. In addition, the committee      
   recommends an increase of $4.4 million as a separate line item in the   
   Department of the Army's Budget Activity 03 to establish this           
   depot-level apprenticeship program.                                     
                            ARMY WORKLOAD AND PERFORMANCE SYSTEM                  

      The committee has long supported the Department of Defense in the    
   development of analytical systems based on workload requirements to     
   support its civilian personnel budget requirements. The committee       
   commends the Department of the Army for leading the effort to correct   
   this material weakness in the staffing requirements determination       
   process by the development of the Army Workload and Performance System  
   (AWPS). Although slow in its formulation, the committee continues to    
   believe that AWPS should be the standard functional management system   
   for all industrial operations and should be adequately funded. In the   
   committee report on H.R. 3616, the National Defense Authorization Act   
   for Fiscal Year 1999 (H. Rept. 105 532), the Secretary of the Army was  
   required to provide the committee with a long-range master plan for the 
   implementation of AWPS. In its review of the AWPS master plan, the      
   General Accounting Office (GAO) reported to the committee that untimely 
   and inadequate funding was causing major delays in the full             
   implementation of AWPS. In addition, the GAO reported that the Army     
   needs to develop a more detailed master plan that includes better system
   cost estimates for future modules, and an improved management and       
   oversight structure. The committee directs the Secretary of the Army to 
   update the AWPS master plan to incorporate GAO's recommendations and    
   submit a revised master plan to the Senate Committee on Armed Services  
   and the House Committee on Armed Services not later than February 1,    
   2001.                                                                   
      In order to sustain this important program at an adequate funding    
   level, the committee recommends the addition of $2.0 million            
   specifically for AWPS during fiscal year 2001. The committee believes   
   that this minimum level of funding is necessary for AWPS to develop in a
   timely and effective manner.                                            
                             AUTOMATIC IDENTIFICATION TECHNOLOGY                  

      The committee continues to be concerned with reports of shortages of 
   repair parts that have necessitated the grounding of critical aviation  
   assets and other combat equipment, and by the decrease in mission       
   capable rates due to a combination of increased maintenance requirements
   and a lack of spare parts. Although the committee has increased funding 
   for spare parts and additional maintenance by nearly $3.5 billion       
   between fiscal years 1994 and 2000, the committee notes that improvement
   trends in these areas show minimal improvements.                        
      The committee understands that Automatic Identification Technology   
   (AIT), currently being developed by the Department of the Army, has the 
   potential to provide the needed solutions to these problems and could   
   significantly improve readiness. As also discussed elsewhere in this    
   report, AIT would make key maintenance information available to all     
   participants in the repair process and would improve productivity and   
   effectiveness to enhance overall logistics operations. In addition, AIT 
   will provide connectivity and information to related business processes 
   such as financial, supply and transportation. Although Congress included
   funding for AIT in the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal    
   Year 2000, there is no funding in the budget request for AIT.           
      Because of the potential to significantly improve readiness in the   
   military services, the committee recommends the addition of $4.0 million
   for the Department of the Army to continue AIT integration.             
                              CIVILIAN AIR TRAFFIC CONTROLLERS                    

      The committee notes that civilian air traffic controllers who are    
   employed by the Federal Aviation Administration are compensated         
   significantly better than air traffic controllers who are employed by   
   the Department of Defense (DOD). The committee understands that the     
   Department of Transportation and Related Agencies Appropriations Act of 
   1996 (Public Law 104 50) established a separate personnel system for the
   Federal Aviation Administration, even though DOD air traffic controllers
   perform the same work to the same standards. The committee has learned  
   that this disparity of pay has created a difficult recruiting and       
   retention challenge for DOD as the Department strives to maintain safety
   at military airfields around the world. The committee is disturbed that 
   the Department has known about this problem for some time, but has yet  
   to formulate a solution. The committee directs the Secretary of Defense 
   to determine the best method to solve the Department's recruiting and   
   retention problem for air traffic controllers and report his            
   recommendations accompanied by any necessary legislative changes to the 
   Senate Committee on Armed Services and the House Committee on Armed     
   Services by January 31, 2001.                                           
                     COMMERCIAL TECHNOLOGIES FOR MAINTENANCE ACTIVITIES           

      The committee continues to believe that the Commercial Technologies  
   for Maintenance Activities (CTMA) program, created by the Department of 
   Defense (DOD) in 1998 to bring the most modern and advanced             
   manufacturing capabilities from commercial industry to depot and related
   maintenance activities, is valuable as a technology resource which will 
   have a positive effect on the efficiency and effectiveness of the       
   Department's industrial activities. The CTMA program is a by-product of 
   section 361 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year   
   1998 (Public Law 105 85) that required DOD to re-engineer industrial    
   processes and adopt best-business practices at their depot-level        
   activities. The committee is concerned that DOD has not provided funding
   for this vital and cost-effective program. Therefore, the committee     
   recommends the addition of $12.0 million for the Defense Logistics      
   Agency to pursue strategies for re-engineering at depot-level activities
   that will lower operations and sustainment costs. The committee believes
   the addition of these funds will allow depot-level activities to        
   participate in manufacturing technology demonstration projects in       
   collaboration with more than 220 of the leading U.S. manufacturers. The 
   committee urges the Secretary of Defense to ensure that funds for the   
   CTMA program will be forthcoming in future budget requests.             
                            CONTAINER FREIGHT STATION OPERATIONS                  

      The committee is aware that the Military Traffic Management Command  
   (MTMC) is presently considering the transfer of workload from the       
   Container Freight Station (CFS), Norfolk, Virginia, to the Defense      
   Distribution Center (DDC), New Cumberland, Pennsylvania. While          
   supportive of the efforts of MTMC for its efforts to reduce costs, the  
   committee is concerned that MTMC has not adequately evaluated the       
   potential adverse impact on fleet operational requirements, contingency 
   operation flexibility, mission readiness of forward deployed units,     
   operations at the Military Ocean Terminal, Norfolk, Virginia, and       
   operations at the Norfolk Naval Air Station. The committee is also aware
   that MTMC is conducting a business case analysis to evaluate the        
   potential impacts of the CFS transfer on current and future military    
   readiness.                                                              
      Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense to report  
   to the Senate Committee on Armed Services and the House Committee on    
   Armed Services on the results of the MTMC business case analysis and to 
   assess the effects of the proposed transfer on military readiness.      
   Further, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense to take no      
   action on the transfer of any existing CFS functions until 180 days     
   after the submission of this report.                                    
                                 CORE LOGISTICS CAPABILITIES                      

      The committee is aware that the Department of Defense (DOD) is       
   undertaking a study to examine the military logistics system, including 
   a review of the implementation by the military departments of core      
   logistics capabilities methodology as required by section 2464 of title 
   10, United States Code. Because the military departments have not had   
   the benefit of clear policy guidance concerning core logistics, the     
   implementation of DOD's current core logistics determination policy has 
   not been consistent. As a result, significant confusion has developed,  
   which the committee believes has worked against the most effective      
   capitalization of resources made available for core logistics           
   activities.                                                             
      The committee believes that the DOD core logistics study represents a
   necessary first step and opportunity to develop and implement the       
   required policy and methodology on a consistent basis, and urges the    
   Department to complete the study as soon as possible. Every effort      
   should be made to develop a consensus of all those involved on those    
   items that would be included in any final policy guidance.              
                               DEFENSE JOINT ACCOUNTING SYSTEM                    

      As well documented by General Accounting Office, the Inspector       
   General of the Department of Defense, and other Department of Defense   
   (DOD) studies, the DOD has had a longstanding history of poor and       
   inadequate automated financial accounting systems. DOD has repeatedly   
   indicated a commitment to financial management reform,                  

                     part of which is to integrate and thus reduce the number of  
          financial and accounting systems. In 1996, DOD initiated the Defense    
          Joint Accounting System (DJAS), a financial information management      
          system that supports the general ledger for general and working capital 
          funds at the installation level. The committee understands that DJAS    
          will ultimately cost $322 million to develop and fully deploy. The      
          committee is concerned that the Department of the Navy and the          
          Department of the Air Force do not intend to participate in this        
          program.                                                                
      The committee has consistently urged DOD and the military departments
   to move away from service unique automated information systems. The     
   DJAS, as its title indicates, appears to be a financial accounting      
   system that has been designed to be truly joint. The committee fails to 
   understand why the Navy and the Air Force have failed to incorporate    
   this joint accounting system and have decided to retain their own       
   service specific legacy systems. Therefore, the committee directs the   
   Secretary of Defense to provide a report to the Senate Committee on     
   Armed Services and the House Committee on Armed Services, no later than 
   September 1, 2000, that addresses the following:                        
       (1) The decision to withdraw the Air Force from DJAS to include the 
   date of the decision and justification used;                            
       (2) The impact of the decision to withdraw the Air Force from DJAS  
   on the projected cost of DJAS; and                                      
       (3) The rationale why the Department of the Navy was not required to
   participate in this joint program.                                      
      In addition, the committee directs the Secretary of the Navy and the 
   Secretary of the Air Force to provide a report to the Senate Committee  
   on Armed Services and the House Committee on Armed Services, no later   
   than September 1, 2000, that address the following:                     
    (1) The specific rationale as to why DJAS will not meet service needs; 

       (2) The identification of any business process reengineering        
   initiatives that were attempted in order to participate in the DJAS     
   program; and                                                            
       (3) The accounting systems are currently in use to support the      
   general ledger, funds control, budget execution, disbursing, travel,    
   cost accumulation and asset accounting for general and transportation   
   working capital funds at the installation level, the level of funding in
   fiscal year 2001 to support these systems, and whether any of the       
   identified systems will migrate to any other system in the next five    
   years, and if so identify the new system.                               
      The committee expects that a milestone III decision on DJAS shall not
   be made until these reports are submitted.                              
           DEFENSE PERSONNEL RECORDS IMAGING SYSTEM-ELECTRONICS MILITARY PERSONNEL
                                 RECORDS SYSTEM                                   
      The committee is concerned with the Defense Personnel Records Imaging
   System-Electronics Military Personnel Records System (DPRIS-EMPRS).     
   DPRIS-EMPRS is an automated imaging system whereby a digital image      
   replaces the current military personnel records systems which are stored
   on obsolete and worn out microfiche. The committee is concerned that the
   Department of the Navy is not adequately committed to DPRIS-EMPRS       
   because the Navy has not adequately funded this program since fiscal    
   year 1996. The committee notes that the Navy recently reported that this
   automated system is not being properly developed and implemented, and   
   that an inadequate number of program management support personnel is the
   principal cause of problems in the program. The Navy also reported that 
   the infrastructure to support the system development, testing, and      
   configuration management is currently non-existent. The committee,      
   however, notes the obligation of the Department of Navy to maintain an  
   adequate personnel-reporting system. The committee directs the Secretary
   of the Navy to submit a report to the Senate Committee on Armed Services
   and the House Committee on Armed Services not later than September 1,   
   2000, identifying the strategy for the sustainment of this system.      
                          DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE CIVILIAN PERSONNEL                

           Personnel safety                                                        

      The committee is concerned with civilian personnel safety and notes  
   that the Department of Defense (DOD) has a safety and worker incident   
   rate over twice the rate of comparable companies in the private sector. 
   The committee further notes that accidents to federal civilian employees
   cost the taxpayer approximately $2.4 billion per year. In the statement 
   of managers accompanying the conference report on H.R. 2561 (H. Rept.   
   106 371), the conferees directed the Secretary of Defense to initiate   
   programs funded from within existing Operation and Maintenance accounts 
   at designated DOD facilities that employ alternative, private sector    
   proven, models of safety to determine the best ways to improve DOD's    
   record with respect to injury incidence rates and associated costs. The 
   committee fully supports this effort and strongly encourages the        
   Secretary of Defense to initiate expeditiously the required worker      
   safety enhancement programs to bring the Department of Defense accident 
   rate more in line with private sector achievements.                     
           Recruiting and retention                                                

      The committee is concerned that the Department of Defense (DOD) has  
   not begun the planning necessary to recruit and retain civilian         
   employees with the technical skills required to fill the critical jobs  
   of the future. The committee received testimony from workforce shaping  
   experts that such planning is essential for large, complex organizations
   such as DOD. Yet, the committee continues to receive numerous unofficial
   requests for special hiring authorities from various components of DOD  
   that would solve a particular need for hiring scientific and engineering
   personnel.                                                              
      While the committee desires the Department to attract high quality   
   scientists and engineers, the committee is disturbed by the lack of a   
   comprehensive plan to meet this critical need. The committee directs the
   Secretary of Defense to develop a comprehensive plan to meet these      
   requirements, and to report his findings and recommendations to the     
   Senate Committee on Armed Services and the House Committee on Armed     
   Services by January 31, 2001.                                           
                      DISTANCE LEARNING COURSEWARE DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM            

      The committee is aware that distance learning technologies have the  
   potential to benefit the armed forces in many ways. These technologies  
   enable those stationed or who perform required duty away from major     
   military installations to complete required educational courses, receive
   updates on important information, and to participate remotely in        
   operationally-oriented learning activities. In short, the               
   ``anytime-anywhere'' characteristics of distance learning enable service
   members, particularly those in the National Guard and Reserve, to better
   meet military education, training and readiness requirements. Such      
   technologies could also have benefit in new, evolving areas of military 
   endeavor, such as weapons of mass destruction-related response          
   activities. The committee anticipates that funds authorized for distance
   learning will be used to create web-based courseware to meet National   
   Guard requirements associated with the development of weapons of mass   
   destruction response capabilities.                                      
                                      FINANCIAL POLICY                            

      The committee is aware of circumstances where the military services  
   have not recorded financial obligations at the time that their legal    
   obligation is incurred. The committee notes the established financial   
   management policy of the Department of Defense (DOD) requires all       
   obligations to be recorded not later than 10 calendar days following the
   date the obligation is incurred. The committee believes that prompt     
   recording of all obligations is absolutely essential to prudent         
   financial management. The committee directs the Secretary of Defense to 
   provide further guidance to the military departments and to take the    
   necessary steps to ensure that all defense agencies follow DOD          
   guidelines for the accurate and timely recording of financial           
   obligations.                                                            
                             LOCAL SCHOOL RENOVATION AND REPAIR                   

      The committee is concerned that children of military personnel are   
   forced to attend many local schools around the country that are falling 
   into disrepair. The committee understands that school districts that    
   serve a great number of military families often have difficulty raising 
   bond issues because the local tax base is constrained by the presence of
   large federal reservations. Nevertheless, the committee believes that   
   failing school infrastructure is a national problem that is not         
   restricted to local schools serving children of military personnel, and 
   is therefore not appropriately solved using Department of Defense funds.
   The committee is heartened to learn that the House Committee on         
   Education and the Workforce has passed the impact aid reauthorization   
   bill of 2000 (H.R. 3616), which when enacted, will provide authority for
   funding these needs. The committee commends the House Committee on      
   Education and the Workforce for its farsighted efforts on behalf of all 
   children of the United States, including the children of military       
   personnel. The committee agrees that these pressing needs should be     
   addressed by appropriations authorized by the committees with           
   jurisdiction over Department of Education funding.                      
                                 LOGISTICS SUPPORT PLANNING                       


      The committee notes that the Department of Defense (DOD) is          
   implementing a logistics support strategy that is resulting in actions  
   that move more authority and responsibility for the performance of      
   logistics support operations from the public to the private sector. Some
   of these actions are being taken using best practices from the private  
   sector and directly applying them to improve the efficiency and         
   effectiveness of logistics support operations. In the past, DOD has     
   based many of these initiatives on a series of studies that promote the 
   outsourcing of various logistics support activities such as supply and  
   base level maintenance. The committee understands that these initiatives
   are intended to provide resources that can be applied to the            
   modernization of military systems and equipment. The committee is       
   concerned, however, that these activities may or may not be performed   
   more cost-effectively in the private sector, and to what extent that at 
   least some of these activities should be retained by the military       
   departments to support military requirements. In addition, the General  
   Accounting Office (GAO) has issued a series of reports that question the
   adequacy of DOD's long-range logistics strategic planning process. The  
   committee believes that a comprehensive long-range logistics strategic  
   plan that is in concert with current statutes and past GAO              
   recommendations will ensure the best utilization of DOD's current       
   logistical infrastructure.                                              
      The committee directs the Comptroller General of the United States to
   provide a report to the Senate Committee on Armed Services and the House
   Committee on Armed Services, not later than February 15, 2001 that      
   addresses the following issues:                                         
       (1) An analysis of the various studies that form the basis for DOD's
   privatization initiatives to determine the extent to which these studies
   provide evidence to support the cost effectiveness of on-going and      
   proposed privatization initiatives;                                     
       (2) Cost and management data for military systems managed using     
   contractor logistics support to determine the extent to which these     
   systems provide information on cost-effectiveness of this strategy of   
   weapons system support;                                                 
       (3) An examination of depot maintenance contracts and military costs
   for the same workloads to compare the cost and responsiveness of both   
   categories of maintenance support;                                      
       (4) An examination of DOD core depot maintenance policy and its     
   implementation in each of the military services to determine:           
    a. How core maintenance policy is being implemented;                   

       b. The extent to which the military depots are being allocated      
   workloads to support new technologies and systems; and                  
       c. The extent to which the DOD depot maintenance strategy and the   
   implementation of that strategy is supporting the long-term viability of
   the military depots.                                                    
       (5) An assessment whether source-of-repair decisions are being made 
   in coordination with all sectors of the logistics community and whether 
   acquisition officials are considering total life-cycle costs in weapons 
   systems purchasing decisions;                                           
       (6) The type and extent of usage of waivers to bypass supportability
   analyses, including source-of-repair decisions for developments,        
   modifications, new acquisitions, and upgrades, and the impact on the    
   field of these waiver decisions;                                        
       (7) An assessment of the current status of the Department of the    
   Army's merger of logistics into the acquisition community, including    
   benefits/problems encountered to date and the validity of the rationale 
   for the merger; and,                                                    
       (8) An assessment of the methodology used by DOD in the formulation 
   of their long-range logistics strategic plan, and whether the plan      
   conforms with current statutes.                                         
                               MILITARY AFFILIATE RADIO SYSTEM                    

      The committee reiterates its long-standing support for the Military  
   Affiliate Radio System (MARS), a Department of Defense-sponsored program
   that relies on volunteer civilian amateur radio operators to provide an 
   auxiliary means of communication in the event of local, national, or    
   international emergencies. Although the MARS program operates at low    
   cost to the Department, the committee believes that the Department      
   continues to underutilize the system and is failing to derive maximum   
   benefit from it.                                                        
      With this in mind, the committee urges the Secretary of Defense take 
   a number of actions to improve the utility of MARS. Such actions should 
   include:                                                                
       (1) Increasing the visibility of MARS to senior military and civil  
   authority leadership;                                                   
       (2) Incorporating MARS into appropriate contingency and emergency   
   operations plans;                                                       
       (3) Increasing the use of MARS as a cost-effective and viable       
   alternative to commercial telecommunications for the purposes of troop  
   morale and welfare;                                                     
       (4) Ensuring that all forward deployed units possess communications 
   equipment capable of operation on MARS frequencies; and                 
       (5) Considering the applicability of using MARS as a low-cost test  
   bed for the evaluation of new communications technology and equipment.  
      The committee notes that contemplated changes to communications modes
   and frequency allocations between military and commercial use may       
   negatively impact the ability of MARS to fulfill its auxiliary          
   communications role in the event of emergency. The committee also notes 
   that section 1062 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal  
   Year 2000 (Public Law 106 65) prevented the commercial use of certain   
   frequencies previously assigned to the federal government and used      
   primarily by the Department of Defense, and further required an         
   interagency review prior to the commercial reallocation of frequencies  
   currently used by the Department. The committee encourages the          
   Department to ensure that issues related to MARS frequency allocations  
   are addressed in connection with any review of emergency response       
   mission requirements.                                                   
                                NATIONAL MAINTENANCE PROGRAM                      

      The committee commends the Secretary of the Army for addressing the  
   critical maintenance needs of the Army with the establishment of the    
   National Maintenance Program (NMP) and the inclusion in the budget      
   request of $16.8 million as an incremental step to execute this program 
   worldwide. While the Army is making significant progress in developing  
   the NMP, as well as developing other needed organizational changes such 
   as the Depot Maintenance Corporate Board, further improvements are      
   needed. The committee continues to believe that the Army needs an       
   effective total depot maintenance and repair program to sustain         
   readiness. For example, the Army still cannot identify the total amount 
   of depot-level maintenance work conducted at field locations.           
   Depot-level maintenance work is currently being performed by civilians  
   and active duty personnel in military units, by contractors in various  
   field locations, as well as in the public depots. Until the Army is able
   to distinguish and account for depot-level maintenance workloads from   
   other work performed by organizations outside of the established        
   maintenance depots, it is unclear how the Army can realistically comply 
   with existing statutes, including section 2466 of Title 10, United      
   States Code.                                                            
      The committee directs the Secretary of the Army to provide a report  
   to the Senate Committee on Armed Services and the House Committee on    
   Armed Service by February 1, 2001 that identifies the proliferation of  
   depot-level maintenance that is performed outside of the public depots. 
   The committee further requests that the Comptroller General of the      
   United States review this report and provide an analysis, including an  
   assessment of the Army's ability to comply with section 2466 of title 10
   United States Code, to the Senate Committee on Armed Services and the   
   House Committee on Armed Services by March 31, 2001.                    
                                     NAVAL AUDIT SERVICE                          

      The committee supports the Department of Defense and the military    
   services to implement initiatives to become more efficient and more cost
   effective. As an example, the Department of the Navy plans to reorganize
   and consolidate the Naval Audit Service. The committee supports this    
   reorganization to the extent that there is efficiency to be gained and  
   all applicable rules, regulations, and statutes are followed. The       
   committee questions, however, whether it would be efficient and         
   economical for the Department of Navy to close audit sites in major     
   fleet concentration areas. The committee, therefore, directs the        
   Secretary of the Navy to inform the Senate Committee on Armed Services  
   and the House Committee on Armed Services of any decision to close audit
   sites in major fleet concentration areas, and to submit documentation to
   support this decision, within 10 days of such a decision being made.    
   Further, the committee directs the Secretary of the Navy to take no     
   action to implement such a decision until 180 days after the            
   Congressional notification.                                             
                         RESERVE COMPONENT AUTOMATION SYSTEM (RCAS)               

      The committee notes that the Reserve Component Automation System     
   (RCAS) is a system critical to the day-to-day operational capabilities  
   and mobilization of the Army National Guard and the Army Reserve. The   
   committee is concerned that without continued support and modernization,
   the Army Reserve could experience a serious deterioration in readiness. 
   The committee is further concerned that the Army has allocated only     
   limited funding for the RCAS program in the future years defense        
   program. In order to ensure this program continues to enable the        
   effective administrative support and mobilization capability required by
   the reserve components, the committee expects the Department of the Army
   to program sufficient funds for RCAS. The                               

                     committee directs the Secretary of Defense to provide a      
          report not later that March 1, 2001 to the Senate Committee on Armed    
          Services and the House Committee on Armed Services detailing programmed 
          funds for RCAS for fiscal years 2002 through 2007.                      
                                   SPARE AND REPAIR PARTS                         

      The committee continues to be concerned by reports of persistent     
   shortages of spare and repair parts throughout the military services.   
   The committee believes that one of the primary causes of unacceptable   
   reliability rates, especially for operational unit aircraft, is the     
   shortage of spare repair parts. The status of critical Air Force C 5    
   aircraft repair and spare parts is illustrative of the committee's      
   concern. The C 5 remains a key asset in air mobility and the airlifting 
   of heavy equipment and personnel to both military contingencies and     
   humanitarian relief efforts around the world. While the Air Force has   
   identified several problem areas, and has begun to implement actions    
   that are intended to mitigate this problem, the committee continues to  
   receive reports of spare and repair parts backlogs and repeated parts   
   cannibalization of air-worthy C 5 aircraft.                             
      The committee is concerned whether the Air Force will be able to meet
   all of its commitments in the future without addressing its parts       
   shortfall problems. As such, the committee directs the Secretary of the 
   Air Force to report to the Senate Committee on Armed Services and the   
   House Committee on Armed Services no later than January 31, 2001 and    
   again on September 30, 2001 on the overall status of the Air Force spare
   and repair parts program, with a specific emphasis on the C 5 aircraft, 
   to include whether the necessary resources are programmed to address    
   future spare and repair parts requirements.                             
                                   URBAN WARFARE TRAINING                         

      The committee notes favorably the recent assessment conducted by     
   General Accounting Office of the Department of Defense's (DOD) urban    
   warfare training. The committee is concerned about significant          
   shortfalls in the areas of joint experimentation, joint training and    
   training facilities, and intelligence. The committee is aware that joint
   experimentation, which is designed to systematically evaluate what new  
   doctrine, organizations, and equipment are needed for urban operations, 
   is not taking place. Although urban operations will likely involve      
   larger units such as battalions and brigades, the military services     
   continue to concentrate their urban training on individual soldiers and 
   small units, such as squads, platoons, and companies.                   
      The committee supports the recommendation of the GAO that the        
   Secretary of Defense should designate a single entity to lead and       
   coordinate Joint Staff and service efforts to improve capabilities to   
   conduct urban operations. The committee believes that the current Joint 
   Urban Working Group does not have the resources or authority necessary  
   to ensure the necessary coordination in this area.                      
      Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense to         
   designate an appropriate executive agent with the authority to develop  
   and coordinate a master plan for a DOD-wide strategy, with milestones,  
   for improving service and joint capabilities to conduct military        
   operations in urban environments. The committee further directs the     
   Secretary of Defense to report on such a master plan to the Senate      
   Committee on Armed Services and the House Committee on Armed Services by
   February 1, 2001.                                                       
                                   LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS                         

                        SUBTITLE A--AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS               

                       SECTION 301--OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE FUNDING             

      This section would authorize $ XXX million in operations and         
   maintenance funding for the Armed Forces and other activities and       
   agencies of the Department of Defense.                                  
                             SECTION 302--WORKING CAPITAL FUNDS                   

      This section would authorize $ XXX million for Working Capital Funds 
   of the Department of Defense.                                           
                          SECTION 303--ARMED FORCES RETIREMENT HOME               

      This section would authorize $69.832 million from the Armed Forces   
   Retirement Trust Fund for the operation of the Armed Forces Retirement  
   Home, including the U.S. Soldiers' and Airmen's Home and the Naval Home.
           SECTION 304--TRANSFER FROM NATIONAL DEFENSE STOCKPILE TRANSACTION FUND 

      This section would authorize the Secretary of Defense to transfer not
   more than $150.0 million from the amounts received from sales in the    
   National Defense Stockpile Transaction Fund to the operation and        
   maintenance accounts of the military services.                          
                            SUBTITLE B--ENVIRONMENTAL PROVISIONS                  

           SECTION 311--PAYMENT OF FINES AND PENALTIES IMPOSED FOR ENVIRONMENTAL  
                                   VIOLATIONS                                     
      This section would authorize the secretary of the army and the       
   Secretary of the Navy to pay for specific environmental violations at   
   several locations within the united states.                             
           SECTION 312--NECESSITY OF MILITARY LOW-LEVEL FLIGHT TRAINING TO PROTECT
                NATIONAL SECURITY AND ENHANCE MILITARY READINESS                  
      This section would mandate that the environmental impact statements  
   previously completed for special use airspace designated by a military  
   department, for the performance of low-level training flights, satisfy  
   the requirements of the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (title
   42, United States Code).                                                
             SECTION 313--USE OF ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION ACCOUNTS TO RELOCATE   
             ACTIVITIES FROM DEFENSE ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION SITES              
      This section would amend section 2703 of title 10, United States     
   Code, to authorize environmental restoration funds to be obligated or   
   expended in order to permanently relocate facilities on land under the  
   control of the Department of Defense, or formerly under control of the  
   Department, if there is a release of a hazardous material on the land,  
   and the Department is obligated to cleanup and restore the land. This   
   new authority would be in effect for the next three fiscal years.       
            SUBTITLE C--COMMISSARIES AND NONAPPROPRIATED FUND INSTRUMENTALITIES   

           SECTION 321--USE OF APPROPRIATED FUNDS TO COVER OPERATING EXPENSES OF  
                                COMMISSARY STORES                                 
      This section would provide that funds appropriated for the operation 
   of the Defense Commissary Agency (DECA) may be used for salaries,       
   utilities, communications, operating supplies and services, second      
   destination transportation costs, and above store level costs.          
      The committee notes that the surcharge fund currently supports       
   several of these items. The committee is concerned that since the       
   surcharge must pay operational expenses first, little or no funds remain
   to provide for store maintenance and replacement. The committee believes
   that appropriated funds are the correct funding source for commissary   
   store operating costs, leaving to the commissary patron the             
   responsibility of providing for capital replacement through payment of  
   the surcharge. The committee expects, however, that DECA will           
   aggressively pursue efficiencies that will result in no increase in the 
   requirement for appropriated fund support.                              
           SECTION 322--ADJUSTMENT OF SALES PRICES OF COMMISSARY STORE GOODS AND  
                       SERVICES TO COVER CERTAIN EXPENSES                         
      This section would clarify that commissary store prices shall include
   the cost of first destination transportation of the goods to the stores 
   and the actual or estimated cost of shrinkage, spoilage, and pilferage  
   of merchandise under the control of commissary stores. The committee    
   notes that the Defense Commissary Agency has an exceptional record in   
   controlling shrinkage and expects that high standard to continue.       
             SECTION 323--USE OF SURCHARGES FOR CONSTRUCTION AND IMPROVEMENT OF   
                                COMMISSARY STORES                                 
      This section would limit the responsibility of the patrons to finance
   the commissary system with their surcharge dollars to store replacement 
   and maintenance only, putting the surcharge fund on sound financial     
   footing. This section would provide that funds received from the        
   surcharge on the price of goods sold in commissary stores               

                    shall be used exclusively for construction and maintenance of 
          commissary stores and central product processing facilities.            
      The committee notes that the surcharge currently is responsible to   
   fund these items, as well as other expenses such as utilities, operating
   supplies, and Defense Commissary Agency wide information technology. The
   committee notes further that the surcharge is unable to meet these      
   expenses and still provide for the maintenance and replacement of older 
   stores. The committee believes that commissaries are an essential       
   non-pay benefit for the nation's service members, retirees, and their   
   families; and that a system of commissary stores bereft of capital      
   funding is not a true benefit.                                          
              SECTION 324--INCLUSION OF MAGAZINES AND OTHER PERIODICALS AS AN     
                   AUTHORIZED COMMISSARY MERCHANDISE CATEGORY                     
      This section would remove magazines and periodicals as items that may
   be sold in commissary stores as noncommissary store inventory and add   
   magazines and periodicals to the list of authorized commissary store    
   merchandise.                                                            
      The committee believes that military patrons rightfully expect to    
   find magazines and periodicals at the checkout counter, as is the       
   practice in commercial grocery stores. The committee understands that   
   this change will provide extra funding to the commissary surcharge fund 
   through increased sales with little impact on military exchange sales.  
           SECTION 325--USE OF MOST ECONOMICAL DISTRIBUTION METHOD FOR DISTILLED  
                                     SPIRITS                                      
      This section would amend section 2488 of title 10, United States     
   Code, to repeal the restriction on the procurement of distilled spirits 
   from a private distributor by nonappropriated fund instrumentalities if 
   the use of a private distributor results in direct or indirect state    
   taxation.                                                               
      The committee notes that in some instances nonappropriated fund      
   instrumentalities are currently compelled to make less than optimal     
   purchases in order to avoid state taxes. The committee urges            
   nonappropriated fund instrumentalities to explore the most economical   
   means of procurement of all products intended for resale.               
             SECTION 326--REPORT ON EFFECTS OF AVAILABILITY OF SLOT MACHINES ON   
                  UNITED STATES MILITARY INSTALLATIONS OVERSEAS                   
      This section would require the Secretary of Defense to report to     
   Congress the effect that the military services' slot machine operations 
   overseas have on military community life and service members' personal  
   financial stability.                                                    
               SUBTITLE D--PERFORMANCE OF FUNCTIONS BY PRIVATE-SECTOR SOURCES     

           SECTION 331--INCLUSION OF ADDITIONAL INFORMATION IN REPORTS TO CONGRESS
    REQUIRED BEFORE CONVERSION OF COMMERCIAL OR INDUSTRIAL TYPE FUNCTIONS TO      
                             CONTRACTOR PERFORMANCE                               
      This section would amend section 2461 of title 10, United States     
   Code, to require the Secretary of Defense to provide Congress additional
   information on studies concerning the change of performance of          
   Department of Defense functions by civilian personnel to performance by 
   the private sector. The provision would require the Secretary of Defense
   to identify when outsourcing studies were initiated, how the results of 
   the study will affect the government workforce, and a certification that
   necessary funds have been specifically included in a budget request to  
   perform the study.                                                      
            SECTION 332--LIMITATION REGARDING NAVY MARINE CORPS INTRANET CONTRACT 

      This section would prohibit the Secretary of the Navy from using     
   FY2001 funds for payment of a long-term contract for comprehensive      
   end-to-end information services until supporting documentation is       
   provided to Congress.                                                   
      The committee understands that the Department of the Navy's          
   initiative, known as the Navy Marine Corps Intranet (NMCI), is an effort
   to acquire information technology that would require a private sector   
   contractor to own and maintain all Navy and Marine Corps desktop        
   computers, network hardware, and software, and to provide all other     
   required information technology services. The proposed transfer of      
   responsibility from the Navy to the private sector is to be achieved    
   through a ``seat management'' contract. The committee notes that the    
   Navy's expected contract for at least 360,000 seats would exceed all    
   prior government contracting experience.                                
      The committee recognizes the Navy's requirement for seamless and     
   interoperable data, voice, and video communications. The committee,     
   however, is quite concerned with the Navy's overall approach to this    
   multi-billion dollar initiative. First, of utmost concern, is the Navy's
   failure to present Congress with any documentation in the budget request
   for this initiative. In pursuit of this initiative the Navy has         
   circumvented internal financial management regulations and Office of    
   Management and Budget requirements. Despite repeated requests, the Navy 
   has not identified what funds will be used in the procurement of the    
   Navy Marine Corps Intranet. The committee is concerned by the Navy's    
   failure to provide basic funding information when the Navy plans to     
   award a multi-billion contract in fiscal year 2000. This section would  
   prohibit the use of FY2001 funds for NMCI until the Navy provides       
   Congress the specific funding requirements for the NMCI contract.       
      The committee expects that if the Navy enters into the NMCI contract,
   that in future year budget submissions the Navy will comply with all    
   planning and budgeting documents.                                       
                          SUBTITLE E--DEFENSE DEPENDENTS EDUCATION                

             SECTION 341--ASSISTANCE TO LOCAL EDUCATIONAL AGENCIES THAT BENEFIT   
  DEPENDENTS OF MEMBERS OF THE ARMED FORCES AND DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE CIVILIAN    
                                    EMPLOYEES                                     
      This section would authorize $35.0 million for educational assistance
   to local education agencies where the standard for the minimum level of 
   education within the state could not be maintained because of the large 
   number of military connected students. The committee's long-standing    
   commitment to the children of military personnel has provided           
   significant assistance to their education.                              
      The committee acknowledges that the Department of Education impact   
   aid program provides supplementary funds to eligible school districts   
   nationwide, and the committee believes that the Department of Education 
   should continue to asserts its leading role to provide federal support  
   for the educational needs of the children of military personnel.        
           SECTION 342--ELIGIBILITY REQUIREMENTS FOR ATTENDANCE AT DEPARTMENT OF  
           DEFENSE DOMESTIC DEPENDENT ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY SCHOOLS            
      This section would authorize the Secretary of Defense to permit a    
   student who is a dependent of an employee of the American Red Cross     
   performing armed forces emergency services on a full-time basis to      
   enroll in Department of Defense domestic schools located in Puerto Rico 
   on a reimbursable basis. The committee notes that children of Red Cross 
   employees stationed in overseas areas are currently authorized to enroll
   in Department of Defense overseas schools on a reimbursable basis. The  
   committee believes that similarly-situated dependents of American Red   
   Cross employees in Puerto Rico should have similar privileges.          
                           SUBTITLE F--MILITARY READINESS ISSUES                  

            SECTION 351--ADDITIONAL CAPABILITIES OF, AND REPORTING REQUIREMENTS   
                       FOR, THE READINESS REPORTING SYSTEM                        
      This section would amend section 117 of title 10, United States Code 
   to include an annual report detailing the funding programmed for        
   deficiencies identified in the Joint Monthly Readiness Review process.  
   Currently, section 117 requires the Secretary of Defense to provide     
   Congress with a quarterly report detailing the readiness of military    
   units. Although generally satisfied with the information provided by    
   this report, the committee believes there should be additional          
   information included to provide an indication that adequate funding is  
   being programmed for identified military readiness and capability       
   deficiencies. This section would provide Congress with more visibility  
   of the existence of these readiness deficiencies and the programmed     
   funding to rectify these known deficiencies.                            
      This section would also require the reporting of the amount of       
   cannibalization performed on vehicles and aircraft during the quarter   
   and the efforts being made to decrease the amount of cannibalization    
   required. The committee is concerned with the increasing amount of      
   cannibalization that takes place in each of the service's maintenance   
   programs due to the chronic shortage of spare and replacement parts. The
   committee continues to hear of numerous occasions where aircraft sit in 
   hangars and are used for spare parts, which are unavailable through     
   normal parts requisition channels. The cannibalization of parts creates 
   extra work for an already overworked maintenance crew and often leads to
   the damage of other parts in the process.                               

                SECTION 352--REPORTING REQUIREMENTS REGARDING TRANSFERS FROM      
                     HIGH-PRIORITY READINESS APPROPRIATIONS                       
      This section would amend section 483 of title 10, United States Code,
   which currently requires an annual report to Congress on any transfers  
   from several specified high-priority readiness accounts. This section   
   would extend the requirement for this report and expands the report to  
   include additional high priority sub-activity groups.                   
      In recent years, the Department of Defense has improved the          
   information it gives to Congress on the movement of Operations and      
   Maintenance (O&M) funds. The report, submitted pursuant to section 483, 
   has been useful to the committee in trying to understand the transfers  
   of funds from several critical readiness accounts. The committee        
   believes that extending and expanding the requirement for this report   
   would continue to be helpful in reviewing the transfer of funds within  
   operation and maintenance accounts.                                     
           SECTION 353--DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE STRATEGIC PLAN TO REDUCE BACKLOG IN 
                  MAINTENANCE AND REPAIR OF DEFENSE FACILITIES                    
      This section would require the Secretary of Defense to develop an    
   overall strategic plan for the maintenance, repair, and sustainment of  
   facilities and infrastructure of the Department of Defense (DOD) to     
   include a comprehensive strategy for facilities revitalization,         
   replacement, demolition of unusable facilities, and sustainment         
   maintenance tied to measurable goals, specified time frames, and        
   expected funding in the five year defense plan. The provision would     
   require the plan to be submitted to the Congressional defense committees
   by March 15, 2001, and be updated annually.                             
      The committee is concerned that the Department of Defense and the    
   military services do not have complete, reliable information on the cost
   associated with either maintaining their current facilities             
   infrastructure or the cost associated with various infrastructure       
   reduction options. Such information is critical to the development of a 
   department-wide strategic plan that considers difficult options for the 
   care and maintenance of essential facilities and infrastructure. The    
   committee is also concerned that the complete disclosure of costs       
   associated with facilities' deferred maintenance and repair and         
   demolition cannot be adequately calculated without such a plan.         
                                 SUBTITLE G--OTHER MATTERS                        

              SECTION 361--AUTHORITY TO ENSURE DEMILITARIZATION OF SIGNIFICANT    
         MILITARY EQUIPMENT FORMERLY OWNED BY THE DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE           
      This section would amend chapter 153 of title 10, United States Code 
   to allow the Secretary of Defense to recover significant military       
   equipment that has been released by the Department of Defense without   
   proper demilitarization. Section 1051 of the Strom Thurmond National    
   Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1999 (Public Law 105 261)     
   identified the need for the Department of Defense to improve            
   demilitarization of excess and surplus defense property. This section   
   would clarify the authority of the United States to recover critical and
   sensitive defense property that has been inadequately demilitarized.    
           SECTION 362--ANNUAL REPORT ON PUBLIC SALE OF CERTAIN MILITARY EQUIPMENT
                   IDENTIFIED ON UNITED STATES MUNITIONS LIST                     
      This section would require the Secretary of Defense to report        
   annually to the Senate Committee on Armed Services and the House        
   Committee on Armed Services on excess military items sold to the public.
   The report would list all items sold to the public that were included on
   the United States Munitions List and labeled with a Department of       
   Defense (DOD) demilitarization code of ``B''. Demilitarization code     
   ``B'' is placed on any item of inventory that is included on the United 
   States Munitions List and for which the Department of Defense does not  
   require demilitarization before the item is sold to the public.         
      The committee is concerned that once again sales of excess military  
   items may have been diverted to uses and individuals that could be      
   harmful to national security. The committee is aware of a recent case in
   which individuals were indicted for illegally exporting items on the    
   munitions list to China without the required export license. The        
   committee understands that the items included export-controlled         
   electronic parts for missiles and military aircraft.                    
            SECTION 363--REGISTRATION OF CERTAIN INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY SYSTEMS   
                         WITH CHIEF INFORMATION OFFICER                           
      This section would require that for the next three fiscal years all  
   mission essential and mission critical information technology system be 
   registered with the Chief Information Officer of the Department of      
   Defense.                                                                
            SECTION 364--STUDIES AND REPORTS REQUIRED AS PRECONDITION TO CERTAIN  
                               MANPOWER REDUCTIONS                                
      This section would require the Secretary of Defense to provide a     
   report to the Senate Committee on Armed Services and the House Committee
   on Armed Services prior to the initiation of any civilian manpower      
   reductions at any organizations within the Department of Defense. A     
   separate report would also be required once a decision has been made to 
   consolidate, restructure, or reengineer an organization or function     
   within the Department.                                                  
           SECTION 365--NATIONAL GUARD ASSISTANCE FOR CERTAIN YOUTH AND CHARITABLE
                                  ORGANIZATIONS                                   
      This section would amend section 508 of title 32, United States Code 
   to include an additional youth organization, known as Reach for         
   Tomorrow, to the list of youth and charitable organizations that are    
   eligible for assistance by the National Guard.                          
                                MILITARY PERSONNEL OVERVIEW                       

      The committee's military personnel recommendations have four major   
   complementary goals that, taken together, will advance and help to      
   sustain the manpower readiness of the all-volunteer force. Those four   
   goals are to:                                                           
       (1) Reform the Defense Health Program (DHP) to improve the TRICARE  
   managed care program; to achieve savings in the DHP through management  
   and process changes; to provide access for all Medicare-eligible        
   military retirees to a pharmacy benefit; and to set the stage for the   
   near-term implementation of a permanent health care program for         
   Medicare-eligible military retirees.                                    
       (2) Continue improvements in the economic well-being of military    
   personnel and their families--a long term effort begun last year by the 
   committee--through both targeted and broad-based pay and benefits       
   initiatives that put real dollars in the pockets of soldiers, sailors,  
   airmen, and marines.                                                    
       (3) Assist the armed services in the demanding task of attracting   
   and retaining sufficient numbers of quality personnel.                  
       (4) Provide targeted increases in active and reserve military       
   manpower where such increases improve readiness or otherwise directly   
   facilitate the recruiting effort.                                       
      A fundamental challenge facing the committee in achieving these goals
   was that the President's budget request was clearly inadequate in       
   several key aspects and required substantial enhancement.               
      With regard to health care, for example, the budget request failed to
   support the commitment of the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff to  
   provide health care reform for military retirees. To fulfill that       
   commitment and to make substantial progress toward defining permanently 
   future military retiree health care, the committee recommends a retail  
   and mail order pharmacy benefit for all Medicare-eligible military      
   retirees and their families. The committee also is committed to renewing
   TRICARE Senior Prime (the Medicare subvention demonstration program)    
   that the Department of Defense would have allowed to expire this year,  
   and extending the two other demonstration programs--TRICARE Senior      
   Supplement and the Federal Employees Health Benefit Program. In         
   addition, believing that final decisions must soon be made to define the
   military health care benefit for Medicare-eligibles, the committee      
   recommends a process to implement a permanent benefit in 2004. To fund  
   the pharmacy benefit and other health care initiatives, including DHP   
   reforms designed to reduce spending by as much as $500.0 million over   
   the next five years, the committee recommends an increase of over $286.0
   million to the DHP.                                                     
      With regard to its longstanding effort to improve the economic       
   viability of service members and their families, the committee again    
   went beyond the welcome, but limited, initiatives contained in the      
   budget request. For example, the committee authorizes a targeted        
   subsistence payment, and $5.0 million, that is designed to assist the   
   most economically challenged service personnel--those living off post   
   and receiving food stamps. To more comprehensively address the economic 
   difficulties confronting junior enlisted people, the committee also     
   authorizes $30.0 million and requires an upward revision of minimum     
   housing standards. Also, the committee provides $30.0 million, an       
   increase of nearly 19 percent over the budget request to accelerate the 
   reduction in service members' out-of-pocket housing costs, and $6.0     
   million to establish a minimum                                          

                    dislocation allowance. This latter measure, targeting junior  
          enlisted military personnel, would begin to reduce the substantial      
          out-of-pocket costs military people experience while moving. Moreover,  
          despite numerous other proposals in the President's budget request that 
          both increased and reduced entitlement spending, the budget request gave
          no priority to the entitlement spending needed to allow service members 
          to participate in the Thrift Savings Plan (TSP). To rectify this        
          significant shortfall, the committee, building on the funding provided  
          in the conference agreement on the Concurrent Resolution on the Budget  
          for Fiscal Year 2001, authorizes service members to begin enrolling in  
          TSP.                                                                    
      Being aware of the severe and continuing challenges facing each of   
   the military services in their mutual goal of sustaining the            
   all-volunteer force with sufficient numbers of quality personnel, the   
   committee is disturbed to learn that most service budget requests for   
   fiscal year 2001 reflect either steady state or decreased funding from  
   fiscal year 2000 when measured in the investment per recruit, or in     
   select critical recruiting accounts, and that the recruiting and        
   retention budget shortfalls identified by the services amount to more   
   than $700.0 million. Furthermore, the current Deputy Secretary of       
   Defense testified to the committee that the services deliberately       
   underfunded recruiting and retention, with the expectation that Congress
   would step up to fill the shortfalls.                                   
      This information directly affected the committee's decision regarding
   funding allocations for the services' recruiting and retention. First,  
   where in the past the committee has willingly provided added resources  
   to meet much of the services' unfunded requirements, this year the      
   committee recommends additional funding for less than one third of the  
   shortfall, an increase of $217.6 million. Second, the recommended       
   additional funding gives priority to enlistment and reenlistment        
   bonuses, rather than recruiting advertising because bonuses not only are
   highly effective at drawing and retaining people, but they also put     
   money into service members' pockets. The committee strongly urges the   
   military services to resolve the remaining fiscal year 2001 recruiting  
   and retention requirements in the fiscal year 2002 budget request.      
      Finally, in an effort to overcome the manpower shortfalls contained  
   in the budget request for both the active and reserve components, the   
   committee authorizes nearly 650 additional active duty Navy personnel,  
   and a total of nearly 2,900 full time support personnel in the Army     
   National Guard, the Army Reserve, Navy Reserve and Marine Corps Reserve.

           TITLE IV--MILITARY PERSONNEL AUTHORIZATIONS                            

                                 SUBTITLE A--ACTIVE FORCES                        

                        SECTION 401--END STRENGTHS FOR ACTIVE FORCES              

      This section would authorize the following end strengths for active  
   duty personnel of the armed forces as of September 30, 2001.            

                                                                                                                      

Service      FY 2000 authorized & floor    FY 2001 request    FY 2001 committee recommendation    Change from FY 2001 request  

Army                            480,000            480,000                             480,000                              0  
Navy                            372,037            372,000                             372,642                            642  
USMC                            172,518            172,600                             172,600                              0  
USAF                            360,877            357,000                             357,000                              0  
DOD                           1,385,432          1,381,600                           1,382,242                            642  

      The committee, responding to the critical manpower shortfall         
   identified by the Chief of Naval Operations, recommends an increase in  
   Navy end strength by 642 above the requested level. The increase will   
   provide 500 recruiters, as well as 142 personnel for the crew of the    
   U.S.S. Houston that the Navy intends to retain in the force structure.  
   To support the additional end strength, the committee authorizes an     
   increase of $18.5 million in Navy military personnel accounts.          
               SECTION 402--REVISION IN PERMANENT END STRENGTH MINIMUM LEVELS     

      This section would amend section 691 of title 10, United States Code,
   by establishing end strength floors for the active forces at the end    
   strengths contained in the budget request.                              
      The committee is surprised that each of the active and reserve       
   components of the Air Force are projected to end fiscal year 2000 below 
   the strengths authorized by law. The committee notes that the           
   Congressional Budget Office projects that the active Air Force could    
   have a shortfall of up to 4,700, the Air National Guard a shortfall of  
   up to 3,200, and the Air Force Reserve a shortfall of as much as 2,300. 
   If these predictions should become fact, the active Air Force will      
   violate the statutory end strength floor for a second consecutive year. 
   The existence of these projected shortfalls in the Air Force is         
   surprising because Congress provided, in the National Defense           
   Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2000 (Public Law 105 65) and the      
   Defense Appropriations Act for Fiscal Year 2000 (Public Law 106 79) the 
   full funding requested by the Department of Defense to sustain end      
   strengths at the requested levels, as well as additional funding beyond 
   the budget request for recruiting and retention initiatives. While the  
   committee applauds the recent Air Force decision to launch major        
   short-term initiatives to stave off active component recruiting and     
   retention shortfalls in fiscal year 2000, the committee believes that   
   the fundamental cause of the projected fiscal year 2000 end strength    
   shortfalls is a lack of early full commitment by the Department of the  
   Air Force to sustain required manpower levels with adequate resources.  
      The committee urges the Secretary of Defense to ensure that future   
   budget requests comply with the requirements of section 691 of title 10,
   United States Code, and to provide the full funding required to sustain 
   active and reserve end strengths at the levels required by law.         
                SECTION 403--ADJUSTMENT TO END STRENGTH FLEXIBILITY AUTHORITY     

      This section would authorize the Secretary to reduce the end strength
   below the floor in cases where the authorized end strength was higher   
   than the floor. Section 691(e) of title 10, United States Code, provides
   authority to the Secretary of Defense to reduce by one-half of one per  
   cent the authorized end strength of a service when the statutorily      
   authorized end strength is equal to the end strength floor established  
   in law.                                                                 
                                 SUBTITLE B--RESERVE FORCES                       

                       SECTION 411--END STRENGTHS FOR SELECTED RESERVE            

      This section would authorize the following end strengths for the     
   selected reserve personnel, including the end strength for reserves on  
   active duty in support of the reserves, as of September 30, 2001:       

                                                                                                                           

Service                   FY 2000 authorized    FY 2001 request    FY 2001 committee recommendation    Change from FY 2001 request  

Army National Guard                  350,000            350,000                             350,706                            706  
Army Reserve                         205,000            205,000                             205,300                            300  
Naval Reserve                         90,288             88,900                              88,900                              0  
Marine Corps Reserve                  39,624             39,500                              39,558                             58  
Air National Guard                   106,678            108,000                             108,000                              0  
Air Force Reserve                     73,708             74,300                              74,358                             58  
Coast Guard Reserve                    8,000              8,000                               8,000                              0  
                        --------------------  -----------------  ----------------------------------  -----------------------------  
Total                                873,298            873,700                             874,822                          1,122  

            SECTION 412--END STRENGTHS FOR RESERVES ON ACTIVE DUTY IN SUPPORT OF  
                                  THE RESERVES                                    
      This section would authorize the following end strengths for reserves
   on active duty in support of the reserves as of September 30, 2001:     

                                                                                                                     

Service                    FY 2000 authorized    FY 2001 request     Committee recommendation    Change from FY 2001 request  

Army National Guard                    22,430             22,448                       23,154                            706  
Army Reserve                           12,804             12,806                       13,106                            300  
Naval Reserve                          15,010             14,649                       14,649                              0  
Marine Corps Reserve                    2,272              2,203                        2,261                             58  
Air National Guard                     11,157             11,148                       11,148                              0  
Air Force Reserve                       1,134              1,278                        1,336                             58  
                        ---------------------  -----------------  ---------------------------  -----------------------------  
Total                                  64,807             64,532                       65,654                          1,122  

      The committee believes that full time manning is a crucial component 
   of readiness in the reserve components and therefore recommends an      
   increase of 1,122 above the requested end strength for reserves on      
   active duty to support the reserve components. To support the increase, 
   the committee authorizes an additional $37.5 million.                   
              SECTION 413--END STRENGTH FOR MILITARY TECHNICIANS (DUAL STATUS)    

      This section would authorize the following end strengths for military
   technicians (dual status) as of September 30, 2001:                     

                                                                                                                                  

Service                  FY 2000 authorized (floor)    FY 2001 request    Committee recommendation (floor)    Change from FY 2001 request  

Army National Guard                          23,125             22,357                              23,392                          1,035  
Army Reserve                                  6,474              5,271                               5,921                            650  
Air National Guard                           22,247             22,221                              22,247                             26  
Air Force Reserve                             9,785              9,733                               9,785                             52  
                       ----------------------------  -----------------  ----------------------------------  -----------------------------  
Total                                        61,631             59,582                              61,345                          1,763  

      The committee recommends an increase of 1,763 in the requested end   
   strength for military technicians (dual status). The bulk of the        
   increase is to meet high priority manning shortfalls in the Army        
   National Guard and the Army Reserve. To support the increases, the      
   committee authorizes a total increase of $51.0 million to the civilian  
   personnel pay accounts of those two components.                         
      The committee is aware that some of the military services have       
   attempted to reduce civilian personnel funding for technicians in the   
   belief that because the annual defense authorization act does not       
   specifically authorize end strength for non-dual status technicians, the
   committee is suggesting that non-dual status technicians should not be  
   funded. To the contrary, the committee believes that the civilian       
   personnel accounts of                                                   

                    the military services must fund not only the military         
          technician (dual status) end strength authorized above, but also the    
          end-strength for the non-dual status technician end strength indicated  
          below:                                                                  


Service                                                                 

FY 2001 request                                                         

  Army National Guard                                                     

 1,600                                                                   

  Army Reserve                                                            

 997                                                                     

  Air National Guard                                                      

 326                                                                     

  Air Force Reserve                                                       

 0                                                                       

                                                                          

  Total                                                                   

 2,923                                                                   


           SECTION 414--INCREASE IN NUMBER OF MEMBERS IN CERTAIN GRADES AUTHORIZED
                 TO BE ON ACTIVE DUTY IN SUPPORT OF THE RESERVES                  
      This section would authorize increases in the grades of reserve      
   members authorized to serve on active duty or on full-time national     
   guard duty for the administration of the reserves or the national guard.
   The section would authorize 20 additional colonels, 82 additional       
   lieutenant colonels, 138 additional majors, 97 additional E 9s, and 90  
   additional E 8s in the Air Force. This section would also authorize 76  
   additional colonels, 219 additional lieutenant colonels, 178 additional 
   majors, 221 additional E 9s, and 373 additional E 8s in the Army. The   
   committee believes these increases are necessary to support the         
   additional missions now being performed by the reserve components.      
      The committee notes that the increases listed above would be the     
   third consecutive year in which the grade tables were adjusted for      
   reserve officers on active duty in support of the reserves. The         
   committee recognizes that section 555 of the National Defense           
   Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2000 (Public Law 106 65) expanded the 
   roles that could be performed by reserve officers on active duty in     
   support of the reserves and that there would be new requirements for    
   career progression for these officers. The committee believes a         
   comprehensive solution for the controlled grades is now necessary.      
      Accordingly, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense to study 
   the grades assigned to reserve officers on active duty in support of the
   reserves and to recommend a permanent solution for managing the grade   
   structure for those officers. In developing his recommendations, the    
   Secretary should consider the following areas during the study:         
       (1) The grade structure authorized for the active duty forces and   
   the reasons why the grade structure for reserve officers on active duty 
   in support of the reserves is different;                                
    (2) The need for independent grade limits for each reserve component;  

       (3) The potential for repealing the current grade tables in favor of
   a system that would manage grades based on the grade authorized for the 
   position occupied by the service member; and                            
       (4) The current mix within each reserve component of traditional    
   reservists, military/civilian technicians, regular component officers,  
   and reserve officers on active duty in support of the reserves in each  
   controlled grade and how that mix for each component would shift over   
   time under the Secretary's recommended solution.                        
      The committee further directs the Secretary to report on his findings
   and recommendations to the Senate Committee on Armed Services and the   
   House Committee on Armed Services by March 31, 2001.                    
                        SUBTITLE C--AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS               

             SECTION 421--AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS FOR MILITARY PERSONNEL  

      This section would authorize $75,801.7 million to be appropriated for
   military personnel.                                                     
      This authorization of appropriations reflects both reductions and    
   increases to the budget request that are itemized below.                

                                                                                            
                                    [Dollars in millions]                                   

                                                   Military personnel accounts    O&M  accounts  

   RECOMMENDED INCREASES                                                                            
Active End Strength:                                                                             
 Navy:                                                                                            
Add Recruiters (500)                                                     $15.0                   
USS Houston (142)                                                          3.5                   
RC End Strength:                                                                                 
 Army National Guard:                                                                             
Add AGR's (706)                                                           23.5                   
Add Military Technicians (Dual Status) (1035)                                             $30.5  
 Army Reserve:                                                                                    
Add AGR's (300)                                                           10.0                   
Add Military Technicians (Dual Status) (650)                                               20.5  
 Air Force Reserve:                                                                               
Add AGR Recruiters (50)                                                    1.7                   
Add Red Horse AGR's (8)                                                    0.4                   
Compensation                                                              30.0                   
Recruiting & Retention:                                                                          
 Army:                                                                                            
Enlistment Bonus                                                          50.0                   
Senior ROTC Recruiting                                                                      7.0  
 Army Reserve:                                                                                    
Recruiting Advertising                                                                      9.0  
Additional Recruiters                                                      1.0                   
Enlistment Bonus                                                          12.0                   
 Navy Reserve:                                                                                    
Recruiting Advertising                                                                      3.7  
Recruiter Support                                                                           3.0  
Non-prior Svc Enlistment Bonus                                             2.4                   
 USMC:                                                                                            
Enlistment Bonus                                                           4.0                   
Selective Reenlistment Bonus                                               4.0                   
College Fund                                                               4.4                   
Recruiting Advertising                                                                      7.5  
Recruiter Support                                                                           0.6  
 Air Force:                                                                                       
Enlistment Bonus                                                           7.5                   
Selective Reenlistment Bonus                                              29.0                   
College-to-USAF Enl. Program                                               6.0                   
 Air Guard:                                                                                       
Recruiter Support                                                                           3.5  
Recruiting Advertising                                                                      6.0  
 AF Reserve:                                                                                      
Tuition Assistance                                                         5.2                   
Air Reserve Technician Pilot Retention Bonus                                                5.0  
AGR Pilot Retention Bonus                                                  3.8                   
Senior ROTC:                                                                                0.4  
Other Issues:                                                                               3.0  
 Naval Reserve:                                                                                   
Reserve Annual Training                                                    2.4                   
Reserve ADT (CINC Support)                                                13.4                   
Reserve ADT (Schools)                                                      4.4                   
ADSW (Voluntary Support)                                                   1.2                   
Inactive Duty for Training Travel                                          3.5                   
Defense Health Program:                                                                     2.0  
                                                 -----------------------------  ---------------  
Total Recommended Additions                                              326.2            396.2  



                                                                                                         
                                          [Dollars in millions]                                          

                                                                 Military personnel accunts    O&M  accounts  

   RECOMMENDED REDUCTIONS                                                                                        
Active Component Strength and Grade Underexecution:                                    $5.3                   
Reserve Component Strength, Grade and Drill Underexecution:                             4.2                   
DOD Reserve Mobilization Income Insurance Fund                                         17.0                   
Defense Health Program Foreign Military Training                                                       $10.0  
Unemployment Compensation:                                                              2.1                   
Foreign Currency Fluctuation:                                                          73.3                   
                                                               ----------------------------  ---------------  
Total Recommended Reductions                                                          326.2             25.4  


           TITLE V--MILITARY PERSONNEL POLICY                                     

                                 ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST                        

                      DEFENSE PRISONER OF WAR/MISSING IN ACTION OFFICE            

      The committee notes that section 1501 of title 10, United States     
   Code, charges the Defense Prisoner of War/Missing in Action Office      
   (DPMO) with broad responsibilities throughout the Department of Defense 
   concerning policy, control, and oversight of the process for the        
   investigation and recovery of missing persons. The committee has learned
   that DPMO is developing a strategic plan intended to serve as a roadmap 
   for all elements of the Department in carrying out those important      
   responsibilities. However, the committee is concerned that the strategic
   plan envisions a lessening of ongoing efforts to account for the        
   thousands of service members still unaccounted for in previous wars. The
   committee directs the Secretary of Defense to consult the Senate        
   Committee on Armed Services and the House Committee on Armed Services   
   before implementing any plan that would reduce the current level of     
   effort to account for missing personnel.                                
      The committee further notes that the Secretary of Defense has        
   published directives implementing the Missing Persons Act (section 569  
   of Public Law 104 106), as amended. However, the committee is           
   disappointed that the directives do not provide a means to inform family
   members of the existence of classified information that could pertain to
   one or more missing persons as required by section 1506(d) of title 10, 
   United States Code. The committee directs the Secretary of Defense to   
   incorporate the procedures required by law into a revised directive by  
   December 1, 2000.                                                       
            DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE INTERNATIONAL STUDENT PROGRAM AT THE MILITARY   
                                    COLLEGES                                      
      The committee, despite working cooperatively last year with          
   Department of Defense (DOD) officials to incorporate the Senior Military
   Colleges (SMC) into the DOD international student program in a manner to
   allow the Secretary of Defense to expand the impact and scope of that   
   program, was severely disappointed that the fiscal year 2001 budget     
   request did not include funds for the SMC international student program.
   The committee, therefore, authorizes $2.0 million for the Secretary of  
   Defense to carry out the SMC international student program and directs  
   the Secretary of Defense to provide funding to the program from funds,  
   other than those for the Senior ROTC program, made available to the     
   Secretary for fiscal year 2001. The committee also strongly encourages  
   the Secretary of Defense to fund this program in the fiscal year 2002   
   budget request.                                                         
                            FUNDING FOR RECRUITING AND RETENTION                  

      The committee continues to be concerned about the ability of the     
   services to recruit and retain a quality force, as well as the apparent 
   unwillingness or inability of the armed services to adequately resource 
   their recruiting and retention programs. Furthermore, based on testimony
   presented to the committee, it appears that the armed services are      
   taking advantage of Congressional support for recruiting and retention  
   by underfunding their budget requests with the expectation that         
   additional resources for recruiting and retention will be provided in   
   the authorization and appropriations process.                           
      Congressional support for recruiting and retention has been          
   substantial, with over $400.0 million in additional funding to          
   recruiting accounts alone provided by Congress over the last three      
   years. In addition, Congress crafted the extensive pay and retirement   
   reforms enacted by the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal    
   Year 2000 (Public Law 106 65).                                          
      Despite this support, the committee notes that the active Army, the  
   Army Reserve, the active Navy, the Naval Reserve, the active Air Force, 
   and the Air Force Reserve all failed to achieve recruiting objectives in
   fiscal year 1999. In fiscal year 2000, the armed services continue to   
   experience difficulty in recruiting due to increased college attendance,
   reduced youth population, and record low unemployment rates, with all   
   components of the Air Force (active, national guard and reserve), the   
   Army Reserve and the Naval Reserve unlikely to meet recruiting goals.   
   Additionally, the active Army, the active Marine Corps and active Navy  
   will be severely challenged to do so.                                   
      Similarly, the armed services continue to experience difficulty in   
   retaining personnel with certain technical skills and within units      
   burdened with high operations tempo. Additionally, both the active      
   component Air Force and the active component Navy failed to meet        
   retention objectives across all segments of the enlisted force during   
   fiscal year 1999, and are unlikely to achieve those retention objectives
   in fiscal year 2000.                                                    
      The committee believes that DOD's inadequate funding for recruiting  
   and retention programs only exacerbates the recruiting and retention    
   difficulties. For example, following the submission of the budget       
   request for fiscal year 2001, the armed services reported $704.0 million
   in unfunded requirements in recruiting and retention programs.          
   Additionally, the budget request included examples for each of the armed
   services, including both active and reserve components, of recruiting   
   and retention accounts that were funded at considerably lower levels for
   fiscal year 2001 than what the armed services expected to execute during
   fiscal year 2000. The committee concludes from these facts that         
   inadequate defense budgets have forced the service secretaries into     
   tough choices, with recruiting and retention getting a lower priority   
   than other programs. The committee believes that the low priority placed
   on recruiting and retention programs by budget managers can be          
   attributed in part to the presumption that Congress will add the needed 
   resources that the secretaries concerned are unwilling or unable to     
   provide.                                                                
      In recognition of the general inadequacy of the defense budget to    
   meet all the armed services requirements, the committee recommends an   
   increase of $217.6 million over the amounts requested for the recruiting
   and retention by the active and reserve components. In deciding what    
   shortfalls to address, the committee gave priority to those recruiting  
   and retention initiatives that provide money directly to service        
   members. The details of the recommended increases are provided in the   
   table accompanying section 421 above.                                   
      The committee notes, however, that the recommended increase is less  
   than one third of the funding shortfall reported by the armed services. 
   The committee expects DOD and the armed services to move aggressively to
   eliminate the remaining shortfall in fiscal year 2001. Furthermore, the 
   committee strongly recommends the secretaries concerned include full    
   funding for recruiting and retention programs in the fiscal year 2002   
   budget request and not rely on Congress to provide the necessary        
   resources to sustain the all volunteer force.                           
      Additionally, the committee is disappointed that progress in         
   developing recruiting kiosks using computer technology has been slowed  
   due to inadequate funding. The committee believes that recruiting kiosks
   are an important initiative that should be developed expeditiously. The 
   committee urges the Secretary of Defense to initiate a fully funded     
   joint program to expand the testing of computer kiosks within all the   
   military departments.                                                   
                                HOMOSEXUAL CONDUCT BRIEFINGS                      

      The committee desires to clarify the objectives of the briefings and 
   training sessions on the policy, regulations, and laws governing        
   homosexual conduct that are required by section 654 of title 10, United 
   States Code, or directed by the Secretary of Defense. The committee     
   believes that all briefings and training sessions on homosexual conduct 
   should focus on the standards of behavior as required by law, and should
   be limited to the behavior expected of service members regarding the    
   professional treatment of other members. The briefings and training     
   sessions should respect and acknowledge the personal or religious values
   of service members, and they shall be informed of their right to retain 
   them.                                                                   
      The committee encourages the Secretary of Defense to review all      
   homosexual conduct briefings and training being conducted by the armed  
   services and bring them in compliance with the committee's directions.  
                             INCENTIVES FOR OVERSEAS ASSIGNMENTS                  

      The committee is concerned that the military services are having     
   difficulty filling overseas duty positions with volunteers. The         
   committee notes that volunteers for overseas duty in the Navy are       
   considered to have met their sea duty requirement, and further notes    
   that volunteers in overseas shore-based positions hinder the Navy's     
   ability to meet its ship staffing requirements. While overseas duty is  
   often desirable for younger unaccompanied service members, senior       
   service members are frequently reluctant to go overseas because of      
   family concerns. Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of      
   Defense to study incentives for overseas assignments and report to the  
   Senate Committee on Armed Services and the House Committee on Armed     
   Services by December 31, 2000, on attainable and affordable             
   recommendations to resolve this problem.                                
                       NATIONAL GUARD MILITARY TECHNICIAN OVERTIME PAY            

      The committee notes that section 709(h) of title 32, United States   
   Code, prohibits Army and Air Force National Guard military technicians  
   from receiving overtime pay. Instead, that section requires that        
   technicians be granted compensatory time for overtime work. The         
   committee recognizes that the law concerning national guard military    
   technician overtime has remained essentially unchanged since the        
   enactment of the National Guard Technicians Act of 1968 (Public Law 90  
   486). The committee believes                                            

                    that a review of this policy is needed, however, because the  
          role and utilization of the full time support force has changed         
          fundamentally since 1968. This increased reliance on the full time force
          causes many military technicians to routinely work irregular and        
          overtime hours. While the law directs that these national guard military
          technicians be given time off in lieu of overtime, the reality is that  
          they are receiving neither. The committee directs the Secretary of      
          Defense to review the policy and cost considerations by which national  
          guard military technicians are treated for overtime work and to report  
          his findings and any recommendations to the Senate Committee on Armed   
          Services and the House Committee on Armed Services by March 31, 2001.   
                       UNIFORMED SERVICES FORMER SPOUSE PROTECTION ACT            

      The committee notes that section 643 of the National Defense         
   Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1998 (Public Law 105 85) required the 
   Secretary of Defense to conduct a comprehensive review of the Uniformed 
   Services Former Spouse Protection Act (USFSPA) and to report his        
   findings to Congress by September 30, 1999. The committee considers this
   an important review with significant implications for many service      
   members and their families. The committee is disappointed the review    
   remains incomplete and encourages the Secretary to submit the report as 
   soon as possible.                                                       
                                   LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS                         

                    SUBTITLE A--GENERAL PERSONNEL MANAGEMENT AUTHORITIES          

             SECTION 501--AUTHORITY FOR SECRETARY OF DEFENSE TO SUSPEND CERTAIN   
         PERSONNEL STRENGTH LIMITATIONS DURING WAR OR NATIONAL EMERGENCY          
      This section would authorize the Secretary of Defense to suspend in  
   time of war or national emergency the limits on the number of personnel 
   serving on active duty in the grades of E 8 and E 9, and the number of  
   personnel serving on active duty in support of the reserves in grades 0 
   6, 0 5, 0 4, E 9, and E 8. This section would also make the procedures  
   for calculating the number of service members authorized to serve in    
   controlled grades in time of war or national emergency for the          
   categories of personnel listed above consistent with the procedures used
   for active duty officers.                                               
           SECTION 502--AUTHORITY TO ISSUE POSTHUMOUS COMMISSIONS IN THE CASE OF  
  MEMBERS DYING BEFORE OFFICIAL RECOMMENDATION FOR APPOINTMENT OR PROMOTION IS    
                         APPROVED BY SECRETARY CONCERNED                          
      This section would clarify that the secretary concerned may confer   
   posthumous commissions in cases where military members die prior to the 
   approval of an official recommendation for appointment or promotion.    
            SECTION 503--TECHNICAL CORRECTION TO RETIRED GRADE RULE FOR ARMY AND  
                               AIR FORCE OFFICERS                                 
      This section would repeal conflicting provisions of law regarding the
   determination of retirement grade for reserve officers. This section    
   would also clarify that retirement grade for reserve officers will be   
   determined in accordance with section 1370 of title 10, United States   
   Code.                                                                   
           SECTION 504--EXTENSION TO END OF CALENDAR YEAR OF EXPIRATION DATE FOR  
                  CERTAIN FORCE DRAWDOWN TRANSITION AUTHORITIES                   
      This section would extend through December 31, 2001, certain force   
   drawdown transition authorities. These authorities include:             
    (1) Active duty early retirement authority;                            

    (2) Special separation benefit authority;                              

    (3) Voluntary separation incentive authority;                          

       (4) Increased flexibility in the management of selective early      
   retirement boards;                                                      
       (5) Reduction of time-in-grade requirement for retention of grade   
   upon voluntary retirement;                                              
       (6) Reduction of length of commissioned service for voluntary       
   retirement as an officer;                                               
       (7) Enhanced travel and transportation allowances and storage of    
   baggage and household effects for certain involuntary separated members;
       (8) Increased flexibility for granting educational leave relating to
   continuing public and community service;                                
    (9) Enhanced health, commissary and family housing benefits;           

       (10) Increased flexibility in the management of enrollments of      
   dependents in the Defense Dependents' Education System;                 
       (11) Definition of the force reduction transition period for reserve
   forces;                                                                 
    (12) Force reduction period reserve retirement authority;              

       (13) Reduction of length of non-regular service requirements for    
   reserve retirements;                                                    
    (14) Reserve early retirement authority;                               

       (15) Reduction of time-in-grade requirement for retention of grade  
   upon voluntary reserve retirement;                                      
       (16) Increased flexibility in the management of the affiliation of  
   active duty personnel with reserve units;                               
       (17) Increased flexibility in the management of eligibility for     
   reserve educational assistance.                                         
               SECTION 505--CLARIFICATION OF REQUIREMENTS FOR COMPOSITION OF      
 ACTIVE-DUTY LIST SELECTION BOARDS WHEN RESERVE OFFICERS ARE UNDER CONSIDERATION  
      This section would clarify section 612 of title 10, United States    
   Code, by specifying that reserve officers serving on active duty may be 
   appointed to serve on promotion boards even though they are not on the  
   active-duty list.                                                       
                         SECTION 506--VOLUNTARY SEPARATION INCENTIVE              

      This section would authorize service members who simultaneously      
   receive retired or retainer pay and voluntary separation incentive (VSI)
   to terminate their eligibility for VSI. The section would also allow the
   service member who is eligible for retired pay and who has received VSI 
   to reimburse the government for the amount of VSI received without      
   concurrently increasing the amount of VSI that is owed.                 
            SECTION 507--CONGRESSIONAL REVIEW PERIOD FOR ASSIGNMENT OF WOMEN TO   
DUTY ON SUBMARINES AND FOR ANY PROPOSED RECONFIGURATION OR DESIGN OF SUBMARINES TO
                         ACCOMMODATE FEMALE CREW MEMBERS                          
      This section would require the Secretary of Defense to provide to    
   Congress written notification prior to any policy change affecting the  
   current male-only assignment policy for submarines take effect, and     
   prior to the expenditure of funds to reconfigure or design a submarine  
   to accommodate the assignment of female crewmembers. Such changes could 
   take place only after 120 days of continuous congressional session have 
   expired following receipt by Congress of the notice of the proposed     
   changes.                                                                
                       SUBTITLE B--RESERVE COMPONENT PERSONNEL POLICY             

            SECTION 511--EXEMPTION FROM ACTIVE-DUTY LIST FOR RESERVE OFFICERS ON  
                 ACTIVE DUTY FOR A PERIOD OF THREE YEARS OR LESS                  
      This section would prevent a reserve officer voluntarily serving on  
   active duty for a period of three years or less from being placed on the
   active-duty list and required to compete for promotion with active duty 
   officers. This section would also authorize such officers to remain on  
   the Reserve Active Status List and compete for promotion with other     
   reserve officers. The committee considers this section to apply to      
   reserve component officers serving in positions authorized by section   
   526(b)(2)(A) of title 10, United States Code.                           
           SECTION 512--EXEMPTION OF RESERVE COMPONENT MEDICAL AND DENTAL OFFICERS
                        FROM COUNTING IN GRADE STRENGTHS                          
      This section would exempt medical and dental officers from the       
   calculation of the number of officers in each grade authorized to serve 
   in an active status in a reserve component. This section would also make
   the procedures for calculating the number of officers serving in        
   controlled grades for the reserve components consistent with the        
   procedures used for active duty officers.                               
           SECTION 513--CONTINUATION OF OFFICERS ON THE RESERVE ACTIVE STATUS LIST
                       WITHOUT REQUIREMENT FOR APPLICATION                        
      This section would authorize the secretary of a military department  
   to offer continuation on the Reserve Active Status List to reserve      
   officers without requiring the officer to request continuation.         

              SECTION 514--AUTHORITY TO RETAIN RESERVE COMPONENT CHAPLAINS AND    
               OFFICERS IN MEDICAL SPECIALTIES UNTIL SPECIFIED AGE                
      This section would authorize the Secretary of the Air Force to extend
   the service of Medical Service Corps and biomedical sciences officers to
   age 67.                                                                 
             SECTION 515--AUTHORITY FOR TEMPORARY INCREASE IN NUMBER OF RESERVE   
 COMPONENT PERSONNEL SERVING ON ACTIVE DUTY OR FULL-TIME NATIONAL GUARD DUTY IN   
                                 CERTAIN GRADES                                   
      This section would authorize the Secretary of Defense to increase the
   number of reserve members serving on active duty in support of the      
   reserves in the Army, Navy, Air Force, and Marine Corps in the grades of
   0 6, 0 5, 0 4, E 9, and E 8 by the same percentage the Secretary is     
   authorized to increase the end strength of that force by section 115 of 
   title 10, United States Code.                                           
             SECTION 516--AUTHORITY FOR PROVISION OF LEGAL SERVICES TO RESERVE    
              COMPONENT MEMBERS FOLLOWING RELEASE FROM ACTIVE DUTY                
      This section would authorize legal services assistance to reservists 
   who served on active duty for more than 29 days and their dependents for
   a period not to exceed twice the length of time served on active duty.  
              SECTION 517--ENTITLEMENT TO SEPARATION PAY FOR RESERVE OFFICERS     
 RELEASED FROM ACTIVE DUTY UPON DECLINING SELECTIVE CONTINUATION ON ACTIVE DUTY   
                 AFTER SECOND FAILURE OF SELECTION FOR PROMOTION                  
      This section would clarify that the separation of a reserve officer  
   on active duty who was non-selected for promotion twice to the same     
   grade, and who subsequently declines selective continuation shall be    
   considered an involuntary separation, and would authorize such an       
   officer to be eligible for separation pay.                              
      The committee is disappointed that the Secretary of the Army was     
   unable to prevent a number of reserve captains from being separated from
   active duty involuntarily without separation pay because the officers   
   declined continuation on active duty after being non-selected for       
   promotion. The committee notes that regular captains non-selected for   
   promotion by the same promotion board did receive separation pay after  
   declining continuation on active duty. This section would insure that   
   similarly situated reserve officers receive separation pay in the       
   future, but would not allow separation pay to be provided to those      
   reserve captains separated during fiscal year 2000.                     
      The Secretary of the Army indicates that he will rely on the Army    
   Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) to restore fairness and
   equity to the reserve captains denied separation pay during fiscal year 
   2000. The committee requests that the Secretary expedite consideration  
   of these cases by the ABCMR to minimize hardships for these members and 
   their families.                                                         
           SECTION 518--EXTENSION OF INVOLUNTARY CIVIL SERVICE RETIREMENT DATE FOR
                           CERTAIN RESERVE TECHNICIANS                            
      This section would authorize the secretaries of the military         
   departments to retain certain non-dual status reserve technicians until 
   age 60, an age beyond which these technicians would otherwise be        
   required to separate from federal civil service as required by section  
   10218 of title 10, United States Code.                                  
      The committee notes that current law was intended to reduce the      
   numbers of non-dual status technicians while providing for a process    
   that minimized the impact on the technicians being separated. The       
   committee has learned that the process has not worked as intended, and  
   the committee is concerned that some technicians would be forced to     
   retire without adequate notice as a result of that process.             
                             SUBTITLE C--EDUCATION AND TRAINING                   

           SECTION 521--COLLEGE TUITION ASSISTANCE PROGRAM FOR PURSUIT OF DEGREES 
          BY MEMBERS OF THE MARINE CORPS PLATOON LEADERS CLASS PROGRAM            
      This section would authorize the use of the Marine Corps Platoon     
   Leaders Class Tuition Assistance Program for the purpose of providing   
   educational assistance to include legal training to commissioned        
   officers participating in the Platoon Leaders Class program.            
           SECTION 522--REVIEW OF ALLOCATION OF JUNIOR RESERVE OFFICERS TRAINING  
                         CORPS UNITS AMONG THE SERVICES                           
      This section would require the Secretary of Defense to review and    
   redistribute the current service Junior Reserve Officers Training Corps 
   (JROTC) allocations for fiscal years 2001 to 2006 to enable those       
   services that want to more quickly eliminate their current JROTC waiting
   lists and are willing to commit the necessary resources to do so, have  
   the opportunity to grow. Further, if the reallocation results in the    
   Secretary of Defense determining that the current statutory cap of 3,500
   JROTC units should be increased, then his recommendations for the       
   increase should be included in the fiscal year 2002 budget request. The 
   Secretary of Defense has begun expanding the number of JROTC units from 
   the present 2,700 to the statutory maximum of 3,500. The committee      
   commends this effort and encourages the Secretary of Defense to achieve 
   expansion before 2006, the target completion date. To that end, the     
   committee believes that if a military service is willing to commit the  
   resources to expand its JROTC program to eliminate its waiting list of  
   high schools that have requested a JROTC program more quickly than      
   envisioned by the six-year Department of Defense (DOD) plan, then the   
   service should not be constrained by the internal unit allocation limits
   of the DOD plan.                                                        
           SECTION 523--AUTHORITY FOR NAVAL POSTGRADUATE SCHOOL TO ENROLL CERTAIN 
  DEFENSE INDUSTRY CIVILIANS IN SPECIFIED PROGRAMS RELATING TO DEFENSE PRODUCT    
                                   DEVELOPMENT                                    
      This section would authorize the Secretary of the Navy to enroll up  
   to ten defense-industry civilians at any one time at the Naval          
   Postgraduate School in a defense product development curriculum leading 
   to the award of a master's degree. The defense-industry civilians would 
   be joined in the curriculum by Department of Defense civilian and       
   military personnel who themselves are engaged in defense product        
   development. The committee believes that the new authority granted by   
   this section will create a shared learning environment that will        
   facilitate the growth and development of government-industry            
   partnerships that are critical to faster and more efficient defense     
   acquisition.                                                            
                     SUBTITLE D--DECORATIONS, AWARDS, AND COMMENDATIONS           

            SECTION 531--AUTHORITY FOR AWARD OF THE MEDAL OF HONOR TO ANDREW J.   
                      SMITH FOR VALOR DURING THE CIVIL WAR                        
      This section would waive the statutory time limitations for the award
   of the Medal of Honor to Andrew J. Smith for valor during the Battle of 
   Honey Hill in South Carolina.                                           
           SECTION 532--AUTHORITY FOR AWARD OF THE MEDAL OF HONOR TO ED W. FREEMAN
                      FOR VALOR DURING THE VIETNAM CONFLICT                       
      This section would waive the statutory time limitations for the award
   of the Medal of Honor to Ed W. Freeman for valor during the battle of   
   the IaDrang Valley in the Republic of Vietnam.                          
             SECTION 533--CONSIDERATION OF PROPOSALS FOR POSTHUMOUS OR HONORARY   
 PROMOTIONS OR APPOINTMENTS OF MEMBERS OR FORMER MEMBERS OF THE ARMED FORCES AND  
                             OTHER QUALIFIED PERSONS                              
      This section would authorize Members of Congress to request the      
   secretary concerned review a proposal for posthumous or honorary        
   promotion or appointment of a member or former member of the armed      
   services or other person. The section would require the secretary       
   concerned to review the case and provide the Senate Committee on Armed  
   Services, the House Committee on Armed Services, and the requesting     
   Member of Congress written notice of one of the following               
   determinations, to include a statement of the reasons supporting the    
   determination:                                                          
      (1) The appointment or promotion does not warrant approval on the    
   merits.                                                                 
      (2) The appointment of promotion warrants approval on the merits and 
   has been recommended to the President as an exception to policy.        
      (3) The appointment or promotion warrants approval on the merits and 
   authorization by law is required, but not recommended.                  
      The committee is concerned that requests for posthumous or honorary  
   promotions and appointments are being considered by Congress without the
   benefit of the views of the service secretaries.                        
           SECTION 534--WAIVER OF TIME LIMITATIONS FOR AWARD OF NAVY DISTINGUISHED
                         FLYING CROSS TO CERTAIN PERSONS                          

      This section would waive the statutory time limitations for the award
   of Distinguished Flying Cross to individuals recommended for award of   
   the Distinguished Flying Cross by the secretaries of the military       
   departments.                                                            
             SECTION 535--ADDITION OF CERTAIN INFORMATION TO MARKERS ON GRAVES    
 CONTAINING REMAINS OF CERTAIN UNKNOWNS FROM THE U.S.S. ARIZONA WHO DIED IN THE   
               JAPANESE ATTACK ON PEARL HARBOR ON DECEMBER 7, 1941                
      This section would require that the Secretary of the Army, based on a
   review of existing information related to the interment of unknown      
   casualties from the U.S.S. Arizona, provide the Secretary of Veterans   
   Affairs with information to be added to the inscriptions on the grave   
   markers of those unknowns who are interred at the National Memorial     
   Cemetery of the Pacific, Honolulu, Hawaii.                              
               SECTION 536--SENSE OF CONGRESS REGARDING FINAL CREW OF U.S.S.      
                                  INDIANAPOLIS                                    
      This section would express the Sense of Congress that the commander  
   of the U.S.S. INDIANAPOLIS, Admiral (then Captain) Charles Butler McVay 
   III was not culpable for the sinking of the ship. The section would also
   express the Sense of Congress that the President should award the       
   Presidential Unit Citation to the final crew of the U.S.S. INDIANAPOLIS 
   for courage and fortitude after the torpedo attack.                     
           SECTION 537--POSTHUMOUS ADVANCEMENT OF REAR ADMIRAL (RETIRED) HUSBAND  
     E. KIMMEL AND MAJOR GENERAL (RETIRED) WALTER C. SHORT ON RETIRED LISTS       
      This section would request the President to advance Rear Admiral     
   Husband E. Kimmel to admiral and Major General Walter Short to          
   lieutenant general on the retired list with no increase in compensation 
   or benefits. The provision also expresses the Sense of Congress that    
   both officers were professional and competent, and the losses incurred  
   during the attack on Pearl Harbor were not the result of dereliction in 
   the performance of duties in the case of either officer.                
           SECTION 538--COMMENDATION OF CITIZENS OF REMY, FRANCE, FOR WORLD WAR II
                                     ACTIONS                                      
      This section would commend the bravery and honor of the citizens of  
   Remy, France for their action to bury Lieutenant Houston Braly, 364th   
   Fighter Group, during World War II. The section would also recognize the
   efforts of the surviving members of the United States 364th Fighter     
   Group to raise funds to restore the stained glass windows of Remy's 13th
   century church that were destroyed.                                     
                            SUBTITLE E--MILITARY JUSTICE MATTERS                  

           SECTION 541--RECOGNITION BY STATES OF MILITARY TESTAMENTARY INSTRUMENTS

      This section would amend chapter 53 of title 10, United States Code, 
   to require the fifty states of the United States, the District of       
   Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, the Commonwealth of the      
   Northern Mariana Islands and each territory and possession of the United
   States, to include Guam, American Samoa, the Trust Territory of the     
   Pacific Islands, and the Virgin Islands to recognize a will prepared for
   a person eligible to receive legal assistance under section 1044 of     
   title 10, United Sates Code. This section would also ensure that wills  
   prepared by members of the armed forces, their spouses, and other       
   persons eligible for legal assistance are admitted for state probate    
   proceedings. This section would also simplify will preparation for      
   eligible personnel and afford them greater certainty and security in    
   accomplishing their testamentary intent.                                
            SECTION 542--PROBABLE CAUSE REQUIRED FOR ENTRY OF NAMES OF SUBJECTS   
                  INTO OFFICIAL CRIMINAL INVESTIGATIVE REPORTS                    
      This section would require the Department of Defense to apply the    
   ``probable cause'' standard before titling a crime suspect. This section
   would also require the Secretary of Defense to amend the standards and  
   procedures for the removal of titling information from the Defense      
   Clearance and Investigations Index to permit the removal of a titled    
   person's name by the head of the submitting Defense Criminal            
   Investigative Organization when there is reason to believe that the     
   titling is in error, a person is falsely accused, no crime occurred, or 
   the entry does not serve the interests of justice.                      
      The committee is concerned that the standard of the Department of    
   Defense for titling a crime suspect as established by Department of     
   Defense Instruction 5505.7 requires ``credible information.'' This      
   standard appears to be significantly different from the ``probable      
   cause'' standard common in state and federal criminal procedure.        
           SECTION 543--COLLECTION AND USE OF DNA IDENTIFICATION INFORMATION FROM 
                VIOLENT AND SEXUAL OFFENDERS IN THE ARMED FORCES                  
      This section would require the secretaries of the military           
   departments to collect a deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) sample from each   
   member of the armed forces who is, or has been, convicted of a violent  
   or sexual offense. This section would also require the Secretary of     
   Defense to analyze each sample and furnish the results of each DNA      
   analysis to the director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI)   
   for use in the Combined DNA Index System of the FBI.                    
           SECTION 544--LIMITATION ON SECRETARIAL AUTHORITY TO GRANT CLEMENCY FOR 
 MILITARY PRISONERS SERVING SENTENCE OF CONFINEMENT FOR LIFE WITHOUT ELIGIBILITY  
                                   FOR PAROLE                                     
      This section would direct the Secretary of Defense to make two       
   changes to the procedures for considering clemency for prisoners serving
   sentences of life without parole. First, the authority for the granting 
   of clemency to prisoners serving sentences of life without parole would 
   be vested solely in the secretary of the military department concerned  
   and would not be delegable to any other person. The section would also  
   establish as a minimum that a prisoner will have served twenty years of 
   a sentence of life without parole before being eligible for             
   consideration for clemency. The committee is                            

                    aware that a majority of the members of the Department of     
          Defense Corrections Council has recommended these or similar actions.   
          The committee supports these recommendations to ensure that prisoners   
          serving sentences of life without parole will remain incarcerated for a 
          significantly longer period of time than would otherwise be expected for
          prisoners serving lesser sentences.                                     
               SECTION 545--AUTHORITY FOR CIVILIAN SPECIAL AGENTS OF MILITARY     
  DEPARTMENT CRIMINAL INVESTIGATIVE ORGANIZATIONS TO EXECUTE WARRANTS AND MAKE    
                                     ARRESTS                                      
      This section would authorize the secretaries of the military         
   departments to grant the authority to execute and serve warrants and    
   make arrests to the civilian special agents of their respective military
   criminal investigative organization subject to certain guidelines.      
                                 SUBTITLE F--OTHER MATTERS                        

                        SECTION 551--FUNERAL HONORS DUTY COMPENSATION             

      This section would authorize a reserve component member assigned to a
   funeral honors detail for the funeral of a veteran to be compensated at 
   the same rate as the member would be compensated for participating in   
   inactive-duty training.                                                 
            SECTION 552--TEST OF ABILITY OF RESERVE COMPONENT INTELLIGENCE UNITS  
      AND PERSONNEL TO MEET CURRENT AND EMERGING DEFENSE INTELLIGENCE NEEDS       
      This section would require the Secretary of Defense to conduct a     
   three-year test to determine the most effective peacetime structure and 
   operational employment of reserve component intelligence assets for     
   meeting future Department of Defense peacetime operational intelligence 
   requirements, and to establish a means of coordinating the transition of
   the peacetime operational support network into wartime requirements.    
                        SECTION 553--NATIONAL GUARD CHALLENGE PROGRAM             

      This section would authorize the head of a federal agency or         
   department to provide funds to the Secretary of Defense to support the  
   National Guard Challenge Program, and would allow the Secretary to      
   expend those funds notwithstanding the $62.5 million limit in defense   
   funding established by section 509(b) of title 32, United States Code,  
   for the Challenge program. The section would also require the Secretary 
   of Defense to establish regulations for the Challenge program.          
           SECTION 554--STUDY OF USE OF CIVILIAN CONTRACTOR PILOTS FOR OPERATIONAL
                                SUPPORT MISSIONS                                  
      This section would require the Secretary of Defense to study the     
   feasibility and cost of using civilian contractor personnel as pilots   
   and other aircrew members to fly government aircraft performing         
   non-combat personnel transportation missions worldwide. Military pilots 
   and aircrew now perform these missions. The committee recommends this   
   study to determine whether such contracting out would help to resolve   
   pilot shortages being experienced by several of the armed services, and 
   help to improve pilot retention.                                        
           SECTION 555--PILOT PROGRAM TO ENHANCE MILITARY RECRUITING BY IMPROVING 
              MILITARY AWARENESS OF SCHOOL COUNSELORS AND EDUCATORS               
      The committee has noted that at some locations the strained          
   relationship between military recruiters and student counselors and     
   educators limits the access of recruiters to students. The committee    
   believes that historical barriers between the two groups can be overcome
   and access to students enhanced by improving the understanding of       
   student counselors and educators about military recruiting and career   
   opportunities.                                                          
      Accordingly, this section would direct the Secretary of Defense to   
   conduct a pilot program to improve communication with student counselors
   and educators by providing funding, assistance, and information to an   
   existing interactive Internet site designed to provide information and  
   services to employees of local education agencies and institutions of   
   higher education. The pilot program would be conducted during a         
   three-year period beginning not later than 180 days after the date of   
   enactment of this act.                                                  
               SECTION 556--REIMBURSEMENT FOR EXPENSES INCURRED BY MEMBERS IN     
              CONNECTION WITH CANCELLATION OF LEAVE ON SHORT NOTICE               
      This section would authorize the service secretaries to reimburse    
   members for travel expenses when leave is cancelled within 48 hours of  
   commencing due to mission requirements of a contingency operation.      

           TITLE VI--COMPENSATION AND OTHER PERSONNEL BENEFITS                    

                                          OVERVIEW                                

      The committee remains convinced that compensation provided to service
   members and their families is the key to reversing unfavorable retention
   trends. Surveys of military members conducted during the past year have 
   confirmed that compensation remains the most important factor in the    
   decision of service members to leave the military.                      
      The National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2000 (Public  
   Law 106 65) enhanced and reformed the following compensation programs:  
       (1) Pay raises guaranteed to exceed private sector pay raises were  
   authorized.                                                             
    (2) Pay table reform was implemented to recognize individual effort.   

    (3) Military retirement benefits were restored to pre-1986 levels.     

       (4) Basic allowance for housing (BAH) was increased to promise      
   improved reimbursement levels.                                          
       (5) Special pays and retention bonuses were initiated and increased 
   to improve compensation to military members.                            
       (6) A military Thrift Savings Plan (TSP) was authorized to provide  
   military members a retirement savings vehicle.                          
      The committee is committed to fulfill the promise for continued      
   improvement to compensation programs begun in the National Defense      
   Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2000 (Public Law 106 65).             
      The committee is pleased that the budget request for fiscal year 2001
   included a pay raise of 3.7 percent, one-half of one percent above the  
   Employment Cost Index (ECI) level, and a program to increase BAH and    
   reduce out-of-pocket housing costs for members to zero by fiscal year   
   2005. Given the Administration's reluctance to fund adequate pay raises 
   and a decision to abandon after one year a prior six-year plan to reduce
   out-of-pocket housing costs, the committee applauds the Administration's
   improvement of military compensation programs.                          
      The committee is disappointed that the Administration was unable to  
   identify the pay-go offsets needed to implement the military Thrift     
   Savings Plan (TSP). The committee is pleased that the Concurrent        
   Resolution on the Budget, Fiscal Year 2001, does include the necessary  
   offsets. Accordingly, the committee would authorize the military TSP to 
   be implemented during fiscal year 2001.                                 
      The committee is concerned that even a small percentage of military  
   families qualify for the food stamp program. Accordingly, the committee 
   would authorize a family assistance supplemental subsistence allowance  
   specifically targeted to increase compensation for low-income members   
   who qualify for food stamps. The allowance would pay members the monthly
   amount of supplemental allowance required to remove them from the food  
   stamp program, not to exceed a maximum of $500 per month. Additionally, 
   the committee would authorize a series of broad-based initiatives to    
   enhance the fiscal welfare of young families by increasing the minimum  
   standards for adequate housing, increasing reimbursement for moving     
   costs, and reducing out-of-pocket housing costs.                        
      The committee also recognizes that military personnel are likely to  
   respond positively to indications that Congress is prepared to make     
   substantial investments in their long-term welfare. Accordingly, the    
   committee would increase the maximum levels on several special pays and 
   would also establish a new retention bonus program that affords the     
   Secretary of Defense a more flexible and responsive tool to retain      
   service members with critical skills.                                   
                                 ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST                        

                          BRIEFINGS ON BENEFITS OF MILITARY SERVICE               

      The committee is concerned that the armed services have not included 
   among the many new retention initiatives a robust program for briefing  
   service members on the benefits of military service. The committee      
   believes that retention would be improved by a program designed to      
   provide service members periodic briefings on benefits.                 
      Accordingly, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense to review
   the current programs employed by the armed services to provide service  
   members information on the full array of benefits available to them. The
   review shall include an assessment of program effectiveness in          
   communicating information on the following benefit programs, at a       
   minimum, as well as other programs operated by the Department of Defense
   and the Department of Veterans Affairs, at the discretion of the        
   Secretary.                                                              
    (1) Military compensation and retired pay;                             

    (2) Health care benefits, including the TRICARE program;               

    (3) Survivor benefits;                                                 

       (4) Montgomery G.I. Bill and other education and training           
   opportunities;                                                          
       (5) Morale, welfare, and recreational benefits, including child care
   benefits;                                                               
    (6) Commissary and exchange benefits;                                  

       (7) Retirement homes operated for the benefit of former military    
   members; and                                                            
       (8) Veteran benefits offered by the Department of Veterans Affairs, 
   including health care; disability benefits, education and training, home
   loan guarantees, life insurance, burial benefits, and survivor benefits.
      The Secretary shall also determine if the current programs providing 
   information on benefits to service members require modification and     
   expansion.                                                              
      The committee directs the Secretary to report his findings and       
   recommendations to the Senate Committee on Armed Services and the House 
   Committee on Armed Services by March 31, 2001.                          
              EXTENSION OF TIME LIMITATION ON USE OF RESERVE EDUCATION BENEFITS   

      The committee is concerned that the time limitation on the use of    
   education benefits by members of the selected reserve detracts from the 
   potential of the program to promote career-long retention. Section 16331
   of title 10, United States Code, provides that members of the selected  
   reserve who remain in an active status lose eligibility 10 years from   
   the date the service member becomes eligible for benefits.              
      The committee directs the Secretary of Defense to study the time     
   limitations on the use of education benefits by the selected reserve and
   determine if an extension of the                                        

                    time limitations is useful and cost effective. The committee  
          directs the Secretary to report his findings and any recommendations to 
          the Senate Committee on Armed Services and the House Committee on Armed 
          Services by March 31, 2001.                                             
                            IMPROVED BASIC ALLOWANCE FOR HOUSING                  

      The committee believes that the additional funding for the basic     
   allowance for housing (BAH) included in the National Defense            
   Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2000 (Public Law 106 65) and the      
   proposal to reduce out-of-pocket housing costs in the fiscal year 2001  
   budget request will improve the quality of life for many military       
   members and their families. The BAH rates in high cost areas have       
   already been significantly increased as of January 1, 2000, pursuant to 
   Public Law 106 65.                                                      
      The committee is concerned that some landlords will view the increase
   in the BAH as an incentive to increase housing costs not only for       
   military members, but also for civilians in the local community. The    
   committee supports additional funding for the BAH to ensure that        
   military families receive sufficient compensation for adequate housing  
   as dictated by the local housing market. The committee intends to       
   monitor any growth in housing costs within areas that appear to be      
   fueled by BAH increases and not the economic forces of the local housing
   market. The committee is prepared to reexamine BAH rates in areas where 
   there is evidence that BAH increases have unduly influenced local       
   housing markets.                                                        
      The committee directs the Secretary of Defense to study the growth of
   housing costs in areas where the local costs of housing are believed to 
   be directly influenced by increases in BAH rates. The Secretary shall   
   report his findings and recommendations for correcting the problem to   
   the Senate Committee on Armed Services and the House Committee on Armed 
   Services by March 31 of each year of the period beginning in 2001 and   
   ending in 2006.                                                         
                               MILITARY PAY DAY EVERY 14 DAYS                     

      The committee recognizes that the current practice of paying military
   personnel twice a month causes some pay periods to be longer, thus      
   increasing the financial stress for military families. The committee    
   notes that paying military personnel every 14 days would provide        
   military members with more consistent pay periods.                      
      Accordingly, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense to study 
   whether the change to a 14-day pay period for military personnel is both
   necessary and desirable. The committee directs the Secretary to report  
   his findings and any recommendations to the Senate Committee on Armed   
   Services and the House Committee on Armed Services by March 31, 2001.   
                       PAY TABLE REFORM FOR MID-GRADE ENLISTED MEMBERS            

      The committee is increasingly interested in pay increases targeted   
   for noncommissioned officers in pay grades E 5 through E 7. The         
   committee recognizes that the pay table reform provision included in the
   National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2000 (Public Law 106 
   65) did little to restore the historic pay advantages enjoyed by        
   mid-grade and senior enlisted members when compared to junior enlisted  
   members.                                                                
      The committee is concerned that more needs to be done to improve     
   mid-grade enlisted pay levels. Accordingly, the committee encourages the
   Secretary of Defense to study the issue and present with the fiscal year
   2002 budget request either a legislative proposal to remedy the concerns
   of the enlisted force, or an explanation as to why the concerns of the  
   enlisted force are not valid.                                           
                        REIMBURSEMENT FOR RESERVISTS' TRAVEL EXPENSES             

      The committee is concerned that some reservists incur significant    
   expenses traveling to inactive-duty training locations. This problem    
   becomes particularly acute when reserve members are forced to use       
   commercial air when surface transportation is not available or large    
   distances are involved. For example, reservists must use commercial air 
   between Pacific islands and some locations in Alaska.                   
      Accordingly, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense to review
   the current travel practices used by reservists to meet training        
   obligations and determine the financial impact on members. The Secretary
   will assess the potential advantages for reservists and the reserve     
   components of providing reimbursement for travel expenses, to include   
   the potential for increasing retention, improving recruiting, and       
   attracting higher quality members to leadership roles.                  
      The committee directs the Secretary to report his findings and       
   recommendations to the Senate Committee on Armed Services and the House 
   Committee on Armed Services by March 31, 2001.                          
                    REIMBURSEMENT OF PERMANENT CHANGE OF STATION EXPENSES         

      The committee is aware of the results of a study conducted by the    
   Department of Defense that demonstrates that military members bear      
   approximately 40 percent of the cost of moving to a new duty station.   
   The committee is deeply concerned that personnel in the grades E 4 and  
   below bear approximately 70 percent of the financial burden to change   
   permanent duty stations (PCS).                                          
      The committee intends to focus on improving PCS reimbursements.      
   Accordingly, the committee strongly encourages the Secretary of Defense 
   to develop a legislative proposal designed to enhance PCS reimbursement 
   levels and to submit such a proposal with the fiscal year 2002 budget   
   request.                                                                
                          RETIRED PAY FOLLOWING REDUCTION IN GRADE                

      The committee notes that during calendar year 2000 longevity retired 
   pay for members of the uniformed services who entered service after     
   September 8, 1980, will be calculated based on the average of the       
   highest 36 months of base pay. The committee is concerned that members  
   covered by the high-36 rule will enjoy a windfall when reduced in grade 
   due to misconduct prior to retirement. Under high-36 procedures, the    
   retired pay of such personnel is largely based on the grade held by the 
   member prior to the reduction in grade.                                 

      Accordingly, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense to study 
   the need for legislation to provide an alternative method for           
   calculating retired pay when a member has been reduced in grade due to  
   misconduct. The Secretary shall report his finding and recommendations  
   to the Senate Committee on Armed Services and the House Committee on    
   Armed Services by March 31, 2001.                                       
                                  LEGISLATIVE  PROVISIONS                         

                               SUBTITLE A--PAY AND ALLOWANCES                     

                   SECTION 601--INCREASE IN BASIC PAY FOR FISCAL YEAR 2001        

      This section would authorize a 3.7 percent military pay raise        
   effective January 1, 2001. This pay raise would be one-half of one      
   percent more than the pay raise that would result if the Employment Cost
   Index (ECI) standard were used.                                         
      The committee strongly supports this pay raise and believes it is    
   critical that military members receive military pay increases over the  
   next five years that improve their level of pay compared to the private 
   sector, as authorized in section 602 of the National Defense            
   Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2000 (Public Law 106 65).             
             SECTION 602--REVISED METHOD FOR CALCULATION OF BASIC ALLOWANCE FOR   
                                   SUBSISTENCE                                    
      The committee believes that the program to transition the basic      
   allowance for subsistence (BAS) for enlisted members to a lower rate    
   established in section 602 of the National Defense Authorization Act for
   Fiscal Year 1998 (Public Law 105 85) is no longer serving the best      
   interests of service members.                                           
      Accordingly, this section would repeal the transition program        
   effective October 1, 2001, and establish a process for increasing the   
   BAS rate in effect for the prior year by the increase in food costs as  
   determined by the Department of Agriculture.                            
      The committee expects the Secretary of Defense to pay eligible       
   service members a partial BAS effective January 1, 2002 equal to rate of
   BAS reduced by the rate of Basic Daily Food Allowance as determined by  
   the Secretary.                                                          
           SECTION 603--FAMILY SUBSISTENCE SUPPLEMENTAL ALLOWANCE FOR LOW-INCOME  
                           MEMBERS OF THE ARMED FORCES                            
      The committee is concerned that a number of service members are      
   eligible to receive food stamps. Although the number of members         
   receiving food stamps has been reduced from the 12,000 estimated in     
   1996, there are still 6,300 service members believed to be relying on   
   food stamps to meet the nutritional needs of family members.            
      This section would authorize the Secretary of Defense to establish a 
   program to pay members who qualify for food stamps a monthly amount to  
   supplement the basic allowance for subsistence (BAS). The program would 
   pay members who qualify for food stamps the amount of supplemental      
   allowance necessary to make them ineligible for food stamps, up to a    
   maximum of $500 dollars per month. The member's eligibility for food    
   stamps would be determined by DOD officials using the same gross income 
   standards used by state officials to determine food stamp eligibility   
   for the general public, except that the income for all military members 
   would be calculated to include the payment of basic allowance for       
   housing (BAH) even when the member resides in government quarters.      
           SECTION 604--CALCULATION OF BASIC ALLOWANCE FOR HOUSING FOR INSIDE THE 
                                  UNITED STATES                                   
      This section would repeal the requirement that service members pay 15
   percent of housing costs out-of-pocket. The section would also authorize
   the Secretary of Defense to increase basic allowance for housing rates  
   and to reduce out-of-pocket housing expenses for military members to    
   zero by fiscal year 2005.                                               
               SECTION 605--EQUITABLE TREATMENT OF JUNIOR ENLISTED MEMBERS IN     
                   COMPUTATION OF BASIC ALLOWANCE FOR HOUSING                     
      This section would require the Secretary of Defense to establish a   
   single housing rate for members in grades E 1 through E 4 with          
   dependents and to increase the basic allowance for housing rate paid to 
   such members above the rate previously paid to members in grade E 4.    
             SECTION 606--BASIC ALLOWANCE FOR HOUSING AUTHORIZED FOR ADDITIONAL   
                 MEMBERS WITHOUT DEPENDENTS WHO ARE ON SEA DUTY                   
      This section would include personnel in the grade of E 4 among those 
   authorized to receive basic allowance for housing (BAH) while assigned  
   to sea duty.                                                            
      The committee notes that some personnel authorized to receive BAH    
   while assigned to sea duty do not maintain residences on shore when     
   their ships are deployed. The committee directs the Secretary of the    
   Navy to study this issue. The committee directs the Secretary to submit 
   a report on his findings and any recommendations to the Senate Committee
   on Armed Services and the House Committee on Armed Services by March 31,
   2001.                                                                   
            SECTION 607--PERSONAL MONEY ALLOWANCE FOR SENIOR ENLISTED MEMBERS OF  
                                THE ARMED FORCES                                  
      This section would authorize a $2,000 personal money allowance to the
   senior enlisted members in each of the armed services.                  
           SECTION 608--ALLOWANCE FOR OFFICERS FOR PURCHASE OF REQUIRED UNIFORMS  
                                  AND EQUIPMENT                                   
      This section would increase the one-time initial uniform allowance   
   paid to officers from $200 to $400, and the one-time additional uniform 
   allowance paid to officers from $100 to $200.                           
           SECTION 609--INCREASE IN MONTHLY SUBSISTENCE ALLOWANCE FOR MEMBERS OF  
                            PRECOMMISSIONING PROGRAMS                             

      This section would increase the minimum stipend to $250 per month,   
   and establish a maximum stipend of $600 per month, and it also would    
   provide the Secretary of Defense the authority to establish a           
   tiered-stipend system. Under such a system, the committee intends that  
   the value of the monthly stipend should grow as a student's involvement 
   in ROTC grows. The changes contained in this section would be effective 
   on October 1, 2001. The committee is aware that the senior Reserve      
   Officers Training Corps (ROTC) programs of the Army and the Air Force   
   continue to have difficulty meeting officer commissioning objectives.   
   The committee notes that the Army may miss its objectives by 20 percent,
   and the Air Force by five percent for fiscal year 2000. The committee   
   further notes that the Department of Defense has reported a 20 percent  
   reduction in the number of ROTC scholarship applications, and that the  
   current monthly fixed subsistence stipend of $200 paid to all contracted
   cadets is ineffective as a recruiting and retention measure. The        
   committee is concerned by these trends in the ROTC program and believes 
   that a fundamental change is required.                                  
           SECTION 610--ADDITIONAL AMOUNT AVAILABLE FOR FISCAL YEAR 2001 INCREASE 
             IN BASIC ALLOWANCE FOR HOUSING INSIDE THE UNITED STATES              
      The committee remains concerned that military families are not       
   receiving sufficient reimbursement for housing. The committee is pleased
   that the budget request included an initiative to decrease out-of-pocket
   housing cost for service members, but the committee is disappointed that
   the initiative would only reduce out-of-pocket housing costs to 15      
   percent.                                                                
      Accordingly, this section would increase the funding available for   
   basic allowance for housing by $30.0 million. This initiative would     
   reduce out-of-pocket housing costs by an additional one-half of one     
   percent.                                                                
                     SUBTITLE B--BONUSES AND SPECIAL AND INCENTIVE PAYS           

           SECTION 611--EXTENSION OF CERTAIN BONUSES AND SPECIAL PAY AUTHORITIES  
                               FOR RESERVE FORCES                                 
      This section would extend the authority for the special pay for      
   health care professionals who serve in the selected reserve in          
   critically short wartime specialties, the selected reserve reenlistment 
   bonus, the selected reserve enlistment bonus, special pay for enlisted  
   members of the selected reserve assigned to certain high priority units,
   the selected reserve affiliation bonus, the ready reserve enlistment and
   reenlistment bonus, and the prior service enlistment bonus until        
   December 31, 2001. This section would also extend the authority for     
   repayment of educational loans for certain health care professionals who
   serve in the selected reserve until January 1, 2002.                    
           SECTION 612--EXTENSION OF CERTAIN BONUSES AND SPECIAL PAY AUTHORITIES  
     FOR NURSE OFFICER CANDIDATES, REGISTERED NURSES AND NURSE ANESTHETISTS       
      This section would extend the authority for the nurse officer        
   candidate accession program, the accession bonus for registered nurses, 
   and the incentive special pay for nurse anesthetists until December 31, 
   2001.                                                                   
             SECTION 613--EXTENSION OF AUTHORITIES RELATING TO PAYMENT OF OTHER   
                            BONUSES AND SPECIAL PAYS                              
      This section would extend the authority for the aviation officer     
   retention bonus, reenlistment bonus for active members, enlistment bonus
   for persons with critical skills, Army enlistment bonus, special pay for
   nuclear qualified officers extending the period of active service,      
   nuclear career accession bonus, and the nuclear career annual incentive 
   bonus to December 31, 2001.                                             
            SECTION 614--CONSISTENCY OF AUTHORITIES FOR SPECIAL PAY FOR RESERVE   
                           MEDICAL AND DENTAL OFFICERS                            
      This section would clarify that reserve medical and dental officers  
   are paid special pay in a consistent manner.                            
                SECTION 615--SPECIAL PAY FOR COAST GUARD PHYSICIAN ASSISTANTS     

      This section would extend the authority to pay special pay currently 
   provided to physician assistants in the military departments to         
   physician assistants in the Coast Guard.                                
                SECTION 616--SPECIAL DUTY ASSIGNMENT PAY FOR ENLISTED MEMBERS     

      This section would increase the maximum amount that may be paid in   
   special duty assignment pay from $275 to $600 per month.                
      The committee notes that recruiters would be eligible for this       
   increase. Given the stress associated with recruiting duty and the      
   importance of attracting quality service members to recruiting duty, the
   committee recommends that the secretaries of the military departments   
   begin to pay increased rates of special duty assignment pay to          
   production recruiters at the earliest date possible.                    
                           SECTION 617--REVISION OF CAREER SEA PAY                

      This section would authorize the secretary concerned to restructure  
   career sea pay and increase the rates of career sea pay to a maximum of 
   $750 per month and the rates for premium sea pay to $350 per month after
   36 months of sea duty.                                                  
      The committee continues to be concerned that the eroding value of sea
   pay has contributed to the shortage of personnel in some sea-going      
   positions. The committee looks forward to the implementation of enhanced
   sea pay rates by the uniformed services at the earliest opportunity.    
                     SECTION 618--REVISION OF ENLISTMENT BONUS AUTHORITY          


      This section would consolidate existing enlistment bonus authorities 
   and establish a maximum amount of $20,000 that may be paid to any       
   enlistee.                                                               
           SECTION 619--AUTHORIZATION OF RETENTION BONUS FOR MEMBERS OF THE ARMED 
                  FORCES QUALIFIED IN A CRITICAL MILITARY SKILL                   
      The section would authorize the Secretary of Defense to implement a  
   critical skill retention bonus program providing payments up to $200,000
   over the course of the career of a military member effective 90 days    
   after providing notice of the details of the program to Congress.       
      The committee is concerned that the Secretary of Defense does not    
   have a retention tool sufficiently flexible to allow skill-specific     
   retention problems to be addressed in a timely manner.                  
           SECTION 620--ELIMINATION OF REQUIRED CONGRESSIONAL NOTIFICATION BEFORE 
                 IMPLEMENTATION OF CERTAIN SPECIAL PAY AUTHORITY                  
      This section would eliminate the requirement for the secretary       
   concerned to notify Congress of the intent to pay special pay to        
   optometrists and nurse anesthetists.                                    
                      SUBTITLE C--TRAVEL AND TRANSPORTATION ALLOWANCES            

             SECTION 631--ADVANCE PAYMENTS FOR TEMPORARY LODGING OF MEMBERS AND   
                                   DEPENDENTS                                     
      This section would authorize advance payment of temporary lodging and
   living expenses incident to permanent changes in station.               
           SECTION 632--ADDITIONAL TRANSPORTATION ALLOWANCE REGARDING BAGGAGE AND 
                                HOUSEHOLD EFFECTS                                 
      This section would authorize the secretaries concerned to reimburse a
   member for mandatory pet quarantine fees for household pets up to a     
   maximum of $275 when the member incurs the fees incident to a permanent 
   change of station.                                                      
             SECTION 633--EQUITABLE DISLOCATION ALLOWANCES FOR JUNIOR ENLISTED    
                                     MEMBERS                                      
      This section would require the Secretary of Defense to increase the  
   amount of dislocation allowance paid to service members with dependents 
   in pay grades E 1 through E 4 to the amount paid to service members in  
   pay grade E 5.                                                          
            SECTION 634--AUTHORITY TO REIMBURSE MILITARY RECRUITERS, SENIOR ROTC  
 CADRE, AND MILITARY ENTRANCE PROCESSING PERSONNEL FOR CERTAIN PARKING EXPENSES   
      This section would authorize the Secretary of Defense to reimburse   
   service members and civilian employees for expenses incurred in parking 
   their privately owned vehicles at their duty locations if they are      
   assigned to duty as a recruiter, with a military entrance processing    
   facility, or with a Senior Reserve Officers' Training Corps detachment. 
               SECTION 635--EXPANSION OF FUNDED STUDENT TRAVEL FOR DEPENDENTS     

      This section would authorize funded student travel payments to be    
   made for students pursuing graduate and vocational education programs in
   addition to secondary and undergraduate education programs.             
                    SUBTITLE D--RETIREMENT AND SURVIVOR BENEFIT MATTERS           

            SECTION 641--INCREASE IN MAXIMUM NUMBER OF RESERVE RETIREMENT POINTS  
                        THAT MAY BE CREDITED IN ANY YEAR                          
      This section would increase from 75 to 90 the maximum number of days 
   in any one year that a reservist may accrue as credit towards retirement
   benefits by permitting a reservist to earn more points each year for    
   attending drills, performing annual training and completing             
   correspondence courses.                                                 
            SECTION 642--RESERVE COMPONENT SURVIVOR BENEFIT PLAN SPOUSAL CONSENT  
                                   REQUIREMENT                                    
      This section would require retirement-eligible reservists to obtain  
   the concurrence of their spouses before making a decision to decline or 
   defer participation in the Reserve Component Survivor Benefit Plan, to  
   select a level of participation that is less than the maximum available,
   or to select the coverage of a child but not the spouse. This section   
   would conform the procedures for the Reserve Component Survivor Benefit 
   Plan to the procedures for the active component Survivor Benefit Plan.  
                                 SUBTITLE E--OTHER MATTERS                        

                      SECTION 651--PARTICIPATION IN THRIFT SAVINGS PLAN           

      This section would authorize active duty and reserve members of the  
   uniformed services to deposit up to five percent of their basic pay,    
   before tax, each month in the Thrift Savings Plan (TSP) now available   
   for federal civil service employees. The section would not require the  
   employing department to match the member's contributions. This section  
   would also authorize members to deposit special pays, incentive pays,   
   and bonuses into a TSP account up to the extent allowable under the     
   Internal Revenue Code. The section would also authorize the secretary   
   concerned to make contributions to the TSP account belonging to members 
   serving in a critical specialty as a retention incentive.               

           TITLE VII--HEALTH CARE PROVISIONS                                      

                                          OVERVIEW                                

      The committee was encouraged by the early, strong commitment late    
   last year by the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff to make major    
   reforms in the Department of Defense health program a part of the budget
   request for fiscal year 2001.                                           
      Notwithstanding that commitment, the budget request unfortunately    
   provided only a shadow of the program support and improvements          
   recommended by the Joint Chiefs. The request was notably bereft of any  
   initiatives to improve military health care benefits available to       
   Medicare-eligible military retirees.                                    
      In the face of an incomplete reform effort by the Department of      
   Defense, and in order to better understand the full range of reforms    
   required, the committee undertook a deliberate oversight and fact       
   finding effort that included field hearings. These hearings, as well as 
   informal staff investigations and meetings, provided all stake          
   holders--beneficiaries, advocacy groups, health care providers and      
   contractors, as well as the Department of Defense--the ability to       
   present options and information upon which the committee could base     
   reform decisions. The oversight developed several significant findings, 
   to include:                                                             
      (1) The provision of a prescription drug benefit to Medicare-eligible
   military retirees and their dependents was given the highest priority by
   all stakeholders.                                                       
      (2) Neither the Department of Defense, nor Congress, had sufficient  
   information to move the currently running health care demonstration     
   programs for the military Medicare-eligible beneficiaries from the      
   demonstration to the permanent program stage.                           
      (3) The cost to the Defense Health Program (DHP) to process claims   
   was found to be three to four times that of Medicare's cost per claim.  
   As a result, the committee determined that hundreds of millions of      
   dollars annually could be saved through investment in reform of the DHP 
   claims system.                                                          
      (4) Access to care was severely hampered by the lack of effective use
   of information technology and funding limits that reduced use of        
   military treatment facilities. The difficulty in getting access to care 
   generated enormous frustration among beneficiaries with the TRICARE     
   system.                                                                 
      (5) Despite a continuing promise that the medical benefits would be  
   portable from one region of the country to the next, military personnel 
   and their families repeatedly found that not to be the case.            
      To address these and other issues, the committee recommends a range  
   of initiatives to improve and reform the DHP for all beneficiaries      
   including active, retired and the Medicare-eligible. These reforms are  
   explained in more detail below in their respective sections, but can be 
   summarized as follows by saying that the committee recommends:          
      (1) Implementation of a TRICARE Senior Pharmacy Program to provide   
   the same level of benefits for Medicare-eligible military retirees as is
   now available to other TRICARE beneficiaries through the mail order     
   pharmacy program and retail pharmacies.                                 
      (2) Extension until 2003 of the current Medicare related             
   demonstration programs to ensure each program receives a fair and       
   comprehensive test, with an independent oversight effort required to    
   make recommendations to Congress on what a permanent program of health  
   care for the Medicare-eligibles should provide.                         
      (3) Claims processing reform, with additional investment funding     
   recommended to the DHP to kick-start the reform effort.                 
      (4) Required use of Internet based systems to help improve claims    
   processing, access to health care and portability of benefits.          
      (5) Additional funding to increase use of the military treatment     
   facilities through the hiring of additional support staff, refurbishment
   of facilities, and procurement of technology and equipment.             
      While the committee believes that the reforms recommended here will  
   move DHP reform forward significantly, other challenges will remain to  
   ensure that the DHP is adequately funded and managed. To that end, the  
   committee recommendations also include requirements for the Secretary of
   Defense to determine if accrual funding of the DHP is necessary, and to 
   assess whether mandatory enrollment of beneficiaries should be required 
   as a possible future step.                                              
                                  ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST                       

                           FUNDING FOR THE DEFENSE HEALTH PROGRAM                 

      The committee is deeply concerned about the persistent inattention   
   demonstrated by the Department of Defense to adequately fund the Defense
   Health Program. The committee received testimony that the underfunding  
   will reach $6.0 billion over the future years defense plan. Two         
   foreseeable and unfortunate responses by military health care managers  
   to this chronic underfunding have resulted: reduced funding for         
   maintenance and repair of facilities, and the delay or elimination of   
   infrastructure and technology investments in order to avoid reductions  
   in the provision of health care services. These two critical budget     
   areas are key components of an effective Defense Health Program.        
   Continuing to underfund these areas will result in less efficient       
   facilities and, ultimately, in a reduction in the amount and quality of 
   services available.                                                     
      The committee is pleased by the active participation of the senior   
   uniformed leadership of the Department of Defense in the important      
   decisions affecting the management of the military health care system.  
   The committee encourages the Secretary of Defense to foster this level  
   of participation and to ensure the health system is funded to a level   
   that not only provides for continuous patient care, but also invests in 
   the health system infrastructure to ensure the long-term effectiveness  
   of the system.                                                          
                               PREVENTIVE HEALTH CARE SERVICES                    

      The committee notes the recent report of the Secretary of Defense,   
   prepared pursuant to the committee report on H.R. 1401 (H. Rept. 106    
   162) describing the scope of preventive health care benefits provided to
   all eligible TRICARE beneficiaries. The report favorably compared the   
   TRICARE preventive benefits to those recommended by the American Academy
   of Pediatrics, the American Academy of Family Physicians and the Agency 
   for Health Research and Quality. At the committee's direction, the      
   Secretary                                                               

                    also evaluated implementation of the ``Put Prevention into    
          Practice'' (PPIP) initiative prepared by each service and concluded that
          PPIP needs to be more effectively and uniformly implemented. The        
          committee concurs with that assessment and directs the Secretary to     
          submit a report by March 1, 2001, to the Senate Committee on Armed      
          Services and the House Committee on Armed Services on the steps taken to
          improve the implementation of the PPIP initiative.                      
            REPORT ON COMPUTER-BASED PATIENT RECORD AND MEDICAL RECORDS TRACKING  
                                     SYSTEM                                       
      The committee notes the on-going cooperation between the Department  
   of Defense (DOD), the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA), and the      
   Indian Health Service to develop a Government Computer-Based Patient    
   Record (GCPR) system. The GCPR system would serve as the core of a      
   medical digital network by linking the agencies' currently incompatible 
   health information systems to provide a life-long medical record for all
   service members. The committee directs the Secretary of Defense to      
   provide an annual report, beginning March 1, 2001, to the Senate        
   Committee on Armed Services and the House Committee on Armed Services on
   the progress to date and the remaining timelines and tasks associated   
   with integrating these medical information systems. The committee       
   further directs the Comptroller General of the United States to evaluate
   the program with a focus on the agencies' plans for meeting critical    
   GCPR milestones, including budget and cost estimates, and issues related
   to data quality, privacy, and security. The Comptroller General shall   
   report on his findings to the Senate Committee on Armed Services and the
   House Committee on Armed Services not later than March 1, 2001.         
      While GCPR will provide for the timely transfer of patient records in
   the future, the committee has recently learned that the Military        
   Personnel Records section of the National Personnel Records Center      
   (NPRC) has been unable to provide timely retrieval of complete medical  
   records needed for adjudication of claims filed with the VA. Many       
   medical records needed by veterans cannot be retrieved because the      
   records are filed according to the treating hospital or other facilities
   and copies or reference to hospitalization are normally not included in 
   the service member's records. The committee understands that DOD has    
   been working since 1995 on a Medical Records Tracking System (MRTS) to  
   facilitate the supply of this information to the Medical Records        
   Registry System being developed by the VA and the NPRC. The committee   
   directs the Secretary of Defense to report to the Senate Committee on   
   Armed Services and the House Committee on Armed Services by March 31,   
   2001, on the progress of the MRTS and any interim measures to assure    
   that all hospital and medical records of service members can be easily  
   identified.                                                             
               REPORT ON MANDATORY ENROLLMENT PROGRAM FOR TRICARE BENEFICARIES    

      The committee is aware that military beneficiaries are required to   
   enroll in the Department of Defense TRICARE Prime option if they wish to
   participate in the managed care program. Enrollment provides the        
   Department of Defense a valuable management tool on which manpower,     
   budget, contracting, and other management decisions are based. The      
   committee is concerned that the same degree of analytic rigor cannot be 
   brought to bear on decisions related to beneficiaries using the point of
   service options under TRICARE because there is no mandatory enrollment  
   requirement. The committee directs the Secretary of Defense to conduct a
   study of the benefits to be gained by requiring TRICARE beneficiaries to
   enroll in any of the Department's TRICARE programs. The study should    
   include, but not be limited to, an analysis of the benefits of requiring
   eligible beneficiaries to enroll in TRICARE Prime or risk being         
   prohibited from using the Department of Defense military treatment      
   facilities. The report should include an analysis of the value of       
   requiring all non-active duty beneficiaries to pay a small enrollment   
   fee to enroll in any TRICARE program. The report shall be submitted to  
   the Senate Committee on Armed Services and the House Committee on Armed 
   Services not later than March 31, 2001.                                 
                              SUBTITLE A--HEALTH CARE SERVICES                    

              SECTION 701--TWO-YEAR EXTENSION OF AUTHORITY FOR USE OF CONTRACT    
PHYSICIANS AT MILITARY ENTRANCE PROCESSING STATIONS AND ELSEWHERE OUTSIDE MEDICAL 
                              TREATMENT FACILITIES                                
      This section would extend for two years, from December 31, 2000, the 
   authority of the Secretary of Defense to contract with physicians to    
   provide health care and new-recruit examination services at military    
   entrance processing stations and other locations. The extension would   
   permit the Secretary of Defense to complete tests of alternative methods
   for streamlining the new-recruit medical screening and make             
   recommendations for changes to Congress.                                
             SECTION 702--MEDICAL AND DENTAL CARE FOR MEDAL OF HONOR RECIPIENTS   

      This section would authorize Medal of Honor recipients who are not   
   otherwise entitled to military medical and dental care and the          
   dependents of those recipients to be given medical and dental care in   
   the same manner that such care is provided to former members who are    
   entitled to military retired pay and the dependents of those former     
   members.                                                                
            SECTION 703--PROVISION OF DOMICILIARY AND CUSTODIAL CARE FOR CHAMPUS  
             BENEFICIARIES AND CERTAIN FORMER CHAMPUS BENEFICIARIES               
      This section would authorize the Secretary of Defense to reimburse   
   certain former Civilian Health and Medical Program of the Uniformed     
   Services (CHAMPUS) beneficiaries for costs incurred for custodial or    
   domiciliary care services during a period of temporary ineligibility for
   such services under CHAMPUS. The section would also authorize a maximum 
   expenditure for the continuing custodial care program at $100.0 million.
           SECTION 704--DEMONSTRATION PROJECT FOR EXPANDED ACCESS TO MENTAL HEALTH
                                   COUNSELORS                                     

      This section would direct the Secretary of Defense to conduct a      
   demonstration project to determine the effect of increasing access to   
   certified professional mental health counselors by removing the         
   requirement for physician referral prior to engaging a counselor under  
   the TRICARE program. The committee is aware that certified professional 
   mental health counselors are only authorized to be reimbursed by TRICARE
   for treating military beneficiaries if a physician refers those         
   beneficiaries to the counselors. The committee views this referral      
   requirement as possibly unnecessary and would test the effect of lifting
   the requirement in a demonstration project to be conducted in one       
   TRICARE region over a two year period.                                  
                      SECTION 705--TELERADIOLOGY DEMONSTRATION PROJECT            

      This section would direct the Secretary of Defense to implement a    
   teleradiology demonstration project for the purpose of increasing       
   efficiency of operations and coordination between outlying clinics and a
   major military medical facility (MTF). The teleradiology initiative     
   would be demonstrated at a multi-specialty tertiary care MTF with a     
   university medical school affiliation and would link at least 5         
   geographically-dispersed Army, Navy and Air Force clinics as well as    
   remote Department of Veterans Affairs and Coast Guard health care       
   clinics. Once implemented, the initiative would be unique in having all 
   but one of the medical facilities in a single TRICARE region using a    
   common Composite Health Care System (CHCS) data platform. The committee 
   expects this teleradiology initiative to increase the efficiency of     
   patient and provider contacts, particularly in the need for follow-up   
   diagnostic and therapeutic appointments. The project will demonstrate   
   the usefulness of teleradiology by eliminating many follow-up           
   appointments and accelerating the processing, reading and interpretation
   of radiographic exam imagery prior to providing clinical reports and    
   consultation to the primary care providers in the outlying clinics. To  
   fund this demonstration project in fiscal year 2001, the committee      
   authorizes an increase of $1.5 million in the amount requested for the  
   Defense Health Program.                                                 
                                SUBTITLE B--TRICARE PROGRAM                       

              SECTION 711--ADDITIONAL BENEFICIARIES UNDER TRICARE PRIME REMOTE    
                    PROGRAM IN THE CONTINENTAL UNITED STATES                      
      This section would repeal the requirement for co-payments by family  
   members of active duty military members under TRICARE Prime Remote and  
   would require the same access and claims processing standards as would  
   be available under TRICARE Prime. This section would also extend this   
   program to all uniformed service personnel and their immediate family   
   members as described in section 101 of title 10, United States Code.    
      The committee is concerned that family members accompanying an active
   duty member who is stationed in a location that is remote from military 
   treatment facilities must pay TRICARE co-payments not normally required 
   of active duty families that have access to military treatment          
   facilities.                                                             
                 SECTION 712--ELIMINATION OF COPAYMENTS FOR IMMEDIATE FAMILY      

      This section would repeal the requirement for co-payments by family  
   members of active duty military members enrolled in TRICARE Prime.      
      The committee is aware that some active duty families enrolled in    
   TRICARE Prime do not pay co-payments when they receive care in military 
   treatment facilities, while others are required to pay co-payments for  
   care received as a result of a referral from a military treatment       
   facility to a civilian network provider when the required care is not   
   available at the military treatment facility. This section would        
   eliminate that inequity.                                                
           SECTION 713--MODERNIZATION OF TRICARE BUSINESS PRACTICES AND INCREASE  
                     OF USE OF MILITARY TREATMENT FACILITIES                      
      This section would require managers for the Department of Defense    
   TRICARE program to implement improvements in business practices by the  
   end of fiscal year 2001, and would require the Secretary of Defense to  
   submit a plan for improving TRICARE business practices by March 15,     
   2001, to the Senate Committee on Armed Services and the House Committee 
   on Armed Services and require implementation of the plan by October 1,  
   2001. This section would also establish improvement benchmarks for the  
   TRICARE program in the area of portability of the benefit. This section 
   would also require the Secretary of Defense to simplify and             
   Internet-enable critical administrative processes within the military   
   health system and TRICARE and authorize the Department of Defense to    
   work with a managed care support contractor to build an open            
   architecture model administration system in one TRICARE managed care    
   region.                                                                 
      The committee also recommends an increase of $134.5 million in the   
   amount requested for the Defense Health Program in fiscal year 2001 to  
   be used solely for the purpose of maximizing the use of military        
   treatment facilities. The committee recommends $85.5 million to provide 
   additional support staff to primary care providers in the military      
   direct care system, $20.0 million to support procurement of a local     
   appointing and scheduling system, and $29.0 million to support local    
   customer service and support initiatives. While the committee expects   
   these funds to be used to improve access at the military treatment      
   facilities, the committee also directs that the planning and            
   installation of the local appointing and scheduling and customer service
   operations be coordinated with the regional managed care support        
   contractors in order to integrate and synchronize the local systems with
   regional applications the managed care support contractors might be     
   operating to the maximum extent possible.                               
      The committee remains concerned that the Department of Defense is not
   taking full advantage of business practices and technologies that could 
   result in increased provider satisfaction or budgetary savings, which   
   could be redirected to providing increased benefits. The committee      
   believes opportunities exist for immediate improvements in the areas of 
   claims processing, appointment access, and benefit portability. The     
   committee also continues to be concerned that the scheduling of         
   appointments for beneficiaries is difficult. Many of the administrative 
   procedures currently employed by TRICARE program managers and claims    
   administrators are relics of the Civilian Health and Medical Program of 
   the Uniformed Services (CHAMPUS) program. The model system would fully  
   exploit all available technologies to enhance beneficiary and provider  
   satisfaction and improve TRICARE efficiency.                            

                         SECTION 714--CLAIMS PROCESSING IMPROVEMENTS              

      This section would require the Secretary of Defense to implement     
   several changes to the TRICARE claims processing system. These actions  
   include: replacing the Health Care Service Record (HCSR) with the       
   TRICARE Encounter Data system, separating the HCSR and claims payment   
   components of the claims adjudication and payment system, requiring high
   volume TRICARE providers to submit claims by electronic means, and      
   increasing the use of automated voice response unit systems for         
   determining claims status. The committee has also coordinated with the  
   research and development subcommittee to recommend an increase of $3.6  
   million in the amount requested for the Defense Health Program in fiscal
   year 2001 to be used only for the purpose of implementing the TRICARE   
   Encounter Data system as a replacement for the HCSR during fiscal year  
   2001. During field hearings and in discussions with TRICARE providers,  
   the committee learned that providers were dissatisfied with TRICARE     
   payment levels seemingly unnecessary, administrative requirements and   
   continuing slow claims payment practices. The committee notes the       
   concern of health care providers that the timeliness of claims          
   processing continues to be a problem, hampering the program's ability to
   attract and retain qualified health care providers. Several witnesses   
   also testified that processing TRICARE claims could cost three to four  
   times the cost of similar Medicare claims. The committee is concerned   
   that the Department of Defense continues to spend money on              
   administration that could be used to provide valuable benefits to       
   military beneficiaries.                                                 
            SECTION 715--PROHIBITION AGAINST REQUIREMENT FOR PRIOR AUTHORIZATION  
   FOR CERTAIN REFERRALS; REPORT ON NONAVAILABILITY-OF-HEALTH-CARE STATEMENTS     
      This section would prohibit the Secretary of Defense from requiring  
   any TRICARE managed care support contractors to establish prior approval
   requirements among network providers.                                   
      The committee is concerned that some TRICARE patients are being      
   needlessly required to seek approval prior to being referred to another 
   specialist or institution within the TRICARE network of providers and   
   institutions.                                                           
                 SECTION 716--AUTHORITY TO ESTABLISH SPECIAL LOCALITY-BASED       
                          REIMBURSEMENT RATES; REPORTS                            
      This section would authorize the Secretary of Defense to establish   
   higher rates for reimbursement for services in some localities under    
   certain conditions.                                                     
      The committee is aware that there are a few areas in the United      
   States where recruitment of health care providers into the TRICARE      
   provider networks is hampered by TRICARE provider reimbursement rates   
   which are unusually low, compared to the prevailing local or other      
   governmental reimbursement rates.                                       
                   SECTION 717--REIMBURSEMENT FOR CERTAIN TRAVEL EXPENSES         

      This section would authorize the Secretary of Defense to reimburse   
   TRICARE beneficiaries for their reasonable expenses incurred while      
   traveling to a referral more than 100 miles from the location at which  
   they normally receive their primary care services. Provisions under     
   TRICARE managed care support contracts require network providers to     
   limit their referrals to specialists available within a one hour drive. 
   However, exceptions are allowed under certain circumstances. These so   
   called ``drive time waivers'' can require TRICARE beneficiaries to      
   travel great distances at their own expense only because a particular   
   specialist is not available within the local network of TRICARE         
   providers. To fund this policy change in fiscal year 2001, the committee
   authorizes an increase of $15.0 million in the amount requested for the 
   Defense Health Program.                                                 
                         SECTION 718--REDUCTION OF CATASTROPHIC CAP               

      This section would reduce the maximum amount retired TRICARE         
   beneficiaries could pay under TRICARE to $3000 per family. To fund this 
   policy change in fiscal year 2001, the committee authorizes an increase 
   of $32.0 million in the amount requested for the Defense Health Program.
      TRICARE beneficiaries not enrolled in TRICARE Prime face potential   
   medical expenses of up to $7500 per family. The committee is concerned  
   that as a result of the decreasing amount of space available care to    
   which the retired beneficiary population has access, more families of   
   retired military personnel who are not enrolled in TRICARE Prime will   
   face these burdensome medical expenses.                                 
              SECTION 719--REPORT ON PROTECTIONS AGAINST HEALTH CARE PROVIDERS    
       SEEKING DIRECT REIMBURSEMENT FROM MEMBERS OF THE UNIFORMED SERVICES        
      The section would require the Secretary of Defense to provide a      
   report by January 31, 2001, to the Senate Committee on Armed Services   
   and the House Committee on Armed Services on ways to discourage or      
   prohibit TRICARE health care providers from seeking inappropriate direct
   reimbursement from military service members or their families for       
   eligible health care services.                                          
      The committee is concerned that the financial credit status of       
   military service members or their family members is being adversely     
   affected by the inability of health care providers to receive           
   reimbursements from TRICARE in a timely manner.                         
            SECTION 720--DISENROLLMENT PROCESS FOR TRICARE RETIREE DENTAL PROGRAM 

      This section would authorize the Secretary of Defense to permit      
   retirees who enrolled in the Department of Defense Retiree Dental       
   Program to disenroll from the program under certain circumstances.      
            SUBTITLE C HEALTH CARE PROGRAMS FOR MEDICARE-ELIGIBLE DEPARTMENT OF   
                              DEFENSE BENEFICIARIES                               
               SECTION 721--IMPLEMENTATION OF TRICARE SENIOR PHARMACY PROGRAM     


      This section would authorize establishment of the TRICARE Senior     
   Pharmacy Program. The TRICARE Senior Pharmacy Program would provide     
   Medicare eligible military retirees and their eligible family members   
   the same pharmacy benefit as is currently available to other military   
   health care beneficiaries through the TRICARE preferred provider and    
   fee-for-service options commonly referred to as TRICARE Extra and       
   TRICARE Standard. No enrollment fee or premium would be required, but   
   the co-pays and out of network deductible expenses normally associated  
   with these programs would apply. Participation in the program would also
   require Medicare-eligible military retirees and their eligible family   
   members to be enrolled in the Medicare Part B supplemental medical      
   insurance program. The TRICARE Senior Pharmacy Program would make       
   available the full range of prescription pharmaceuticals now offered    
   through the Department of Defense TRICARE uniform formulary and         
   preserves the beneficiaries' right to choose a non-network pharmacy when
   that is their best choice. Participants in the TRICARE Senior Pharmacy  
   Program would continue to be eligible to use the pharmacies located in  
   military treatment facilities. To fund this requirement in fiscal year  
   2001, the committee authorizes an increase of $94.0 million in the      
   amount requested for the Defense Health Program.                        
              SECTION 722--STUDY ON HEALTH CARE OPTIONS FOR MEDICARE-ELIGIBLE     
                                MILITARY RETIREES                                 
      This section would require the Secretary of Defense to conduct a     
   study on alternatives for providing continued health care benefits for  
   Medicare-eligible military retirees. The section would also require the 
   Secretary of Defense to conduct the study through an agreement with a   
   federally funded research and development center (FFRDC) and require the
   Secretary of Defense to appoint an independent committee to advise the  
   Secretary and the FFRDC on the conduct of the study. To fund this       
   requirement in fiscal year 2001, the committee authorizes an increase of
   $2.0 million in the amount requested for the Defense Health Program.    
           SECTION 723--EXTENDED COVERAGE UNDER FEDERAL EMPLOYEES HEALTH BENEFITS 
                                     PROGRAM                                      
      This section would extend the period of the Federal Employees Health 
   Benefits Program (FEHBP) demonstration program for one year and would   
   require the Secretary of Defense to take the necessary actions to       
   encourage participation in the program to its full-authorized enrollment
   level of 66,000 persons.                                                
      The committee is concerned that the FEHBP demonstration program has  
   not attracted sufficient retirees to be considered a true test of its   
   value as an alternative source of health care benefits for military     
   retirees. In the selection of additional sites for this program, the    
   committee encourages the Secretary of Defense to select at least one    
   site with at least 5,000 military retirees served by multiple military  
   installations. The committee expects such a site would show evidence    
   that retirees are heavily reliant on the local Department of Veterans   
   Administration hospitals and outpatient clinics, thereby demonstrating  
   the attractiveness of the FEHBP option relative to Departments of       
   Defense and Veterans Administration facilities. The committee also      
   expects such a site to be representative of both urban and rural        
   populations in order to test the attractiveness of the                  

                    FEHBP option for persons with easy access to military         
          treatment facilities as well as those residing in locations more remote 
          from military treatment facilities.                                     
      The committee is aware that some beneficiaries are reluctant to sign 
   up for the FEHBP program because of concerns about health insurance     
   availability, without any assurance of continuation in the elected FEHBP
   option, when the test period ends. Congress anticipated this concern in 
   the original authorization for the program and provided assured         
   availability of standard Medigap plans. Unfortunately, the Department of
   Defense marketing materials for this demonstration program failed to    
   effectively convey this assurance thereby leading potential enrollees to
   believe they might be without any health insurance options at the       
   conclusion of the demonstration program. Therefore, the committee       
   encourages the Secretary to modify all marketing materials in such a way
   as to make clear to potential enrollees that alternative health care    
   insurance will be available at the conclusion of the demonstration      
   project.                                                                
                 SECTION 724--EXTENSION OF TRICARE SENIOR SUPPLEMENT PROGRAM      

      This section would extend the period of the TRICARE Senior Supplement
   Program for one year. The committee is concerned that several Department
   of Defense TRICARE demonstration programs will not be in effect for     
   sufficient time to permit a complete evaluation of their desirability as
   an alternative TRICARE benefit or their effectiveness as health benefit 
   management tools.                                                       
            SECTION 725--EXTENSION OF TRICARE SENIOR PRIME DEMONSTRATION PROJECT  

      This section would extend to December 31, 2003, the Senior Prime     
   Demonstration to make the project consistent with the termination date  
   of other demonstration projects.                                        
                                 SUBTITLE D--OTHER MATTERS                        

             SECTION 731--TRAINING IN HEALTH CARE MANAGEMENT AND ADMINISTRATION   

      The section would require the Secretary of Defense to provide a      
   report to the Senate Committee on Armed Services and the House Committee
   on Armed Services on the continued implementation of section 715 of the 
   National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1996 (Public Law 104 
   106). This section would increase the number of senior management       
   positions requiring professional management and administrative          
   experience. Section 715 directed the Secretary of Defense to provide a  
   report on the training of Department of Defense health care managers.   
   Since the submission of that report, the TRICARE managed care           
   environment has changed significantly and even more change lies on the  
   horizon. The committee is concerned that Department of Defense personnel
   are not being properly prepared before being assigned to duties         
   requiring expert knowledge of the managed care environment.             
            SECTION 732--STUDY OF ACCRUAL FINANCING FOR HEALTH CARE FOR MILITARY  
                                    RETIREES                                      
      This section would require the Secretary of Defense to conduct a     
   study on the feasibility and desirability of financing the military     
   health care program for uniformed services retirees on an accrual basis.
   The committee expects the study be conducted by an organization, which  
   has expertise in financial programs, retirement systems, actuarial      
   methodologies and health care financing and is independent of the       
   Department of Defense. To fund this requirement in fiscal year 2001, the
   committee authorizes an increase of $2.0 million in the amount requested
   for the Defense Health Program.                                         
             SECTION 733--TRACKING PATIENT SAFETY IN MILITARY MEDICAL TREATMENT   
                                   FACILITIES                                     
      This section would require the Secretary of Defense to implement a   
   system of indicators, standards, and protocols necessary to track       
   patient safety. The Department of Defense does not have a process to    
   systematically report, compile and analyze errors in the provision of   
   health care under the Defense Health Program.                           
                    SECTION 734--PHARMACEUTICAL IDENTIFICATION TECHNOLOGY         

      This section would require the Secretary of Defense to implement a   
   pharmaceutical bar code identification program to improve the safety of 
   Department of Defense pharmacy programs. The committee notes that       
   similar pharmaceutical bar code identification applications utilized by 
   the private sector have resulted in significant improvements in patient 
   safety.                                                                 
                   SECTION 735--MANAGEMENT OF VACCINE IMMUNIZATION PROGRAM        

      This section would strengthen Congressional oversight of the         
   Department of Defense Anthrax Vaccine Immunization Program (AVIP). The  
   Department of Defense Inspector General and the Defense Contract Audit  
   Agency have both been critical of the management of financial aspects of
   the program. The committee is concerned that poor financial practices   
   could lead to wasteful expenditures. The committee is also concerned    
   that these practices, if continued, could undermine service members'    
   confidence in the program itself. Therefore, the committee would require
   the Secretary of Defense to implement several initiatives to strengthen 
   oversight of the program. These actions include: require the Secretary  
   to keep track of and report separations resulting from refusal to       
   participate in the program; require clear guidance for emergency        
   essential civilian personnel who are participating in AVIP; require the 
   Secretary of Defense to put uniform medical and administrative          
   exemptions into regulation; improve the system for the monitoring of    
   adverse reactions including ``active surveillance'' and long term       
   follow-up; require the Secretary of Defense to develop a plan of action 
   for modernizing all-force protection immunizations and avoid using a    
   single manufacturer wherever possible; require reports on financial and 
   overall program management.                                             
              SECTION 736--STUDY ON FEASIBILITY OF SHARING BIOMEDICAL RESEARCH    
                                    FACILITY                                      
      Modern biomedical research requires highly sophisticated equipment,  
   sufficient research facilities and a highly skilled and educated        
   workforce. The committee recognizes the desire of the Army to expand its
   research capabilities and commends its efforts to partner with the      
   Department of Veterans Affairs (VA), particularly at the Tripler Army   
   Medical Center (TAMC). The partnering successes between TAMC, VA and the
   School of Medicine at the University of Hawaii (UH) has allowed for     
   further collaboration. The committee understands that the Army is       
   interested in expanding their research capabilities, but acknowledges   
   the scarcity of funds to expand research. The committee believes that it
   would be advantageous for the Army to conduct a feasibility study for a 
   medical research facility to be shared by TAMC, VA, and UH that includes
   a clinical research center, educational, academic, and laboratory       
   research space to better leverage its limited research funds. The       
   committee authorizes an additional $2.5 million in the amount requested 
   for the Defense Health Program to fund this study.                      
              SECTION 737--CHIROPRACTIC HEALTH CARE FOR MEMBERS ON ACTIVE DUTY    

      This section would require the Secretary of Defense to submit to the 
   Senate Committee on Armed Services and the House Committee on Armed     
   Services a plan to phase in over a period of five years, permanent      
   chiropractic services for all active duty military personnel. This      
   section would also require the Secretary of Defense to continue to      
   provide the same level of chiropractic health care services and benefits
   during fiscal year 2001 as were provided during fiscal year 2000. The   
   committee intends that the scope of services offered under this section 
   would include, at a minimum, care for neuro-musculoskeletal conditions  
   typical among military personnel on active duty. The committee does not 
   intend that the scope of chiropractic services should be limited to the 
   treatment of conditions of the lower back.                              
                 SECTION 738--VA/DOD SHARING AGREEMENTS FOR HEALTH SERVICES       

      This section would require the Secretary of Defense to give full     
   force and effect to any sharing agreement entered into between the      
   Veterans Health Administration and the Department of Defense treatment  
   facilities. The section would also require the Secretary of Defense over
   the next year to review all sharing agreements.                         
      The committee is concerned that some payments from the Department of 
   Defense to the Department of Veterans Affairs under existing VA/DOD     
   sharing agreements are not being made in accordance with the agreements.

                     TITLE VIII--ACQUISITION POLICY, ACQUISITION MANAGEMENT, AND  
          RELATED MATTERS                                                         
                                 ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST                        

           PROCUREMENT OF MILITARY CLOTHING AND CLOTHING-RELATED ITEMS BY MILITARY
                       INSTALLATIONS IN THE UNITED STATES                         
      Pursuant to the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year   
   1998 (Public Law 105 85) the Department of Defense Inspector General    
   performed an audit of purchases of military clothing and                
   clothing-related items in excess of the micro-purchase threshold by     
   military installations during fiscal years 1996 and 1997 to determine   
   the extent to which such procurements did not comply with the Buy       
   American Act. The committee is concerned with the number of violations  
   of the Buy American Act identified in the audit. The committee directs  
   the Department of Defense Inspector General to perform a follow-up audit
   on the purchases of military clothing and clothing-related items in     
   excess of the micro-purchase threshold by military installations during 
   fiscal years 1998 and 1999. The audit shall also include an evaluation  
   of DOD actions, if any, taken since the original audit in order to      
   improve compliance by military installations with the Buy American Act. 
              COMPLIANCE WITH APPLICABLE LABOR LAWS IN PROCUREMENT OF MILITARY    
                                    CLOTHING                                      
      The Secretary of Defense shall report to the congressional defense   
   committees, no later than April 1, 2001, any information indicating     
   non-compliance with applicable labor laws by contractors supplying      
   military clothing and clothing-related items. Emphasis shall be placed  
   on proper wage payments and scales. This information shall be gathered  
   pursuant to compliance checking required by part 22 of the Federal      
   Acquisition Regulation.                                                 
                                   LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS                         

               SECTION 801--EXTENSION OF AUTHORITY FOR DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE      
                  ACQUISITION PILOT PROGRAMS; REPORTS REQUIRED                    
      This section would amend the Federal Acquisition Streamlining Act of 
   1994 (Public Law 103 355) to extend until fiscal year 2005 the          
   acquisition pilot programs originally authorized by that Act. This      
   section would also require the Secretary of Defense to submit, no later 
   than January 1, 2001, a report evaluating the success of these pilot    
   programs.                                                               
           SECTION 802--TECHNICAL DATA RIGHTS FOR ITEMS DEVELOPED EXCLUSIVELY AT  
                                 PRIVATE EXPENSE                                  
      This section would amend section 2320 of title 10, United States     
   Code, by modifying the circumstances under which a contractor would be  
   considered responsive to a solicitation. This section would authorize   
   the Department to negotiate with a potential contractor the United      
   States rights to technical data, developed exclusively at private       
   expense, when the technical data is necessary for normal operations,    
   maintenance, installation, or training. This section would also require 
   the Secretary of Defense to prescribe regulations describing the        
   difference between normal and critical operations, maintenance,         
   installation, or training.                                              
            SECTION 803--MANAGEMENT OF ACQUISITION OF MISSION-ESSENTIAL SOFTWARE  
                     FOR MAJOR DEFENSE ACQUISITION PROGRAMS                       
      This section would require the Under Secretary of Defense for        
   Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics to designate a Director of       
   Mission-Essential Software Management. The Director would oversee       
   development and management of software embedded in software intensive   
   defense acquisition programs.                                           
      The committee expects the Director to seek advice from a wide range  
   of organizations and officials, including the Chief Information Officer 
   for the Department of Defense and the Software Program Managers Network.
   The committee also expects the Director to examine issues best software 
   management practices such as a set of standard metrics, strong risk     
   management analysis, interoperability, and opportunities for reuse of   
   software.                                                               
      The committee directs the Secretary of Defense to provide a report to
   the congressional defense committees, no later than March 1, 2001, that 
   identifies plans implemented and recommendations made to improve the    
   acquisition, management, development, and maintenance of mission        
   essential software for major defense acquisition programs. The report   
   shall also describe any necessary legislation needed to carry out plans 
   and recommendations.                                                    
            SECTION 804--EXTENSION OF WAIVER PERIOD FOR LIVE-FIRE SURVIVABILITY   
         TESTING FOR MH 47E AND MH 60K HELICOPTER MODIFICATION PROGRAMS           
      This section would amend section 142 of the National Defense         
   Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1993 (Public Law 102 484) to authorize
   the Secretary of Defense to waive the survivability testing requirements
   of section 2366 of title 10, United States Code, for the MH 47E and MH  
   60 K helicopters prior to full materiel release of those systems.       
             SECTION 805--THREE-YEAR EXTENSION OF AUTHORITY OF DEFENSE ADVANCED   
        RESEARCH PROJECTS AGENCY TO CARRY OUT CERTAIN PROTOTYPE PROJECTS          
      This section would amend section 845 of the National Defense         
   Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1994 (Public Law 103 160), by         
   extending for three years the authority of the Defense Advanced Research
   Projects Agency, the military departments, and other officials          
   designated by the Secretary of Defense to carry out prototype projects  
   using transactions other than contracts, cooperative agreements, and    
   grants, which must be executed with statutes or regulations applicable  
   to contracts.                                                           
      The committee believes that other transaction authority is an        
   important acquisition tool that facilitates integration of the civilian 
   and military industrial bases and                                       

                    incorporation of commercial technology into military weapon   
          systems. The flexibility of the other transaction authority provides the
          Department the opportunity to streamline the procurement process,       
          facilitate development of contractor strategic relationship, take       
          advantage of innovative or commercial business practices, and attract   
          companies that do not traditionally do business with the Department of  
          Defense. In an environment where commercial industry is leading defense 
          in many technological areas and defense budgets are declining, it is    
          imperative that the Department continue to have the flexibility provided
          by this tool to use innovative contractual instruments that provide the 
          opportunity to broaden the technology and industrial base or foster new 
          relationships and practices that support our national security.         
           SECTION 806--CERTIFICATION OF MAJOR AUTOMATED INFORMATION SYSTEMS AS TO
                        COMPLIANCE WITH CLINGER-COHEN ACT                         
      This section would require that in each of the next three fiscal     
   years the Department of Defense Chief Information Officer certify that  
   each major automated information system is in compliance with the       
   Clinger-Cohen Act of 1996 prior to granting milestone approval. This    
   section would also require the Chief Information Officer for the        
   Department of Defense to notify the Congressional defense committees    
   upon each decision to label a major automated information system as a   
   special interest major technology initiative.                           
                  SECTION 807--LIMITATIONS ON PROCUREMENT OF CERTAIN ITEMS        

      This section would amend section 2534 of title 10, United States     
   Code, to extend the limitations on the procurement of ball bearings and 
   roller bearings. This section would also extend the limitations on the  
   procurement of naval valves for another three fiscal years, and         
   authorize limitations on the procurement of polyacrylonitrile based     
   carbon fiber for the next three fiscal years.                           
                          SECTION 808--MULTIYEAR SERVICES CONTRACTS               

      This section would amend section 2306b of title 10, United States    
   Code, to clarify that this section applies to the multiyear procurement 
   of property, as well as to the multiyear procurement of services.       
               SECTION 809--STUDY ON IMPACT OF FOREIGN SOURCING OF SYSTEMS ON     
       LONG-TERM MILITARY READINESS AND RELATED INDUSTRIAL INFRASTRUCTURE         
      This section would require the Secretary of Defense to study and     
   provide a report to Congress on whether parts, components, and materials
   of certain systems are obtained through domestic sources or from foreign
   sources, and the impact on military readiness of purchasing such items  
   from foreign sources.                                                   
           SECTION 810--PROHIBITION AGAINST USE OF DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE FUNDS TO 
 GIVE OR WITHHOLD A PREFERENCE TO A MARKETER OR VENDOR OF FIREARMS OR AMMUNITION  
      This section would prohibit the Department of Defense from using a   
   preference for the procurement of items from a marketer or vendor of    
   firearms or ammunition that has entered into an agreement to abide by a 
   designated code of conduct, operating practice, or product design.      
             SECTION 811--STUDY AND REPORT ON PRACTICE OF CONTRACT BUNDLING IN    
                         MILITARY CONSTRUCTION CONTRACTS                          
      This section would require the General Accounting Office to study the
   use of ``contract bundling'' in military construction contracts. A      
   report on the study findings would be due to the congressional defense  
   committees no later than February 1, 2001.                              

           TITLE IX--DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE ORGANIZATION AND MANAGEMENT            

                                 ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST                        

                      CENTER FOR THE STUDY OF CHINESE MILITARY AFFAIRS            

      The committee notes that section 914 of the National Defense         
   Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2000 (Public Law 106 65) required the 
   Secretary of Defense to establish a Center for the Study of Chinese     
   Military Affairs at the National Defense University. Although the       
   Secretary established this center on March 1, 2000, the committee is    
   concerned that the Department of Defense has not placed sufficient      
   priority on ensuring that the center can carry out its mandate. The     
   committee is especially concerned that the Department has not identified
   a source of funding for the center to allow it to proceed with hiring a 
   permanent director and implementing the research, conference, and other 
   activities for which the center was established.                        
      The committee reiterates its belief that the center should play a    
   central role in assessing political, strategic, and military            
   developments within the People's Republic of China and the security     
   implications of the evolving U.S.-China relationship. The committee     
   believes the importance of the center is highlighted by recent          
   developments in the evolution of Chinese military capability and        
   strategic thought.                                                      
      The committee believes that these developments reinforce the need to 
   move forward rapidly with the appointment of a permanent director for   
   the center by June 1, 2000, and to ensure that the center is fully      
   operational by June 1, 2001, as required by Public Law 106 65. The      
   committee is aware of proposals by the center's interim director for the
   center to identify and hire research scholars, create a high-level Board
   of Visitors, establish a working group, and conduct at least one        
   conference this year. The committee encourages the Department to provide
   adequate funding to the center in order to allow planned activities to  
   proceed in a timely manner.                                             
      Finally, the committee expects the Department to facilitate the      
   center's mission of informing government policymakers, including        
   Congress, of the national goals and strategic posture of the People's   
   Republic of China and that country's ability to develop and deploy      
   effective military power in support of its national strategic           
   objectives. In this regard, the committee expects the Secretary of      
   Defense to provide the committee with regular reports on the activities 
   and research findings of the center.                                    
                                   MANAGEMENT HEADQUARTERS                        

      The committee notes that the fiscal year 2001 budget request for the 
   Department of Defense supports an estimated 60,867 positions performing 
   management headquarters functions, an increase in personnel of nearly 30
   percent over the revised fiscal year 1999 level as reported to Congress 
   in March of this year. The committee is aware that this personnel       
   increase is a result of a statutorily mandated directive contained in   
   section 921 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year   
   2000 (Public Law 106 65),                                               

                     which was intended to more accurately capture the            
          Department's personnel level of effort in support of management         
          headquarters activities.                                                
      The committee continues to strongly believe that management          
   headquarters reductions must be in alignment with overall personnel cuts
   that have occurred throughout the Department. However, the fiscal year  
   2001 budget request, after adjusting for the revised baseline, only     
   reduces management headquarters positions by 734 from the fiscal year   
   2000 estimate, far below the mandated 3,182 positions required by       
   section 921. Accordingly, the committee recommends a decrease of funding
   for management headquarters activities as provided elsewhere in this    
   report.                                                                 
                                   LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS                         

           SECTION 901--CHANGE OF TITLE OF CERTAIN POSITIONS IN THE HEADQUARTERS, 
                                  MARINE CORPS                                    
      This section would abolish the positions of Chief of Staff and Deputy
   and Assistant Chiefs of Staff from Headquarters, Marine Corps,          
   authorized by sections 5041 and 5045 of title 10, United States Code,   
   respectively. This section would also authorize five Deputy Commandant  
   positions within the Marine Corps. The committee understands that this  
   section would not change the current staffing requirements of the Marine
   Corps.                                                                  
             SECTION 902--FURTHER REDUCTIONS IN DEFENSE ACQUISITION AND SUPPORT   
                                    WORKFORCE                                     
      This section would require the Secretary of Defense to implement     
   13,000 reductions in the Defense acquisition workforce in fiscal year   
   2001. This section would also direct the Secretary of Defense to provide
   a report to the Senate Committee on Armed Services and the House        
   Committee on Armed Services by May 1, 2001, containing an implementation
   plan for re-shaping, recruiting, and sustaining the Department's        
   acquisition workforce and any changes in statutory authorities that the 
   Secretary deems necessary.                                              
      The committee is aware that the Department has programmed personnel  
   reductions of 11,800 full-time equivalents (FTEs) in fiscal year 2001 in
   the defense acquisition workforce, as defined in section 931 of the     
   Strom Thurmond National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1999  
   (Public Law 105 261). Since 1996, however, the Department has exceeded  
   its annual reduction goals within the acquisition workforce. The        
   committee supports continued reductions in this area for the purposes of
   reducing costly overhead, encouraging cross-functional acquisition      
   relationships between the military services, and improving the          
   acquisition process. In addition, the committee believes the Department 
   must reorganize and streamline its acquisition structure to capitalize  
   on rapidly changing technology and industry practices.                  
            SECTION 903--CLARIFICATION OF SCOPE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL AUTHORITIES  
                        UNDER MILITARY WHISTLEBLOWER LAW                          
      This section would authorize the inspectors general of the defense   
   agencies and joint service organizations and civilian employees assigned
   as inspectors general elsewhere within the Department of Defense to     
   receive and process protected communications and reprisal allegations   
   from members of the armed forces under section 1034 of title 10, United 
   States Code.                                                            
             SECTION 904--REPORT ON NUMBER OF PERSONNEL ASSIGNED TO LEGISLATIVE   
                                LIAISON FUNCTIONS                                 
      This section would require the Secretary of Defense to provide the   
   Senate Committee on Armed Services and the House Committee on Armed     
   Services a report identifying all personnel assigned to legislative     
   affairs and legislative liaison offices throughout the military         
   departments and all defense agencies not later than December 1, 2000.   
      The committee has long benefited from the Department's various       
   legislative affairs offices and relies on these offices to provide      
   timely and accurate information and to respond to numerous inquires     
   daily. However, the committee is concerned by the increasing number of  
   legislative affairs, or liaison offices throughout the Department. The  
   committee notes that there are now legislative affairs or legislative   
   liaison offices at nearly every unified and specified command, at major 
   military commands, and at most defense agencies. The committee questions
   how the necessary coordination between these separate various offices   
   and the primary legislative affairs offices of the Secretary of Defense 
   and the secretaries of the military departments can be effectively      
   accomplished.                                                           
            SECTION 905--JOINT REPORT ON ESTABLISHMENT OF NATIONAL COLLABORATIVE  
                         INFORMATION ANALYSIS CAPABILITY                          
      The committee is aware of the emerging capability to collect and     
   analyze information using the latest computer technology to leverage the
   ability of analysts. The committee notes that this capability to discern
   meaningful intelligence from disparate data has, to this moment, been   
   best demonstrated through the work of the Army's Land Information       
   Warfare Activity's (LIWA) recent analysis conducted at the request of   
   the Deputy Secretary of Defense.                                        
      The committee believes that this data mining capability must be      
   rapidly and fully developed as strong foundation for future efforts to  
   support national defense against new and growing worldwide asymmetrical 
   threats.                                                                
      The committee supports Department of Defense efforts to determine the
   proper architecture for a collaborative operations and analysis         
   capability to fuse the distributed efforts of the more than thirty      
   appropriate entities into a national level center. However, the         
   committee realizes that several approaches are under consideration,     
   including the Joint Counterintelligence Assessment Group and the        
   National Analysis and Operations Hub concepts. Therefore, the committee 
   recommends a provision, (sec. 905) that would require the Secretary of  
   Defense and the Director of Central Intelligence to prepare a joint     
   report assessing alternatives for the establishment of a national       
   information analysis capability. The provision would also require that  
   the Secretary of Defense take maximum advantage of the data mining,     
   profiling and analysis capability of the LIWA.                          
                SECTION 906--ORGANIZATION AND MANAGEMENT OF CIVIL AIR PATROL      


      This section would revise section 9441 of title 10, United States    
   Code to define more clearly the relationship between the United States  
   Air Force and the Civil Air Patrol (CAP). This section would also       
   authorize a new board of governors for the CAP to include               
   representatives from the Air Force, the CAP, and from outside interests,
   and would also make numerous changes in the organization of the CAP to  
   improve administrative and financial management.                        
                       SECTION 907--REPORT ON NETWORK CENTRIC WARFARE             

      This section would require a report on Network Centric Warfare (NCW).
   It would require the Secretary of Defense to clearly define NCW, and    
   outline the conceptual, doctrinal and operational concepts surrounding  
   NCW. It would also require the Secretary to outline how NCW is related  
   the overall strategy for military transformation. Finally, the Secretary
   would be required to report on any acquisition programs and experiments 
   that are planned or currently underway that relate to NCW.              
      Historically, revolutions in military affairs (RMA) have occurred    
   when new technologies imbedded in a significant number of military      
   systems, combined with innovative operational concepts, have            
   fundamentally altered the nature of armed conflict. This combination    
   often significantly increases the combat power and military             
   effectiveness of military forces. The committee recognizes that due to  
   the rapid advances in information technology, such a condition may exist
   today.                                                                  
      One possible concept proposed in relation to the emerging RMA is the 
   idea of Network Centric Warfare (NCW). According to proponents, NCW will
   integrate emerging technologies to create a ``system-of-systems'' that  
   will enable the U.S. military to apply force with dramatically greater  
   efficiency while simultaneously reducing the risk to U.S. forces. While 
   there has been much discussion of this concept within the Department, no
   consensus on the definition, operational concepts, doctrine, programs or
   experiments relating to NCW has emerged. The committee also recognizes  
   that some detractors are critical of NCW believing it is an attempt to  
   impose a technically rigid theory of warfare on the inherent chaos of   
   armed conflict.                                                         
      The committee believes this to be an important debate and recognizes 
   the potential enhancement in military capability that could result from 
   transformation concepts such as NCW. Therefore, the committee looks     
   forward to the Department's assessment and to the resultant debate on   
   this issue.                                                             
             SECTION 908--DEFENSE INSTITUTE FOR HEMISPHERIC SECURITY COOPERATION  

      This section would authorize the Secretary of Defense to establish   
   and operate the Defense Institute for Hemispheric Security Cooperation. 
   The purpose of the Defense Institute for Hemispheric Security           
   Cooperation would be to provide professional education and training to  
   military, law enforcement, and civilian personnel of nations of the     
   Western Hemisphere in defense and security matters. The section would   
   require that the curriculum of the Institute include a minimum of eight 
   hours of instruction per student in human rights, the rule of law, due  
   process, civilian control of the military, and the role of the military 
   in a democratic society. The section would additionally establish a     
   board of visitors to oversee the activities and curriculum of the       
   Institute and require the board to submit a report to the Secretary of  
   Defense and, in turn, to Congress. This section would strike the        
   authority for the Secretary of the Army to operate the School of the    
   Americas contained in section 4415 of title 10, United States Code, and 
   direct the Secretary of Defense to take such steps as he deems necessary
   to ensure that the Secretary of the Army provides for the transition of 
   the School of the Americas into the Defense Institute for Hemispheric   
   Security Cooperation.                                                   
      The committee affirms its long-standing support for the mission of   
   the Army School of the Americas to enhance military professionalism and 
   respect for democratic values throughout Latin America. The committee   
   notes the significant contribution the School has played in advancing   
   democratization in the hemisphere over the past two decades. However,   
   the committee is aware of persistent concerns that the School of the    
   Americas does not focus sufficient classroom attention upon critical    
   issues such as rule of law and civilian control of the military within  
   the countries of Latin America. While the committee believes that these 
   concerns are unfounded, the committee recognizes the need to implement  
   fundamental changes to the School of the Americas to ensure that its    
   student curriculum is properly structured. Accordingly, the committee   
   proposes to eliminate the School of the Americas and establish in its   
   place the Defense Institute for Hemispheric Security Cooperation. The   
   committee believes that the establishment of a board of visitors with a 
   broad mandate to examine the activities and curriculum of the Defense   
   Institute for Hemispheric Security Cooperation will serve to address any
   future concerns associated with the operations of the program.          
      The committee believes a relationship should exist between the       
   duration of courses offered at the Institute and instruction in human   
   rights, rule of law, due process, civilian control of the military, and 
   the role of the military in a democratic society. Accordingly, the      
   committee urges the Secretary of Defense to consider initiatives to     
   increase such instruction beyond eight hours, where practicable. The    
   committee recommends the Secretary consider a minimum of twelve hours of
   instruction in human rights, rule of law, due process, civilian control 
   of the military, and the role of the military in a democratic society   
   for each student attending courses of the Institute for up to eight     
   weeks duration; twenty four hours of instruction for courses between    
   eight and fifteen weeks duration; and forty hours of instruction for    
   courses over fifteen weeks duration.                                    
              SECTION 909--DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE REGIONAL CENTERS FOR SECURITY    
                                     STUDIES                                      
      This section would consolidate in title 10, United States Code,      
   various authorities that currently exist regarding the operation of     
   Department of Defense regional centers for security studies. It would   
   also require congressional notification of an intent to establish       
   additional regional centers and an annual report to Congress by the     
   Secretary of Defense on the status, objectives, and operations of the   
   regional centers.                                                       
             SECTION 910--CHANGE IN NAME OF ARMED FORCES STAFF COLLEGE TO JOINT   
                              FORCES STAFF COLLEGE                                
      The section would strike the reference to Armed Forces Staff College 
   contained in section 2165 of title 10, United States Code, and insert in
   its place Joint Forces Staff College.                                   

           TITLE X--GENERAL PROVISIONS                                            

                                  ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST                       

                                  COUNTER-DRUG ACTIVITIES                         

                                          OVERVIEW                                

      The budget request for fiscal year 2001 for counter-drug activities  
   includes an expanding commitment by the Department of Defense to support
   the government of Colombia in its counter-drug efforts. In particular,  
   the budget request would support the training and equipping of two      
   Colombian army counter-drug battalions in addition to naval riverine    
   units, upgrade Colombian military aircraft, and expand intelligence     
   collection in Colombia. The committee notes with concern that the budget
   request continues the trend of requesting authorization of              
   appropriations for foreign military assistance through the Department of
   Defense as opposed to the Department of State.                          
      The committee is aware that the escalating production of cocaine and 
   heroin in Colombia has fueled the ongoing conflict between the          
   government of Colombia and armed insurgents and paramilitary groups. The
   increasing level of violence within Colombia continues to cause         
   instability throughout the region and has specifically strained the     
   ability of the governments of Panama, Ecuador, and Peru to respond      
   adequately to incursions by Colombian drug trafficking organizations,   
   guerrillas, and paramilitary forces. The committee recognizes the       
   important contribution that the Department of Defense can play in       
   support of these regional allies as part of a comprehensive and         
   coordinated effort by the United States to contain the drug trade.      
   However, as noted in the committee report on H.R. 1401 (H. Rept. 106    
   162), the committee remains concerned with the appropriateness of       
   expanding the role of the Department of Defense in support of Colombian 
   governmental security forces and, in particular, the force protection   
   risks for U.S. military personnel stationed or assigned to temporary    
   duty in Colombia.                                                       
      The committee continues to support a robust Department of Defense    
   counter-drug program and notes the challenges to U.S. Southern Command  
   with the 1999 closure of Howard Air Force Base in Panama that served as 
   a key installation for aircraft monitoring the source and transit zones.
   The committee notes that long-term agreements for the establishment of  
   forward operating locations (FOLs) for drug interdiction purposes at    
   Manta, Ecuador, and Curacao and Aruba in the Netherlands Antilles, were 
   recently secured and that limited operations are ongoing at these sites.
   The committee also notes the testimony provided by senior officials of  
   the Department of Defense that an FOL in Central America is crucial in  
   confronting drug trafficking by the way of the Eastern Pacific. The     
   committee has raised concern over the prior two fiscal years that the   
   Department has failed to resource adequately the gaps in Eastern Pacific
   detection and monitoring despite increased usage by maritime drug       
   traffickers. Therefore, the committee is encouraged that a long-term FOL
   agreement with the government of El Salvador is pending and urges the   
   Secretary of the Navy, as executive agent, to utilize fully such an FOL 
   for the conduct of detection and monitoring flights over the Eastern    
   Pacific transit zone.                                                   
                                           FUNDING                                

      The budget request for counter-drug activities contained $836.3      
   million for drug interdiction and counter-drug activities, in addition  
   to $155.9 million for operational tempo, which is included within the   
   operating budgets of the military services. The budget request          
   represents a net increase of $48.2 million from the fiscal year 2000    
   budget request of $788.1 million, and a decrease of $10.6 million for   
   operational tempo from the previous budget request of $166.5 million.   
   The committee understands that the overall increase in the fiscal year  
   2001 counter-drug budget request is attributed to increased activities  
   in Colombia.                                                            
      The committee recommends authorization for Department of Defense     
   counter-drug activities as follows:                                     

          [Dollars in thousands]                                                  



          FY01 Drug Interdiction & Counter-Drug Request                $836,300



          Educate America's Youth                23,029



          Increase Safety of Citizens                81,974



          Reduce Health & Social Costs                74,754



          Shield America's Frontiers                339,486



          Break Drug Sources of Supply                317,057

   Recommended Decreases:                                                  



          Air National Guard Fighter Operations                5,000



          Coastal Patrol Equipment Procurement                3,000

   Recommended Increases:                                                  



          Operation Caper Focus                6,000



          Puerto Rico ROTHR Security                1,200



          Southwest Border Fence                6,000



          Recommendation                 841,500


                                  ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST                       

           Air National Guard Fighter Operations                                   

      The committee notes the fighter operations of the Air National Guard 
   previously located at Howard Air Force Base, Panama, in support of the  
   Department of Defense counter-drug program have relocated to Curacao,   
   Netherlands Antilles, and are currently conducting operations. The      
   committee further notes that in fiscal year 1999, the Air National Guard
   was funded at $7.2 million for this purpose. The fiscal year 2001 budget
   request included $15.8 million for this purpose, due in part to the high
   cost of temporary duty for pilots and crews in Curacao. However, the    
   committee believes the budget request significantly overstates the      
   actual costs associated with planned operations and, therefore,         
   recommends a reduction of $5.0 million for this purpose.                

           Coastal Patrol equipment procurement                                    

      The budget request contained $3.0 million for the continued          
   installation of Combatant Craft Retrieval Systems (CCRS) on two Navy    
   Coastal Patrol ships. The committee is aware that such equipment        
   supports various activities of the Special Operations Command, but      
   understands that CCRS provides slight benefit for the conduct of        
   counter-drug operations. Accordingly, the committee recommends a        
   decrease of $3.0 million for this program.                              
           Operation Caper Focus                                                   

      The committee notes with concern that the budget request failed to   
   support fully Operation Caper Focus, a valuable, ongoing operation to   
   disrupt maritime narcotics trafficking in the Eastern Pacific. The      
   committee continues to support strongly this important operation and,   
   therefore, recommends an increase of $6.0 million for this purpose.     
           Puerto Rico ROTHR security                                              

      The committee understands the Relocatable Over-The-Horizon Radar     
   (ROTHR) based in Puerto Rico will greatly enhance the effectiveness of  
   the interagency effort to curtail the flow of illegal narcotics into the
   United States. The committee supports strongly the ROTHR program but    
   notes with concern that the Navy's planned transfer of land on the      
   western side of Vieques, Puerto Rico, would leave the ROTHR without     
   adjacent federal property. The Navy, as executive agent for the program,
   recognizes the inadequacy of its force protection plan for the ROTHR but
   the committee notes the budget request does not contain funding for this
   purpose. Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $1.2 million
   for security enhancements of the ROTHR facility.                        
           Southwest border fence                                                  

      The committee remains concerned with the increased smuggling of      
   narcotics across the Southwest border in the San Diego County,          
   California, area. The committee is aware that the Southwest border      
   continues to be one of the most heavily utilized drug trafficking       
   corridors into the United States. Accordingly, the committee believes   
   that existing fence and road-building activities must continue and      
   recommends an increase of $6.0 million for this purpose.                
                                        OTHER MATTERS                             

                                 QUADRENNIAL DEFENSE REVIEW                       

      The committee reiterates its concern over the pending Quadrennial    
   Defense Review (QDR). Previous attempts to define U.S. national security
   interests in the post-Cold War world have been less than satisfactory,  
   as have efforts to identify the proper national military strategy and   
   the force structure required to execute that strategy. The committee has
   previously expressed its view that any defense strategy should be       
   designed to protect the full range of U.S. national security interests  
   and that forces should be sufficient to do so at the lowest possible    
   risk.                                                                   
      The committee reemphasizes this view and reminds the Department that 
   the QDR should be driven by the demands of strategy and should not be   
   constrained by any presupposition about the size of future defense      
   budgets. Previous reviews, including the 1996 Quadrennial Defense Review
   and the 1993 Bottom-Up Review, were budget-driven exercises that reduced
   the size of the armed forces by approximately 40 percent from 1991      
   levels. Neither study recommended a substantial change to the way the   
   services were structured or organized. This reduced force, coupled with 
   a national security strategy of ``engagement and enlargement,'' has     
   increased operations tempo 300 percent over Cold War levels.            
      Currently, the force is ostensibly sized and structured to fight and 
   win two nearly simultaneous major regional conflicts. However, the      
   requirement to forward deploy forces on an ever-increasing number of    
   peacekeeping and humanitarian missions on a rotational basis with a     
   force designed to fight major theater wars has strained military        
   readiness. In addition, the committee believes that not enough attention
   is paid by the Department of Defense to future threats facing this      
   nation and the requirement to maintain forces to meet these threats.    
   These include the rise of a near-peer competitor and the difficulties   
   posed by asymmetric threats, including weapons of mass destruction,     
   improved ballistic missile technology, and cyber-attacks against        
   critical infrastructure.                                                
      The committee urges the Secretary of Defense to take a comprehensive 
   approach to the QDR and to develop an honest and realistic assessment of
   the vital national security interests of this nation. With these        
   interests in mind, the QDR should provide recommendations for a force   
   that is sized and structured to meet the challenges of this new era.    
            DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE PERSONNEL SECURITY INVESTIGATION REQUIREMENTS   
                                   PRIORITIES                                     
      The federal government uses personnel security investigations to     
   determine whether individuals should be granted access to classified    
   information. These investigations are a critical first step in          
   safeguarding national security information. The committee is concerned  
   over the results of a review conducted by the Comptroller General that  
   established that Department of Defense personnel security investigations
   are often incomplete and are not conducted in a timely manner. Moreover,
   there does not seem to be a prioritization scheme for these             
   investigations to ensure that those with the most sensitive duties are  
   investigated first and subject to more frequent review and update.      
      Therefore, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense, in        
   conjunction with the service secretaries and heads of defense agencies, 
   to develop a means of quantifying requirements for personnel security   
   investigations for clearances and of prioritizing categories of         
   personnel involved in duties requiring access to the most sensitive     
   national security information. This prioritization scheme should ensure 
   that personnel with sensitive positions should be subject to background 
   investigation review and update at least every five years to ensure the 
   currency of relevant information. Priority categories                   

                    should be used to guide the submission and expeditious        
          completion of background investigations on personnel with the most      
          sensitive duties. The Secretary shall submit a report describing the    
          Department's efforts to establish a prioritization scheme and to provide
          more timely and complete personnel security investigations to the Senate
          Committee on Armed Services and the House Committee on Armed Services no
          later than March 1, 2001.                                               
                                   LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS                         

                               SUBTITLE AU--FINANCIAL MATTERS                     

                              SECTION 1001--TRANSFER AUTHORITY                    

      This section would permit the transfer of amounts of authorizations  
   made available in Division A of the bill for any fiscal year to any     
   other authorization made available in Division A upon determination by  
   the Secretary of Defense that such a transfer would be in the national  
   interest. The provision would provide the authorization for             
   reprogramming involving the transfer of authorization between amounts   
   authorized as set out in bill language.                                 
      The authority to transfer could only be used to provide authorization
   for higher priority items than the items from which authorization was   
   transferred and could not be used to provide authorization for an item  
   that was denied authorization by Congress. The Secretary of Defense     
   would be required to notify the Congress promptly of transfers. The     
   total amount of transfers would be limited to $2.0 billion.             
   Historically, the transfer authority authorized has changed as follows: 


                                                                        

Billions                                                                

  FY85 88                                                                 

 2.00                                                                    

  FY89 91                                                                 

 3.00                                                                    

  FY92                                                                    

 2.25                                                                    

  FY93                                                                    

 1.50                                                                    

  FY94 00                                                                 

 2.00                                                                    


                       SECTION 1002--INCORPORATION OF CLASSIFIED ANNEX            

      This section would incorporate the classified annex prepared by the  
   Committee on Armed Services into the National Defense Authorization Act 
   for Fiscal Year 2001.                                                   
            SECTION 1003--AUTHORIZATION OF EMERGENCY SUPPLEMENTAL APPROPRIATIONS  
                              FOR FISCAL YEAR 2000                                
      This section would extend authorization to those defense items       
   appropriated pursuant to the 2000 Emergency Supplemental Appropriations 
   Act. Specifically, $5,254,346,000 of national defense appropriations in 
   the Act would be authorized as follows:                                 
           Department of Defense                                                   

  Title I, Chapter 2:                                                     

       $185,800,000 for Drug Interdiction and Counter-Drug Activities,     
   Defense.                                                                
  Title I, Chapter 4:                                                     

    $116,523,000 for Military Construction, Defense-Wide.                  

  Title II, Chapter 2:                                                    

    $19,532,000 for Operation and Maintenance, Army;                       

    $20,565,000 for Operation and Maintenance, Navy;                       

    $37,155,000 for Operation and Maintenance, Marine Corps;               

    $30,065,000 for Operation and Maintenance, Air Force;                  

    $40,000,000 for Operation and Maintenance, Defense-Wide;               

    $2,174,000 for Operation and Maintenance, Army Reserve;                

    $2,851,000 for Operation and Maintenance, Army National Guard;         

    $2,050,400,000 for Overseas Contingency Operations Transfer Fund;      

    $73,000,000 for Aircraft Procurement, Air Force;                       

    $3,533,000 for Defense Health Program.                                 

  Section 2202:                                                           

    $1,556,200,000 for Defense-Wide Working Capital Fund.                  

  Section 2204:                                                           

       $125,000,000 for Procurement of Weapons and Tracked Combat Vehicles,
   Army.                                                                   
  Section 2205:                                                           

    $854,500,000 for Defense Health Program.                               

  Title II, Chapter 4:                                                    

    $12,348,000 for Military Construction, Army Reserve.                   

  Section 2401:                                                           

    $2,000,000 for Family Housing, Army.                                   

    $3,000,000 for Family Housing, Navy and Marine Corps.                  

    $1,700,000 for Family Housing, Air Force.                              

           Department of Energy                                                    

  Title III, Chapter 3:                                                   

    $63,000,000 for Other Defense Activities.                              

  Title IV, Chapter 1:                                                    

    $55,000,000 for Weapons Activities.                                    

           SECTION 1004--CONTINGENT REPEAL OF CERTAIN PROVISIONS SHIFTING CERTAIN 
                     OUTLAYS FROM ONE FISCAL YEAR TO ANOTHER                      
      This section would repeal, subject to inclusion in appropriations    
   acts, provisions of fiscal year 2000 appropriations acts that delayed   
   obligations of Department of Defense funds for pay and benefits and     
   progress payments.                                                      
            SECTION 1005--LIMITATION ON FUNDS FOR BOSNIA AND KOSOVO PEACEKEEPING  
                         OPERATIONS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2001                          

      This section would limit the amount of funds available for           
   peacekeeping operations in Bosnia and Kosovo to the amounts contained in
   the budget request, $1,387.8 million for operations in Bosnia and       
   $1,650.4 million for operations in Kosovo. The provision would authorize
   the president to waive the limitation after submitting to the Congress a
   written certification that the waiver is necessary to the national      
   security interests of the United States. This section would also require
   a written certification that the exercise of the waiver will not        
   adversely affect the readiness of U.S. military forces; a report setting
   forth the reasons for the waiver, a discussion of the impact of the     
   involvement of U.S. military forces in Balkans peacekeeping operations  
   on U.S. military readiness; and a supplemental appropriations request   
   for the Department of Defense for fiscal year 2001 costs associated with
   U.S. military forces participating in, or supporting, Bosnia or Kosovo  
   peacekeeping operations.                                                
                          SUBTITLE B--NAVAL VESSELS AND SHIPYARDS                 

                       SECTION 1011--NATIONAL DEFENSE FEATURES PROGRAM            

      This section would amend section 2218 of title 10, United States     
   Code, to permit the payment to a vessel operator, as consideration for  
   making a vessel available to the government on such terms as the        
   Secretary of Defense or secretary of a military department and the      
   operator agree, amounts equal to the cost of maintaining the vessel in a
   4 day Reduced Operating Status (ROS-4) condition in the Ready Reserve   
   Fleet for a period of 25 years.                                         
                            SUBTITLE C--COUNTER-DRUG ACTIVITIES                   

           SECTION 1021--REPORT ON DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE EXPENDITURES TO SUPPORT  
                         FOREIGN COUNTER-DRUG ACTIVITIES                          
      This section would require the Secretary of Defense to submit a      
   report to the congressional defense committees by January 1, 2001,      
   detailing the total amount and type of, and legal basis for, foreign    
   counter-drug assistance provided by the Department of Defense during    
   fiscal year 2000.                                                       
      The committee notes that the Department of Defense has increased its 
   level of counter-drug assistance to foreign law enforcement agencies and
   militaries in recent years. As part of the fiscal year 2001 budget      
   request, the Department requested additional authority to directly      
   support the governments of Colombia, Peru, and Ecuador. Under section   
   1004 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1991     
   (Public Law 101 510) and section 1033 of the National Defense           
   Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1998 (Public Law 105 85), the         
   Department is presently authorized to support various types of foreign  
   assistance ranging from equipment maintenance to military training and  
   intelligence sharing. While the committee recognizes the important role 
   of the Department of Defense in supporting regional allies in combating 
   the flow of illegal narcotics into the United States, the committee     
   believes that any additional counter-drug authorities for the Department
   should be considered only after a comprehensive review of the current   
   foreign counter-drug support activities of the Department.              
                   SECTION 1022--REPORT ON TETHERED AEROSTAT RADAR SYSTEM         

      The section would require the Secretary of Defense, in consultation  
   with the Commissioner of Customs, to submit to Congress a report on the 
   Tethered Aerostat Radar System (TARS) by May 1, 2001, that includes the 
   operational availability of each of the existing TARS sites; a          
   discussion of any plans to close TARS sites over the next 5 years and a 
   justification for each proposed closure; a review of the requirements of
   other agencies, especially the United States Customs Service, for TARS  
   data; an assessment of the value of TARS in the conduct of              
   counter-narcotics, border security, and air sovereignty operations, and;
   costs associated with the Department's planned standardization of the   
   program and the Secretary's analysis of that standardization.           
                                 SUBTITLE D--OTHER MATTERS                        

            SECTION 1031--FUNDS FOR ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENSES UNDER DEFENSE EXPORT  
                             LOAN GUARANTEE PROGRAM                               
      This section would authorize the Secretary of Defense to allocate up 
   to $500,000 per year from available Operations and Maintenance,         
   Defense-wide, funds to administer the Defense Export Loan Guarantee     
   Program. The provision would require the Secretary to replenish fully   
   the funds expended under this authority from fees generated from the    
   loans guaranteed under the program.                                     
      The committee notes the increasing interest in the Defense Export    
   Loan Guarantee Program recently displayed by domestic defense industry, 
   eligible countries, and the financial sector. The committee believes the
   program has significant potential to support U.S. national security     
   objectives in certain regions of the world and believes further that the
   authority in this section will provide the stability needed for the     
   effective long-term management of the program.                          
                       SECTION 1032--TECHNICAL AND CLERICAL AMENDMENTS            

      This section would make a number of technical and clerical amendments
   to existing law of a non-substantive basis.                             
              SECTION 1033--TRANSFER OF VIETNAM ERA TA 4 AIRCRAFT TO NONPROFIT    
                                   FOUNDATION                                     
      This section would permit the Secretary of the Navy to convey,       
   without consideration, one surplus TA 4 aircraft to a nonprofit         
   foundation. This section would also require that any aircraft           
   transferred under this authority would be completely demilitarized prior
   to transfer and that the conveyance would be at no cost to the United   
   States.                                                                 
                   SECTION 1034--TRANSFER OF 19TH CENTURY CANNON TO MUSEUM        


      This section would direct the Secretary of the Army to convey,       
   without consideration, a specific 19th century cannon that was          
   manufactured in Macon, Georgia, to the Cannonball House Museum, Macon,  
   Georgia. The section would also direct the Secretary of the Army to     
   acquire, by donation or purchase, one or more cannons documented as     
   having been manufactured in Macon, Georgia, during the Civil War in     
   order to replace the cannon conveyed to the museum.                     
                 SECTION 1035--EXPENDITURES FOR DECLASSIFICATION ACTIVITIES       

      This section would require that any future budget request submitted  
   to Congress by the Department of Defense (DOD) specifically identify, in
   a single display, funds being requested for the Department, each        
   military department, and each defense agency to be used to declassify   
   records to comply with declassification requirements of any statute or  
   executive order. This section would also limit the expenditure of funds 
   by the Department of Defense for the declassification of records during 
   fiscal year 2001 to no more than $30.0 million.                         
      The review or records for potential declassification and release to  
   the public can be quite costly. The Department estimates that records   
   review for declassification and public release will cost the Department 
   $34.0 million from operation and maintenance (O&M) accounts during      
   fiscal year 2000. The committee is concerned about the drain on         
   operations and maintenance resources resulting from the declassification
   process. The O&M accounts, and the readiness accounts in particular,    
   have been dramatically underfunded for years, a serious problem that is 
   exacerbated by almost annual unbudgeted contingency operations. The     
   committee believes that record declassification is a significantly lower
   priority for already scarce O&M funds and believes these funds should be
   spent addressing shortfalls in higher priority areas such as            
   maintenance, training, spare parts, and other key readiness activities. 
   Consequently, this section would limit the amount of funds available for
   the Department's fiscal year 2001 records declassification effort to    
   $30.0 million, the amount the Department estimates will be necessary for
   planned record reviews.                                                 
      In addition, section 230 of title 10, United States Code provides    
   that the Secretary of Defense shall provide in budget justification     
   materials submitted to Congress ``specific identification, as a         
   budgetary line item, of the amounts required to carry out''             
   declassification activities. The Department of Defense failed to provide
   in the fiscal year 2001 budget request the required declassification    
   line item. Parts of the declassification budget request were scattered  
   across more than 10 budget accounts, and other portions of the          
   declassification budget request were invisible, having been imbedded in 
   other budget lines. The committee believes it is necessary that the full
   DOD declassification budget be visible in the annual budget request, so 
   Congress will be better able to establish appropriate levels for such   
   expenditures. Therefore, this section would require the Department to   
   include in future budget request materials a single display reflecting  
   the total amount requested for records declassification.                
           SECTION 1036--AUTHORITY TO PROVIDE LOAN GUARANTEES TO IMPROVE DOMESTIC 
                      PREPAREDNESS TO COMBAT CYBERTERRORISM                       
      This section would allow the Secretary of Defense to provide loan    
   guarantees to qualified commercial firms seeking to improve their       
   critical infrastructure protection. It would require the Secretary to   
   prescribe regulations providing that fees assessed for the purpose of   
   loan guarantees be credited to a special account and be available, to   
   the extent provided in appropriations acts, to pay administrative       
   expenses associated with this program. This section would also require  
   the recipients of loan guarantees to report to the Secretary on the     
   results of improvements made pursuant to this program, and would require
   the Secretary to submit to Congress an annual report on the loan        
   guarantee program.                                                      
             SECTION 1037--V 22 COCKPIT AIRCRAFT VOICE AND FLIGHT DATA RECORDERS  

      This section would direct the Secretary of Defense to require that   
   all V 22 Osprey aircraft be equipped with state-of-the-art cockpit      
   aircraft voice and flight data recorders which meet, as a minimum, the  
   National Transportation Safety Board standards for such devices.        

           TITLE XI--DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE CIVILIAN PERSONNEL                     

                                   LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS                         

           SECTION 1101--EMPLOYMENT AND COMPENSATION PROVISIONS FOR EMPLOYEES OF  
          TEMPORARY ORGANIZATIONS ESTABLISHED BY LAW OR EXECUTIVE ORDER           
      This section would provide legislative and executive agencies the    
   flexibility to use a streamlined process to hire and pay employees for  
   temporary organizations established by law or executive order. The      
   committee notes that temporary organizations are normally established to
   examine issues of immediate public concern, yet these organizations are 
   often slow to begin substantive work due to the lack of established     
   structures or processes to acquire staff.                               
               SECTION 1102--RESTRUCTURING THE RESTRICTION ON DEGREE TRAINING     

      This section would authorize the Secretary of Defense to pay tuition 
   for a civilian employee to obtain an academic degree if that degree     
   training occurs at an accredited institution and is part of a planned   
   Department of Defense (DOD) professional development program. The       
   committee supports education and training programs that the service     
   secretaries conduct for military personnel, but is concerned that DOD   
   civilian personnel professional development programs have been          
   neglected. The committee expects this authority will be used to enhance 
   the professional abilities of the Department's most promising civilian  
   employees.                                                              
            SECTION 1103--CONTINUATION OF TUITION REIMBURSEMENT AND TRAINING FOR  
                          CERTAIN ACQUISITION PERSONNEL                           
      This section would amend section 1745 of title 10, United States     
   Code, to extend the ``shortage of personnel'' designation for qualified 
   civilian acquisition personnel of the Department of Defense until       
   September 30, 2005, in order for such personnel to qualify for          
   eligibility for reimbursement of expenses for training and tuition. The 
   committee believes such an extension is necessary to enhance the        
   professional development of the acquisition workforce of the Department 
   of Defense.                                                             
             SECTION 1104--EXTENSION OF AUTHORITY FOR CIVILIAN EMPLOYEES OF THE   
     DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE TO PARTICIPATE VOLUNTARILY IN REDUCTIONS IN FORCE      
      This section would amend section 3502 of title 5, United States Code,
   to extend to September 30, 2005, the authority of the Secretary of      
   Defense to allow certain civilian employees to volunteer for separation 
   under reduction in force procedures even though those employees would   
   not otherwise be subject to separation. The committee believes that this
   program has ameliorated the disruptive effects of reductions-in-force by
   lessening the number of civilian employees who would otherwise have been
   involuntarily separated.                                                
             SECTION 1105--EXPANSION OF DEFENSE CIVILIAN INTELLIGENCE PERSONNEL   
                                SYSTEM POSITIONS                                  
      This section would amend section 1601 of title 10, United States     
   Code, to authorize the Secretary of Defense to create positions within  
   the Defense Civilian Intelligence Personnel System outside the          
   designated intelligence components of the Department of Defense. The    
   committee believes that a limited number of positions should be created 
   outside the designated intelligence components to establish appropriate 
   career broadening intelligence related positions within the Office of   
   the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Command, Control, Communications,
   and Intelligence and other activities of the Office of the Secretary of 
   Defense.                                                                
             SECTION 1106--PILOT PROGRAM FOR REENGINEERING THE EQUAL EMPLOYMENT   
                          OPPORTUNITY COMPLAINT PROCESS                           
      This section would authorize the Secretary of the Navy to carry out a
   pilot program to demonstrate improved processes for the resolution of   
   equal employment opportunity complaints.                                

           TITLE XII--MATTERS RELATING TO OTHER NATIONS                           

                                  ITEM OF SPECIAL INTEREST                        

                                 ARMS CONTROL IMPLEMENTATION                      

      The budget request contained $219.0 million for arms control         
   implementation programs, representing a slight decrease from the fiscal 
   year 2000 current spending level of $222.7 million. The committee       
   recommends $207.5 million, a decrease of $11.5 million from the budget  
   request.                                                                
      The committee notes that the budget request assumes the entry into   
   force of a number of arms control treaties that remain unratified by all
   necessary parties. This includes the Open Skies Treaty and the          
   Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty (CTBT); the latter failed a vote on       
   ratification before the United States Senate. In addition, although the 
   START II Treaty between the United States and Russia was signed in 1993,
   subsequently ratified by the United States Senate, and ratified by the  
   Russian Duma in April 2000, the Duma has linked Russian observance of   
   START II to acceptance by the United States of a Protocol to the START  
   II Treaty that was agreed to by Presidents Clinton and Yeltsin in 1997. 
   The START II Treaty cannot enter into force prior to the Senate giving  
   its advice and consent to the Protocol to the Treaty, which has yet to  
   be submitted to the Senate for its consideration.                       
      In light of the delayed entry into force of these treaties, the      
   committee believes that adjustments to the budget request are warranted.
   The committee's recommendation to reduce the requested level of funding 
   is premised on the belief that funds should not be expended on          
   activities to comply unilaterally with treaties that have not yet       
   entered into force. The committee expects the Department to take this   
   into account in apportioning the recommended reductions.                
                                   LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS                         

            SECTION 1201--SUPPORT OF UNITED NATIONS-SPONSORED EFFORTS TO INSPECT  
                      AND MONITOR IRAQI WEAPONS ACTIVITIES                        
      This section would amend section 1505 of the Weapons of Mass         
   Destruction Control Act of 1992 by extending the authority provided to  
   the Department of Defense under that Act to support the activities of   
   the United Nations Monitoring, Verification and Inspection Commission   
   (UNMOVIC) in fiscal year 2001. This section would limit assistance      
   provided to UNMOVIC by the Department of Defense to $15.0 million.      
      The committee continues to be troubled by the efforts of Iraq to     
   develop and potentially to militarize weapons of mass destruction (WMD).
   The committee strongly believes that the United Nations must            
   re-establish a robust, long-term monitoring program in Iraq that        
   includes on-site inspections and remote surveillance involving cameras, 
   sensors, seismic devices, and other technology. However, United Nations 
   weapons inspectors have been barred from entering Iraq since October    
   1998. The committee believes the current status-quo is unacceptable and 
   jeopardizes long-standing U.S. policy that Iraq must be denied access to
   ballistic missile technology and weapons of mass destruction.           
      The committee notes the adoption by the United Nations Security      
   Council of Resolution 1284 in December 1999 that established UNMOVIC as 
   the successor to the United Nations Special Commission on Iraq (UNSCOM).
   The committee remains doubtful that Iraq will fulfill its responsibility
   to allow inspections as mandated by the Security Council. However, the  
   committee supports the Department of Defense's assistance to UNMOVIC    
   under the Weapons of Mass Destruction Control Act of 1992 and believes  
   the Department should maintain a level of readiness necessary to ensure 
   the swift resumption of monitoring missions should future conditions    
   permit.                                                                 
           SECTION 1202--ANNUAL REPORT ASSESSING EFFECT OF CONTINUED OPERATIONS IN
    THE BALKANS REGION ON READINESS TO EXECUTE THE NATIONAL MILITARY STRATEGY     
      This section would amend section 1035 of the National Defense        
   Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2000 (Public Law 106-65) to make      
   annual the reporting requirement of the Secretary of Defense to submit a
   report 180 days after enactment assessing the effects of operations in  
   the Balkans on the ability of the United States to meet other regional  
   contingencies and the National Military Strategy. The committee notes   
   that the slow pace of civil implementation in both Bosnia-Herzegovina   
   and Kosovo will require the United States and NATO to maintain military 
   forces in the region for the foreseeable future necessitating an annual 
   reporting requirement.                                                  
      The committee further notes with concern that the Army announced in  
   November 1999 that the two divisions deployed to the Balkans, the 1st   
   Infantry Division in Kosovo and the 10th Mountain Division in Kosovo,   
   had been assigned a C-4 readiness rating. The division commanders of    
   each unit assigned this rating over concerns that neither division could
   disengage from their peacekeeping duties in time to deploy to a major   
   theater conflict as required by current war plans. These concerns were  
   subsequently reported in the Department's Quarterly Readiness Report of 
   the Department of Defense to Congress for that period, in which the     
   Department expressed concern over the ability of the armed forces to    
   disengage forces from on-going contingencies in order to fight major    
   regional conflicts. The committee believes that as long as the United   
   States has military forces in the Balkans region conducting peacekeeping
   operations, combat readiness will be degraded.                          
                           SECTION 1203--SITUATION IN THE BALKANS                 

      This section would require the President to establish militarily     
   significant benchmarks that will create a sustainable peace in Kosovo   
   and that will facilitate the withdrawal of US troops from Kosovo. This  
   section would also require the President to seek concurrence with       
   members of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) to establish a 
   comprehensive political-military strategy toward the situation in the   
   Balkans. In creating this strategy, this section would urge the         
   President to take into consideration the benchmarks already established 
   for the Bosnia peacekeeping mission as well as those that are to be     
   developed for Kosovo. This section would also require an initial and    
   subsequent semi-annual reports on the progress being made toward        
   developing and implementing a comprehensive strategy in the Balkans.    
   This section would also require an initial and subsequent semi-annual   
   reports on the progress being made on the establishment and             
   implementation of the benchmarks for Kosovo.                            
      The committee remains concerned about the on-going, open-ended       
   peacekeeping missions in the Balkans and their effect on military       
   readiness. Since last year, the United States, in conjunction with the  
   NATO alliance, fought a 78-day air war against Serbia, followed by the  
   introduction of a peacekeeping force into the province of Kosovo. These 
   efforts were in addition to NATO's already extensive commitment to      
   peacekeeping in Bosnia-Herzegovina that began in 1995. As a result, the 
   United States has a significant military commitment to peacekeeping     
   operations in the region.                                               
      These extensive military efforts have produced an absence of war in  
   the Balkans. However, the pace of civil implementation has lagged far   
   behind the military operations in both areas. In Bosnia, the slow       
   progress on implementation of the Dayton Accords has led to questions   
   regarding the duration of the Stabilization Force (SFOR) mission. Due to
   the lack of civil institutions, military forces have assumed many tasks 
   more appropriately reserved for civilian law enforcement and judicial   
   institutions. In Kosovo, the final status of the province remains       
   unresolved. The Kosovar Albanians desire an independent country, while  
   the Serbs desire the area remain a province of Serbia. The committee is 
   concerned that several European nations are not maintaining commitments 
   regarding promised troop levels in the Kosovo Force (KFOR). The         
   committee is also concerned that there is a chronic shortage of civilian
   international police and that the United Nations Mission in Kosovo is   
   severely underfunded. Without a clearly defined end-state, and with     
   unrest between the warring parties continuing, prospects for stability  
   in Kosovo are bleak.                                                    
      The committee is concerned that the lack of an overall strategy in   
   the Balkans, compounded by the continuing destabilizing influence of    
   Yugoslav President Slobodan Milosevic, is slowing the pace of civil     
   implementation and prolonging the military mission in the region. The   
   lack of a comprehensive strategy ensures that the military missions in  
   both Bosnia and Kosovo appear vague and open-ended.                     
      The studies conducted by the Government Accounting Office estimates  
   the cost of U.S. operations in Bosnia and Kosovo to the Department of   
   Defense at $15.6 billion between fiscal years 1992 and 2000. These      
   operations are projected to cost the Department $3.1 billion in fiscal  
   year 2001 alone. These operations drain funds from modernization and    
   operations and maintenance accounts. At the same time, the requirement  
   to maintain large numbers of personnel on a rotational basis in the     
   region adversely affects the ability of the armed forces to conduct     
   wartime missions as required by the National Military Strategy. The     
   increased pace of operations has compelled the Department to augment    
   active duty units with reserve component forces in an attempt to relieve
   the pressure on already over-committed units.                           
      The committee believes that a comprehensive strategy for dealing with
   the Balkans is an essential prerequisite to lasting stability in the    
   region and the maintenance of the readiness of the armed forces.        
            SECTION 1204--LIMITATION ON NUMBER OF MILITARY PERSONNEL IN COLOMBIA  

      This section would restrict funds available to the Department of     
   Defense to support or maintain more than 500 U.S. military personnel on 
   duty in Colombia at any time. This section would exclude from the       
   numerical limitation any U.S. military personnel who are in Colombia for
   a period of not more than 30 days, unless expressly authorized by law,  
   for the purpose of rescuing or retrieving U.S. military or governmental 
   personnel. This section would also exempt from the limitation U.S.      
   military personnel assigned to the U.S. Embassy in Colombia as an       
   attache AE1, as part of the security assistance office, or the Marine   
   Corps security contingent; service members participating in natural     
   disaster relief efforts, and; non-operational transient military        
   personnel.                                                              

                     TITLE XIII--COOPERATIVE THREAT REDUCTION WITH STATES OF THE  
          FORMER SOVIET UNION                                                     
                                          OVERVIEW                                

      The budget request contained $458.4 million for cooperative threat   
   reduction (CTR) activities, representing a slight increase of $0.3      
   million over the amounts appropriated for fiscal year 2000. The request 
   included $226.2 million for destruction and dismantlement, $161.1       
   million for fissile materials and nuclear weapons safety and storage,   
   $32.1 million for reactor core conversion in Russia, $12.0 million for  
   biological weapons proliferation prevention in Russia, $14.0 million for
   defense and military contacts, and $13.0 million for other program      
   support, including administrative and management costs.                 
      The committee recommends a total of $433.4 million for CTR activities
   in fiscal year 2001, a decrease of $25.0 million from the budget        
   request. The committee recommends the request of $57.4 million for      
   fissile material storage in Russia; $9.3 million for fissile material   
   processing and packaging in Russia; $14.0 million for nuclear weapons   
   transportation security in Russia; $89.7 million for nuclear weapons    
   storage security in Russia; $12.0 million for biological weapons        
   proliferation prevention in Russia; and $13.0 million for other program 
   support. The committee recommends the following increases to the budget 
   request: $10.0 million for strategic offensive arms elimination in      
   Russia; and $5.0 million for strategic nuclear arms elimination in      
   Ukraine; The committee recommends the following decreases to the budget 
   request: $35.0 million for chemical weapons destruction; and $5.0       
   million for defense and military contacts.                              
      Although the committee supports the overriding goal of the CTR       
   program to reduce the threat to the United States posed by the former   
   Soviet Union's residual weapons of mass destruction, the committee      
   remains concerned that the United States is absorbing an increasing     
   share of the costs of implementing CTR projects as a result of the      
   continued poor economic situation in the states of the former Soviet    
   Union. In Congressional testimony on March 6, 2000, Deputy Assistant    
   Secretary of Defense for Threat Reduction Policy Susan Koch stated that 
   Russia's economic conditions mean that its financial contribution to    
   threat reduction projects ``is less than originally expected.'' The     
   committee is concerned that U.S. costs will continue to grow unless     
   economic conditions in the former Soviet Union improve markedly. As the 
   General Accounting Office (GAO) noted in recent testimony, ``Given the  
   current situation, the United States may have to fully fund not only its
   implementation but also the operations and maintenance of the threat    
   reduction projects.''                                                   
      In this regard, the committee is troubled by the Department of       
   Defense's willingness to absorb additional costs without prior          
   consultation with the Congress. In response to the reporting requirement
   contained in section 1308 of the National Defense Authorization Act for 
   Fiscal Year 2000 (Public Law 106 65), the Secretary of Defense noted    
   that the Department ``continuously urges the states receiving CTR       
   assistance to contribute their own funds to projects. . . . CTR assesses
   the contribution arrangements of each project to avoid starting a       
   project under conditions whereby the recipient will not be able to meet 
   its share and restructuring has to occur.'' Unfortunately, the committee
   sees                                                                    

                    no evidence that this strategy has achieved the desired       
          results, and calls on the Department to redouble its efforts in this    
          regard.                                                                 
      Further, the committee is convinced that the focus of the CTR program
   should remain on eliminating those weapons that pose the most serious   
   and direct threat to U.S. security--first and foremost, strategic       
   nuclear weapons and associated infrastructure. The committee notes that 
   the original focus of the CTR program has expanded in scope since its   
   inception, raising questions about the Department's role in funding     
   certain projects. Section 1306 of Public Law 106 65 prohibits the       
   obligation or expenditure of more than 50 percent of fiscal year 2000   
   CTR funds until the Secretary of Defense submits to Congress a report   
   explaining why the Department is the appropriate funding source for each
   CTR project for which funding is requested, and identifies those        
   projects that might more appropriately be funded by other agencies. The 
   committee has not yet received this report, but believes that certain   
   projects--for example, those associated with the effort to eliminate the
   production of weapons-grade plutonium at Russian nuclear reactors--ought
   not to be funded by the Department.                                     
      Finally, the committee's overall support of the CTR program is       
   tempered with the realization that it is increasingly difficult to know 
   with certainty how effective this program is in actually reducing the   
   threat to the United States. This is the case as the program transitions
   away from more concrete projects involving the destruction of missile   
   launchers and associated hardware and toward support of less tangible   
   projects, such as funding collaborative research with former Soviet     
   scientists. The committee notes recent testimony by the GAO, which      
   points out that ``conclusively demonstrating that most of these programs
   are having a positive impact has proven to be very difficult. . . . Most
   of these programs . . . are inherently a cost risk in that we may never 
   be able to prove that they have achieved their intended purpose.''      
                                 ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST                        

                             ARMS ELIMINATION PROJECTS IN RUSSIA                  

      The budget request contained $152.8 million for strategic offensive  
   arms elimination projects in Russia, a 16 percent decrease from the     
   fiscal year 2000 appropriated amount of $182.3 million. The committee   
   recommends $162.8 million for this activity, an increase of $10.0       
   million to the budget request.                                          
      The committee continues to support the accelerated reduction and     
   elimination of Russian strategic nuclear arms. However, the committee   
   remains concerned that Russia has not been complying with certain arms  
   reduction obligations and that CTR funding provided to assist Russia in 
   meeting its obligations is not being used for this purpose. In          
   particular, the committee notes that under the START I Treaty, Russia   
   committed to eliminating at least 22 SS 18 intercontinental ballistic   
   missile (ICBM) launchers annually. According to the Department of       
   Defense, Russia eliminated only 6 SS 18 launchers in 1997 and none in   
   1998 or 1999. In a January 9, 2000 report to Congress on the SS 18 ICBM 
   elimination program, the Department conceded that Russia's commitment to
   eliminate at least 22 SS 18 ICBM launchers per year is ``legally        
   binding.''                                                              
      The committee remains concerned with Russia's failure to carry out   
   its obligations in this regard, and fails to understand why Russia      
   should be allowed to renege on its legally binding obligation while it  
   continues to invest scarce resources in the development, production, and
   deployment of more modern and capable ICBMs such as the SS 27           
   ``Topol-M.'' The committee expects the Department to continue to press  
   Russia to comply with its obligations under START I, regardless of the  
   level of CTR assistance provided.                                       
      Moreover, the committee notes that under the START II Treaty,        
   recently ratified by Russia, up to 90 SS 18 silos may be converted for  
   deployment of modern SS 27 ICBMs. The committee supports the complete   
   elimination of SS 18 missiles, silos, and related infrastructure, and   
   does not support the use of CTR funds for activities that would         
   facilitate silo conversion. Therefore, the committee directs the        
   Secretary of Defense to focus the Department's SS 18 elimination effort 
   at locations where missile silos are to be eliminated, not converted, to
   ensure that CTR assistance is not used in support of Russia's strategic 
   modernization program.                                                  
                            ARMS ELIMINATION PROJECTS IN UKRAINE                  

      The budget request contained $29.1 million for strategic nuclear arms
   elimination projects in Ukraine, a 17 percent reduction from the fiscal 
   year 2000 appropriated level of $35.0 million. This decrease continues a
   downward trend in funding strategic nuclear elimination projects in     
   Ukraine made possible by the completion of certain activities and       
   objectives. The committee recommends $34.1 million for this activity, a 
   $5.0 million increase to the budget request, for the purpose of         
   accelerating dismantlement activity.                                    
      The committee notes that last year Ukraine agreed to transfer to     
   Russia 11 heavy bombers, including Tu-95 Bear and Tu-160 Blackjack      
   bombers, in partial payment of energy debts. More than 500 air-launched 
   cruise missiles were also included in the deal. These weapons and       
   platforms were planned to be eliminated in Ukraine. The committee       
   regrets Ukraine's decision to transfer these systems to Russia, and     
   encourages the Department to seek Russia's agreement to the elimination 
   of these systems.                                                       
                    BIOLOGICAL WEAPONS PROLIFERATION PREVENTION IN RUSSIA         

      The budget request contained $12.0 million for biological weapons    
   proliferation prevention activities in Russia, a 14 percent decrease    
   from the fiscal year 2000 appropriated level of $14.0 million. This     
   would support approximately one dozen collaborative research projects   
   with Russian scientists at institutes previously involved in biological 
   weapons work. In addition, it would help to secure and safeguard        
   stockpiles of biological pathogens that exist at several institutes in  
   Russia. The committee recommends the budget request.                    
      The committee continues to support efforts directed toward reducing  
   the risk of biological weapons proliferation, but continues to have     
   concerns regarding the overall approach taken by the Department to      
   addressing those risks.                                                 
      First, unlike other collaborative ventures where joint research      
   projects are directed toward exclusively civilian applications, it is   
   difficult to demonstrate that collaborative research projects in the    
   area of biological defense have no offensive military application.      
   According to an April 2000 GAO report, ``This type of research is       
   difficult to distinguish from offensive research because of the inherent
   dual-use nature of biotechnology.''                                     

      Second, the committee is concerned that funding collaborative        
   research efforts with Russian scientists in the area of biological      
   defense may serve to perpetuate a knowledge base and set of skills among
   Russian scientists that might make them more attractive targets for     
   recruitment by foreign states seeking to develop their own biological   
   weapons programs. Such an outcome would be precisely the opposite of    
   that intended. As the GAO recently testified, ``supplementing the       
   salaries of these scientists is no guarantee that they will not in the  
   future sell their services to individuals or countries that pose        
   national security risks to the United States.'' Moreover, the GAO's     
   April 2000 report concludes that ``sustained U.S. support of institutes,
   especially through research aimed at advancing U.S. biodefense          
   capabilities, may help to preserve Russian scientists' knowledge and    
   skills and otherwise help to maintain these institutes' capacity to     
   research and develop biological weapons.''                              
      Third, the committee remains troubled with the overall lack of       
   transparency with respect to Russia's biological weapons programs.      
   Existing and planned collaborative projects involve scientists at       
   Russian civilian institutes that were a part of the former Soviet       
   Union's massive biological weapons complex. To date, the Russian        
   Ministry of Defense has refused to engage the United States in          
   collaborative projects at sites or institutes exclusively under its     
   control. Moreover, there is much about the former Soviet biological     
   weapons program that remains unknown, and Russia has not been           
   forthcoming in providing information that would reassure the United     
   States that it is not still engaged in offensive biological weapons     
   work. The United States cannot be assured that scientists currently     
   engaged in collaborative efforts at civilian institutes will not be     
   subsequently employed at facilities controlled by the Russian Ministry  
   of Defense. According to the GAO report, ``None of these [proposed U.S. 
   risk-mitigation] measures, however, would prevent Russian project       
   participants or institutes from potentially using their skills or       
   research outputs to later work on offensive weapons activities at any of
   the Russian military institutes that remain closed to the United        
   States.''                                                               
      Fourth, the committee is concerned about the ability of the United   
   States to verify that assistance is being used for the purposes intended
   and not being diverted to offensive weapons work. This concern has      
   increased in light of recent revelations that civilian research         
   assistance previously provided to Russia by the National Aeronautics and
   Space Administration and the Agency for International Development was   
   diverted to Biopreparat, the main civilian support arm of Russia's      
   biological weapons complex.                                             
      Fifth, the committee notes that under the Expanded Threat Reduction  
   Initiative, the Department of Defense is only one of several agencies   
   involved in support of collaborative biological research efforts with   
   Russian scientists. This places a premium on ensuring that current and  
   planned efforts are not in conflict and raises questions regarding the  
   Department of Defense's overall role in this effort. To this end,       
   section 1309 of Public Law 106 65 required the President to submit to   
   the Congress no later than March 31, 2000 a report on the Expanded      
   Threat Reduction Initiative. This report has not yet been submitted, and
   therefore, the committee does not have all the information it needs to  
   determine whether program redundancies have been avoided. Consequently, 
   the committee recommends a provision (sec. 1311) that would prohibit the
   obligation or expenditure of CTR funds for biological weapons           
   proliferation prevention activities until the required report is        
   submitted. The committee will continue to assess carefully the          
   Department's plans and programs with respect to this activity.          
                           CHEMICAL WEAPONS DESTRUCTION IN RUSSIA                 

      The budget request contained a provision that would repeal section   
   1305 of Public Law 106 65, which prohibits any funding for the design,  
   planning, or construction of a chemical weapons destruction facility in 
   Russia. The budget request also contained $35.0 million to restart      
   funding for the chemical weapons destruction facility at Shchuch'ye,    
   Russia. The committee disapproves repeal of the existing statutory      
   prohibition and denies the requested funding for this activity.         
      The Department of Defense bases its request for repeal of the section
   1305 prohibition on three main arguments: 1) that the risk of           
   proliferation of the chemical munitions stockpiled at Shchuch'ye remains
   a threat to the United States; 2) that Russia has begun to take the     
   actions necessary to move forward with the project; and 3) that the     
   international community is willing to contribute additional resources to
   the task of assisting Russia with the elimination of its chemical       
   weapons. The committee questions the Department's assessment and does   
   not believe that the situation warrants a reversal of the Congress'     
   decision last year to halt funding for this project.                    
      To begin with, while the committee supports in principle efforts to  
   eliminate Russia's chemical weapons stockpile in accordance with its    
   obligations under the Chemical Weapons Convention, the committee takes  
   issue with the Department's characterization of the proliferation threat
   at Shchuch'ye. The committee recognizes that there is a risk of         
   proliferation of chemical weapons in Russia. For this reason, the       
   Congress last year directed that $20.0 million in CTR assistance be used
   to enhance security at Russia's existing chemical weapons sites.        
   Nevertheless, the committee is not aware of any evidence to suggest that
   the risk of theft or diversion of the chemical munitions stockpiled at  
   Shchuch'ye is particularly acute. The committee notes that no fiscal    
   year 2001 CTR funds are proposed to be spent on additional security     
   upgrades at Shchuch'ye. This alone calls into question the Department's 
   assertion that the risk of weapons theft or diversion at this site is   
   serious.                                                                
      Second, the Department has noted that Russia has begun making        
   infrastructure improvements to the local community--a necessary         
   prerequisite to U.S. construction of the chemical weapons destruction   
   facility. For example, new housing units are being constructed and water
   and sewer lines are being installed. However, the committee notes that, 
   in part, the Congress' prohibition on funding the Shchuch'ye facility   
   last year was not based on the lack of infrastructure improvements but  
   on concern over Russia's ability to absorb all of the prospective costs 
   associated with this effort. This concern has not abated. Consequently, 
   the committee does not believe that recent developments warrant a repeal
   of last year's statutory prohibition.                                   
      Third, the level of international contributions to Russia's chemical 
   weapons elimination effort in general--and to support for the Shchuch'ye
   facility in particular--is minimal. Based on the Department's projection
   of the life-cycle costs of the Shchuch'ye facility ($1.6 billion) and   
   the level of international funding required to ensure that the facility 
   meets its chemical weapons destruction objectives ($721.5 million to    
   $756.0 million), current assistance provided by the international       
   community amounts to roughly 0.001 percent of what is required. To date,
   only Canada has provided assistance to help Russia with the costs of    
   local infrastructure improvements at Shchuch'ye--and only in            

                    the amount of $70,000. Great Britain is considering           
          contributing approximately $5 million to the effort, but has conditioned
          this assistance on a U.S. decision to restart funding. Other countries  
          had previously committed to assist in the overall Russian chemical      
          weapons elimination effort. However, the level of assistance committed  
          is also a small fraction of what is required and little is directed     
          toward the effort at Shchuch'ye.                                        
      The Department's latest estimate of the cost to the United States of 
   the Shchuch'ye project has grown significantly, rising from roughly $750
   million last year to almost $900 million. The committee expects that    
   this cost estimate will continue to rise and may soon exceed $1.0       
   billion. Moreover, the committee remains concerned over the ability of  
   Russia to fund the costs of increasing the destruction rate of the      
   facility and to operate and maintain it over the period of time required
   to eliminate the chemical weapons stockpile located there. Without any  
   assurances that Russia will absorb the costs of running and maintaining 
   the facility over the next decade, the United States may spend more than
   a billion dollars to build a facility that never accomplishes its       
   objective, unless the United States--despite Administration             
   representations to the Congress--reverses its position and agrees to pay
   these costs. In fact, the committee notes that Russia continues to      
   significantly underfund its chemical weapons destruction effort.        
      According to Russian officials, Russia has fallen significantly      
   behind schedule in destroying its chemical weapons stockpiles and has   
   missed the April 1, 2000 deadline established by the Chemical Weapons   
   Convention to eliminate 400 tons of its declared chemical weapons       
   stockpile. As Lieutenant General Valery Kapachin, the head of Russia's  
   chemical weapons elimination effort, declared on March 31, 2000, ``We   
   haven't destroyed anything as of today.'' With respect to the           
   demilitarization of existing chemical weapons production plants, three  
   Russian officials noted last year that ``the Russian Government can     
   provide only ten percent of the necessary budget,'' and therefore       
   ``financial assistance from other countries is crucial.''               
      Finally, the committee notes that Shchuch'ye is only one of seven    
   declared sites where Russian chemical munitions are stored and one of   
   five sites where nerve agents are located. The Department asserts that  
   Russia's arsenal of nerve agents poses the most serious security threat 
   to the United States. However, Russian law prohibits the transportation 
   of agents located at one stockpile site to another site for destruction.
   Therefore, unless Russia changes its law, additional chemical weapons   
   destruction facilities will need to be built at the other locations.    
      Last year, the committee directed the Department to use unobligated  
   prior year balances ``to provide for an orderly close-out'' of          
   activities at Shchuch'ye. To date, the Department has ignored this      
   direction. The committee reiterates its call for an orderly close-out   
   and urges the Department to focus its efforts on projects with greater  
   prospective benefits for U.S. security.                                 
                                DEFENSE AND MILITARY CONTACTS                     

      The budget request contained $14.0 million for defense and military  
   contacts with the states of the former Soviet Union, a 600 percent      
   increase over the fiscal year 2000 appropriated level of $2.0 million.  
   The Department asserts that this increase is necessary to support       
   approximately 350 contacts annually and that the program has exhausted  
   much of the prior year unobligated funds that allowed it to maintain a  
   consistent level of contacts in recent years with significantly less new
   funding. The committee recommends $9.0 million for this activity, a     
   decrease of $5.0 million from the budget request.                       
      The committee notes that, according to the latest financial          
   information provided by the Department, there remains approximately     
   $20.0 million in prior year unobligated balances for these activities.  
   Moreover, the committee recalls the long-standing prohibition on        
   conducting peacekeeping exercises or related activities with Russia     
   using CTR funds, and questions whether all planned exercises are        
   consistent with this prohibition. This concern has been exacerbated by  
   the Department's explanation that the description of some planned       
   activities identified to the committee as peacekeeping-related was ``in 
   error.'' The committee expects the Department to ensure that all defense
   and military contacts are consistent with statutory guidance.           
                        ELIMINATION OF PLUTONIUM PRODUCTION IN RUSSIA             

      The budget request contained $32.1 million for the elimination of    
   plutonium production in Russian nuclear reactors, a slight decrease from
   the fiscal year 2000 appropriated level of $32.2 million. The committee 
   recommends the budget request, subject to the restriction below.        
      Since the start of this project, CTR funds have been directed toward 
   core conversion--a process whereby the production of weapons-grade      
   plutonium would be eliminated, but the nuclear reactors would continue  
   producing lower-grade fuel to provide for the energy needs of the       
   communities where they are located. Recently, Russia informed the United
   States that it would prefer to shut down the reactors entirely and to   
   construct fossil fuel plants to provide for local energy needs. The     
   Department of Defense previously rejected this option as too costly.    
   However, Russia now believes the cost of the fossil fuel option would be
   less than core conversion. In order to determine of validity of Russian 
   estimates, U.S. and Russian officials met in March 2000 to discuss the  
   issue. In the meantime, all work on the core conversion project has been
   suspended.                                                              
      Department of Defense officials have indicated that if the fossil    
   fuel option turns out to be the most cost-effective approach, Russia    
   will link its agreement to shut down the nuclear reactors at Krasnoyarsk
   and Tomsk with U.S. assistance for the construction of fossil fuel      
   plants. Although the committee supports the elimination of Russia's     
   weapons-grade plutonium production and the shutting down of these       
   reactors, the committee does not believe that CTR funds should be used  
   to build fossil fuel plants in Russia. Therefore, if this option is     
   chosen, the committee believes that any U.S. assistance provided for    
   this activity should be funded through other means, external to the     
   Department of Defense. Consequently, the committee recommends a         
   provision (sec. 1309) that would prohibit the obligation or expenditure 
   of any CTR funds for the construction of fossil fuel plants in Russia.  
                          FISSILE MATERIAL PROCESSING AND PACKAGING               

      The budget request contained $9.3 million to assist Russia in        
   processing the fissile components of dismantled nuclear warheads in     
   preparation for long-term storage. This amount is the same as the fiscal
   year 2000 appropriated level. The committee recommends the budget       
   request.                                                                

      The committee notes that the required implementing agreement that    
   would allow the United States to assist Russia in this endeavor has not 
   yet been negotiated. In addition, discussions regarding effective       
   transparency measures have not produced any agreement. Agreement on     
   transparency measures is essential to ensure that these fissile         
   materials are the actual materials removed from dismantled nuclear      
   warheads. Therefore, the committee recommends a provision (sec. 1307)   
   that would prohibit the obligation or expenditure of fiscal year 2001   
   CTR funds for this purpose until 15 days after the Secretary of Defense 
   notifies the Congress that an acceptable transparency agreement has been
   concluded.                                                              
                              FISSILE MATERIAL STORAGE FACILITY                   

      The budget request contained $57.4 million for continued construction
   of a fissile material storage facility in Russia, a reduction of 8      
   percent from the fiscal year 2000 appropriated level of $62.1 million.  
   The facility, located at Mayak, Russia, would be used to house fissile  
   materials from dismantled nuclear weapons. The committee recommends the 
   budget request.                                                         
      The committee reiterates its previously expressed concern over cost  
   increases and schedule delays in connection with construction of the    
   Mayak facility. In particular, the committee notes that the anticipated 
   cost of this project has increased by roughly 300 percent since 1996.   
   Moreover, the committee remains troubled by the fact that the United    
   States agreed last year to increase its share of the costs of this      
   facility by 50 percent without seeking prior Congressional consultation 
   or approval. Consequently, the committee recommends a provision (sec.   
   1304) that would establish a funding cap of $412.6 million on the level 
   of U.S. assistance provided for activities associated with the Mayak    
   facility.                                                               
      Moreover, the committee is aware of plans to construct a second      
   storage wing of the Mayak facility to provide additional storage        
   capacity for weapons-origin fissile materials. However, no agreement    
   with Russia on transparency measures has yet been reached to assure that
   the fissile materials stored at Mayak are in fact weapons-origin. The   
   committee understands that transparency negotiations are taking place in
   the context of possible U.S. assistance to Russia in the processing and 
   packaging of fissile material removed from nuclear warheads. Therefore, 
   consistent with last year's Congressional action, the committee         
   recommends a provision (sec. 1304) that would prohibit fiscal year 2001 
   CTR funds from being used for construction of a second wing at Mayak and
   would restrict funding for design and planning until 15 days after the  
   Secretary of Defense notifies the Congress that a transparency agreement
   with Russia has been reached.                                           
                         NUCLEAR WEAPONS STORAGE SECURITY IN RUSSIA               

      The budget request contained $89.7 million for nuclear weapons       
   storage security in Russia, a 7 percent increase from the fiscal year   
   2000 appropriated level of $84.0 million. The committee recommends the  
   budget request.                                                         
      The committee continues to support the objective of ensuring the safe
   and secure storage of nuclear weapons in Russia. However, the committee 
   believes it essential that the United States be granted appropriate     
   access to nuclear weapons storage facilities to ensure that assistance  
   provided is being used as intended. Consequently, the committee         
   recommends a provision (sec. 1308) that would direct the Secretary of   
   Defense to seek an agreement with Russia that would grant the United    
   States appropriate access to nuclear weapons storage sites where CTR    
   assistance is being provided to confirm such assistance is being used as
   intended.                                                               
                           NUCLEAR WEAPONS TRANSPORTATION SECURITY                

      The budget request contained $14.0 million for nuclear weapons       
   transportation security in Russia, an 8 percent decrease from the fiscal
   year 2000 appropriated level of $15.2 million. The committee recommends 
   the budget request. However, the committee again urges the Department to
   seek an agreement with Russia that does not commit the United States to 
   paying the costs of nuclear weapons transportation, costs previously    
   paid by Russia.                                                         
                        OTHER ASSESSMENTS AND ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPORT              

      The budget request contained $13.0 million for other program costs,  
   including management and administrative costs, project development, and 
   audits and examinations, a 550 percent increase from the fiscal year    
   2000 appropriated level of $2.0 million. The Department asserts that it 
   requires additional new funding because of the drawdown in prior year   
   unobligated balances. The committee recommends the budget request.      
      The committee notes that this funding is used to support at least 20 
   audits and examinations of CTR assistance annually, which are intended  
   to ensure that such assistance is being used as intended. However, the  
   committee is concerned that the Department, which is required to report 
   to the Congress annually on the results of these audits and             
   examinations, has not provided this information in a timely manner and, 
   in several instances, provided information that is incomplete or        
   inaccurate.                                                             
      The committee emphasizes that this reporting requirement is essential
   to ensure that the Congress can exercise its appropriate oversight role 
   with respect to the CTR program. According to a recent GAO study, the   
   Department ``cannot fully support its determination that assistance was 
   used as intended'' and places a ``relatively low priority'' on providing
   audit and examination information to the Congress. Consequently, the    
   committee recommends a provision (sec. 1310) that would require the     
   Comptroller General of the GAO to conduct an audit and examination of   
   the Department's ability to make accurate assessments of whether CTR    
   funds are being used as intended.                                       
      The committee notes that section 1312 of Public Law 106 65 required  
   the Department to include information on Russia's arsenal of tactical   
   nuclear warheads in its annual reports on audits and examinations       
   submitted to the Congress after fiscal year 1999. The committee further 
   notes that the Department's 1997 and 1998 audit and examination reports 
   did not contain this information, even though they were submitted to the
   Congress in fiscal year 2000. The Department has indicated that it      
   interprets the section 1312 requirement to apply to only those reports  
   covering fiscal year 2000 and beyond, the first of which would not be   
   submitted to the Congress until January 2001. The committee notes that  
   the language of section 1312 is clear and does not support the          
   Department's interpretation. Therefore, the committee recommends a      
   provision (sec.                                                         

                    1306) that would require the Department to provide this       
          information not later than October 1, 2000.                             
                                   LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS                         

            SECTION 1301--SPECIFICATION OF COOPERATIVE THREAT REDUCTION PROGRAMS  
                                    AND FUNDS                                     
      This section would specify the kinds of programs to be funded under  
   this title and would make fiscal year 2001 CTR funds available for      
   obligation for three years.                                             
                              SECTION 1302--FUNDING ALLOCATIONS                   

      This section would allocate fiscal year 2001 funding for various CTR 
   purposes and activities.                                                
                SECTION 1303--PROHIBITION ON USE OF FUNDS FOR ELIMINATION OF      
                              CONVENTIONAL WEAPONS                                
      This section would prohibit the use of CTR funds for conventional    
   weapons elimination purposes.                                           
           SECTION 1304--LIMITATIONS ON USE OF FUNDS FOR FISSILE MATERIAL STORAGE 
                                    FACILITY                                      
      This section would restrict the use of CTR funds for activities      
   associated with the construction of a fissile material storage facility 
   in Russia and would establish a funding ceiling on the first wing of    
   such a facility.                                                        
           SECTION 1305--LIMITATION ON USE OF FUNDS UNTIL SUBMISSION OF MULTIYEAR 
                                      PLAN                                        
      This section would limit the obligation or expenditure of fiscal year
   2001 CTR funds until the Secretary submits the update to the multiyear  
   plan required by section 1205 of Public Law 103 337.                    
                       SECTION 1306--RUSSIAN NONSTRATEGIC NUCLEAR ARMS            

      This section would require the Secretary of Defense to submit a      
   report on Russian nonstrategic nuclear arms not later than October 1,   
   2000.                                                                   
                SECTION 1307--LIMITATION ON USE OF FUNDS TO SUPPORT WARHEAD       
                            DISMANTLEMENT PROCESSING                              
      This section would prohibit the use of fiscal year 2001 CTR funds to 
   support warhead dismantlement processing in Russia until a transparency 
   agreement with Russia is signed.                                        
                  SECTION 1308--AGREEMENT ON NUCLEAR WEAPONS STORAGE SITES        

      This section would require the Secretary of Defense to seek an       
   agreement with Russia allowing for U.S. access to nuclear weapons       
   storage sites where CTR assistance is provided.                         
            SECTION 1309--PROHIBITION ON USE OF FUNDS FOR CONSTRUCTION OF FOSSIL  
                               FUEL ENERGY PLANTS                                 
      This section would prohibit the use of CTR funds for the construction
   of fossil fuel plants in Russia.                                        
                SECTION 1310--AUDITS OF COOPERATIVE THREAT REDUCTION PROGRAMS     

      This section would require the Comptroller General to submit to      
   Congress not later than March 31, 2001 a report on procedures used by   
   the Department of Defense to audit CTR assistance.                      
           SECTION 1311--LIMITATION ON USE OF FUNDS FOR PREVENTION OF BIOLOGICAL  
                         WEAPONS PROLIFERATION IN RUSSIA                          
      This section would prohibit the obligation or expenditure of CTR     
   funds for this purpose until the report required by section 1309 of the 
   National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2000 (Public Law 106 
   65) is submitted to the Congress.                                       

                     TITLE XIV--COMMISSION TO ASSESS THE THREAT TO THE UNITED     
          STATES FROM ELECTROMAGNETIC PULSE (EMP) ATTACK                          
                                          OVERVIEW                                

      The committee understands that a nuclear weapon detonated at         
   high-altitude would generate a powerful electromagnetic pulse (EMP),    
   similar to a very high energy radio wave, that can potentially damage or
   destroy electronic systems over a wide area of the Earth's surface. For 
   example, a single nuclear weapon detonated at an altitude of 500        
   kilometers could produce an EMP that would blanket the entire           
   continental United States, potentially damaging or destroying military  
   forces and civilian communications, power, transportation and other     
   infrastructure on which modern society depends.                         
      The committee is aware that EMP has been the focus of significant    
   government-funded research and testing for over 30 years. However, the  
   committee is also aware that most of these efforts were conducted during
   the Cold War and focused on hardening strategic systems against a       
   massive nuclear attack from the Soviet Union. The committee understands 
   that far fewer resources have been dedicated to examining the potential 
   vulnerability of the U.S. civilian and industrial infrastructure to an  
   EMP attack. Moreover, since the Cold War, U.S. military and civilian    
   systems have become increasingly dependent on advanced electronics that 
   are potentially more vulnerable than older electronics to EMP attack, a 
   trend that is likely to continue in the future.                         
      In the committee's view, the potential vulnerability of the United   
   States to an EMP attack may be an issue of greater moment, now that     
   missiles and nuclear weapons are proliferating. Some analysts have      
   suggested that nations having small numbers of nuclear missiles, such as
   China or North Korea, may consider an EMP attack against U.S. forces    
   regionally, to degrade the U.S. technological advantage, or against the 
   United States' national electronic infrastructure, as a way to get the  
   most utility from their modest nuclear capabilities. Analysts have also 
   suggested that Russia's new military doctrine, which gives unprecedented
   emphasis to limited nuclear options, may assign increased importance to 
   EMP attacks as a way of limiting a nuclear conflict and averting a      
   massive nuclear exchange in the event of a confrontation with the United
   States.                                                                 
      Accordingly, the committee recommends the establishment of a         
   commission to assess the threat to the United States from               
   electromagnetic pulse attacks.                                          
                                   LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS                         

                          SECTION 1401--ESTABLISHMENT OF COMMISSION               

      This section describes how the ``Commission to Assess the Threat to  
   the United States from Electromagnetic Pulse Attack'' is to be selected 
   and organized.                                                          
                             SECTION 1402--DUTIES OF COMMISSION                   


      This section describes the duties of the Commission, would require   
   the Commission to assess the EMP threat to the United States, to make   
   recommendations on how to better protect U.S. military and civilian     
   infrastructure from EMP, and would require the Department of Defense and
   Federal Emergency Management Agency to cooperate with the Commission.   
                                    SECTION 1403--REPORT                          

       This section would require the Commission to submit a report to     
   Congress, the Secretary of Defense, and the Director of the Federal     
   Emergency Management Agency within twelve months of the Commission's    
   first meeting.                                                          
                                    SECTION 1404--POWERS                          

       This section would grant the Commission the power to hold hearings  
   and secure information directly from any Federal department or agency.  
                             SECTION 1405--COMMISSION PROCEDURES                  

       This section describes the procedural rules for Commission meetings,
   for establishing Commission panels, and for agents or individual members
   acting on behalf of the Commission.                                     
                               SECTION 1406--PERSONNEL MEMBERS                    

       This section would describe and regulate how Commission members are 
   to be paid and reimbursed for travel expenses; and how Commission staff 
   are to be appointed and paid, government employees detailed to the      
   Commission, and temporary services acquired by the Commission.          
                    SECTION 1407--MISCELLANEOUS ADMINISTRATIVE PROVISIONS         

       This section would make postal, printing, administrative and support
   services available to the Commission.                                   
                                    SECTION 1408--FUNDING                         

       This section would regulate how funds are to be provided to the     
   Commission.                                                             
                         SECTION 1409--TERMINATION OF THE COMMISSION              

       This section would provide for the termination of the Commission    
   within 60 days after the submission of its report under Section 1403.   

           TITLE XV--PROVISIONS REGARDING VIEQUES ISLAND, PUERTO RICO             

                                          OVERVIEW                                

      The committee remains concerned about the situation at the Atlantic  
   Fleet Weapons Training Facility located on Vieques Island, Puerto Rico. 
   On April 19, 1999, during a routine training event, live ordnance       
   deployed by a Marine Corps F/A 18 accidentally struck an observation    
   post within the Vieques weapons range complex and killed David Sanes    
   Rodriguez, a Navy contract employee. From that day until May 4, 2000,   
   protestors occupying the live impact area on Vieques prevented the Navy 
   and Marine Corps from conducting training on the range.                 
      Due to this situation, the Eisenhower and George Washington battle   
   groups and their associated amphibious ready groups were unable to      
   conduct pre-deployment training on Vieques. As a result, valuable live  
   naval gunfire, air-to-ground, and combined arms training normally       
   conducted prior to deployment did not take place. This had a substantial
   negative impact on the overall readiness of these deploying units as    
   reported in the Department of Defense Quarterly Readiness Report to     
   Congress for October to December 1999. The Navy stated in that report   
   that, ``Several deploying surface combatants will depart Atlantic ports 
   in February 2000 with reduced training readiness due to expired gunfire 
   qualifications resulting from the continued non-availability of the     
   Vieques training range.''                                               
      On January 31, 2000, the President and the Governor of Puerto Rico   
   concluded an agreement on the future of Vieques. This agreement would   
   allow the Navy to resume live fire on Vieques with inert ammunition in  
   return for $40.0 million in economic assistance and the conveyance of   
   Navy land on the western end of the island to The Commonwealth of Puerto
   Rico. According to the agreement, the future status of Navy training on 
   Vieques would be determined by a local referendum.                      
      On May 4, 2000, after over a year of occupation, federal law         
   enforcement and Puerto Rican officials cleared the live impact area and 
   Eastern Maneuver Area of protestors. However, even with the range now   
   cleared, training is still restricted to inert munitions. This          
   restriction will not allow the for the full range of live, joint and    
   combined training that is necessary prior to the deployment of carrier  
   battle groups and amphibious ready groups. The committee does not       
   believe that training conducted solely with inert ammunition adequately 
   provides for the readiness of our combat forces.                        
      The committee also believes that the Department of the Navy has not  
   been a good steward of Vieques. The Navy has failed to implement        
   adequately many of the provisions of the Memorandum of Understanding of 
   1983 concluded between the Navy and the Government of Puerto Rico.      
   Furthermore, the committee believes that the Navy has consistently      
   failed to take into account the concerns of the local population        
   regarding training on the island. These facts, combined with the lack of
   economic development that normally accrues to communities that host     
   military installations, has created an occasionally hostile atmosphere  
   toward the Navy presence on the island that has been central to this    
   situation.                                                              

      In recognition of this problem and in order to encourage the Navy to 
   be a better neighbor, the committee recommends training restrictions on 
   the use of the range designed to protect the citizens of Vieques. Live  
   fire training would be restricted to 90 days a year, with an allowance  
   for an additional 90 days of non-live fire training. The committee would
   also require the Navy take steps to ensure the safety of civilians on   
   Vieques while also taking measures to reduce noise in civilian areas of 
   the island. The committee also recommends the establishment of an       
   advisory committee made up of military officers and Puerto Rican        
   citizens appointed by the Governor of Puerto Rico and the Mayor of the  
   Municipality of Vieques. The advisory committee would provide a forum   
   for the people of Vieques to express their views to the Navy and to     
   comment on operations and the policies relating to military activities  
   on Vieques. All these measures are recommended by the committee in      
   recognition of the sacrifices made by the people of Vieques toward the  
   national security of the United States.                                 
      However, the committee ultimately believes that Vieques is vital to  
   the training of the Nation's naval forces and that it is imperative that
   live-fire training resume on the island as soon as possible. The        
   committee is concerned about the possibility that the ranges on Vieques 
   may be unavailable in the future and believes that battle groups        
   deploying overseas are not currently receiving the training necessary to
   meet the challenges they may face during overseas deployments.          
      The committee rejects the idea that the future of military training  
   on Vieques be determined by referendum. Allowing local communities to   
   vote on the future of military training at local bases would establish a
   precedent that could endanger access to other critical military         
   installations both in the United States and overseas. Therefore, the    
   committee does not believe that the agreement signed by the President   
   and the Governor of Puerto Rico on January 31, 2000, adequately provides
   for U.S. national security by ensuring the Navy's future access to this 
   vital training area. The committee believes that its recommendations    
   provide for the fair and equitable treatment of the people of Vieques   
   while preserving access to critical training ranges.                    
              SECTION 1501--CONDITIONS ON DISPOSAL OF NAVAL AMMUNITION SUPPORT    
                           DETACHMENT, VIEQUES ISLAND                             
       This section would prohibit the Secretary of the Navy from including
   any portion of the Naval Ammunition Support Detachment on the western   
   end of Vieques Island, Puerto Rico, in a report of excess real property 
   pursuant to the requirements of section 2662 of title 10, United States 
   Code, until the President certifies to Congress that military training  
   operations have resumed using the full range of live ordnance in use    
   prior to April 19, 2000 and that this training is conducted without     
   interference. This section would also require any portion of the land   
   declared as excess by the Navy be managed by any recipient as a         
   conservation zone subject to the irrevocable condition that the         
   recipient of the property, and any successor in interest, manage all    
   lands in the same manner. This section would further require the        
   Secretary to retain approximately 100 acres, containing the Relocatable 
   Over-the-Horizon Radar and the Mt. Pirata telecommunication facility, at
   the Naval Ammunition Support Detachment.                                
                SECTION 1502--RETENTION OF EASTERN PORTION OF VIEQUES ISLAND      

       This section would prohibit the Secretary of the Navy from declaring
   any lands within the Eastern Manuever Area or the Atlantic Fleet Weapons
   Training Facility, including the live impact area, on Vieques Island,   
   Puerto Rico, to be excess to the needs of the armed forces or           
   transferring or conveying any such lands from the jurisdiction of the   
   Department of the Navy.                                                 
                 SECTION 1503--LIMITATIONS ON MILITARY USE OF VIEQUES ISLAND      

       This section would require the Secretary of the Navy to notify the  
   Government of Puerto Rico at least 15 days prior to any major training  
   exercise on Vieques. This section would also limit the number of        
   training days explosive ordnance can be used to 90 days per calendar    
   year, and allows for an additional 90 days of training with inert       
   ordnance. This section would further require the Secretary of the Navy  
   to establish an advisory committee to review and comment on operations  
   and policies regarding military training on Vieques. This section would 
   also require the Secretary of the Navy to ensure the safety of the      
   inhabitants of Vieques and to minimize noise levels in civilian areas to
   the maximum extent possible. Finally, the section would also provide for
   a waiver of the advance warning requirements, the safety and noise      
   restrictions and training day limitations for reasons of national       
   security.                                                               
              SECTION 1504--ECONOMIC ASSISTANCE FOR RESIDENTS OF VIEQUES ISLAND   

       This section would authorize $40.0 million in economic assistance   
   for the citizens of Vieques for the projects outlined in the President's
   Directive to the Secretary of Defense and Director, Office of Management
   and Budget (Community Assistance) and the President's Directive to the  
   Secretary of Defense and Director, Office of Management and Budget      
   (Referendum) dated January 31, 2000. However, this section would        
   expressly prohibit any of the funds to be used for a referendum         
   regarding the further use of the island for military training purposes. 
   In addition, the section would withhold all funding until the Department
   of Defense can resume live-fire training on the island using the full   
   range of live ordnance in use prior to April 19, 1999, without          
   interference.                                                           

          DIVISION B--MILITARY CONSTRUCTION AUTHORIZATIONS                        

                                           PURPOSE                                

      The purpose of Division B is to provide military construction        
   authorizations and related authority in support of the military         
   departments during fiscal year 2001. As approved by the committee,      
   Division B would authorize appropriations in the amount of              
   $8,433,908,000 for construction in support of the active forces, reserve
   components, defense agencies for fiscal year 2001.                      
                               MILITARY CONSTRUCTION OVERVIEW                     

      The military construction authorization request for fiscal year 2001 
   was introduced by request as division B of H.R. 4205 on April 6, 2000.  
      The Department of Defense requested authorization of appropriations  
   of $4,553,427,000 for fiscal year 2001 for military construction,       
   including $1,174,369,000 for activities associated with base closure and
   realignment, and $3,480,481,000 for family housing construction and     
   support. The committee recommends $4,874,647,000 for military           
   construction, including $1,174,369,000 for activities associated with   
   base closure and realignment, and $3,559,261,000 for family housing     
   construction and support for fiscal year 2001.                          
       The committee restates its deepening concern about the condition of 
   the Nation's military installations and facilities and continues to be  
   troubled by the continuing and persistent underinvestment by the        
   Administration in military facilities and infrastructure. The budget    
   request for the authorization of appropriations for fiscal year 2001 for
   the military construction and military family housing programs of the   
   Department of Defense, if enacted, would represent a four percent       
   reduction from current spending levels and a 25 percent reduction from  
   the funding levels authorized by Congress for fiscal year 1996.         
      To address the serious shortfalls in the Administration's budget     
   request, the committee recommends an increase in new budget authority   
   for these programs of $400,000,000.                                     
      In an effort to improve the quality of life for military personnel   
   and their families, the committee reiterates its support for the        
   authorities provided in subchapter IV, chapter 169 of title 10, United  
   States Code. The Military Housing Privatization Initiative remains a    
   central component of the ultimate resolution of the military housing    
   crisis. The committee recommends an extension of current authorities to 
   support this program for an additional five years to 2006. The committee
   recognizes that implementation of this program has occurred more slowly 
   than initially anticipated and expects the secretaries of the military  
   departments to accelerate implementation of this program during the     
   extended pilot program period.                                          
      A tabular summary of the authorizations provided in Division B for   
   fiscal year 2001 follows:                                               

[Graphic Image Not Available]

[Graphic Image Not Available]

[Graphic Image Not Available]

[Graphic Image Not Available]

[Graphic Image Not Available]

[Graphic Image Not Available]

[Graphic Image Not Available]

[Graphic Image Not Available]

[Graphic Image Not Available]

[Graphic Image Not Available]

[Graphic Image Not Available]

[Graphic Image Not Available]

[Graphic Image Not Available]

[Graphic Image Not Available]

      A tabular summary of the military construction projects included with
   the authorization of appropriations for fiscal year 2001 for the BRAC IV
   account follows:                                                        

[Graphic Image Not Available]

           TITLE XXI--ARMY                                                        

                                           SUMMARY                                

      The budget request contained $897,938,000 for Army military          
   construction and $1,140,381,000 for family housing for fiscal year 2001.
   The committee recommends authorization of $672,391,000 for military     
   construction and $1,152,249,000 for family housing for fiscal year 2001.

                                  ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST                       


                       CONDITION OF BARRACKS TO SUPPORT BASIC TRAINING            


      The committee notes favorably the commitment of the Secretary of the 
   Army and the uniformed leadership of the Army to a resolution of the    
   problem of substandard barracks conditions for permanent party personnel
   by fiscal year 2008. The committee continues to support strongly        
   improvement in the quality of life for unaccompanied military personnel.
   The committee recognizes that the program to conclude the modernization 
   of permanent party barracks in a timely manner, combined with the       
   requirement to modernize the Army's strategic mobility infrastructure by
   fiscal year 2004, limits the ability of the Army to program adequately  
   for other military construction priorities given the funds currently    
   allocated to the military construction account in the current future    
   years defense program (FYDP). The committee reiterates its view that    
   additional funds for military construction are required to meet         
   significant infrastructure shortfalls affecting military readiness and  
   the retention of military personnel. The committee is concerned that    
   current Army programming will not permit adequate attention to the      
   problem of substandard barracks conditions for recruits. The committee  
   notes that only one barracks construction project, based on newly       
   adopted Army standards for recruit barracks, is funded within the       
   current FYDP. The committee does not believe such a funding profile is  
   sufficient. The committee is especially concerned that training         
   installations, which may expect increases in the number of new recruits 
   and trainees, lack sufficient barracks spaces to accommodate that       
   training load and that existing barracks spaces are generally           
   substandard. The committee urges the Secretary of the Army to review    
   current plans and programs to improve the condition of barracks to      
   support basic training and directs the Secretary to report on his       
   findings, including any recommendations, coincident with the submission 
   of the fiscal year 2002 budget request.                                 

                           IMPROVEMENTS TO MILITARY FAMILY HOUSING                


      The committee recommends that, within authorized amounts for         
   improvements to military family housing and facilities, the Secretary of
   the Army execute the following projects: $4,700,000 for Whole           
   Neighborhood Revitalization (28 units) at Fort Irwin, California, and   
   $4,150,000 for Whole Neighborhood Revitalization (56 units) at Fort     
   Leonard Wood, Missouri.                                                 

                                     PLANNING AND DESIGN                          


      The committee recommends that, within authorized amounts for planning
   and design, the Secretary of the Army complete planning and design      
   activities for the following projects: $1,600,000 for a power train     
   modification facility at Anniston Army Depot, Alabama, and $4,320,000   
   for a basic trainee barracks complex at Fort Jackson, South Carolina.   

                               UNSPECIFIED MINOR CONSTRUCTION                     


      The committee recommends that, within authorized amounts for         
   unspecified minor construction, the Secretary of the Army execute the   
   following project: $500,000 for multimedia learning centers at the      
   United States Military Academy, New York.                               

                                   LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS                         


              SECTION 2101--AUTHORIZED ARMY CONSTRUCTION AND LAND ACQUISITION     
                                    PROJECTS                                      

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

                                SECTION 2102--FAMILY HOUSING                      


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

                 SECTION 2103--IMPROVEMENTS TO MILITARY FAMILY HOUSING UNITS      


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

                     SECTION 2104--AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS, ARMY          


      This section would authorize specific appropriations for each line   
   item contained in the Army's budget for fiscal year 2001. This section  
   also provides an overall limit on the amount the Army may spend on      
   military construction projects.                                         

            SECTION 2105--MODIFICATION OF AUTHORITY TO CARRY OUT CERTAIN FISCAL   
                                YEAR 1999 PROJECT                                 

      This section would amend the table in section 2101 of the Military   
   Construction Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1999 (division B of      
   Public Law 105 261) to provide for an increase in the amount authorized 
   for the construction of a railhead facility at Fort Hood, Texas.        

           TITLE XXII--NAVY                                                       

                                           SUMMARY                                

      The budget request contained $753,422,000 for Navy military          
   construction and $1,245,460,000 for family housing for fiscal year 2001.
   The committee recommends authorization of $887,810,000 for military     
   construction and $1,299,863,000 for family housing for fiscal year 2001.
                                  ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST                       

           ACQUISITION OF PREPOSITIONED EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE FACILITIES, BLOUNT  
                          ISLAND, JACKSONVILLE, FLORIDA                           
      The committee reiterates its support for the acquisition of          
   prepositioned equipment facilities managed under lease by the Department
   of the Navy at Blount Island Command, Jacksonville, Florida. The        
   committee recalls that the Department of Defense Appropriations Act,    
   2000 (Public Law 106 79) provided authority for the expenditure of      
   $5,000,000 as the first phase of this major land acquisition. The       
   committee recommends an additional $3,320,000 for this purpose for      
   fiscal year 2001 and expects those funds to be combined to acquire three
   parcels of real property based on current real estate valuations. The   
   committee notes that the budget estimates for fiscal year 2002 provided 
   by the Secretary of the Navy indicate that sufficient funds are         
   programmed to acquire the remainder of the real property required by the
   Marine Corps. The committee urges the Secretary of the Navy to make     
   every effort to complete this acquisition in a timely fashion.          
                           IMPROVEMENTS TO MILITARY FAMILY HOUSING                

      The committee recommends that, within authorized amounts for         
   improvements to military family housing and facilities, the Secretary of
   the Navy execute the following project: $8,600,000 for Whole House      
   Revitalization (98 units) at Marine Corps Base, Camp Pendleton,         
   California.                                                             
                                   LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS                         

              SECTION 2201--AUTHORIZED NAVY CONSTRUCTION AND LAND ACQUISITION     
                                    PROJECTS                                      
      This section contains the list of authorized Navy construction       
   projects for fiscal year 2001. The authorized amounts are listed on an  
   installation-by-installation basis. The state list contained in this    
   report is intended to be the binding list of the specific projects      
   authorized at each location.                                            
                                SECTION 2202--FAMILY HOUSING                      


      This section would authorize new construction and planning and design
   of family housing units for the Navy for fiscal year 2001.              
                 SECTION 2203--IMPROVEMENTS TO MILITARY FAMILY HOUSING UNITS      

      This section would authorize improvements to existing units of family
   housing for fiscal year 2001.                                           
                     SECTION 2204--AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS, NAVY          

      This section would authorize specific appropriations for each line   
   item in the Navy's budget for fiscal year 2001. This section also       
   provides an overall limit on the amount the Navy may spend on military  
   construction projects.                                                  
           SECTION 2205--MODIFICATION OF AUTHORITY TO CARRY OUT FISCAL YEAR 1997  
     PROJECT AT MARINE CORPS COMBAT DEVELOPMENT COMMAND, QUANTICO, VIRGINIA       
      This section would modify the authorized use of funds authorized for 
   appropriation for fiscal year 1997 for a military construction project  
   at Marine Corps Command Development Command, Quantico, Virginia. This   
   section would permit the use of previously authorized funds to carry out
   a military construction project involving infrastructure development at 
   that installation.                                                      

           TITLE XXIII--AIR FORCE                                                 

                                           SUMMARY                                

      The budget request contained $530,969,000 for Air Force military     
   construction and $1,049,754,000 for family housing for fiscal year 2001.
   The committee recommends authorization of $703,873,000 for military     
   construction and $1,062,263,000 for family housing for fiscal year 2001.
                                  ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST                       

                                ROME RESEARCH SITE, NEW YORK                      

      The committee notes the authority provided by the Department of      
   Defense Appropriations Act, 2000 (Public Law 106 79) to permit the      
   Secretary of the Air Force to utilize appropriated funds and            
   contributions by the State of New York to support the improvement of    
   facilities at the Rome Research Site, New York. The committee was       
   concerned that such authority could be utilized in a manner that would  
   provide a comparative advantage over similar installations for which the
   authority did not apply in the event additional base closures and       
   realignments are authorized by Congress. The committee notes that the   
   terms of the memorandum of understanding entered into by Empire State   
   Development, Griffiss Local Development Corporation, and Air Force      
   Materiel Command does not constitute a commitment by the Air Force to   
   preclude the Rome Research Site from being considered, recommended, or  
   selected for closure under any current or future base closure law.      
                                   LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS                         

            SECTION 2301--AUTHORIZED AIR FORCE CONSTRUCTION AND LAND ACQUISITION  
                                    PROJECTS                                      
      This section contains the list of authorized Air Force construction  
   projects for fiscal year 2001. The authorized amounts are listed on an  
   installation-by-installation basis. The state list contained in this    
   report is intended to be the binding list of the specific projects      
   authorized at each location.                                            
                                SECTION 2302--FAMILY HOUSING                      

      This section would authorize new construction and planning and design
   of family housing units for the Air Force for fiscal year 2001.         
                 SECTION 2303--IMPROVEMENTS TO MILITARY FAMILY HOUSING UNITS      

      This section would authorize improvements to existing units of family
   housing for fiscal year 2001.                                           
                  SECTION 2304--AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS, AIR FORCE        

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

           TITLE XXIV--DEFENSE AGENCIES                                           

                                           SUMMARY                                

      The budget request contained $784,753,000 for defense agencies       
   military construction and $44,886,000 for family housing for fiscal year
   2001. The committee recommends authorization of $815,504,000 for        
   military construction and $44,886,000 for family housing.               
                                  ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST                       

              FORWARD OPERATING LOCATIONS IN SUPPORT OF COUNTER-DRUG AND DRUG     
                             INTERDICTION ACTIVITIES                              
      The budget request contained $76,823,000 for military construction at
   Manta, Ecuador, and Aruba and Curacao in the Netherlands Antilles for   
   the establishment of forward operating locations to support the         
   counter-drug and drug interdiction activities of the Department of      
   Defense. The committee supports the establishment of forward operating  
   locations at those sites. However, the committee notes that funds to    
   support military construction for this purpose was included in H.R.     
   3908, the Emergency Supplemental Appropriations Act, as passed by the   
   House on March 30, 2000. Therefore, the committee recommends a decrease 
   of that amount in Military Construction, Defense-Wide.                  
                                   LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS                         

              SECTION 2401--AUTHORIZED DEFENSE AGENCIES CONSTRUCTION AND LAND     
                              ACQUISITION PROJECTS                                
      This section contains the list of authorized defense agencies        
   construction projects for fiscal year 2001. The authorized amounts are  
   listed on an installation-by-installation basis. The state list         
   contained in this report is intended to be the binding list of the      
   specific projects authorized at each location.                          
               SECTION 2402--AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS, DEFENSE AGENCIES    

      This section would authorize specific appropriations for each line   
   item in the Defense Agencies' budget for fiscal year 2001. This section 
   also would provide an overall limit on the amount the Defense Agencies  
   may spend on military construction projects.                            

           TITLE XXV--NORTH ATLANTIC TREATY ORGANIZATION INFRASTRUCTURE           

                                           SUMMARY                                

      The budget request contained $190,000,000 for the NATO infrastructure
   fund (NATO Security Investment Program) for fiscal year 2001. The       
   committee recommends $177,500,000.                                      
                                   LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS                         

              SECTION 2501--AUTHORIZED NATO CONSTRUCTION AND LAND ACQUISITION     
                                    PROJECTS                                      
      This section would authorize the Secretary of Defense to make        
   contributions to the North Atlantic Treaty Organization security        
   investment program in an amount equal to the sum of the amount          
   specifically authorized in section 2502 of this bill and the amount of  
   recoupment due to the United States for construction previously financed
   by the United States.                                                   
                     SECTION 2502--AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS, NATO          

      This section would authorize appropriations of $177,500,000 as the   
   U.S. contribution to the NATO security investment program.              

           TITLE XXVI--GUARD AND RESERVE FORCES FACILITIES                        

                                           SUMMARY                                

      The budget request contained $221,976,000 for fiscal year 2001 for   
   guard and reserve facilities. The committee recommends authorization for
   fiscal year 2001 of $434,560,000 to be distributed as follows:          




          Army National Guard            $  129,139,000



          Air National Guard             110,885,000



          Army Reserve                   104,854,000



          Naval and Marine Corps Reserve                47,934,000



          Air Force Reserve              41,748,000

                                                                             



                                         443,200,000


                                  ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST                       

                          PLANNING AND DESIGN, ARMY NATIONAL GUARD                

      The committee recommends that, within authorized amounts for planning
   and design, the Secretary of the Army complete planning and design      
   activities for the following project: $1,281,000 for a combined support 
   and maintenance shop at Fort Lewis, Washington.                         
                              PLANNING AND DESIGN, ARMY RESERVE                   

      The committee recommends that, within authorized amounts for planning
   and design, the Secretary of the Army complete planning and design      
   activities for the following project: $809,000 for an advanced training 
   barracks complex at Fort Dix, New Jersey.                               
                        UNSPECIFIED MINOR CONSTRUCTION, ARMY RESERVE              

      The committee recommends that, within authorized amounts for         
   unspecified minor construction, the Secretary of the Army execute the   
   following project: $700,000 for parking and site improvements at Fort   
   Douglas, Utah.                                                          
                                   LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS                         

              SECTION 2601--AUTHORIZED GUARD AND RESERVE CONSTRUCTION AND LAND    
                              ACQUISITION PROJECTS                                
      This section would authorize appropriations for military construction
   for the guard and reserve by service component for fiscal year 2001. The
   state list contained in this report is intended to be the binding list  
   of the specific projects authorized at each location.                   

           TITLE XXVII--EXPIRATION AND EXTENSION OF AUTHORIZATIONS                

                                   LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS                         

           SECTION 2701--EXPIRATION OF AUTHORIZATIONS AND AMOUNTS REQUIRED TO BE  
                                SPECIFIED BY LAW                                  
      This section would provide that authorizations for military          
   construction projects, repair of real property, land acquisition, family
   housing projects and facilities, contributions to the North Atlantic    
   Treaty Organization infrastructure program, and guard and reserve       
   projects will expire on October 1, 2000 or the date of enactment of an  
   Act authorizing funds for military construction for fiscal year 2001,   
   whichever is later. This expiration would not apply to authorizations   
   for which appropriated funds have been obligated before October 1, 2000 
   or the date of enactment of an Act authorizing funds for these projects,
   whichever is later.                                                     
           SECTION 2702--EXTENSIONS OF AUTHORIZATIONS OF CERTAIN FISCAL YEAR 1998 
                                    PROJECTS                                      
      This section would provide for selected extension of certain fiscal  
   year 1998 military construction authorizations until October 1, 2000, or
   the date of the enactment of an Act authorizing funds for military      
   construction for fiscal year 2001, whichever is later.                  
           SECTION 2703--EXTENSION OF AUTHORIZATIONS OF CERTAIN FISCAL YEAR 1997  
                                    PROJECTS                                      
      This section would provide for selected extension of certain fiscal  
   year 1997 military construction authorizations until October 1, 2000, or
   the date of the enactment of the Act authorizing funds for military     
   construction for fiscal year 2001, whichever is later.                  
                                SECTION 2704--EFFECTIVE DATE                      

      This section would provide that Titles XXI, XXII, XXIII, XXIV, and   
   XXVI of this bill shall take effect on October 1, 1999, or the date of  
   the enactment of this Act, whichever is later.                          

           TITLE XXVIII--GENERAL PROVISIONS                                       

                                 ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST                        

                          MILITARY HOUSING PRIVATIZATION INITIATIVE               

      The committee reiterates its strong support for the development of   
   military housing under the authority provided by subchapter IV, chapter 
   169 of title 10, United States Code. The committee acknowledges that the
   privatization of military family housing may, in certain instances, have
   an effect on local educational agencies and educational infrastructure  
   requirements. The committee notes that section 2871 of title 10, United 
   States Code, provides general authority for the development of          
   facilities to support elementary or secondary education as ancillary    
   supporting facilities to privatized military housing. The committee     
   urges the secretaries of the military departments to assess more        
   adequately the impact of the development of military housing under this 
   authority on local education agencies and infrastructure. The committee 
   directs the Secretary of the Army, in consultation with the Secretary of
   Defense, to assess the impact of military housing developed under the   
   authority of subchapter IV, chapter 169 of title 10, United States Code,
   at Fort Carson, Colorado. The committee further directs the Secretary of
   the Army to submit a report on his findings, and any recommendations,   
   concurrent with the submission of the budget request for fiscal year    
   2002.                                                                   
            WATER QUALITY ISSUES AFFECTING MILITARY INSTALLATIONS IN THE AREA OF  
                             KAISERSLAUTERN, GERMANY                              
      The committee is aware of limited environmental contamination at five
   locations on, or near, military installations supporting the missions of
   the Army and the Air Force in the area of Kaiserslautern, Germany. The  
   committee urges the Secretary of the Army and the Secretary of the Air  
   Force to continue to work cooperatively with local German authorities to
   resolve matters relating to environmental contamination affecting the   
   water supply supporting military installations and civilians in the area
   of Kaiserlautern, Germany.                                              
                                   LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS                         

           SUBTITLE A--MILITARY CONSTRUCTION PROGRAM AND MILITARY FAMILY HOUSING  
                                     CHANGES                                      
                 SECTION 2801--REVISION OF LIMITATIONS ON SPACE BY PAY GRADE      

      This section would amend section 2826 of title 10, United States     
   Code, to require the secretary concerned to ensure that the room        
   patterns and floor areas of military family housing units constructed,  
   acquired, or improved by the secretary shall be generally comparable to 
   those available in the locality of the military installation on which   
   such military family housing units are located.                         
              SECTION 2802--LEASING OF MILITARY FAMILY HOUSING, UNITED STATES     
                        SOUTHERN COMMAND, MIAMI, FLORIDA                          
      This section would amend section 2828 of title 10, United States     
   Code, to modify the authorized terms of leasing for military family     
   housing to support the United States Southern Command in Miami, Florida.
           SECTION 2803--ALTERNATIVE AUTHORITY FOR ACQUISITION AND IMPROVEMENT OF 
                                MILITARY HOUSING                                  
      This section would amend section 2885 of title 10, United States     
   Code, to extend the authorities contained in subchapter 169 of title 10,
   United States Code, for an additional five-year period to 2006.         
            SECTION 2804--EXPANSION OF DEFINITION OF ARMORY TO INCLUDE READINESS  
                                     CENTERS                                      
      This section would amend section 18232 of title 10, United States    
   Code, to clarify that the term ``readiness center'' shall have the same 
   meaning as the term ``armory''.                                         
                  SUBTITLE B--REAL PROPERTY AND FACILITIES ADMINISTRATION         

            SECTION 2811--INCREASE IN THRESHOLD FOR NOTICE AND WAIT REQUIREMENTS  
                         FOR REAL PROPERTY TRANSACTIONS                           
      This section would amend section 2662 of title 10, United States     
   Code, to increase the threshold for notice and wait requirements for    
   real property transactions from $200,000 to $500,000.                   
           SECTION 2812--ENHANCEMENT OF AUTHORITY OF MILITARY DEPARTMENTS TO LEASE
                               NON-EXCESS PROPERTY                                
      This section would amend section 2667 of title 10, United States, to 
   modify the permissible forms of consideration received by the secretary 
   concerned for the lease of non-excess real property under the control of
   the secretary.                                                          
              SECTION 2813--CONVEYANCE AUTHORITY REGARDING UTILITY SYSTEMS OF     
                              MILITARY DEPARTMENTS                                
      This section would amend section 2688 of title 10, United States     
   Code, to require the secretary concerned to comply with the competition 
   requirements of section 2304 of title 10, United States Code, in the    
   conveyance of utility system infrastructure.                            
                           SUBTITLE C--LAND CONVEYANCES GENERALLY                 

                                  PART I--ARMY CONVEYANCES                        

            SECTION 2831--TRANSFER OF JURISDICTION, ROCK ISLAND ARSENAL, ILLINOIS 

      This section would authorize the transfer of, and exchange of        
   jurisdiction on, a parcel of real property with improvements consisting 
   of approximately 23 acres at Rock Island Arsenal, Illinois, between the 
   Secretary of the Army and the Secretary of Veterans' Affairs. The parcel
   is to be incorporated into the Rock Island National Cemetery.           
           SECTION 2832--LAND CONVEYANCE, ARMY RESERVE CENTER, GALESBURG, ILLINOIS

      This section would authorize the Secretary of the Army to convey,    
   without consideration, a parcel of real property with improvements,     
   consisting of approximately 4.65 acres in Galesburg, Illinois, to Knox  
   County, Illinois. The property is to be used for the development of     
   municipal and other public purposes. The cost of any surveys necessary  
   for the conveyance would be borne by the County.                        
            SECTION 2833--LAND CONVEYANCE, ARMY RESERVE CENTER, WINONA, MINNESOTA 

      This section would authorize the Secretary of the Army to convey,    
   without consideration, a parcel of real property with improvements to   
   Winona State University Foundation. The property is to be used for      
   educational purposes. The cost of any surveys necessary for the         
   conveyance would be borne by the Foundation.                            
                     SECTION 2834--LAND CONVEYANCE, FORT POLK, LOUISIANA          

      This section would authorize the Secretary of the Army to convey,    
   without consideration, a parcel of real property with improvements,     
   consisting of approximately 100 acres at Fort Polk, Louisiana, to the   
   State of Louisiana. The property is to be used for the establishment of 
   a State-run veterans' cemetery. The cost of any surveys necessary for   
   the conveyance would be borne by the Commission.                        
                    SECTION 2835--LAND CONVEYANCE, FORT PICKETT, VIRGINIA         

      This section would authorize the Secretary of the Army to convey,    
   without consideration, a parcel of real property with improvements,     
   consisting of not more than 700 acres, at Fort Pickett, Virginia, to the
   Commonwealth of Virginia. The property is to be used for the development
   and operation of a public safety training facility. The cost of any     
   surveys necessary for the conveyance would be borne by the Commonwealth.
                     SECTION 2836--LAND CONVEYANCE, FORT DIX, NEW JERSEY          

      This section would authorize the Secretary of the Army to convey,    
   without consideration, a parcel of real property with improvements,     
   consisting of approximately two acres and containing a parking lot      
   inadvertently constructed on the parcel, at Fort Dix, New Jersey, to    
   Pemberton Township, New Jersey.                                         

              SECTION 2837--LAND CONVEYANCE, NIKE SITE 43, ELRAMA, PENNSYLVANIA   

      This section would authorize the Secretary of the Army to convey,    
   without consideration, a parcel of real property with improvements,     
   consisting of approximately 160 acres in Elmara, Pennsylvania, to the   
   Board of Supervisors of Union Township, Pennsylvania. The parcel is to  
   be used for municipal and other public purposes. The cost of any surveys
   necessary for the conveyance would be borne by the Township.            
                        SECTION 2838--LAND EXCHANGE, FORT HOOD, TEXAS             

      This section would authorize the Secretary of the Army to convey a   
   parcel of real property with improvements, consisting of approximately  
   200 acres at Fort Hood, Texas, to the City of Copperas Cove, Texas. As  
   consideration for the conveyance, the City would convey to one or more  
   parcels of real property, consisting of approximately 300 acres, to the 
   Secretary. The cost of any surveys necessary for the conveyances would  
   be borne by the City.                                                   
            SECTION 2839--LAND CONVEYANCE, CHARLES MELVIN PRICE SUPPORT CENTER,   
                                    ILLINOIS                                      
      This section would authorize the Secretary of the Army to convey a   
   parcel of real property with improvements consisting of approximately   
   752 acres to the Tri-City Regional Port District of Granite City,       
   Illinois. As consideration for the conveyance, the Secretary shall      
   determine if the Port District satisfies the criteria to qualify for a  
   public benefit conveyance. If the public interest is served, the        
   secretary may accept an amount less than fair market value for a lease  
   of the property. The cost of any surveys necessary for the conveyance   
   would be borne by the Port District.                                    
             SECTION 2840--LAND CONVEYANCE, ARMY RESERVE LOCAL TRAINING CENTER,   
                             CHATTANOOGA, TENNESSEE                               
      This section would authorize the Secretary of the Army to convey,    
   without consideration, a parcel of real property with improvements,     
   consisting of approximately 15 acres at the Army Reserve Local Training 
   Center, Chattanooga, Tennessee, to the Medal of Honor Museum, Inc.,     
   Chattanooga, Tennessee. The parcel is to be used as a museum and for    
   other educational purposes. The cost of any surveys necessary for the   
   conveyance would be borne by the Corporation.                           
                                  PART II--NAVY CONVEYANCES                       

            SECTION 2851--MODIFICATION OF AUTHORITY FOR OXNARD HARBOR DISTRICT,   
             PORT HUENEME, CALIFORNIA, TO USE CERTAIN NAVY PROPERTY               
      This section would amend section 2843 of the Military Construction   
   Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1995 (division B of Public Law 103    
   337) to clarify the restrictions on the use of real property under the  
   jurisdiction of the Secretary of the Navy by the Oxnard Harbor District,
   Port Hueneme, California. This section would also clarify the forms of  
   consideration which the District shall pay to the Secretary for the use 
   of the property.                                                        
              SECTION 2852--MODIFICATION OF LAND CONVEYANCE, MARINE CORPS AIR     
                          STATION, EL TORO, CALIFORNIA                            
      This section would amend section 2811 of the National Defense        
   Authorization Act for Fiscal Years 1990 and 1991 (Public Law 101 189) to
   modify the permissible uses of funds received by the Secretary of the   
   Navy.                                                                   
             SECTION 2853--TRANSFER OF JURISDICTION, MARINE CORPS AIR STATION,    
                               MIRAMAR, CALIFORNIA                                
      This section would authorize the transfer of, and exchange of        
   jurisdiction on, a parcel of real property with improvements, consisting
   of approximately 250 acres at Marine Corps Air Station, Miramar,        
   California, between the Secretary of the Navy and the Secretary of the  
   Interior. The parcel is to be incorporated into the Vernal Pool Unit of 
   the San Diego National Wildlife Refuge.                                 
            SECTION 2854--LEASE OF PROPERTY, MARINE CORPS AIR STATION, MIRAMAR,   
                                   CALIFORNIA                                     
      This section would authorize the Secretary of the Navy to lease,     
   without consideration, a parcel of real property with improvements,     
   consisting of approximately 250 acres and known as the Hickman Field, to
   the City of San Diego, California, for a period not to exceed five      
   years. The lease would be subject to the condition that the City        
   maintain the property at no cost to the United States, make the property
   available to the existing tenant at no cost, and use the property solely
   for recreational purposes. The cost of any survey necessary for the     
   lease would be borne by the City.                                       
           SECTION 2855--LEASE OF PROPERTY, NAVAL AIR STATION, PENSACOLA, FLORIDA 

      This section would authorize the Secretary of the Navy to lease real 
   property improvements to be designed and constructed by the Naval       
   Aviation Museum Foundation at the National Museum of Naval Aviation at  
   Naval Air Station, Pensacola, Florida, to the Foundation for a period up
   to 50 years, with an option to renew for an additional 50 years. The    
   improvements are to be used for the development and operation of a      
   National Flight Academy. As a condition for the lease, the Foundation   
   would make the property available at no cost to the Secretary under     
   certain specified conditions. This section would also authorize the     
   Secretary to provide assistance to the Foundation in the form services  
   on a reimbursable basis. The cost of any survey necessary for the lease 
   would be borne by the Secretary.                                        
            SECTION 2856--LAND EXCHANGE, MARINE CORPS RECRUIT DEPOT, SAN DIEGO,   
                                   CALIFORNIA                                     
      This section would authorize the Secretary of the Navy to convey a   
   parcel of real property with improvements, consisting of approximately  
   45 acres at Marine Corps Recruit Depot, San Diego, California, to the   
   San Diego Unified Port District. As consideration for the conveyance,   
   the Port District would convey to the Secretary a parcel of real        
   property contiguous to the installation and would construct suitable    
   replacement facilities and necessary supporting structures as determined
   by the Secretary.                                                       
            SECTION 2857--LAND EXCHANGE, NAVAL AIR RESERVE CENTER, COLUMBUS, OHIO 

      This section would authorize the Secretary of the Navy to convey a   
   parcel of real property with improvements, consisting of approximately  
   24 acres comprising the Naval Air Reserve Center at Rickenbacker        
   International Airport, Ohio, to the Rickenbacker Port Authority of      
   Columbus, Ohio. As consideration for the conveyance, the Authority would
   convey to the Secretary a parcel of real property consisting of         
   approximately 15 acres. This section would require the Secretary to     
   utilize the property conveyed by the Authority as the site for a joint  
   reserve center for units associated with the Naval Air Reserve Center at
   the Airport and the Naval and Marine Corps Reserve Center currently     
   located in Columbus, Ohio. The cost of any survey necessary for the     
   exchange would be borne by the Authority.                               
             SECTION 2858--LAND CONVEYANCE, NAVAL RESERVE CENTER, TAMPA, FLORIDA  

      This section would authorize the Secretary of the Navy to convey a   
   parcel of real property with improvements, consisting of approximately  
   2.18 acres and comprising the Naval Reserve Center, Tampa, Florida, to  
   the Tampa Port Authority. As consideration for the conveyance the Port  
   Authority is required to provide a replacement facility and bear all    
   reasonable costs incurred during the relocation. The cost of any surveys
   necessary for the conveyance would be borne by the Port Authority.      
                               PART III--AIR FORCE CONVEYANCES                    

            SECTION 2861--LAND CONVEYANCE, WRIGHT PATTERSON AIR FORCE BASE, OHIO  

      This section would authorize the Secretary of the Air Force to       
   convey, without consideration, a parcel of real property with           
   improvements, consisting of approximately 100 acres at Wright Patterson 
   Air Force Base, Ohio, to Greene County, Ohio. The property is to be used
   for recreational purposes. The cost of any surveys necessary for the    
   conveyance would be borne by the County.                                
               SECTION 2862--LAND CONVEYANCE, POINT ARENA AIR FORCE STATION,      
                                   CALIFORNIA                                     
      This section would authorize the Secretary of the Air Force to       
   convey, without consideration, a parcel of real property with           
   improvements, consisting of approximately 82 acres at the Point Arena   
   Air Force Station, California, to Menocino County, California. The      
   property is to be used for municipal and other public purposes. The cost
   of any surveys necessary for the conveyance would be borne by the       
   County.                                                                 
            SECTION 2863--LAND CONVEYANCE, LOS ANGELES AIR FORCE BASE, CALIFORNIA 


      This section would authorize the Secretary of the Air Force to convey
   on terms the Secretary considers appropriate, any or all portions of    
   four parcels of real property with improvements, totaling approximately 
   111 acres at Los Angeles Air Force Base, California. As consideration   
   for the conveyance, the recipient shall provide for the design and      
   construction, acceptable to the Secretary, of one or more facilities to 
   consolidate the mission and support functions at the installation. Any  
   such facilities would comply with specified seismic and safety          
   standards. This section would also authorize the Secretary to enter into
   a lease for the facility for a period not to exceed 10 years in the     
   event the fair market value of a facility provided as consideration for 
   the conveyance exceeds the fair market value of the conveyed property.  
   Rental payments under the lease would be established at the rate        
   necessary for the lessor to recover, by the end of the lease term, the  
   difference between the fair market value of the facility and the fair   
   market value of the conveyed property. The cost of any surveys necessary
   for the conveyance would be borne by the recipient.                     
                                 PART IV--OTHER CONVEYANCES                       

              SECTION 2871--CONVEYANCE OF ARMY AND AIR FORCE EXCHANGE SERVICE     
                         PROPERTY, FARMERS BRANCH, TEXAS                          
      This section would authorize the Secretary of Defense to permit the  
   Army and Air Force Exchange Service to sell a parcel of real property   
   with improvements in Farmers Branch, Texas, for an amount equal to the  
   fair market value of the parcel. The section would also require the     
   payment by the purchaser to be handled in the manner provided in section
   485(c) of title 40, United States Code. The cost of any surveys         
   necessary for the sale would be borne by the purchaser.                 
                                 SUBTITLE D--OTHER MATTERS                        

             SECTION 2881--RETENTION OF EASEMENT AUTHORITY TO LEASED PARKLAND,    
                  MARINE CORPS BASE, CAMP PENDLETON, CALIFORNIA                   
      This section would amend section 2851 of the Military Construction   
   Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1999 (division B of Public Law 105    
   261) to exempt certain lands located within Marine Corps Base, Camp     
   Pendleton, California, and leased by the State of California for use as 
   a restricted access highway from the requirements of section 303 of     
   title 49 and section 138 of title 23, United States Code. This section  
   would also require the Foothill/Eastern Transportation Agency to be     
   responsible for the implementations of any mitigation measures required 
   by the Secretary of Transportation.                                     
           SECTION 2882--EXTENSION OF DEMONSTRATION PROJECT FOR PURCHASE OF FIRE, 
   SECURITY, POLICE, PUBLIC WORKS, AND UTILITY SERVICES FROM LOCAL GOVERNMENT     
                                    AGENCIES                                      
      This section would amend section 816 of the National Defense         
   Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1995 (Public Law 103 337), as amended,
   to extend the period under which a demonstration project is authorized  
   for the purchase of fire, security, police, public works, and utility   
   services from local government at specified locations in Monterey,      
   California.                                                             
                SECTION 2883--ESTABLISHMENT OF WORLD WAR II MEMORIAL ON GUAM      

      This section would authorize the Secretary of Defense, in            
   consultation with the American Battle Monuments Commission, to establish
   a suitable memorial on federal property near the Fena Caves in Guam to  
   honor those civilians killed during the occupation of Guam during World 
   War II and to commemorate the liberation of Guam by the armed forces of 
   the United States in 1944.                                              
            SECTION 2884--NAMING OF THE ARMY MISSILE TESTING RANGE AT KWAJALEIN   
    ATOLL AS THE RONALD REAGAN BALLISTIC DEFENSE TEST SITE AT KWAJALEIN ATOLL     
      This section would designate the missile testing range at Kwajalein  
   Atoll as the Ronald Reagan Ballistic Defense Test Site at Kwajalein     
   Atoll.                                                                  
            SECTION 2885--DESIGNATION OF BUILDING AT FORT BELVOIR, VIRGINIA, IN   
                           HONOR OF ANDREW T. MCNAMARA                            
      This section would designate a building at Fort Belvoir, Virginia, as
   the Andrew T. McNamara Building.                                        
            SECTION 2886--REDESIGNATION OF THE BALBOA NAVAL HOSPITAL, SAN DIEGO,  
       CALIFORNIA, IN HONOR OF BOB WILSON, A FORMER MEMBER OF THE HOUSE OF        
                                 REPRESENTATIVES                                  
      This section would redesignate the Balboa Naval Hospital, San Diego, 
   California, as the Bob Wilson Naval Hospital.                           
            SECTION 2887--SENSE OF CONGRESS REGARDING IMPORTANCE OF EXPANSION OF  
                NATIONAL TRAINING CENTER, FORT IRWIN, CALIFORNIA                  
      This section would express the sense of Congress that the prompt     
   expansion of the National Training Center, Fort Irwin, California, is   
   vital to the national security interests of the United States.          

                    DIVISION C--DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY NATIONAL SECURITY            
          AUTHORIZATION AND OTHER AUTHORIZATIONS                                  
           TITLE XXXI--DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY NATIONAL SECURITY PROGRAMS            

                                          OVERVIEW                                

      The budget request contained $13,150.6 million for the national      
   security activities of the Department of Energy. This includes $6,177.6 
   million for the programs of the National Nuclear Security               
   Administration. The budget request also contained $6,832.9 million for  
   defense environmental and other defense activities. The committee       
   recommends $12,871.4 million, a decrease of $279.2 million. The         
   following table summarizes the request and the committee                
   recommendations:                                                        

[Graphic Image Not Available]

[Graphic Image Not Available]

[Graphic Image Not Available]

[Graphic Image Not Available]

[Graphic Image Not Available]

[Graphic Image Not Available]

[Graphic Image Not Available]

[Graphic Image Not Available]

[Graphic Image Not Available]

[Graphic Image Not Available]

[Graphic Image Not Available]

[Graphic Image Not Available]

[Graphic Image Not Available]

[Graphic Image Not Available]

[Graphic Image Not Available]

[Graphic Image Not Available]

[Graphic Image Not Available]

[Graphic Image Not Available]


                         ENVIRONMENTAL AND OTHER DEFENSE ACTIVITIES               

                                          OVERVIEW                                

      The budget request contained $6,832.9 million for environmental and  
   other defense activities.                                               
   The committee recommends $6,601.9, a decrease of $231.0 million.        

                                  ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST                       

                      Acceleration of the 94 1 program and restoration of          
           infrastructure at the Savannah River Site                               
      The budget request contained $452.9 million for Site Project         
   Completion at the Savannah River Site.                                  
      In May 1994, the Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board submitted   
   Recommendation 94 1 to the Secretary of Energy dealing with the need to 
   stabilize and to store safely large amounts of fissionable and other    
   nuclear materials at the Savannah River Site. The committee is aware of 
   accomplishments in remediating this material. However, the committee    
   notes severe problems continue to exist. The committee believes that an 
   acceleration of the 94 1 Program is necessary and recommends an increase
   of $16.0 million to execute the following projects: (1) development of  
   process flowsheets, safety documentation, and pre-operational activities
   to support planned stabilization campaigns; (2) acceleration of the rack
   construction and testing for the Amercium/Curium stabilization project; 
   and (3) continued operation of the HB-Line Phase I to process plutonium 
   residues.                                                               
      The committee notes that much of the Savannah River Site             
   infrastructure is nearing 50 years of age and believes that Savannah    
   River environmental management programs require restorative improvements
   to support current operations, retain core competencies, and to maintain
   nuclear materials in a safe and secure manner. Therefore, the committee 
   recommends an increase of $24.0 million for Savannah River Site         
   infrastructure improvements, including $16.0 million for design and     
   procurement of site ventilation, electrical, and safety alarm systems   
   and for repair or replacement of leaking roofs, and $8.0 million of the 
   increase for replacement of the computer control system for the Defense 
   Waste Processing Facility.                                              
      The committee recommends $492.9 million for Site Project Completion  
   at the Savannah River Site, an increase of $40.0 million.               
           Energy Employees Compensation Initiative                                

      The budget request contained $17.0 million for the Energy Employees  
   Compensation Initiative to fund a program, separately transmitted to    
   Congress in November 1999, that would establish three programs to       
   compensate current and former Department of Energy (DOE) and contractor 
   employees who are ill due to:                                           
       (1) Workplace exposure to beryllium at various DOE nuclear weapons  
   production facilities;                                                  
       (2) workplace exposure to plutonium and other highly radioactive    
   materials at the Paducah, Kentucky, gaseous diffusion facility; or      
       (3) workplace exposure to radiation and hazardous materials, at the 
   Oak Ridge, Tennessee, site.                                             
      While the committee acknowledges that some DOE or contractor         
   employees may have developed illnesses as a result of being unknowingly 
   exposed to dangerous materials or not being adequately protected from   
   such exposure, it questions whether the funds to compensate these       
   individuals should come from the national defense budget function and   
   why a compensation program should not be set up as an entitlement rather
   than financed from discretionary appropriations.                        
      The committee notes that the legislative proposal, the Energy        
   Employees' Compensation Act was introduced and referred to committees in
   both the House of Representatives (H.R. 3418) and the Senate (S. 1954)  
   in November 1999 but was not referred to the House Committee on Armed   
   Services, since authorization for the program would have to be approved 
   by another committee. The committee further notes that no other         
   committee has held hearings or taken any other action on the legislative
   proposal.                                                               
      Additionally, the committee notes that the $17.0 million requested is
   just the beginning of the Department's plans to compensate workers who  
   were exposed to radiation while helping to build the nation's nuclear   
   arsenal. The Department has recently publicized a plan that would cost  
   an estimated $400.0 million over the first five years for this purpose. 
      The committee believes that the compensation program under the       
   Radiation Exposure Compensation Act (RECA) provides a useful precedent  
   in addressing compensation of the DOE and contractor employees at issue 
   here. RECA is an entitlement program designed to compensate uranium     
   miners and individuals who suffered radiation exposure because they     
   lived down-wind from nuclear test sites. The program is administered by 
   the Department of Justice, and entitlement funding is carried in        
   Department of Justice budgetary accounts.                               
      The committee believes that the Department of Energy could use RECA  
   as a model in establishing a program to compensate those made ill by    
   working at DOE facilities. Such an entitlement program would have the   
   advantage of guaranteeing appropriate compensation once eligibility     
   criteria are defined. Moreover, the program would not be subject to the 
   funding vagaries of the annual authorization process. Once such a       
   program is established and eligibility criteria are defined, the        
   committee will be in a position to make a more informed judgment about  
   how much funding is appropriate and necessary.                          
      Even though the committee has questions about this compensation      
   initiative, it nevertheless recommends a $2.0 million increase for      
   Environment, Safety, and Health to structure such a program. The        
   committee notes that DOE officials have recently indicated that almost  
   all of the $17.0 million requested would be used for administrative     
   start-up expenses rather than to pay claims. The committee does not     
   support this amount for administrative purposes and believes that the   
   $2.0 million should be adequate for these costs until the committee's   
   concerns can be properly addressed.                                     

           Hanford tank waste remediation system privatization, phase I            

      The budget request contained $450.0 million for the Hanford Tank     
   Waste Remediation System (TWRS) Privatization, Phase IB 2.              
      The current contractor for TWRS Phase IB 1 recently submitted a      
   proposal to the Department of Energy (DOE) to complete the design, as   
   well as to construct and operate, a waste treatment facility for the    
   radioactive waste at the Hanford site. The expected cost for this work  
   was $15.2 billion, which the Secretary of Energy denounced as           
   unacceptably high. The Secretary stated that the $15.2 billion cost was 
   proposed just 18 months after the contractor informed the Department    
   that it could design, construct, and operate a waste treatment facility 
   for $6.9 billion and that he would not approve the proposal.            
      While the Secretary of Energy has rejected the proposal, the         
   committee acknowledges that this waste must be extracted from the tanks,
   solidified, and safely stored because the risk of leakage is            
   unacceptable. However, the committee believes that given the uncertain  
   path forward for this program, the budget request is overstated.        
   Therefore, the committee recommends $194.0 million, a decrease of $256.0
   million for the TWRS.                                                   
      The committee believes that the $194.0 million in new budget         
   authority should be combined with funds appropriated for TWRS in prior  
   years that remain unobligated. The committee understands that $118.0    
   million in prior appropriations are currently reserved for termination  
   costs which would be incurred if the Phase IB 1 contract is terminated  
   by the Department. Since DOE intends to allow this contract to be       
   completed in August 2000, these funds will not be needed for termination
   expenses. The committee also understands that $58.0 million of prior    
   year carryover balances exist in the TWRS program and that DOE intended 
   to apply this amount to Phase IB 2 TWRS design work in fiscal year 2001.
   Therefore, the $176.0 million of prior appropriations could be combined 
   with the $194.0 million of new budget authority to provide DOE with     
   $370.0 million for the planned continuation of the design work for the  
   waste treatment facility, for procurement of long lead items, and to    
   provide for possible rework required should a different contractor be   
   selected to continue this project.                                      
      In order to make the funds held for termination liability available  
   for other purposes, the committee has included a provision (section     
   3131) that would prohibit the use of appropriated funds to establish a  
   reserve for contract termination costs for the Tank Waste Remediation   
   System. Should the need for termination liability arise, the committee  
   stands ready to assist the Department.                                  
           Mixed oxide fuel fabrication facility                                   

      The budget request contained $15.0 million for design of the mixed   
   oxide fuel (MOX) fabrication facility.                                  
      The Department of Energy (DOE) awarded a $65.0 million contract for  
   the design of the MOX fabrication facility in March 1999. The committee 
   understands that since the award of the contract, the contractor has had
   to make unforeseen changes to the facility's planned configuration and  
   will have to do additional environmental work to satisfy the Nuclear    
   Regulatory Commission (NRC).                                            
      The committee notes that recent DOE security assessments recommend   
   the installation of earth and concrete barriers around the MOX facility 
   to deny or delay access by intruders and that these requirements were   
   not conveyed to the contractor until after the contract award.          
   Similarly, the DOE Final Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for the   
   MOX facility was not available until after the design contract award,   
   and the NRC indicated that significant differences between the MOX      
   facility advance preliminary design and the EIS will require the        
   contractor to do additional environmental impact analyses.              
      Due to these unforeseen changes and a subsequent requirement for     
   additional contingency funds, the committee recommends $23.0 million for
   the MOX fabrication facility, an increase of $8.0 million.              
           Nonproliferation and national security                                  

      The budget request contained $38.0 million for a new start design of 
   facilities in Russia for the storage of spent fuel from civil nuclear   
   reactors. The committee understands that this program is intended to    
   encourage Russia to cease separating plutonium from spent reactor fuel  
   due to concerns about the potential for increased risk of proliferation 
   of nuclear weapons material. The committee is concerned that the        
   completed facility should have adequate security to protect the stored  
   fissile material. Therefore, the committee directs that, if this        
   facility is constructed, the Department of Energy (DOE) extend          
   protection to the facility through the Department's International       
   Materials Protection, Control, and Accounting program.                  
      The committee is also concerned about the expenditure of funds on    
   nonproliferation efforts in Russia with little DOE on-site monitoring.  
   The committee understands that the Department currently monitors the    
   various programs in Russia through occasional visits by Department      
   employees and believes that this level of monitoring is insufficient.   
   Therefore, the committee directs that at each Russian site where a      
   significant DOE nonproliferation program is in operation, the Department
   locate a DOE employee or contractor on a continual basis to monitor the 
   operations of the nonproliferation program and that U.S. funds are      
   efficiently applied.                                                    
           Worker and community transition                                         

      The budget request contained $24.5 million for Worker and Community  
   Transition, of which $6.0 million was designated for assistance at an   
   identified site. The remainder was either designated for administration 
   of the program ($3.0 million) or intended to be held as a contingency   
   for site closings and workforce transitions that were unforeseen at the 
   time the budget was prepared ($15.5 million).                           
      The committee understands that a portion of the Savannah River Site  
   is in Barnwell County, South Carolina, an area of the state experiencing
   chronic underemployment resulting from workforce reductions at Savannah 
   River during the last decade.                                           
      In the 1970s, a facility to reprocess spent nuclear fuel was         
   constructed on the Allied General Nuclear Site (AGNS) in Barnwell County
   immediately adjacent to the Savannah River Site. However, before        
   reprocessing began, federal policy toward                               

                    reprocessing was reversed and the facility was closed. In an  
          effort to mitigate the employment problems surrounding the Savannah     
          River Site, the Tri-County Alliance, consisting of the counties of      
          Barnwell, Allendale, and Bamberg, has agreed to acquire the AGNS site   
          for redevelopment as a special-use industrial park. The committee       
          understands that a major investment is required at the site to develop  
          the necessary infrastructure for industries that would locate there to  
          serve the Savannah River Site and the surrounding community.            
      Therefore, the committee recommends $24.5 million for Worker and     
   Community Transition and directs that $5.0 million of the undesignated  
   amount be expended on infrastructure development at the AGNS site.      
                          NATIONAL NUCLEAR SECURITY ADMINISTRATION                

      The budget request contained $6,177.6 million for the National       
   Nuclear Security Administration for fiscal year 2001.                   
   The committee recommends $6,269.4 million, an increase of $91.8 million.

                                  ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST                       

           Budget Structure of the National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) 

      The committee notes that section 3251of the National Defense         
   Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2000 (Public Law 106 65) required     
   that, beginning with fiscal year 2001, the budget request for the NNSA  
   be set forth in individual, dedicated program elements. The committee   
   notes that the budget request does not include such program elements    
   and, therefore, does not comply with the requirements of current law.   
      The committee observes that supporting material accompanying the     
   budget request for Defense Programs describes in detail a budget        
   structure organized around directed stockpile work, campaigns, readiness
   in technical base and facilities (RTBF), and construction. Within each  
   of these areas, funds are identified to support discrete project        
   activities or sets of activities. In view of the lack of cooperation    
   from the Department of Energy (DOE) in formulating the budget request in
   compliance with the requirements of Public Law 106 65, the committee    
   believes that it must take the step of establishing program elements.   
   The committee believes that the discrete activities identified in the   
   budget request provide the basis for such program elements. The         
   designation of program elements and funding levels recommended by the   
   committee are depicted in table entries.                                
      However, the committee does not believe that the Defense Programs    
   activities identified in directed stockpile work, campaigns, RTBF, and  
   construction are appropriately aligned or portrayed. As a first step    
   toward realigning these activities, the committee recommends that       
   related activities and construction projects be consolidated under their
   associated campaign program elements. The realignment of funds by the   
   committee within the individual program elements is described elsewhere 
   in this report.                                                         
      The committee urges the Administrator of NNSA to prepare, and the    
   Department to submit, future budget requests that: (1) align major      
   construction projects and facilities with their related campaigns, in   
   order to enhance Congressional and managerial oversight; (2) fund       
   infrastructure and operational readiness by facility, in order to       
   provide a clear picture of the business and overhead costs at NNSA      
   facilities; and (3) organize directed stockpile work by warhead, in     
   order to provide a clear picture of the status of each warhead in the   
   inventory and the work required to sustain it.                          
      The committee also notes that section 3252 of Public Law 106 65      
   required that, beginning with fiscal year 2001, funding requested for   
   the NNSA be available for obligation for a limited number of years. The 
   committee notes that the DOE has again requested that its funds be      
   available until expended. The committee recommends a provision (section 
   3128) that would define the length of time for which funding for the    
   NNSA would be available.                                                
           Campaigns                                                               

   The budget request contained $1,049.9 million for campaigns.            

      The committee recommends $2057.0 million for campaigns, including an 
   increase of $131.0 million, a transfer of $621.8 million from readiness 
   in technical base and facilities, and a transfer of $254.3 million from 
   construction.                                                           
            Advanced Design and Production Technology (ADAPT)                       

      The budget request contained $75.7 million for the ADAPT campaign,   
   which will develop advanced manufacturing capabilities critical to      
   improving efficiency at the nuclear weapons plants, but included no     
   funds for the American Textile (AMTEX) partnership.                     
      The committee understands that the budget request does not adequately
   support process development, integrated product and process and design, 
   agile manufacturing, and enterprise integration at the Kansas City      
   plant. Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $3.0 million  
   to support these activities.                                            
      AMTEX enhances capabilities relevant to both the stockpile           
   stewardship program and the textile industry by developing technologies 
   that integrate product and process design in a concurrent manufacturing 
   enterprise. Consistent with its previous support for AMTEX activities,  
   the committee recommends an increase of $3.0 million in the ADAPT       
   campaign to continue this effort.                                       
      In total, the committee recommends $81.7 million for ADAPT, an       
   increase of $6.0 million.                                               
            Advanced radiography                                                    

      The budget request contained $43.0 million for the advanced          
   radiography campaign and $35.2 million for construction of the dual-axis
   radiographic hydrotest facility (DARHT). The committee believes that    
   congressional and managerial oversight of these activities would be     
   enhanced if funds for these activities were consolidated in the advanced
   radiography campaign. Therefore, the committee directs this realignment.
   The budget request contained a total of $78.2 million in these          
   activities. The committee recommends the requested amount.              

      The committee understands that hydrotest capabilities are unlikely to
   provide test results in a timely manner to certify new and              
   remanufactured primaries (the fission device that triggers the fusion   
   reaction in nuclear weapons), that development of advanced radiography  
   technologies has been delayed, and that the advanced radiography and    
   primary certification campaigns are being rebaselined. Therefore, the   
   committee directs the Administrator of the National Nuclear Security    
   Administration to provide a report to the congressional defense         
   committees by January 15, 2001, on hydrotest and radiography            
   requirements, the process by which they are defined, the technologies   
   available to meet the requirements, the timelines on which these        
   technologies are available, and the funding associated with the         
   technologies and schedules.                                             
      The committee also encourages the Administrator to examine the       
   relationship between the advanced radiography and campaign and the      
   primary certification campaign to determine if management insight would 
   be enhanced by an appropriate realignment of these two efforts.         
            Defense computing and modeling                                          

      The budget request contained $477.1 million for the Accelerated      
   Strategic Computing Initiative (ASCI) component of advanced simulation  
   and computing in readiness in technical base and facilities (RTBF). The 
   budget request also contained the following amounts for ASCI and defense
   computing: $249.1 million for the defense application and modeling      
   campaign, which provides funds to develop and run nuclear weapons       
   computer codes on ASCI computers; $2.3 million for construction of the  
   distributed information systems laboratory at Sandia National           
   Laboratories; $5.0 million for construction of the terascale simulation 
   facility at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory; $56.0 million for   
   construction of the strategic computing complex at Los Alamos National  
   Laboratory; and $6.7 million for the joint computational engineering    
   laboratory at Sandia National Laboratories. Each of these facilities    
   under construction will be used to house ASCI computers. The committee  
   believes that funding all of these activities in the defense application
   and modeling campaign will provide better understanding of ASCI costs   
   and enhance congressional oversight and managerial control. Therefore,  
   the committee directs this realignment. As realigned, the budget request
   contained $796.2 million for defense computing and modeling.            
      ASCI is an effort to develop by 2004 a computer capable of 100       
   trillion operations a second. This computer will be powerful enough to  
   conduct three-dimensional simulations of nuclear explosions to be used  
   as a means of assuring the safety, reliability, and effectiveness of    
   U.S. nuclear weapons in the absence of actual testing. The committee    
   understands the significance of ASCI for science-based stockpile        
   stewardship and is encouraged by the technical progress demonstrated to 
   date.                                                                   
      Of the $477.1 million requested for ASCI in RTBF, $55.7 million was  
   included for collaborations with universities and industry. The         
   committee notes that this represents a 38 percent increase over the     
   amount appropriated in fiscal year 2000. The committee understands the  
   value of these collaborations in attracting university talent to the    
   benefit of the stewardship program, but believes that the increase is   
   excessive. The committee recommends $40.7 million for university        
   collaborations, a reduction of $15.0 million.                           
      The budget request also contained $112.8 million for the visual      
   interactive environment for weapon simulation (VIEWS) project, a 68     
   percent increase over the fiscal year 2000 appropriated level. The      
   committee continues to be concerned about the pace of growth in certain 
   parts of the ASCI project and does not believe that the Department of   
   Energy has adequately justified an increase of this magnitude.          
   Therefore, the committee recommends $107.8 million for VIEWS, a         
   reduction of $5.0 million.                                              
      In total, the committee recommends $776.2 million for the defense    
   computing and modeling campaign, a reduction of $20.0 million.          
            Inertial confinement fusion (ICF) ignition and high yield margins       

      The budget request contained $120.8 million for the ICF ignition and 
   high yield margins campaign; $100.8 million in readiness in technical   
   base and facilities (RTBF) for the National Ignition Facility (NIF), a  
   key component of the ICF ignition campaign; $43.9 million for other RTBF
   operations related to pulse power and lasers; and $74.1 million for NIF 
   construction. The total request in these various activities is $339.6   
   million. The committee believes that funding all of these activities in 
   the ICF ignition campaign will provide a better understanding of ICF    
   costs and enhance both congressional oversight and managerial control.  
   Therefore, the committee directs this realignment.                      
      The committee also encourages the Administrator of the National      
   Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) to examine the relationship of   
   the ICF high yield campaign and the secondary readiness campaign and to 
   determine if management insight would be enhanced by an appropriate     
   realignment of these two efforts.                                       
      The committee recognizes that NIF is a key element of the effort to  
   sustain the nuclear stockpile in the absence of underground nuclear     
   testing and supports completion of the NIF project. NIF will use a large
   array of lasers used to achieve a fusion reaction by focusing their     
   energy on a small hydrogen target. Experiments with NIF, both those that
   achieve a fusion reaction and subcritical experiments, will contribute  
   important experimental data to several stockpile stewardship campaigns  
   and will allow scientists to confirm computer models on the behavior of 
   nuclear weapons explosions.                                             
      However, the committee understands that the NIF project is now $750.0
   million to $1.0 billion over budget and behind schedule by four years.  
   The cost growth and delay stem from the greater-than-expected complexity
   of assembling and integrating 192 high energy lasers in a clean,        
   confined space.                                                         
      The committee is concerned that the NIF project management failed to 
   indicate in a clear and timely way the magnitude of the technical       
   difficulties as they emerged. The committee is also concerned that      
   project oversight by Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, independent
   review teams, the University of California as the contractor with       
   oversight responsibilities, and the Department of Energy failed to      
   detect or report the technical difficulties. For example, the committee 
   understands that independent reviews examined the program's performance 
   related to schedule and budget, without examining the underlying        
   engineering plans. The General Accounting Office and the Department now 
   both confirm that, in fact, there was no detailed engineering plan for  
   the assembly and integration of the laser components. These failures    
   also highlight the lack of                                              

                    appropriate technical expertise within the Department to allow
          for effective oversight and the urgent need to address this problem.    
      The committee, therefore, directs that no more than 35 percent of the
   funds authorized for appropriation for the NIF program may be obligated 
   until the Administrator certifies to the congressional defense          
   committees that program management flaws resident in the laboratory and 
   contractor have been corrected and that NNSA oversight and management of
   the program is performed by NNSA personnel with appropriate technical   
   and management expertise.                                               
      The committee notes that the Secretary of Energy has recently        
   recommended a realignment of $95.0 million from various campaigns to    
   NIF. In light of the significance of the NIF project to stockpile       
   stewardship, the committee recommends an increase of $95.0 million to   
   the ICF and High Yield Margins campaign for NIF construction.           
      However, the committee believes that the sources for the additional  
   NIF funds identified in the Secretary's recommendation will detract from
   activities that are key to sustaining the safety, reliability, and      
   effectiveness of the nuclear stockpile and that lower priority funding  
   should be identified for realignment. In the absence of credible sources
   for additional NIF funding, the committee believes that the designation 
   of specific sources to offset the increase to NIF construction is       
   premature. The committee will coordinate closely with the Administrator 
   of the NNSA to assure that that appropriate offsets for this increase   
   are identified in a timely manner.                                      
      The ICF campaign budget request also included $32.1 million for the  
   University of Rochester's Laboratory for Laser Energetics (LLE). The    
   committee believes that LLE's Omega laser continues to make important   
   contributions to the ICF program, particularly in light of the delays   
   and technical challenges facing the NIF project, and directs that the   
   Department fund this facility at the requested level.                   
            Laser development                                                       

      The budget request contained $120.8 million for the inertial         
   confinement fusion (ICF) ignition and high yield margins campaign but   
   included no funds for laser research and development jointly funded by  
   the Department of Defense (DOD) and the National Nuclear Security Agency
   (NNSA).                                                                 
      The committee notes that the high energy laser master plan mandated  
   by section 251 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year
   2000 (Public Law 106 65) recommended that DOD and the Department of     
   Energy conclude a memorandum of agreement to conduct a joint high energy
   laser research program beneficial to both the NNSA and DOD. The         
   committee recommends a provision, described elsewhere in this report,   
   that would require the NNSA and DOD to conclude such an agreement       
   wherein the costs of peer-reviewed research conducted under the auspices
   of the agreement would be evenly shared between them.                   
      The committee believes that joint research on high energy lasers can 
   help to meet critical national security challenges, including the need  
   for effective ballistic missile defenses, while simultaneously          
   benefitting stockpile stewardship activities of the NNSA.               
      Therefore, the recommends an increase of $10.0 million to the ICF    
   ignition and high yield margins campaign budget request for joint DOD   
   NNSA research on high energy lasers.                                    
            Pit manufacturing readiness                                             

      The budget request contained $108.0 for the pit manufacturing        
   readiness campaign.                                                     
      The committee notes that the National Nuclear Security Administration
   (NNSA) lacks a robust capability for the replacement of plutonium pits. 
   The Report of the Panel to Assess the Reliability, Safety, and Security 
   of the United States Nuclear Stockpile expressed concern over ``the high
   degree of uncertainly in the current understanding of the useful life of
   plutonium pits.'' The Panel, citing estimates that construction of new  
   plutonium facilities could take 7 to 15 years, urged that conceptual    
   design activities of a pit production facility begin on an expedited    
   basis.                                                                  
      The committee also notes that the pit production facility at Los     
   Alamos National Laboratory is designed for a maximum capacity of about  
   50 pits per year. The committee recognizes that the rate at which pits  
   may need replacement remains unclear, due to the uncertainties related  
   to pit lifetime and the ultimate size of the stockpile, but the         
   committee understands that this rate is unlikely to allow for replacing 
   stockpile pits in a timely manner. Accordingly, the committee believes  
   conceptual design of a pit production facility should begin promptly as 
   a hedge against the risk that the need for expanded pit production will 
   develop more rapidly than is now anticipated. Given the uncertain demand
   for pit production, the committee also believes that a scalable design  
   is desirable so that the design can be readily adapted as demand is more
   precisely defined.                                                      
      Therefore, the committee recommends $123.0 million for pit           
   manufacturing readiness, an increase of $15.0 million for the initiation
   of conceptual design work on a pit manufacturing facility. Noting that a
   science-oriented laboratory is not the best institution for pit         
   production and that industry is better suited to this task, the         
   committee urges the Administrator of the NNSA to maximize industry      
   involvement in the design and manufacture of plutonium pits.            
      The committee understands that funds appropriated in fiscal year 1999
   for pit production readiness were diverted for other uses, have not yet 
   been restored, and may result in a delay of up to two years in the      
   production of the first certifiable pit. The committee strongly urges   
   the Department to initiate a reprogramming to restore these funds as    
   soon as possible.                                                       
            Tritium readiness                                                       

      The budget request contained $77.0 million in the tritium readiness  
   campaign, including $58.0 million for commercial light water reactor    
   (CLWR) tritium production and $19.0 million for accelerator production  
   of tritium (APT). It also contained $75.0 million for construction of   
   the tritium extraction facility. The committee believes that            
   congressional and managerial oversight of these activities would be     
   enhanced if funding for these activities were consolidated in the       
   tritium readiness campaign. Therefore, the committee directs this       
   realignment. As realigned, the budget request contained a total of      
   $152.0 million in these activities.                                     
      The committee notes that section 3134 of the National Defense        
   Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2000 (Public Law 106 65) required the 
   Department of Energy to                                                 

                    complete preliminary design and engineering development of APT
          and codified the December 1998 tritium production decision by the       
          Secretary of Energy that designated CLWR technology as the primary      
          tritium production technology but committed to completion of the APT    
          preliminary design. The budget request, however, suspends APT backup    
          design activities and, in so doing, both violates current law and       
          contradicts the Secretary's tritium production decision.                
      The committee believes that the uncertainty inherent in the CLWR     
   license amendment process requires the precaution of continuing APT     
   design work at a reasonable level. Therefore, the committee recommends  
   $177.0 million in the tritium readiness campaign, an increase of $25.0  
   million.                                                                
           Construction projects                                                   

      The budget request contained $414.2 million for construction and     
   infrastructure improvements. The committee recommends the alignment of  
   most construction projects with their associated campaigns. The         
   committee recommends that the following projects be realigned: the      
   distributed information systems laboratory (01 D 101, $2.3 million), the
   terascale simulation facility (00 D 103, $5.0 million), the strategic   
   computing complex (00 D 105, $56.0 million), and the joint computational
   engineering laboratory (00 D 107, $6.7 million) to the defense          
   applications and modeling campaign; the tritium extraction facility (98 
   D 125, $75.0 million) to the tritium readiness campaign; the dual-axis  
   radiographic hydrotest facility (97 D 102, $35.2 million) to the        
   advanced radiography campaign; and the national ignition facility (96 D 
   111, $74.1 million) to the inertial confinement fusion ignition and high
   yield margins campaign.                                                 
      The budget request contained $159.8 million for the remaining        
   construction projects. The committee recommends the budget request. The 
   committee believes that many of these projects should also migrate to an
   associated campaign and encourages the Administrator of the National    
   Nuclear Security Administration to do so in subsequent budget requests. 
           Defense programs requirements process                                   

      The committee understands that the nuclear weapons requirements      
   process involves project officer groups responsible for the health of   
   each weapons type, the nuclear weapons requirements working group, the  
   nuclear weapons council standing and safety committee, and the nuclear  
   weapons council. The membership of each of these groups includes        
   officers and personnel of the Department of Defense (DOD) and Department
   of Energy (DOE) and each deals with system or technical requirements at 
   various levels of detail. The committee notes that DOE's 1999 Stockpile 
   Stewardship Program 30-Day Review concluded that coordination between   
   DOD and DOE is inadequate to generate and prioritize nuclear weapons    
   requirements. The review further contended that the Office of Defense   
   Programs (DP) lacks a formal process for assessing these requirements,  
   developing plans to address them, and prioritizing workloads. The       
   committee believes that concerns expressed by the review are legitimate.
      The committee also notes that DP has pursued a science-based         
   stockpile stewardship program to sustain the viability of U.S. nuclear  
   weapons in the absence of underground nuclear testing. DP has been      
   developing and acquiring a range of science-based tools for this        
   purpose, and the committee understands that DP must also define and     
   prioritize requirements for these tools. The committee notes that DP has
   a long history of poor program management, in part attributable to poor 
   program definition and frequently changing program baselines. The       
   committee believes that this history gives rise to legitimate concern   
   that DP also lacks a sufficiently formal and rigorous approach to       
   defining the technical requirements of these science-based tools and    
   prioritizing competing technology programs.                             
      Therefore, the committee directs the Administrator of the National   
   Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA), in consultation with the        
   Secretary of Defense, to submit to the congressional defense committees 
   by February 15, 2000, a report on the steps being taken to improve      
   requirements processes related to nuclear weapons. The report should    
   include an assessment of coordination between the NNSA and DOD together 
   with actions required to more fully coordinate this process, as well as 
   an assessment of DP's internal processes for developing plans to address
   nuclear weapons requirements and prioritizing resulting workloads       
   together with any actions required to improve DP's processes. The report
   should further assess DP's procedures for defining the technical        
   requirements for science-based stewardship tools and prioritizing       
   competing technology programs and steps required to improve these       
   procedures.                                                             
           Department of Energy Reorganization Issues                              

      The committee notes that title 32 of the National Defense            
   Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2000 (Public Law 106-65) required the 
   establishment of the National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) by 
   March 1, 2000, and the committee is pleased that the NNSA has been      
   formally established by the Department of Energy (DOE). The committee is
   also pleased that a nominee for Administrator of the National Nuclear   
   Security Administration has been forwarded to the Senate by the         
   President.                                                              
      However, the committee remains concerned about the slow progress of  
   the Department toward full compliance with the law. The Special         
   Oversight Panel on Department of Energy Reorganization expressed, in its
   report to the committee on February 11, 2000, a number of concerns with 
   the Department's January 2000 implementation plan. These concerns       
   included the Department's placement of DOE officials to serve           
   concurrently in key NNSA positions, the continuation of confused lines  
   of authority within the NNSA, the failure to provide any information on 
   the use of authorities to restructure the NNSA workforce, an            
   overemphasis in the plan on continued DOE control over the NNSA, and the
   retention of current DOE budget and planning practices.                 
      The committee remains particularly concerned about the placement of  
   DOE officials to serve concurrently in key NNSA positions, a practice   
   known as ``dual-hatting.'' The Secretary of Energy testified to the     
   committee that he would not change this practice, even after an NNSA    
   Administrator is confirmed by the Senate.                               
      The committee notes that the Department, in its written legal opinion
   in support of this practice, maintains that Congress was explicit and   
   detailed throughout title 32 of Public Law 106-65, but did not          
   explicitly prohibit dual-hatting.                                       

      The committee asserts that dual-hatting DOE officials to any         
   positions in NNSA violates a clearly implied prohibition in current law 
   and notes that the entire purpose, structure and legislative history of 
   title 32 of Public Law 106 65 reflect an intent to insulate NNSA and its
   contractors from the rest of DOE. This intent is apparent in several    
   sections, including: section 3213(a), which established that the        
   Secretary or Deputy Secretary may provide direction to NNSA only through
   the NNSA Administrator; section 3212(d), which stated that the          
   Administrator may make policies specific to NNSA, subject only to the   
   disapproval of the Secretary; section 3212(c), which established the    
   Administrator as the chief procurement executive for NNSA; sections     
   3212(b) and 3218, that provide the NNSA Administrator with staff to     
   perform all of the normal administrative functions in running an agency,
   including budget, personnel, legislative affairs, public affairs,       
   procurement, counterintelligence; section 3217 which established the    
   position of General Counsel within the Administration; and sections     
   3213(a) and 3213(b), which specifically prohibited DOE officers and     
   employees, other than the Secretary acting through the Administrator,   
   from exercising authority, direction, or control over NNSA employees or 
   NNSA contractor employees. The committee believes that these provisions,
   in combination, provide compelling evidence of congressional intent to  
   insulate the NNSA from direct control by DOE staff and to prohibit      
   dual-hatting within the NNSA.                                           
      The legislative history also clearly indicates that Congress, in     
   mandating the establishment of the NNSA, was attempting to rectify the  
   longstanding bureaucratic confusion and overlap that has plagued DOE.   
   The committee remains concerned that the DOE implementation plan fails  
   to correct these confused lines of authority. The Department as         
   currently organized requires three NNSA facilities to report through    
   non-NNSA operations offices. The committee believes that this           
   arrangement is not compliant with current law. The implementation plan  
   also makes no changes in the role or function of operations offices. The
   committee believes that the roles and functions of operations offices   
   should be revised to clarify headquarters authorities and streamline    
   NNSA management. Finally, the committee notes that dual-hatting senior  
   DOE officials to NNSA positions, particularly those that involve        
   overseeing NNSA field operations, will undermine the authority of the   
   Administrator, perpetuate confused lines of authority, and ultimately   
   will make it more difficult to rectify problems in the weapons complex. 
      The committee also observes that section 3241 of Public Law 106 65   
   authorized the Administrator of the NNSA to establish up to 300 excepted
   service positions to fill science, engineering, and technical positions 
   with qualified personnel. The committee notes the Department's lack of  
   appropriate technical expertise to manage complex projects and          
   activities. Thus, the committee was disappointed that a proposal to use 
   this authority was not forwarded as part of the Secretary's January 2000
   implementation plan. The committee continues to believe that this       
   authority will be an important tool for the Administrator to reshape the
   NNSA workforce.                                                         
      Accordingly, the committee expects the Secretary and the             
   Administrator of the NNSA to reform lines of authority and the roles and
   functions of operations offices within the NNSA, and to develop         
   management structures that incorporate the use of personnel hired       
   through excepted service authority.                                     
           Directed stockpile work                                                 

   The budget request contained $836.6 million for directed stockpile work.

   The committee recommends $856.6 million, an increase of $20.0 million.  

            Stockpile evaluation                                                    

   The budget request contained $151.7 million for stockpile evaluation.   

      The committee notes that the budget request does not adequately      
   support radiographic inspection of nuclear weapons components and       
   assemblies, vacuum chamber inspection activities, testing in the        
   accelerated aging unit, and other stockpile evaluation activities at the
   Pantex plant. The committee recommends an increase of $5.0 million to   
   support these activities.                                               
      The committee also notes that the budget request does not adequately 
   support quality evaluation and certification activities and joint test  
   assemblies at the Y 12 plant. The committee recommends an increase of   
   $6.0 million for stockpile evaluation at the Y 12 plant.                
      In total, the committee recommends $162.7 million, an increase of    
   $11.0 million for stockpile evaluation.                                 
            Stockpile maintenance                                                   

   The budget request contained $258.0 million for stockpile maintenance.  

      The committee notes that the budget request does not adequately      
   support life extension and repairs for the B 61 warhead and other       
   directed stockpile work at the Kansas City plant. The committee         
   recommends an increase of $5.0 million to support these activities.     
      The committee also notes that the budget request does not adequately 
   support life extension activities for the B 61 and W-76 warheads and    
   other directed stockpile work at the Y 12. The committee recommends an  
   increase of $4.0 million to support these activities.                   
      In total, the committee recommends $267.0 million, an increase of    
   $9.0 million for stockpile maintenance.                                 
           Program direction for defense programs                                  

      The budget request contained $224.1 million for program direction for
   the Office of Defense Programs (DP).                                    
      The committee notes federal staffing levels planned for National     
   Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) operations offices is the same as
   the authorized staffing level for fiscal year 2000. The committee also  
   notes that the size of the operations offices and the confusing lines of
   authority within the Office of Defense Programs were criticized in many 
   independent reports over two decades, most recently by the June 1999    
   report by the President's Foreign Intelligence Advisory Board. The      
   committee believes that the Administrator of the NNSA should clarify    
   lines of authority and adjust the personnel levels at the operations    
   offices accordingly. Consequently, the committee recommends a           

                    reduction of $5.0 million, which corresponds to a five percent
          reduction in federal staffing at the NNSA operations offices.           
      The committee also notes that of the funds requested for program     
   direction, $2.2 million would support automatic data processing         
   equipment (ADPE) upgrades at the Oak Ridge and Oakland Operations       
   Offices. These operations offices are part of the Office of Science of  
   the Department of Energy. Title 32 of the National Defense Authorization
   Act for Fiscal Year 2000 (Public Law 106 65) included Lawrence Livermore
   National Laboratory and the Y 12 plant as part of the NNSA and required 
   that these facilities report to the Deputy Administrator for Defense    
   Programs. The committee believes that an organizational structure that  
   entails DP facilities reporting through the Office of Science is both   
   inefficient and inappropriate and does not believe that DP should fund  
   computer upgrades for the Office of Science. Therefore the committee    
   recommends an additional reduction of $2.2 million to program direction.
      The committee recommends $216.9 million, a decrease of $7.2 million  
   for program direction for the Office of Defense Programs.               
           Readiness in Technical Base and Facilities (RTBF)                       

      The budget request contained $1,953.6 million in RTBF. The committee 
   recommends $1,366.8 million, including an increase of $35.0 million and 
   a transfer of $621.8 million to campaigns.                              
      The committee understands that the facility costs budgeted in RTBF   
   were not calculated consistently. While the nuclear weapons production  
   plants included all salaries under RTBF, the nuclear weapons            
   laboratories allocated salaries to various ongoing program activities.  
   The committee believes that this inconsistency hinders congressional    
   understanding of overhead costs and project costs and expects the       
   Administrator of the NNSA to develop the NNSA budget for submission by  
   DOE with RTBF funding calculated consistently among all the facilities. 
      Further, the committee does not believe that projects and activities 
   that present complex scientific and engineering challenges should be    
   funded in RTBF. Consequently, as described elsewhere in this report, the
   committee recommends funding for the advanced simulation and computing  
   component of RTBF through the defense computing and modeling campaign,  
   and that inertial confinement fusion (ICF) and national ignition        
   facility operations be funded through the ICF and high yield margins    
   campaign.                                                               
            Operations of facilities                                                

      The budget request contained $1,313.4 million for operations of      
   facilities, including $29.1 million for infrastructure costs at the     
   Pantex plant, $39.8 million for infrastructure costs at the Kansas City 
   plant, and $67.3 million for infrastructure costs at the Y 12 plant.    
      The committee understands that the budget request for infrastructure 
   costs at the nuclear weapons plants represent reductions of 25 percent, 
   6 percent, and 27 percent at the Y 12, Kansas City, and Pantex plants   
   respectively. The committee is concerned that such reductions are       
   inconsistent with the problems highlighted by the Stockpile Stewardship 
   Program 30-Day Review conducted by the Department of Energy. This review
   cited studies showing that the historical rate of reinvestment in       
   nuclear weapons facilities is far below industry standards and that the 
   aging infrastructure was not designed to meet current mission           
   requirements or safety standards.                                       
      The committee believes that the budget request places insufficient   
   priority on restoring and modernizing infrastructure at the plants, and 
   recommends $49.1 million for infrastructure improvements at Pantex      
   plant, an increase of $20.0 million; $56.8 million for infrastructure   
   improvements and capital equipment at the Kansas City plant, an increase
   of $17.0 million; and $82.3 million for infrastructure improvements at  
   the Y 12 plant, an increase of $15.0 million.                           
      As described elsewhere in this report, the committee recommends      
   realigning $100.8 million from operations of facilities for the National
   Ignition Facility (NIF) and $43.9 million in other RTBF funds to the    
   inertial confinement fusion ignition and high yield margins campaign.   
      Overall, the committee recommends $1,220.7 million for operations of 
   facilities, a reduction of $92.7 million.                               
            Special projects                                                        

      The budget request contained $17.0 million for educational           
   activities, including funding for mathematics and science education for 
   local schools near the national weapons laboratories, the Los Alamos    
   County School District, and the Northern New Mexico Educational         
   Enrichment Foundation.                                                  
      The committee understands the importance of primary and secondary    
   education in mathematics and science but believes that funding of these 
   activities in the Defense Programs account provides no direct benefit to
   the core national security mission of the National Nuclear Security     
   Administration. Consequently, the committee recommends no funds for     
   these activities, a reduction of $17.0 million.                         
                                   LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS                         

                   SUBTITLE A--NATIONAL SECURITY PROGRAMS AUTHORIZATIONS          

                   SECTION 3101--NATIONAL NUCLEAR SECURITY ADMINISTRATION         

      This section would authorize funds for the National Nuclear Security 
   Administration for fiscal year 2001.                                    
            SECTION 3102--DEFENSE ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION AND WASTE MANAGEMENT  

      This section would authorize funds for Department of Energy          
   environmental restoration and waste management activities for fiscal    
   year 2001.                                                              
                           SECTION 3103--OTHER DEFENSE ACTIVITIES                 

      This section would authorize funds for other defense activities of   
   the Department of Energy for fiscal year 2001.                          

                      SECTION 3104--DEFENSE FACILITIES CLOSURE PROJECTS           

      This section would authorize funds for Department of Energy defense  
   facilities closure projects for fiscal year 2001.                       
                SECTION 3105--DEFENSE ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PRIVATIZATION      

      This section would authorize funds for Department of Energy defense  
   environmental management privatization activities for fiscal year 2001. 
                        SECTION 3106--DEFENSE NUCLEAR WASTE DISPOSAL              

      This section would authorize funds for Department of Energy defense  
   nuclear waste disposal activities for fiscal year 2001.                 
                          SUBTITLE B--RECURRING GENERAL PROVISIONS                

                                 SECTION 3121--REPROGRAMMING                      

      This section would prohibit the reprogramming of funds in excess of  
   110 percent of the amount authorized for the program, or in excess of   
   $1.0 million above the amount authorized for the program until the      
   Secretary of Energy has notified the congressional defense committees   
   and a period of 60 days has elapsed after the date on which the         
   notification is received.                                               
                       SECTION 3122--LIMITS ON GENERAL PLANT PROJECTS             

      This section would limit the initiation of general plant projects if 
   the current estimated cost for any project exceeds $5.0 million and     
   would require the Secretary of Energy to notify the congressional       
   defense committees in the event the estimated cost of any project       
   exceeds $5.0 million and the reasons for the cost variation.            
                        SECTION 3123--LIMITS ON CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS             

      This section would permit the initiation and continuation of any     
   construction project only if the estimated cost for the project does not
   exceed 125 percent of the higher of: (1) the amount authorized for the  
   project; or (2) the most recent total estimated cost presented to       
   Congress as justification for such project. To exceed this limit, the   
   Secretary of Energy must report in detail the reason therefore to the   
   congressional defense committees and the report must be before the      
   committees for 30 legislative days. This section would also specify that
   the 125 percent limitation would not apply to projects estimated to cost
   under $5.0 million.                                                     
                            SECTION 3124--FUND TRANSFER AUTHORITY                 

      This section would authorize the Secretary of Energy to transfer     
   funds to other agencies of the government for performance of work for   
   which the funds were authorized and appropriated. The provision would   
   permit the merger of such funds with the funds made available to the    
   agency to which they are transferred.                                   
               SECTION 3125--AUTHORITY FOR CONCEPTUAL AND CONSTRUCTION DESIGN     

      This section would require the Secretary of Energy to certify that a 
   conceptual design for a construction project has been completed prior to
   requesting funding for that project, except in the case of emergencies. 
           SECTION 3126--AUTHORITY FOR EMERGENCY PLANNING, DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION
                                   ACTIVITIES                                     
      This section would permit the Secretary of Energy to perform planning
   and design for construction activities utilizing available funds for any
   Department of Energy national security program construction project     
   whenever the Secretary determines that the design must proceed          
   expeditiously to protect the public health and safety, to meet the needs
   of national defense, or to protect property.                            
                             SECTION 3127--AVAILABILITY OF FUNDS                  

      This section would require that funds authorized for the various     
   activities of the National Nuclear Security Administration and          
   environmental management activities of the Department of Energy would be
   available for obligation for three years, and that funding authorized   
   for program direction would be available for obligation for one year.   
           SECTION 3128--AUTHORITY RELATING TO TRANSFER OF DEFENSE ENVIRONMENTAL  
                                MANAGEMENT FUNDS                                  
      This section would provide the manager of each field office of the   
   Department of Energy with limited authority to transfer defense         
   environmental management funds from a program or project under the      
   jurisdiction of the office to another such program or project.          
           SECTION 3131--FUNDING FOR TERMINATION COSTS FOR TANK WASTE REMEDIATION 
               SYSTEM ENVIRONMENTAL PROJECT, RICHLAND, WASHINGTON                 
      This section would prohibit the Secretary of Energy from using       
   appropriated funds to establish a reserve for the payment of termination
   costs of contracts relating to the tank waste remediation system at     
   Richland, Washington and identifies alternatives to pay for these costs 
   should the need arise to do so.                                         
            SECTION 3132--ENHANCED COOPERATION BETWEEN NATIONAL NUCLEAR SECURITY  
            ADMINISTRATION AND BALLISTIC MISSILE DEFENSE ORGANIZATION             
      This section would establish the basis for expanded cooperation      
   between the Ballistic Missile Defense Organization and the National     
   Nuclear Security Administration.                                        
      The committee continues to believe that ballistic missile defense    
   remains one of the highest defense priorities and that the national     
   laboratories represent a repository of expertise of potentially great   
   value in meeting technology challenges in the ballistic missile defense 
   program.                                                                
              SECTION 3133--REQUIRED CONTENTS OF FUTURE-YEARS NUCLEAR SECURITY    
PROGRAM TO BE SUBMITTED WITH FISCAL YEAR 2002 BUDGET AND LIMITATION ON OBLIGATION 
               OF CERTAIN FUNDS PENDING SUBMISSION OF THAT PROGRAM                
      This section would make certain findings that the budget submission  
   for fiscal year 2001 to Congress does not comply with requirements      
   imposed by sections 3251 and 3253 of the National Defense Authorization 
   Act for Fiscal Year 2000 (Public Law 106 65); would establish           
   requirements for the content of the future-years nuclear security       
   program to be submitted annually by the Administrator of the National   
   Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) pursuant to section 3253 of      
   Public Law 106 65; and would prohibit the obligation of more than 50    
   percent of funds authorized for appropriation for program direction     
   within NNSA until 30 days after the Administrator provides Congress with
   the required future-years nuclear security program.                     
                   SECTION 3134--LIMITATION ON OBLIGATION OF CERTAIN FUNDS        

      This section would prohibit the use of funds authorized to be        
   appropriated for the National Nuclear Security Administration for       
   infrastructure upgrades or maintenance in the readiness of technical    
   base and facilities or construction accounts to be used for any other   
   purpose.                                                                

           TITLE XXXII--DEFENSE NUCLEAR FACILITIES SAFETY BOARD                   

                                  ITEM OF SPECIAL INTEREST                        

           Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board                                 

      The budget request contained $18.5 million for the Defense Nuclear   
   Facilities Safety Board (DNFSB).                                        
      The committee notes that the fiscal year 2000 appropriation for DNFSB
   was $17.0 million and does not believe there is ample justification to  
   warrant increase of $1.5 million. The Board cites an increased number of
   Department of Energy facilities to oversee as the basis for their       
   increased budget request. However, most of these new facilities will be 
   in the design, not construction, phase during fiscal year 2001.         
      Consequently, the committee recommends $17.0 million for the DNFSB, a
   decrease of $1.5 million.                                               
                                    LEGISLATIVE PROVISION                         

                                 SECTION 3201--AUTHORIZATION                      

      This section would authorize $17.0 million for the operation of the  
   Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board.                                

           TITLE XXXIII--NATIONAL DEFENSE STOCKPILE                               

                                   LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS                         

                      SECTION 3301--AUTHORIZED USES OF STOCKPILE FUNDS            

      This section would authorize $70.5 million from the National Defense 
   Stockpile Transaction Fund for the operation and maintenance of the     
   National Defense Stockpile for fiscal year 2001. The provision would    
   also permit the use of additional funds for extraordinary or emergency  
   conditions 45 days after a notification to Congress.                    
            SECTION 3302--USE OF EXCESS TITANIUM SPONGE IN THE NATIONAL DEFENSE   
            STOCKPILE TO MANUFACTURE DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE EQUIPMENT              
      This section would authorize the Secretary of Defense to transfer    
   excess titanium sponge contained in the National Defense Stockpile for  
   use in manufacturing equipment to be used by the military services. This
   transfer authority would be on a non-reimbursable basis, except that the
   military service requesting the titanium would be responsible for all   
   transportation and related costs. This new transfer authority would not 
   conflict with transfer authorities for titanium contained in section    
   3305 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1996     
   (Public Law 104 106).                                                   

                                                                             


           TITLE XXXIV--MARITIME ADMINISTRATION                                   


                                  ITEM OF SPECIAL INTEREST                        


                                   MERCHANT MARINE ACADEMY                        


      The budget request contained $37.2 million for the U.S. Merchant     
   Marine Academy (USMMA). The committee is deeply troubled that the health
   and safety hazards to the cadets and staff still continue due to the    
   appalling condition of physical plant and infrastructure at the         
   institution. Although the budget request includes an increase of $3.0   
   million for repairs and capital improvements, this amount is            
   insufficient to begin to buy down the backlog of deferred maintenance   
   and facilities replacement. The committee is concerned that a facilities
   master plan that would establish and prioritize necessary repairs and   
   improvements is not complete. Therefore, the committee recommends an    
   increase of $13.9 million to complete development of a facilities master
   plan and to address the most critical health and safety related repair  
   and capital replacement projects at the USMMA.                          

                                   LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS                         


             SECTION 3401--AUTHORIZATION  OF APPROPRIATIONS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2001  

      This section would authorize a total of $148.3 million for fiscal    
   year 2001, an increase of $61.9 million above the budget request, for   
   the Maritime Administration. Of the funds authorized, $94.2 million     
   would be for operations and training programs, $50.0 million would be   
   for the costs as defined in section 502 of the Federal Credit Reform Act
   of 1990, of loan guarantees authorized by Title XI of the Merchant      
   Marine Act, 1936, as amended (46 App. U.S.C. 1271 et seq.), and $4.2    
   million would be for administrative expenses related to providing these 
   loan guarantees.                                                        

           SECTION 3402--EXTENSION OF PERIOD FOR DISPOSAL OF OBSOLETE VESSELS FROM
                           THE NATIONAL RESERVE FLEET                             

      This section would amend the National Maritime Heritage Act of 1994  
   to extend by five years, until September 20, 2006, the date by which    
   obsolete vessels from the National Defense Reserve Fleet vessels must be
   disposed and require the use if overseas scrapping facilities to meet   
   this requirement. In addition, this section would require the Secretary 
   of Transportation to submit to the Congress a plan describing how the   
   required disposals will be completed by the revised date.               

              SECTION 3403--AUTHORITY TO CONVEY NATIONAL DEFENSE RESERVE FLEET    
                                 VESSEL, GLACIER                                  

      This section would authorize the Secretary of Transportation to      
   convey, at no cost to the government, a surplus National Defense Reserve
   Fleet vessel, to the Glacier Society for use as a museum.               

           DEPARTMENTAL DATA                                                      

      The Department of Defense requested legislation, in accordance with  
   the program of the President, as illustrated by the correspondence set  
   out below:                                                              
                         DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION REQUEST              

       Department of Defense,                                                  

       Office of General Counsel,                                              

       Washington, DC, March 6, 2000.                                          



          Hon.  J. Dennis Hastert,                Speaker of the House of Representatives,

       Washington, DC.                                                         

       Dear Mr. Speaker: The Department of Defense proposes the enclosed   
   draft legislation, ``To authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2001   
   for military activities of the Department of Defense, to prescribe      
   military personnel strengths for fiscal year 2001, and for other        
   purposes.''                                                             
      This legislative proposal is part of the Department of Defense       
   Legislative Program for the Second Session of the 106th Congress and is 
   necessary to carry out the President's budget plans for fiscal year     
   2001. The Office of Management and Budget advises that there is no      
   objection to the presentation of this proposal to the Congress, and that
   its enactment would be in accord with the program of the President.     
      The bill proposes several important initiatives needed for the       
   efficient operation of the Department of Defense. It would contribute to
   the smooth management of the Department by providing many improvements  
   to the authorities under which we operate.                              
      The Department currently is developing several other legislative     
   proposals, including an initiative regarding the basic allowance for    
   housing for military personnel. We will submit these initiatives in the 
   near future.                                                            
   Sincerely,                                                              

        Douglas A. Dworkin,                                                     

        Acting General Counsel.                                                 

   Enclosures.                                                             

                         MILITARY CONSTRUCTION AUTHORIZATION REQUEST              

       Department of Defense,                                                  

       Office of General Counsel,                                              

       Washington, DC, February 28, 2000.                                      



          Hon.  J. Dennis Hastert,                Speaker of the House of Representatives,

       Washington, DC.                                                         

       Dear Mr. Speaker: Enclosed is proposed legislation to authorize     
   military construction and related activities of the Department of       
   Defense. It is styled as Division B--Military Construction              
   Authorizations, with the expectation that it will be included in the    
   National Defense authorizations for fiscal year 2001 with that          
   designation. Enactment of this legislation is necessary to carry out the
   President's budget plan with regard to military housing and property for
   fiscal year 2001. This legislation is part of the Legislative Program of
   the Department of Defense for the Second Session of the 106th Congress. 
      If enacted, this legislation would make several improvements to the  
   efficiency of managing military construction, base housing, and the use 
   of defense lands. These improvements would include extension of         
   authority to conduct our military privatization initiatives, the        
   revision of the limitations on space in housing by grade, the           
   enhancement of the Military Leasing Act, and several other general and  
   specific authorities in the management of our military housing and      
   property.                                                               
      The Office of Management and Budget advises that there is no         
   objection to the presentation of this proposal to the Congress, and that
   its enactment would be in accord with the program of the President.     
   Sincerely,                                                              

        Douglas A. Dworkin,                                                     

        Acting General Counsel.                                                 

   Enclosures.                                                             

                                     COMMITTEE POSITION                           

      On May 10, 2000 the Committee on Armed Services, a quorum being      
   present, approved H.R. 4205, as amended, by a vote of 56 to 1.          

                            COMMUNICATIONS FROM OTHER COMMITTEES                  

       House of Representatives,                                               

       Committee on Veterans' Affairs,                                         

       Washington, DC, May 12, 2000.                                           



          Hon.  Floyd Spence,             Chairman, Committee on Armed Services, House of Representatives, Washington, DC.

       Dear Mr. Chairman: According to information provided by Armed       
   Services staff, H.R. 4205, the National Defense Authorization Act for   
   Fiscal Year 2001, includes several provisions that affect laws within   
   the jurisdiction of the Committee on Veterans' Affairs. Those provisions
   are found at section 738 of the bill (improvements regarding VA DOD     
   sharing agreements for health services), section 535 of the bill        
   (addition of certain information to markers on graves at the National   
   Memorial Cemetery of the Pacific), and section 2831 of the bill         
   (transfer of jurisdiction of land to VA at Rock Island Arsenal). In     
   order to expedite consideration of H.R. 4205, the Committee on Veterans'
   Affairs waives the right it would have under the House Rules to seek a  
   referral of the measure to the Committee for consideration of these     
   provisions.                                                             
      Thank you for your courtesy in bringing these matters to the VA      
   Committee's attention.                                                  
   Sincerely,                                                              

         Bob Stump,  Chairman.                                                  

                                                                                 

       House of Representatives,                                               

       Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure,                         

       Washington, DC, May 11, 2000.                                           



          Hon.  Floyd Spence,            Chairman, Committee on Armed Services, House of Representatives, Washington, DC.

       Dear Mr. Chairman: I write concerning the jurisdictional interest of
   the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure in H.R. 4205, the    
   Fiscal Year 2001 National Defense Authorization Act.                    
      H.R. 4205 as reported by the Committee on Armed Services contains    
   many provisions over which the Committee on Transportation and          
   Infrastructure has jurisdiction and as such would be entitled to a      
   sequential referral. As in previous bills, these generally include all  
   sections that affect the pay, benefits and personnel of the United      
   States Coast Guard, including Section 615, providing for Physicians     
   Assistants for the Coast Guard.                                         
      In addition to matters related to pay, benefits and personnel of the 
   Coast Guard, we would also be entitled to a sequential referral of Title
   XIV, creating a Commission to assess the threat to the United States    
   from electromagnetic pulse attack, Section 2839, regarding a land       
   conveyance for the Charles Melvin Price Support Center in Illinois, and 
   Section 2881, relating to easement authority to leased parkland at the  
   Marine Corps Base, Camp Pendleton, California.                          
      Our Committee recognizes the importance of H.R. 4205 and the need for
   this legislation to move expeditiously. While we have a valid claim to  
   jurisdiction over the provisions identified above, I do not intend to   
   request a sequential referral. This is of course conditional on our     
   mutual understanding that nothing in this legislation waives or affects 
   the jurisdiction of the Transportation Committee, that every effort will
   be made to include any agreements worked out by our staffs as the bill  
   is taken to the Floor and that a copy of this letter and your response  
   will by included in the Committee Report and as part of the record      
   during consideration of this bill by the House. Our Committee would     
   request to be included as conferees on these provisions, as well.       
   Thank you for your cooperation in this manner.                          

   Sincerely,                                                              

         Bud Shuster,  Chairman.                                                

                                                                                 

       House of Representatives,                                               

       Committee on Armed Services,                                            

       Washington, DC, May 12, 2000.                                           



          Hon.  Bud Shuster,             Chairman, Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, House of Representatives, Washington, DC.

       Dear Mr. Chairman: Thank you for your letter of May 12, 2000        
   regarding H.R. 4205, the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal  
   Year 2001.                                                              
      I agree that the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure has  
   valid jurisdictional claims to certain provisions in this important     
   legislation, and I am most appreciative of your decision not to request 
   such a referral in the interest of expediting consideration of the bill.
   I agree that by foregoing a sequential referral, the Committee on       
   Transportation and Infrastructure is not waiving its jurisdiction.      
   Further, as you requested, this exchange of letters will be included in 
   the Committee report on the bill.                                       
   Thank you for your cooperation in this matter.                          

   Sincerely,                                                              

         Floyd D. Spence,  Chairman.                                            

                                                                                 

       House of Representatives,                                               

       Committee on Resources,                                                 

       Washington, DC, May 12, 2000.                                           



          Hon.  Floyd Spence,            Chairman, Committee on Armed Services, House of Representatives, Washington, DC.

       Dear Mr. Chairman: Thank you for an opportunity to review the text  
   of H.R. 4205, the Floyd D. Spence National Defense Authorization Act for
   Fiscal Year 2001, for provisions which are within the jurisdiction of   
   the Committee on Resources. These provisions include those dealing with 
   oceanography, environmental review, benefits for the National Oceanic   
   and Atmospheric Administration Corps, historic preservation, public     
   lands, and territories of the United States.                            
      Because of the continued cooperation and consideration you have      
   afforded me and my staff in developing these provisions, I will not seek
   a sequential referral of H.R. 4205 based on their inclusion in the bill.
   Of course, this waiver does not prejudice any future jurisdictional     
   claims over these provisions or similar language. I also reserve the    
   right to seek to have conferees named from the Committee on Resources on
   these provisions, should a conference on H.R. 4205 or a similar measure 
   become necessary.                                                       
      Once again, it has been a pleasure to work with you and Phil Grone of
   your staff. I look forward to seeing H.R. 4205 enacted soon as a very   
   suitable monument to your years of distinguished service as Chairman of 
   the Committee on Armed Services.                                        
   Sincerely,                                                              

         Don Young,  Chairman.                                                  

                                                                                 

       House of Representatives,                                               

       Committee on International Relations,                                   

       Washington, DC, May 12, 2000.                                           



          Hon.  Floyd Spence,            Chairman, Committee on Armed Services, House of Representatives, Washington, DC.

       Dear Mr. Chairman: I understand that on Wednesday, May 10, 2000, the
   Committee on Armed Services ordered favorably reported H.R. 4250, the   
   National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2001. The bill       
   includes a number of provisions that fall within the legislative        
   jurisdiction of the Committee on International Relations pursuant to    
   Rule X(k) of the House of Representatives.                              
      The specific provisions within our committee's jurisdiction are: (1) 
   Section 232, Sense of Congress concerning commitment to deployment of   
   National Missile Defense system; (2) Section 233, Reports on ballistic  
   missile threat posed by North Korea; (3) Section 908, Defense Institute 
   for Hemispheric Security Cooperation; (4) Section 1201, Support of      
   United Nations-sponsored efforts to inspect and monitor Iraqi weapons   
   activities; (5) Section 1203, Situation in the Balkans; and (6) Title   
   XIII, Cooperative Threat Reduction with States of the Former Soviet     
   Union.                                                                  
      With respect to Section 1204, Limitation on number of military       
   personnel in Colombia, it is my understanding that the Parliamentarians 
   continue to review our jurisdictional claim on this provision. Because  
   of our Committee's strong interest in this provision, which we believe  
   is at the heart of our Committee's jurisdiction regarding decisions     
   governing intervention abroad, we will continue to seek jurisdiction    
   over this provision as we move toward conference committee on H.R. 4250.
      Pursuant to Chairman Dreier's announcement that the Committee on     
   Rules will move expeditiously to consider a rule for H.R. 4250 and your 
   desire to have the bill considered on the House floor next week, the    
   Committee on International Relations will not seek a sequential referral
   of the bill as a result of including these provisions, without waiving  
   or ceding now or in the future this committee's jurisdiction over the   
   provisions in question. I will seek to have conferees appointed for     
   these provisions during any House-Senate conference committee.          
   Sincerely,                                                              

         Benjamin A. Gilman,  Chairman.                                         

                                                                                 

       House of Representatives,                                               

       Committee on Ways and Means,                                            

       Washington, DC, May 9, 2000.                                            




          Hon.  Floyd Spence,            Chairman, Committee on Armed Services, House of Representatives, Washington, DC.

       Dear Mr. Chairman: I am writing concerning H.R. 4025, the ``National
   Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2001,'' which contains several
   items of jurisdictional interest to the Committee on Ways and Means.    
      Specifically, draft section 651, ``participation in the Thrift       
   Savings Plan,'' would permit the military to participate in the Thrift  
   Savings Plan. I understand that the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) is
   expected to score secondary revenue losses of approximately $321 million
   over 5 years due to this provision. Normally, the Committee on Ways and 
   Means would have a budgetary interest in such legislation. However, I am
   informed that the statement of managers to accompany the Conference     
   Report for H. Con. Res. 290, the Concurrent Resolution on the Budget for
   Fiscal Year 2001 states that ``the revenue levels in the Conference     
   Agreement would accommodate the revenue effects from legislation that   
   would permit members of the Armed Forces to participate in the Thrift   
   Savings Plan.''                                                         
      Draft section 724 would directly amend the Medicare law contained in 
   Title XVIII of the Social Security Act to extend the Tricare Senior     
   Prime Demonstration Project for an additional three years.              
      Finally, a new draft section would authorize, in consultation with   
   the Commissioner of Customs, a report on the Tethered Aerostat Radar    
   System, used, in part, by the Customs Service to conduct counter-drug   
   detection and interdiction.                                             
      Normally, the Committee on Ways and Means would meet to consider such
   legislation. However, in order to expedite consideration of H.R. 4205, I
   will not object to the inclusion of these items, and, for this reason,  
   it will not be necessary for the Committee on Ways and Means to meet to 
   consider the legislation.                                               
      However, this is only being done with the clear understanding that   
   you have agreed to accept no additional changes on these or any other   
   matters of concern to this Committee during further consideration of    
   this legislation, including during consideration on the House floor and 
   during a conference with the Senate. Finally, this action is being done 
   with the understanding that it will not prejudice the jurisdictional    
   prerogatives of the Committee on Ways and Means on these provisions or  
   any other similar legislation and will not be considered as precedent   
   for consideration of matters of jurisdictional interest to my Committee 
   in the future.                                                          
      Finally, I would ask that you include a copy of our exchange of      
   letters on this matter in your Committee Report on the legislation.     
   Thank you for your assistance and cooperation in this matter. With best 
   personal regards,                                                       
   Sincerely,                                                              

         Bill Archer,  Chairman.                                                

                                                                                 

       House of Representatives,                                               

       Committee on Commerce,                                                  

       Washington, DC, May 12, 2000.                                           



          Hon.  Floyd Spence,            Chairman, Committee on Armed Services, House of Representatives, Washington, DC.

       Dear Mr. Chairman: On May 10, 2000, the Committee on Armed Services 
   ordered reported H.R. 4205, the Floyd D. Spence National Defense        
   Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2001. H.R. 4205, as ordered reported  
   by the Committee on Armed Services, contains a number of provisions     
   within the jurisdiction of the Committee on Commerce. They include:     
       Section 601, relating to the compensation of uniformed officers of  
   the Public Health Service;                                              
    Section 723, relating to Medicare subvention;                          

    Section 724, extending a pilot program;                                

    Section 725, extending a pilot program;                                

    Section 736, relating to biomedical research; and,                     

       Title XIV, creating a commission to study issues related to         
   electromagnetic pulse.                                                  
      Because of the importance of this matter, I recognize your desire to 
   bring this legislation before the House in an expeditious manner and    
   will waive consideration of the bill by the Commerce Committee. By      
   agreeing to waive its consideration of the bill, the Commerce Committee 
   does not waive its jurisdiction over H.R. 4205. In addition, the        
   Committee on Commerce reserves its authority to seek conferees on any   
   provisions of the bill that are within the Commerce Committee's         
   jurisdiction during any House-Senate conference that may be convened on 
   this legislation. I ask for your commitment to support any request by   
   the Committee on Commerce for conferees on H.R. 4205 or related         
   legislation.                                                            
      I request that you include this letter as a part of your committee's 
   report on H.R. 4205 and as part of the Record during consideration of   
   the legislation on the House floor.                                     
   Thank you for your attention to these matters.                          

   Sincerely,                                                              

         Tom Bliley,  Chairman.                                                 


           FISCAL DATA                                                            

      Pursuant to clause 3(d) Rule XIII of the Rules of the House of       
   Representatives, the committee attempted to ascertain annual outlays    
   resulting from the bill during fiscal year 2001 and the following four  
   years. The results of such efforts are reflected in the cost estimate   
   prepared by the Director of the Congressional Budget Office under       
   section 402 of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974, which is included  
   in this report pursuant to clause 3(c)(3)                               
                            CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET OFFICE ESTIMATE                  

      In compliance with clause 3(c)(3) of rule XIII of the House of       
   Representatives, the cost estimate prepared by the Congressional Budget 
   Office and submitted pursuant to section 402 of the Congressional Budget
   Act of 1974 is as follows:                                              

         May 12, 2000.                                                          



          Hon.  Floyd Spence,            Chairman, Committee on Armed Services, House of Representatives, Washington, DC. 

       Dear Mr. Chairman: The Congressional Budget Office has prepared the 
   enclosed cost estimate for H.R. 4205, the National Defense Authorization
   Act for Fiscal Year 2001.                                               
      The CBO staff contact is Kent Christensen, who can be reached at 226 
   2840. If you wish further details on this estimate, we will be pleased  
   to provide them.                                                        
   Sincerely,                                                              

         Dan L. Crippen.                                                        


                         CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET OFFICE COST ESTIMATE                

      Summary: H.R. 4205 would authorize appropriations totaling $310      
   billion for fiscal year 2001 and an estimated $9 billion for 2000 for   
   the military functions of the Department of Defense (DoD) and the       
   Department of Energy. It also would prescribe personnel strengths for   
   each active duty and selected reserve component of the U.S. armed       
   forces. CBO estimates that appropriation of the authorized amounts for  
   2000 and 2001 would result in additional outlays of $313 billion over   
   the 2000 2005 period. In addition, the bill contains provisions that    
   would raise the costs of discretionary defense programs over the 2002   
   2005 period by about $8 billion, assuming appropriation of the necessary
   sums.                                                                   
      The bill contains provisions that would affect direct spending,      
   primarily through demonstration projects in the defense health program. 
   We estimate that the direct spending resulting from provisions of H.R.  
   4205 would total about $165 million over the 2001 2005 period and $151  
   million over the 2001 2010 period. The bill would reduce revenues by    
   about $380 million over the 2001 2005 period and $1.1 billion over the  
   2001 2010 period as the result of a provision that would allow military 
   personnel to participate in the Thrift Savings Plan (TSP). Because it   
   would affect direct spending and receipts, the bill would be subject to 
   pay-as-you-go procedures.                                               
      The bill contains private-sector and intergovernmental mandates;     
   however, the costs of those mandates would not exceed the thresholds    
   specified in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA).                   
      Estimated cost to the Federal Government: The estimated budgetary    
   impact of H.R. 4205 is shown in Table 1.                                

   TABLE 1.--BUDGETARY IMPACT OF H.R. 4205 AS ORDERED REPORTED BY THE HOUSE COMMITTEE ON ARMED SERVICES  
                                 [By fiscal year, in millions of dollars]                                

                                                          2000        2001       2002       2003      2004      2005  

    SPENDING SUBJECT TO APPROPRIATION                                                                                     
Spending Under Current Law for Defense Programs:       289,218           0          0          0         0         0  
Proposed Changes:                                                                                                     
 Authorization of Supplemental Appropriations:                                                                         
Estimated Authorization Level\2\                         9,205           0          0          0         0         0  
Estimated Outlays\2\                                     6,953         136      1,470        453       134        28  
 Authorization of Regular Appropriations:                                                                              
Authorization Level                                          0     310,182          0          0         0         0  
Estimated Outlays                                            0     199,797     65,795     24,055     9,210     4,525  
 Subtotal-Proposed Changes:                                                                                            
Estimated Authorization Level                            9,205     310,182          0          0         0         0  
Estimated Outlays                                        6,953     199,933     67,265     24,508     9,344     4,553  
Spending Under H.R. 4205 for Defense Programs:         298,423     310,182          0          0         0         0  
    CHANGES IN DIRECT SPENDING                                                                                            
Estimated Budget Authority                                   0          27         39         83        21        -5  
Estimated Outlays                                            0          27         39         83        21        -5  
    CHANGES IN REVENUES                                                                                                   
Change in Income Tax Receipts                                0         -10        -61        -82      -105      -125  

\1\The 2000 level is the amount appropriated for programs authorized by the bill.                                                                                                                                                                                                                                       
\2\The amounts shown here for the 2000 supplemental are the total amounts in the 2000 Emergency Supplemental Appropriations Act as passed by the House. The outlay estimate includes $4,897 million designated as emergency funding. Excluding emergency funds would lower total outlays in 2001 to $294,314 million.   
Note.--Costs of the bill would fall within budget function 050 (national defense), except for certain items noted in the text.                                                                                                                                                                                          

           Authorizations of Appropriations                                        

      The bill would authorize specific appropriations totaling $310       
   billion in 2001 (see Table 2) and such sums as may be necessary for     
   supplemental appropriations in 2000. It would also authorize certain    
   payments, which are due to be made in fiscal year 2001, to be paid      
   instead in 2000. Most of those costs would fall within budget function  
   050 (national defense). H.R. 4205 would also authorize appropriations of
   $94 million for the Maritime Administration (function 400) and $70      
   million for the Armed Forces Retirement Home (function 700).            
      The estimate assumes that the amounts authorized for 2001 will be    
   appropriated by October 1, 2000, and that the authorization of          
   supplemental appropriations would amount to $9 billion, the amount of   
   funding passed by the House in the 2000 Emergency Supplemental          
   Appropriations Act. (All but $167 million of the supplemental funding is
   designated as an emergency.) Outlays are estimated based on historical  
   spending patterns.                                                      
      The bill also contains provisions that would affect various costs,   
   mostly for personnel, that would be covered by the fiscal year 2001     
   authorization and by authorizations in future years. Table 3 contains   
   estimates of those amounts. In addition to the costs covered by the     
   authorizations in the bill for 2001, these provisions would raise       
   estimated costs by $8 billion over the 2002 2005 period. The following  
   sections describe the provisions identified in Table 3 and provide      
   information about CBO's cost estimates.                                 
      Multiyear Procurement Programs. In most cases, purchases of weapon   
   systems are authorized annually, and as a result, DoD negotiates a      
   separate contract for each annual purchase. In a small number of cases, 
   the law permits multiyear procurement; that is, it allows DoD to enter  
   into a contract to buy specified annual quantities of a system for up to
   five years. In those cases, DoD can negotiate lower prices because its  
   commitment to purchase the weapons gives the contractor an incentive to 
   find more economical ways to manufacture the weapon, including          
   cost-saving investments. Funding would continue to be provided on an    
   annual basis for these multiyear contracts, but potential termination   
   costs would be covered by an initial appropriation.                     
      H.R. 4205 would authorize DoD to enter into new multiyear contracts  
   for three weapons systems: Blackhawk (UH 60L) helicopters, Knighthawk   
   (CH 60S) helicopters, and Bradley fighting vehicles. The Blackhawk and  
   Knighthawk helicopters would be purchased under one contract            
   administered by the Army and covering five years of production beginning
   in 2002. The contract for the Bradley fighting vehicles would cover     
   three years starting in 2001. H.R. 4205 would also extend the           
   authorization of multiyear procurement of the Arleigh Burke class       
   destroyer by two years through 2005.                                    


  TABLE 2.--SPECIFIC AUTHORIZATIONS IN THE NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2001 AS ORDERED REPORTED BY THE HOUSE COMMITTEE ON ARMED SERVICES  
                                                             [By fiscal year, in millions of dollars]                                                            

Category                                              2001     2002     2003     2004     2005  

Military Personnel:                                 75,802        0        0        0        0  
Operation and Maintenance:                         109,709        0        0        0        0  
Procurement:                                        62,300        0        0        0        0  
Research, Development, Test, and Evaluation:        39,309        0        0        0        0  
Military Construction and Family Housing:            8,434        0        0        0        0  
Atomic Energy Defense Activities:                   12,888        0        0        0        0  
Other Accounts:                                      1,667        0        0        0        0  
General Transfer Authority:                              0        0        0        0        0  
Total:                                             310,109        0        0        0        0  


  TABLE 3.--ESTIMATED AUTHORIZATIONS OF APPROPRIATIONS FOR SELECTED PROVISIONS IN H.R. 4205 AS ORDERED REPORTED  
                                     [By fiscal year, in millions of dollars]                                    

Category                                2001      2002      2003      2004      2005  

Multiyear Procurement:                     0       -12        -9       -20       -45  
Military Endstrengths:                  -113      -233      -241      -249      -257  
Compensation and Benefits (DOD):         358       257       136       105        71  
Military Health Care:                     94       320       481       536       595  
Other Provisions:                         90        90        90        90        90  
Bill Total:                            1,234     1,555     1,949     2,177     2,680  

Notes:--For every item in this table except one, the 2001 impacts are included in the amounts specifically authorized to be appropriated in the bill. Those amounts are shown in Table 2. Only the authorization of endstrength for the Coast Guard Reserve is additive to the amounts in Table 2.   


      CBO estimates that savings from buying the Blackhawk and Knighthawk  
   helicopters under a multiyear contract would total $86 million or an    
   average of about $22 million a year over the 2002 2005 period. Funding  
   requirements would total just under $2.2 billion instead of the almost  
   $2.3 billion needed under annual contracts. Similarly, CBO estimates    
   that the Army would save $79 million, or about $26 million a year,      
   through 2003 under a multiyear contract for Bradley fighting vehicles,  
   which would cost about $0.9 billion over that period under current law. 
   CBO estimates that extending the Arleigh Burke destroyer multiyear      
   contract would save the Navy an additional $132 million between 2001 and
   2005. Those estimates are based on actual savings from multiyear        
   procurement of similar systems and the assumption that annual production
   will be at the levels planned by the Administration for each of these   
   programs.                                                               
      Endstrength. The bill would authorize active and reserve endstrengths
   for 2001 and would lower the minimum endstrength authorization in       
   permanent law. The authorized endstrengths for active-duty personnel and
   personnel in the selected reserve would total about 1,382,000 and       
   866,000, respectively. The bill would specifically authorize            
   appropriations of $75.8 billion for military pay and allowances in 2001.
   The reduction in authorized personnel would decrease costs for salaries 
   and other expenses by $113 million in the first year and about $250     
   million annually in subsequent years, compared to the authorized        
   strengths for 2000.                                                     
      Also, the bill would authorize an endstrength of 8,000 in 2001 for   
   the Coast Guard Reserve. This authorization would cost about $73 million
   and would fall under budget function 400, transportation.               
      Section 414 would change the grade structure of active duty personnel
   in support of the reserves. This change would not increase the overall  
   strength, but would result in more promotions. The provision would cost 
   $11 million in 2001 and about $25 million a year in subsequent years.   
      Compensation and Benefits. H.R. 4205 contains several provisions that
   would affect military compensation and benefits.                        
       Pay Raises. Section 601 would raise basic pay by 3.7 percent at a   
   total cost of about $1.5 billion in 2001. Because this pay raise would  
   be the same as the one projected under current law and assumed in its   
   baseline projections, CBO estimates no incremental costs.               
       Expiring Bonuses and Allowances. Several sections would extend for  
   one year DoD's authority to pay certain bonuses and allowances to       
   current personnel. Under current law, these authorities are scheduled to
   expire in December 2000, or three months into fiscal year 2001. The bill
   would extend most of those authorities through December 2001. CBO       
   estimates that the cost of these extensions would be as follows:        
      Payment of reenlistment bonuses for active duty personnel would cost 
   $193 million in 2001 and $111 million in 2002; enlistment bonuses for   
   active duty personnel would cost $65 million in 2001 and $29 million in 
   2002. (The bill would extend the authority to pay enlistment bonuses    
   only through September 2001);                                           
      Various bonuses for the Selected and Ready Reserve would cost $48    
   million in 2001 and $55 million in 2002;                                
      Special payments for aviators and nuclear-qualified personnel would  
   cost $44 million in 2001 and $47 million in 2002; and                   
      Authorities to make special payments to nurse officer candidates,    
   registered nurses, and nurse anesthetists would cost $8 million in 2001 
   and $3 million in 2002.                                                 
      Extension of other authorities, including temporary early retirement 
   authority, special separation benefit, voluntary separation incentive,  
   and certain other contingent benefits would cost $12 million in 2002.   
   (The bill would extend the authorities for three months past their      
   current expiration date of October 1, 2001.)                            
      Most of these changes would result in additional, smaller costs in   
   subsequent years because payments are made in installments.             
       Increases in Special Pays and Bonuses. Sections 616 through 618     
   would revise certain eligibility criteria and pay for personnel with    
   special skills. Those provisions would raise maximum pay rates for      
   servicemembers performing career sea duty and certain enlisted personnel
   performing special duty, including recruiters. In addition, the bill    
   would establish a common enlistment bonus among the services for certain
   personnel on active duty, by ending the separate authority for the Army 
   and by revising the existing department-wide enlistment bonus. Under    
   section 618, the minimum enlistment period for enlistment bonuses would 
   decrease from four to two years and the critical skill requirement would
   be eliminated. Authority to pay the enlistment bonuses would expire     
   December 31, 2001. These changes would have no cost in 2001 and cost    
   $216 million in 2002, when the changes would become effective. Costs in 
   subsequent years would total about $200 million annually.               
       Housing Allowances. Several sections would increase housing         
   allowances for servicemembers within the United States. The combination 
   of these provisions would cost $315 million in 2001 and $4.8 billion    
   over the 2001 2005 period.                                              
      Section 604 would revise the calculation of Basic Allowance for      
   Housing (BAH) within the United States by no longer requiring that      
   housing allowances be limited to 85 percent of the cost of adequate     
   housing in the United States. DoD plans to gradually increase BAH over 5
   years to reach 100 percent of that cost by 2005. Based on that plan, CBO
   estimates that higher BAH payments would cost $274 million in 2001 and  
   $4.4 billion over the 2001 2005 period.                                 
      Section 605 would revise the basis of BAH for enlisted members with  
   dependents in pay grades E 1 through E 4. BAH rates for enlisted members
   in these grades are currently based on the cost of a two-bedroom        
   apartment. Section 605 would increase the minimum housing standard to   
   the amount halfway between the current standard and the cost of a       
   two-bedroom townhouse. This change would be effective July 1, 2001. CBO 
   estimates that increasing the minimum housing standard for these        
   enlisted members would cost $10 million in 2001 and $188 million over   
   the 2001 2005 period.                                                   
      Section 606 would allow the Secretary of Defense to pay BAH to       
   certain enlisted members without dependents in pay grade E 4, who are   
   assigned to sea duty and who sleep aboard ship when it is in port and   
   quarters on base are unavailable. Based on the Navy's plan to implement 
   this authority, and an effective date of October 1, 2001, CBO estimates 
   that paying BAH to these enlisted members would cost $45 million        
   starting in 2002 and total $186 million over the 2002 2005 period.      
      Section 610 would earmark $30 million of the amount authorized to be 
   appropriated in 2001 for military pay and allowances to further increase
   BAH within the United States.                                           
       Subsistence Allowances. Sections 602, 603, and 609 would increase   
   subsistence allowances for certain active-duty servicemembers and       
   officers prior to being commissioned. CBO estimates that enactment of   
   these provisions would cost $5 million in 2001 and $579 million over the
   2001 2005 period.                                                       
      Compared to current law, section 602 would allow a speedier          
   elimination of the gap between the Basic Allowance for Subsistence (BAS)
   paid to enlisted members who eat off-base and the value of subsistence  
   provided to enlisted members who eat in DoD dining facilities. Current  
   law limits the annual growth of regular BAS to 1 percent and allows for 
   a partial                                                               

                    allowance to be paid to those receiving an in-kind benefit.   
          Because the partial allowance grows at a faster rate, the gap between   
          the total benefits would eventually close. CBO estimates that the cost  
          to equalize payments to both groups in 2001 and eliminate the 1 percent 
          growth cap would be $35 million in 2002 and would grow to $166 million  
          by 2005.                                                                
      Section 603 would authorize the Secretary of Defense to provide a new
   allowance, through fiscal year 2006, for servicemembers who meet certain
   eligibility criteria of the Food Stamp program. CBO estimates that, if  
   the Secretary chooses to offer it, this allowance would increase        
   personnel costs by $5 million in fiscal year 2001 and by a total of $59 
   million over the 2001 2005 period.                                      
      To receive the allowance, a servicemember would apply to DoD,        
   providing proof that his or her household income meets the gross income 
   test for the Food Stamp program. The value of the allowance would be the
   amount needed to make the household ineligible for food stamps, up to a 
   maximum of $500 per month. In determining eligibility and the size of   
   the allowance, DoD would count the value of all housing assistance as   
   income, even if that assistance is delivered in-kind.                   
      Under current law, CBO estimates that about 5,500 servicemembers will
   participate in the Food Stamp program in 2001. This estimate is based on
   a recent DoD survey of servicemembers receiving food stamps, adjusted   
   for projected pay raises. Not all of these Food Stamp participants would
   be eligible for the new allowance when the value of in-kind housing is  
   counted as income. Using data on the distribution of servicemembers by  
   pay grade and family size, CBO expects that about 3,300 current Food    
   Stamp recipients would be eligible for the allowance and that another   
   800 servicemembers would apply, at an average household cost of $315 per
   month. CBO assumes that the allowance would be available beginning April
   1, 2001, and participation would phase in over the remainder of the     
   fiscal year. Once the allowance is fully phased in, the costs are       
   projected to decrease each year as fewer servicemembers would be        
   eligible for the allowance. The number of eligible members would decline
   because pay rates are projected to rise faster than the poverty         
   threshold used to determine Food Stamp eligibility.                     
      If this allowance is instituted, it would make an estimated 1,100    
   servicemembers ineligible for food stamps and reduce costs of the Food  
   Stamp program by an estimated $22 million over the 2001 2005 period.    
   Because the decision to provide the allowance would depend, in part, on 
   future appropriation action, CBO has not shown direct spending savings  
   for this provision.                                                     
      Section 609 would increase the subsistence allowance paid to members 
   in precommissioning programs, effective October 1, 2001. These members  
   currently receive a monthly allowance of $200. Section 609 would        
   establish a minimum monthly rate of $250 and allow the Secretary of     
   Defense to pay as much as $600. CBO estimates that this increase would  
   cost $12 million in 2002 and $50 million by 2005, when the allowance    
   would approach the $600 limit.                                          
       Travel and Transportation Allowances. Section 632 would allow the   
   Secretary of Defense to reimburse members who change duty stations for  
   the fees of mandatory pet quarantine, but limit the compensation amount 
   to $275 per change. CBO estimates that these payments would cost $1     
   million a year. Section 633 would increase dislocation allowances for   
   enlisted members with dependents in pay grades E 1 through E 4 by       
   requiring that the Secretary of Defense not differentiate between grades
   E 1 through E 5 when determining dislocation allowances for enlisted    
   members with dependents. CBO estimates that paying the resulting higher 
   dislocation allowances would cost $6 million in 2001 and $33 million    
   over the 2001 2005 period. Under section 634, the Secretary could       
   reimburse recruiters and other military and civilian employees assigned 
   to certain duties for parking expenses. CBO estimates that that the cost
   of paying these parking fees would be $41 million in 2001 and $210      
   million over the 2001 2005 period.                                      
       Involuntary Separation Pay. Section 517 would reclassify as         
   involuntary the discharges of reserve officers who are twice passed over
   for promotion. This would allow these members to receive involuntary    
   separation pay. Based on information from DoD, CBO estimates that       
   approximately 550 reserve officers a year would become eligible for     
   separation pay under this provision. CBO estimates that enactment of    
   section 517 would cost $30 million in 2001 and $162 million over the    
   2001 2005 period.                                                       
       New Retention Bonus for Critical Skills. Section 619 would authorize
   a new retention bonus for military personnel with critical skills who   
   extend their period of duty by at least one additional year. This new   
   bonus could be paid in addition to the current selected reenlistment    
   bonus available to certain enlisted members and certain other           
   compensation provided to officers. The authority to offer this bonus    
   would expire on December 31, 2001. CBO estimates that this new retention
   bonus would cost $12 million in 2001. Smaller costs would be incurred in
   subsequent years because payments are made in installments.             
       TSP Contributions. Under section 651, the Secretary of Defense could
   make contributions to the Thrift Savings Plan (TSP) for military        
   personnel in designated occupational specialties who commit to serve on 
   active duty in that specialty for a period of six years. Based on DoD's 
   use of similar authority to award bonuses for enlistment or             
   reenlistment, CBO estimates that the discretionary costs for the agency 
   contributions to TSP would total $1 million in 2001 and $26 million by  
   2005, based on an effective date of July 15, 2001.                      
       Other Compensation Provisions. Section 641 would raise reserve      
   retirement pay by increasing the number of days that can be counted in  
   the retirement pay calculation. The military retirement system is       
   financed in part by an annual payment from appropriated funds to the    
   military retirement trust fund, based on an estimate of the system's    
   accruing liabilities. If the bill is enacted, the yearly contribution to
   the military retirement trust fund (a DoD outlay in budget function 050)
   would increase to reflect the added liability from the increase in      
   retirement pay. The payment into the trust fund is discretionary because
   it depends on whether and how much funding is made available each year  
   for military personnel. Using information from DoD, CBO estimates that  
   implementing this bill would increase such payments by $4 million in    
   2001, $23 million over the 2001 2005 period, and $50 million over the   
   2001 2010 period, subject to appropriation of the necessary amounts.    
   This provision would also increase outlays from the retirement trust    
   fund. Those costs are discussed under the heading of direct spending.   
      CBO estimates that increases in allowances paid to officers for      
   purchasing uniforms and equipment would cost $5 million a year under    
   section 608.                                                            
      Military Health Care. Title VII contains several provisions that     
   would affect DoD health care and benefits. Tricare is the name of DoD's 
   three-part health care program: Tricare Prime is a managed care option; 
   Tricare Extra is a preferred provider program; and Tricare Standard is a
   fee-for-service program of other participating providers.               
       Tricare Pharmacy Benefit. Section 721 would allow military          
   beneficiaries age 65 and over to use DoD's National Mail Order Pharmacy 
   (NMOP) and retail networks, and would allow Tricare to pay 75 percent of
   all pharmacy claims after each beneficiary meets an annual $150         
   deductible. CBO estimates that this provision would affect about 360,000
   individuals who do not currently use DoD for pharmacy benefits, and     
   about 450,000 beneficiaries who are                                     

                    eligible for the NMOP and retail networks but do not have     
          access to the Tricare insurance for reimbursement. Because the program  
          would not take effect until April 1, 2001, the cost in fiscal year 2001 
          is comparatively low. CBO estimates that providing the Tricare pharmacy 
          benefit to seniors would cost $94 million in 2001 and a little more than
          $2 billion over the 2001 2005 period.                                   
       Tricare Prime Remote. Under current law, members of the armed forces
   on active duty who live far enough away from a military treatment       
   facility (MTF) are eligible to participate in what DoD calls Tricare    
   Prime Remote. This program allows such personnel to receive care without
   facing the co-insurance and deductibles that they would otherwise face  
   if they used Tricare Standard. To implement the program, DoD either     
   establishes a network of providers for the active-duty personnel, or it 
   waives the copayments and deductibles when claims are filed under       
   Tricare Standard. In many cases, where the cost of setting up networks  
   is more costly than the cost of waiving such payments, DoD just waives  
   the deductibles and co-insurance.                                       
      Section 711 would grant the Tricare Prime Remote benefit to          
   dependents of members of the armed forces on active duty and to other   
   members of the uniformed services (e.g., uniformed members of the Public
   Health Service) and their dependents. Using data from DoD, CBO estimates
   that roughly 71,000 people in remote locations already use Tricare      
   Standard or Extra. DoD's only additional cost for those beneficiaries   
   would come from waiving the co-insurance and deductibles. CBO expects   
   that almost 4,000 people who do not currently use Tricare insurance     
   would enroll in Tricare Prime Remote under the bill because of the lower
   out-of-pocket costs. Those beneficiaries would cost DoD significantly   
   more per person. CBO estimates that establishing Tricare Prime Remote   
   for the 75,000 new beneficiaries would cost $50 million in 2001 and $268
   million over the 2001 2005 period.                                      
       Copayments Under Tricare Prime. Under current law, beneficiaries who
   use MTFs do not need to make any copayments, but beneficiaries enrolled 
   in Tricare Prime, the military health care system's managed care option,
   are required to make copayments whenever they visit a civilian doctor.  
   In 1999, dependents of active-duty personnel who are enrolled in Tricare
   Prime saw civilian doctors about 2.4 million times. Section 712 would   
   eliminate the requirement for those copayments. (Beneficiaries who use  
   Tricare Standard or Extra would still have to pay the applicable        
   co-insurance amounts for each civilian visit.)                          
      CBO estimates that this change would cost $38 million in 2001 and    
   $195 million over the 2001 2005 period. Reimbursing Tricare insurance   
   providers for lost revenue would compose about 70 percent of DoD's cost.
   The remaining 30 percent of the estimated cost results because the lack 
   of cost sharing would likely increase the number of visits to civilian  
   doctors.                                                                
       Reduction of Catastrophic Cap. Under current law, beneficiaries who 
   use Tricare Standard or Extra must pay deductibles and co-insurance up  
   to a cap of $7,500 each year. DoD is responsible for any costs over     
   $7,500. Section 718 would lower this cap from $7,500 to $3,000 per      
   family. CBO estimates that lowering the cap would cost $30 million in   
   2001 and $153 million over the 2001 2005 period. Using data from the    
   Medical Expense Panel Survey, conducted by the Department of Health and 
   Human Services, CBO estimates that about 3 percent of the population has
   out-of-pocket costs greater than $3,000. Applying this to the DoD       
   population that uses Tricare Standard or Extra yields roughly 14,000    
   people that would be affected by this provision. Assuming a uniform     
   distribution of expenditures across the range from the new cap ($3,000) 
   to the existing cap ($7,500), CBO estimates that DoD's costs would rise 
   by an average of just under $2,250 per person.                          
       Reimbursement for Travel Expenses. Under current law, when somebody 
   using the military health system is referred to a new doctor or         
   hospital, the costs of traveling to the new location are paid by the    
   individual. Section 717 would require the Secretary of Defense to       
   reimburse reasonable travel expenses for anybody who had to travel more 
   than 100 miles because of a medical referral. CBO estimates that this   
   provision would apply about 50,000 times each year and that in about    
   one-third of those cases, additional expenses would be incurred for     
   individuals who must accompany the patient. CBO also expects that       
   reimbursements would average about $650 per occurrence, although those  
   costs would rise with inflation. CBO estimates that implementing this   
   proposal would cost $15 million in 2001 and $137 million over the 2001  
   2005 period.                                                            
       Chiropractic Care. Section 737 would require DoD to continue        
   providing chiropractic care in 2001 at MTFs where such care is currently
   provided. The bill would require a five-year phase-in period beginning  
   in 2002 for DoD to provide chiropractic care to all members of the      
   uniformed services. The costs are initially low because of the phase-in 
   period. CBO estimates that the provision would cost $3 million in 2001  
   and $80 million over the 2001 2005 period.                              
       Patient Safety. Section 733 would require DoD to set up a           
   centralized process for tracking and reporting mistakes in the provision
   of health care that endangers patient safety. Simple reporting is part  
   of DoD's current effort to improve services, but more complex reporting 
   would likely require substantial investments in information technology. 
   Based on information from DoD, CBO estimates that this provision would  
   cost the department about $50 million over the 2001 2005 period,        
   primarily for the purchase of computer equipment and software support.  
       Other Health Care Provisions. Title VII also contains several       
   proposals that would cost relatively little over the 2001 2005 period,  
   including some temporary authorities and demonstration projects. CBO    
   estimates that implementing all of these additional health care         
   provisions would cost $7 million in 2001 and $34 million over the 2001  
   2005 period.                                                            
      The Congress authorized a demonstration program, called Tricare      
   Senior Supplement, at two sites during a period ending December 2002    
   where Tricare acts as second-payer to Medicare for those beneficiaries  
   who have enrolled in the program. Enrollment for the demonstration      
   program began in March of 2000. Enrollees must pay a fee and are no     
   longer eligible to use MTFs. Section 724 would extend the demonstration 
   program through the end of calendar year 2003. CBO estimates that this  
   provision would cost $5 million over the 2003 2004 period. Those costs  
   would be discretionary, but extending this demonstration program would  
   also raise Medicare costs because better insurance tends to increase the
   use of health care. CBO estimates that the Medicare costs of Tricare    
   Senior Supplement would be about $1 million over the 2003 2004 period.  
      Other health care provisions that would have discretionary budgetary 
   effects are as follows:                                                 
      Section 715 would prohibit Tricare insurers from requiring prior     
   authorization for specialty medical care if the provider of that        
   specialty care is part of the Tricare network. CBO estimates that this  
   provision would cost $5 million a year.                                 
      Section 701 would extend for two years the authority to employ       
   physicians on a contract basis under certain conditions, including at   
   entrance processing stations. CBO estimates that this provision would   
   save $6 million over the two years.                                     
      Section 702 would allow all recipients of the Medal of Honor and     
   their dependents to have access to the military health system and would 
   cost less than $500,000 a year.                                         

      Section 703 would allow DoD to pay for domiciliary and custodial care
   for certain Medicare-eligible beneficiaries. CBO estimates that the cost
   of this proposal would be less than $500,000 a year.                    
      Section 704 would authorize a two-year demonstration program allowing
   all DoD beneficiaries to use mental health facilities without the need  
   for prior authorization and supervision. CBO estimates that this would  
   cost $6 million over the two years.                                     
      Section 705 would authorize a two-year teleradiology demonstration   
   project. CBO estimates the cost would be $4 million, assuming that the  
   sites require new equipment.                                            
      Section 720 would allow beneficiaries enrolled in the Tricare retiree
   dental program to withdraw under special circumstances. CBO estimates   
   that this would cost less than $500,000 a year.                         
       Commissary Surcharge. Subtitle C of title III would make several    
   changes to laws governing DoD's commissaries, and CBO estimates that    
   their combined cost would be about $90 million a year. The commissary   
   system is supported through a mix of appropriated and nonappropriated   
   funding. One source of nonappropriated funds, a surcharge on grocery    
   bills, funds a combination of operating expenses and construction costs.
   The bill would limit DoD to using the collections from the surcharge for
   only construction or improvement of commissary stores. Funding from that
   source that now goes for other purposes would have to be made up with   
   discretionary appropriations. CBO estimates those costs to be about $90 
   million a year, based on information from DoD.                          
       Reductions in Defense Acquisition Workforce. The bill would limit   
   the size of the acquisition workforce by requiring a reduction of at    
   least 13,000 military and civilian personnel during fiscal year 2001.   
   Because the total number of military personnel is determined by         
   endstrength requirements, CBO assumes that the provision would lead to  
   their transfer to other activities rather than separation from the      
   services. Separations of civilian personnel, who comprise about 80      
   percent of the acquisition workforce, would account for the remaining   
   reductions. Because these civilian reductions would exceed those        
   expected under current law, CBO estimates savings of $7 million in 2001,
   $63 million in 2002, and similar amounts in subsequent years. Savings   
   would be relatively small during the first year because the cost of     
   separation payments would offset most of the initial savings in         
   salaries.                                                               
       Tuition Reimbursement for Civilians. Section 1103 would extend for  
   five years a program to reimburse certain civilians in the acquisition  
   workforce for tuition expenses. Based on recent funding levels for that 
   program, CBO estimates that section 1103 would cost about $6 million a  
   year starting in 2002.                                                  
       Military Housing Privatization Initiative (MHPI). Section 2803 would
   extend from 2001 to 2006 special authorities to finance the construction
   and renovation of military family housing. It would authorize DoD to    
   continue to use direct loans, loan guarantees, long-term leases, rental 
   guarantees, barter, direct government investment, and other financial   
   arrangements to encourage private-sector participation in building      
   military housing. Funding for those activities is contained in the      
   Family Housing Improvement Fund and would consist of direct             
   appropriations to the fund, transfers from other accounts, receipts from
   property sales and rents, returns on any capital, and other income from 
   operations or transactions connected with the program. The amounts in   
   the fund would be available to acquire housing using the various        
   techniques mentioned above, but the total value of budget authority for 
   all contracts and investments undertaken would be limited to $1 billion.
      The bill would not explicitly authorize appropriations for the fund, 
   and based on how the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has treated  
   recent use of the authority, CBO does not estimate any budgetary impact 
   from extending the authorities. However, CBO believes that OMB's current
   accounting for MHPI initiatives is at odds with government-wide         
   standards for recording obligations and outlays. Those standards call   
   for different treatments depending on the character of the transaction. 
   The OMB accounting treats certain initiatives primarily as matters of   
   credit reform that have relatively little cost in terms of recorded     
   obligations and outlays. In contrast, CBO considers those initiatives as
   having the characteristics of lease-purchases, which call for recording 
   higher levels of obligations and outlays. The budgetary effect of the   
   Administration's approach (compared to CBO's) is to allow DoD to        
   obligate significantly more federal resources than the $1 billion       
   allocated for such projects.                                            
       Government-wide Accounting Principles. Some of the options available
   for use of the Family Housing Improvement Fund involve up-front         
   commitments of government resources that would be spent over a long     
   period of time. According to standard principles of federal accounting, 
   obligations of the fund should reflect the full amount of the financial 
   liability incurred when the government makes such a commitment. In the  
   case of a long-term capital lease or rental guarantee, for example,     
   obligations should equal the total amount of lease or rental payments   
   over the life of the contract, and appropriations to cover the full     
   amount of such obligations should be available before entering into the 
   lease or guarantee. Some commitments could take the form of             
   lease-purchases, which would require the recording of both obligations  
   and outlays up front. For a direct loan or loan guarantee, obligations  
   should equal the estimated present value of federal transactions with   
   the public, excluding receipts from other federal budget accounts that  
   depend on the availability of future appropriations.                    
       Actual Accounting for Current DoD Projects. To date, DoD has signed 
   contracts for four projects and will soon finalize 12 others. The common
   thread among the projects so far is that regular appropriations directly
   finance only a small portion of the construction costs; most costs      
   initially are paid by developers, who borrow funds from private markets.
   The developers will repay the loans from the government and the private 
   sector using rent received from servicemembers who pay their housing    
   costs with their allowances, which are provided as part of              
   appropriations for military personnel. If rents exceed the              
   servicemembers' housing allowances, DoD can make up the difference. The 
   four projects underway are as follows:                                  
      Lackland Air Force Base (AFB), Texas: In exchange for the            
   construction of 420 housing units, the Air Force provided the contractor
   with a long-term lease of federal land, a direct loan of $11 million,   
   and a guarantee of a private-sector loan ($30 million) against base     
   closure, downsizing, and substantial redeployment of units based at     
   Lackland. The Administration recorded an obligation of $6 million for   
   the transaction.                                                        
      Fort Carson, Colorado: For construction of 840 units and renovation  
   of 1,800 others, the Army provided a long-term lease of federal land,   
   title to existing housing, and a $220 million loan guarantee against    
   base closure, downsizing, and substantial redeployment. The             
   Administration recorded an obligation of $10 million for the            
   transaction.                                                            
      Naval Station Everett, Washington: For construction of 185 units and 
   a share of proceeds and equity, the Navy provided an equity investment  
   of $6 million and funds the difference between the rent and the member's
   housing allowance. Occupants have the right to purchase the units at    
   below-market prices during the last five years of the 10-year           
   partnership. The recorded obligation totaled $9 million from the equity 
   investment ($6 million) and the differential lease payments ($3         
   million).                                                               

      Corpus Christi, Texas: In exchange for 404 units of off-base housing 
   and a share of proceeds and equity, the Navy provided an equity         
   investment of $10 million and funds the difference between the rent and 
   the member's housing allowance. The recorded obligation amounted to $19 
   million from the equity investment ($10 million) and the differential   
   lease payments ($9 million).                                            
      Thus, for these four projects DoD obtained about $320 million worth  
   of housing at the expense of $44 million in obligational authority.     
       MHPI Under Government-wide Accounting Principles. The principles    
   guiding the accounting for programs like the MHPI are defined in the    
   conference report to the Balanced Budget Act of 1997 (H. Rept. 105 217, 
   pages 1007 1012). CBO believes that the four listed projects meet the   
   criteria stated in the scorekeeping guidelines for a lease-purchase with
   substantial government risk. Although current MHPI projects employ tools
   like direct loans, they are more fundamentally projects that achieve the
   practical effects of government ownership of the properties. Thus,      
   up-front scoring of obligations and outlays is more appropriate than the
   methods of credit reform.                                               
      In CBO's view, those guidelines require the up-front accounting of   
   obligations and outlays for those four projects and for other similar   
   projects this bill would make possible. First, the construction is      
   occurring on federal land for at least two of the four projects. Second,
   the private-sector market for the housing will be sharply constrained.  
   On-base housing will probably be restricted to military personnel for   
   security and other such reasons. Off-base housing must first be offered 
   to servicemembers over civilians, and since demand for on-base housing  
   exceeds supply, the practical effect would likely be the same as for a  
   federally constructed facility. Third, although DoD is not providing an 
   open-ended guarantee of third-party financing, it is essentially        
   committing itself to providing tenants. Finally, DoD is providing the   
   developers with significant portions of their up-front equity, including
   direct loans and cash investments.                                      
      In sum, the lease-purchase criteria clearly apply to the two projects
   on government property (Lackland AFB and Fort Carson). The proper       
   treatment of the other two projects is less clear, but on balance, CBO  
   believes that they too are the equivalent of lease-purchases with       
   substantial government risk because the housing units will be built or  
   renovated for governmental purposes and would be based on a significant 
   financial commitment by the government. On that basis, the true         
   obligations and outlays from current projects are higher than were      
   recorded, as would be the obligations and outlays from future projects  
   if they are recorded the same way.                                      
      Table 4 shows how CBO believes these projects should be recorded in  
   the budget, compared to the approach used by the Administration.        

      TABLE 4.--ILLUSTRATIVE SCORING OF MHPI AUTHORITIES FOR FOUR PROJECTS      

                                            By Fiscal Year, in Millions of Dollars        

                                          2000     2001     2002     2003     2004     2005  

Administration Approach to Scoring:         44        0        0        0        0        0  
CBO Approach to Scoring:                   320        0        0        0        0        0  

SOURCE: Congressional Budget Office based on information from the Department of Defense.                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                   
Note: This table illustrates the approach that the Administration uses for recording obligations and outlays for four MHPI projects compared to the approach that CBO believes would be in keeping with government-wide accounting principles. The four projects are family housing initiatives at Lackland AFB, Ft. Carson, Naval Station Everett, and Corpus Christi. For illustrative purposes, we assume the obligations for the four projects occur in 2000 even though actual obligations occurred in other years.   

           Direct Spending                                                         

      The bill contains provisions that would affect direct spending       
   primarily through changes to defense health programs. We estimate that  
   the direct spending from provisions of H.R. 4205 would total about $165 
   million over the 2001 2005 period.                                      
       Demonstration of Medicare Subvention. DoD provides health care to   
   almost 350,000 retirees and survivors who are over age 64 and eligible  
   for Medicare. This health care is provided at MTFs on a space-available 
   basis and includes some services that Medicare does not cover, primarily
   prescription drugs. Under current law, DoD cannot bill Medicare for the 
   cost of providing health care to those beneficiaries over age 64 except 
   in a demonstration project.                                             
      The Congress authorized a demonstration project at up to six sites   
   beginning in January 1998 and ending in December 2000. Under that       
   demonstration, DoD provides care to Medicare-eligible beneficiaries and 
   is reimbursed under certain conditions by the Health Care Financing     
   Administration (HCFA), which administers Medicare. The most important   
   condition is the requirement that DoD maintain a level of effort; any   
   additional care is reimbursable by HCFA up to a cap set in law. This    
   care and reimbursement procedure is known as Medicare subvention. To    
   date, however, HCFA has not reimbursed DoD for any care provided under  
   this program.                                                           
      Section 725 would extend the demonstration project for three more    
   years, through the end of 2003. In the current demonstration project,   
   enrolled beneficiaries use substantially more care than civilians       
   enrolled in Medicare managed care plans. Because these enrollees have a 
   high priority for care in MTFs, Medicare-eligible beneficiaries who now 
   receive space-available care at MTFs and choose not to enroll in the    
   subvention program would not be able to use the MTFs as frequently as   
   they otherwise would. Instead, they would obtain more of their care in  
   the private sector, thus raising costs for the Medicare program because 
   Medicare would be paying for some services that would otherwise be      
   provided at MTFs. CBO estimates that these provisions would cost $20    
   million in 2001 and $95 million over the 2001 2005 period (see Table 5).
       FEHB Demonstration Program. Under current law, military retirees    
   under the age of 65 are eligible to either enroll in DoD's managed care 
   program (Tricare Prime) or use one of its insurance programs (Tricare   
   Standard or Extra). Those who use Tricare Standard or Extra may also    
   seek care at an MTF on a space-available basis. Once retirees turn age  
   65, they are no longer eligible to use Tricare, though they may continue
   to seek care at an MTF when space is available. The same eligibility    
   rules apply to survivors, who are primarily widows and widowers.        
      Section 723 would extend a current demonstration project by three    
   years (through December 2005), increase the number of eligible sites,   
   and allow new or extended enrollment in all sites. The demonstration    
   allows up to 66,000 people to enroll in FEHB at up to 10 sites, though  
   only about 2,000 people are currently enrolled. Because there would be  
   more sites and increased familiarity with the program, CBO estimates    
   that the program would eventually cover a total of about 13,000         
   people--10,000 in existing sites and 3,000 in new sites under H.R. 4205.
   Expanding coverage to new sites would cost $18 million over 2001 and    
   2002, and extending the demonstration project for one more year would   
   cost an additional $63 million over the 2003 2005 period. The           
   government's contribution toward FEHB premiums for beneficiaries under  
   H.R. 4205 would be direct spending because the bill would add an        
   entitlement benefit.                                                    


                       TABLE 5.--ESTIMATED DIRECT SPENDING FROM HEALTH CARE PROVISIONS IN H.R. 4205                      

                                                                           By Fiscal Year, in Millions of Dollars--                

                                                                    2000        2001        2002        2003        2004        2005  

   DIRECT SPENDING                                                                                                                       
    Cost Increases in Medicare                                                                                                           
Spending Under Current Law:                                      195,113     211,518     217,077     234,887     250,997     274,149  
Proposed Changes:                                                                                                                     
 Medicare Subvention:                                                                                                                  
Estimated Budget Authority                                             0          20          30          35          10           0  
Estimated Outlays                                                      0          20          30          35          10           0  
 FEHB Demonstration Project:                                                                                                           
Estimated Budget Authority                                             0           1           1           4           1           0  
Estimated Outlays                                                      0           1           1           4           1           0  
 Tricare Senior Supplement:                                                                                                            
Estimated Budget Authority                                             0           0           0           1           0           0  
Estimated Outlays                                                      0           0           0           1           0           0  
                                                              ----------  ----------  ----------  ----------  ----------  ----------  
  Subtotal-Proposed Changes:                                                                                                            
 Estimated Budget Authority                                             0          21          31          40          11           0  
 Estimated Outlays                                                      0          21          31          40          11           0  
Spending Under H.R. 4205:                                        195,113     211,539     217,108     234,927     251,008     274,149  
   Costs of Premium Payments Under FEHB                                                                                                  
Spending Under Current Law:                                        5,012       5,456       5,906       6,352       6,826       7,338  
Proposed Changes:                                                      0           7          11          48          15           0  
Spending Under H.R. 4205:                                          5,012       5,463       5,917       6,400       6,841       7,338  
    Total Changes in Direct Spending--Health Care Provisions                                                                             
Estimated Budget Authority                                             0          28          42          88          26           0  
Estimated Outlays                                                      0          28          42          88          26           0  

      In addition, extending the demonstration would tend to raise Medicare
   costs because better insurance coverage often leads to greater use of   
   health care services. That increase would cost an estimated $7 million  
   over the 2001 2005 period.                                              
       Tricare Senior Supplement. This program involves Tricare Standard   
   and Extra in a demonstration project for retirees over age 64 and their 
   dependents. The costs to DoD for those programs are treated as          
   discretionary, but expanding them to cover beneficiaries of Medicare    
   would raise direct spending by $1 million in 2003 (and by less than     
   $500,000 in 2004). Other costs of Tricare Senior Supplement are         
   discussed above with other spending subject to appropriation.           
       Retirement of Reserve Technicians. The reserves employ a number of  
   civilian federal workers to perform administrative and maintenance      
   tasks. These employees, known as military technicians, are usually      
   required to be members of the reserve units for which they work. Under  
   current law, employees who lose their membership in the reserves and    
   were hired before February 10, 1996, have to retire as soon as they     
   become eligible for an unreduced annuity under one of the civilian      
   retirement programs. Section 518 of the bill would allow these employees
   to remain in their positions until they become eligible for an unreduced
   annuity or reach age 60, whichever is later. Technicians who have       
   already been forced to retire and are under age 60 would be able to     
   apply for reinstatement.                                                
      Based on information from DoD, CBO estimates that about 500          
   technicians would be affected by this provision. This includes 400      
   technicians who, under current law, would retire during the 2001 2005   
   period, and 100 technicians who have already retired but would be       
   reinstated to their old positions. By allowing these technicians to     
   delay their retirement, CBO estimates this bill would reduce spending on
   federal retirement benefits (function 600, income security) by $17      
   million over the 2001 2005 period. Since many technicians would be      
   covered by the Federal Employees Health Benefits Program (function 550, 
   health) after their retirement, this provision would also reduce direct 
   spending in that program by $3 million over the same period.            
       Retroactive Housing Allowances. Section 604 would authorize         
   retroactive BAH payments to compensate members who received lower BAH   
   during January and February of 2000 compared to the BAH rate they       
   received prior to December 31, 1999. CBO estimates that these           
   retroactive payments would cost $1 million in 2001.                     
       Property Transactions. Title XXVIII contains a variety of provisions
   that would authorize DoD to convey or lease land to nonfederal entities.
   These transactions would affect both large and small properties, ranging
   from about 700 acres at Fort Pickett, Virginia to about two acres at    
   Fort Dix, New Jersey.                                                   
       Conveyances. Some property that would be conveyed under title XXVIII
   has been--or soon will be--declared excess by DoD and transferred to the
   General Services Administration (GSA) for disposal. In some instances,  
   GSA is likely to give the property to state or local governments, and in
   those cases conveyances would not affect receipts. In other instances,  
   such as the conveyances of about 5 acres containing an Army Reserve     
   Center in Galesburg, Illinois and about 100 acres at Fort Polk,         
   Louisiana, the property would likely be sold under current law. Based on
   information from DoD, forgone receipts from these conveyances would     
   total less than $500,000.                                               
      CBO has not received any information from the Administration on other
   parcels specified in the bill, some of which are large and potentially  
   worth $1 million or more.                                               

                    Because CBO has no basis for knowing whether these parcels    
          have been or will be declared excess and sold under current law, CBO    
          cannot estimate the extent of any forgone receipts.                     
       Leases. Section 2851 would allow the Navy to receive in-kind        
   consideration for the lease of property at Port Hueneme, California.    
   Under current law, the Navy will receive cash for that lease. CBO       
   estimates that this provision would lower receipts by less than $500,000
   annually.                                                               
       Other Provisions. The following provisions would have an            
   insignificant budgetary impact:                                         
      Section 506 would allow retirees receiving Voluntary Separation      
   Incentive (VSI) payments concurrently with retired or retainer pay to   
   give up the VSI payment. Currently, retirement pay is reduced by the    
   amount of VSI payments. The formula for the offset causes retirement pay
   to be reduced by future VSI payments. Terminating participation in the  
   program would accelerate outlays for military retirement. Based on      
   information from DOD, CBO expects few people would be affected by this  
   provision.                                                              
      Section 641 would increase reserve retirement pay by giving more     
   credit toward annuities for time spent in training. While CBO estimates 
   this provision would have a substantial effect when today's reservists  
   reach 60 years of age and would begin to collect retirement benefits    
   under this new rule, it would affect few people during the next 10      
   years.                                                                  
      Section 642 would increase participation in the Reserve Component    
   Survivor Benefit Plan (RCSBP) by requiring certain reservists to obtain 
   spousal consent to waive participation. Spousal consent is already      
   required for reservists over 60 years of age. This provision would make 
   that requirement effective when the reservist is first notified that he 
   or she has completed the years of service required for retirement       
   eligibility. CBO estimates the provision would create a negligible      
   increase in payments to annuitants.                                     
           Revenues                                                                

      Section 651 would allow members of the uniformed services on active  
   duty and members of the Ready Reserve in any pay status to participate  
   in the Thrift Savings Plan (TSP). Contributions would be capped at 5.0  
   percent of basic pay. In addition, servicemembers would be able to      
   contribute income they receive in the form of special or incentive pay  
   to the extent allowable under the Internal Revenue Code. This provision 
   would become effective July 15, 2001, or earlier if certain legislative 
   conditions are met. The Joint Committee on Taxation estimates that the  
   revenue loss caused by deferred income tax payments would total $10     
   million in 2001 and $1.1 billion over the 2001 2010 period.             
           Pay-as-you-go considerations                                            

      The Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act sets up        
   pay-as-you-go procedures for legislation affecting direct spending or   
   receipts. The net changes in direct spending that would result from H.R.
   4205 are shown in Table 6. For the purposes of enforcing pay-as-you-go  
   procedures, only the effects in the current year, the budget year, and  
   the succeeding four years are counted.                                  

               TABLE 6.--ESTIMATED IMPACT OF H.R. 4205 ON DIRECT SPENDING AND RECEIPTS              

                                                By Fiscal Year, in Millions of Dollars--                           

                           2000     2001     2002     2003     2004     2005     2006     2007     2008     2009     2010  

Changes in outlays            0       27       39       83       21       -5       -4       -4       -3       -2       -1  
Changes in receipts           0      -10      -61      -82     -105     -125     -135     -144     -153     -162     -171  

           Intergovernmental and private-sector impact                             

      The bill contains both intergovernmental and private-sector mandates,
   including one preemption of state law. None of the mandates would impose
   significant costs; therefore, the thresholds established by UMRA ($55   
   million for intergovernmental mandates and $109 million for private     
   sector mandates in 2000, adjusted annually for inflation) would not be  
   exceeded.                                                               
      The bill would give the Secretary of Defense the authority to require
   recipients of military equipment either to ensure that the equipment is 
   demilitarized or to return the equipment to DoD for demilitarization.   
   The Secretary of Defense could also repossess the equipment under some  
   circumstances. In all of those cases, the requirements would be         
   considered intergovernmental and private-sector mandates because, if the
   equipment is not returned to DoD for demilitarization, the recipient    
   would have to bear the costs of demilitarizing the equipment. However,  
   this provision would be rarely used because, in most cases, DoD         
   demilitarizes equipment prior to transferring ownership. Consequently,  
   the costs of this mandate would be minimal.                             
      The bill would extend and expand a demonstration project that        
   involves intergovernmental and private sector mandates. Specifically, it
   would require insurers, under certain circumstances, to issue medigap   
   policies to Medicare enrollees who choose to drop coverage from DoD's   
   Federal Employees Health Benefits demonstration program. The bill would 
   also prohibit insurers from discriminating in the pricing of such       
   policies based on an individual's health status or use of care, or from 
   using coverage exclusions for preexisting conditions as long as any     
   lapse in coverage was no more than 63 days. Those requirements would be 
   intergovernmental and private-sector mandates as defined in UMRA.       
   However, because only a small number of people could be affected by     
   these provisions, the direct costs of the mandates would be small.      

      In addition, the bill contains a mandate affecting only state        
   governments. It would give legal effect to military testamentary        
   instruments regardless of the provisions of state law. (A testamentary  
   instrument is a document intended to take effect after the death of the 
   person who executes it.) This provision would preempt state laws        
   governing the execution of such documents; however, it would impose no  
   costs on those governments.                                             
      The bill also would convey lands to state and local entities, provide
   support for cooperative efforts between the Civil Air Patrol and state  
   and local governments, and authorize funding for assistance to local    
   school districts and agencies.                                          
       Estimate Prepared By. --Federal Costs: Military Construction and    
   Other Defense--Kent Christensen, Military and Civilian Personnel--Dawn  
   Regan, Civilian Retirement--Eric Rollins, Food Stamps--Valerie Baxter,  
   Stockpile Sales and Atomic Energy Defense Activities--Raymond Hall,     
   Military Retirement--Sarah Jennings, Health Programs--Sam Papenfuss,    
   Medicare Subvention--Tom Bradley, Multiyear Procurement--Jo Ann Vines,  
   Maritime Administration--Deborah Reis. Impact on State, Local, and      
   Tribal Governments: Leo Lex. Impact on the Private Sector: William      
   Thomas.                                                                 
       Estimate Approved By: Robert A. Sunshine, Assistant Director for    
   Budget Analysis.                                                        
                                   COMMITTEE COST ESTIMATE                        

      Pursuant to clause 3(d) of rule XIII of the Rules of the House of    
   Representatives, the committee generally concurs with the estimates as  
   contained in the report of the Congressional Budget Office.             
                                     OVERSIGHT FINDINGS                           

      With respect to clause 3(c)(1) of rule XIII of the Rules of the House
   of Representatives, this legislation results from hearings and other    
   oversight activities conducted by the committee pursuant to clause      
   2(b)(1) of rule X.                                                      
      With respect to clause 3(c)(2) of rule XIII of the Rules of the House
   of Representatives and section 308(a) of the Congressional Budget Act of
   1974, this legislation does not include any new spending or credit      
   authority, nor does it provide for any increase or decrease in tax      
   revenues or expenditures. The bill does, however, authorize             
   appropriations. Other fiscal features of this legislation are addressed 
   in the estimate prepared by the Director of the Congressional Budget    
   Office under section 402 of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974.       
      With respect to clause 3(c)(4) of rule XIII of the Rules of the House
   of Representatives, the committee has not received a report from the    
   Committee on Government Reform and Oversight pertaining to the subject  
   matter of H.R. 4205.                                                    
                             CONSTITUTIONAL AUTHORITY STATEMENT                   

      Pursuant to Rule XIII, clause 3(d)(1) of the Rules of the House of   
   Representatives, the committee finds the authority for this legislation 
   in Article I, Section 8 of the United States Constitution.              
                                STATEMENT OF FEDERAL MANDATES                     

      Pursuant to section 423 of Public Law 104 4, this legislation        
   contains no federal mandates with respect to state, local, and tribal   
   governments, nor with respect to the private sector. Similarly, the bill
   provides no federal intergovernmental mandates.                         
                                        RECORD VOTES                              

      In accordance with clause 3(b) of rule XIII of the Rules of the House
   of Representatives, record and voice votes were taken with respect to   
   the committee's consideration of H.R. 4205. The record of these votes is
   attached to this report.                                                
      The committee ordered H.R. 4205 reported to the House with a         
   favorable recommendation by a vote of 56 1, a quorum being present.     

[Graphic Image Not Available]

[Graphic Image Not Available]

[Graphic Image Not Available]

[Graphic Image Not Available]

[Graphic Image Not Available]

[Graphic Image Not Available]

[Graphic Image Not Available]

[Graphic Image Not Available]


                   CHANGES IN EXISTING LAW MADE BY THE BILL, AS REPORTED          

     In compliance with clause 3(e) of rule XIII of the Rules of the House
  of Representatives, changes in existing law made by the bill, as        
  reported, are shown as follows (existing law proposed to be omitted is  
  enclosed in black brackets, new matter is printed in italic, existing   
  law in which no change is proposed is shown in roman):                  
                   NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT FOR FISCAL YEAR 1995        

         * * * * * * *                                                           

           DIVISION A--DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE AUTHORIZATIONS                        

            TITLE I--PROCUREMENT                                                   

           Subtitle A--Authorization of Appropriations                             

         * * * * * * *                                                           

          SEC. 116. BUNKER DEFEAT MUNITION ACQUISITION PROGRAM.                   

     The Secretary of the Army, in acquiring munitions under the bunker   
  defeat munition weapons acquisition program--                           
       (1) may acquire only those munitions that are designated as ``type  
   classified, limited procurement for contingency operations''; and       
    (2) may not acquire more than 6,000  8,500 such munitions.             

         * * * * * * *                                                           

                      TITLE VIII--ACQUISITION POLICY, ACQUISITION MANAGEMENT, AND  
           RELATED MATTERS                                                         
         * * * * * * *                                                           

           Subtitle B--Other Matters                                               

         * * * * * * *                                                           

                    SEC. 816. DEMONSTRATION PROJECT ON PURCHASE OF FIRE, SECURITY,
          POLICE, PUBLIC WORKS, AND UTILITY SERVICES FROM LOCAL GOVERNMENT        
          AGENCIES.                                                               
   (a)  * * *                                                             

         * * * * * * *                                                           

     (c) Duration of Project.--The authority to purchase or receive       
  services under the demonstration project shall expire on September 30,  
  2000 2002.                                                              
         * * * * * * *                                                           

           TITLE XIII--MATTERS RELATING TO ALLIES AND OTHER NATIONS                

           Subtitle A--Matters Relating to NATO                                    

         * * * * * * *                                                           

          SEC. 1306. GEORGE C. MARSHALL EUROPEAN CENTER FOR SECURITY STUDIES.     

     (a) Use of Contributions.--Funds received by the United States       
  Government from the Federal Republic of Germany as its fair share of the
  costs of the George C. Marshall European Center for Security Studies    
  shall be credited to appropriations available to the Department of      
  Defense for the George C. Marshall European Center for Security Studies.
  Funds so credited shall be merged with the appropriations to which      
  credited and shall be available for the Center for the same purposes and
  the same period as the appropriations with which merged.                
     (b) Waiver of Charges.--(1) The Secretary of Defense may waive       
  reimbursement of the costs of conferences, seminars, courses of         
  instruction, or similar educational activities of the George C. Marshall
  European Center for Security Studies for military officers and civilian 
  officials of cooperation partner states of the North Atlantic           
  Cooperation Council or the Partnership for Peace if the Secretary       
  determines that attendance by such personnel without reimbursement is in
  the national security interest of the United States.                    
         * * * * * * *                                                           

                                                                                 

                  ARMAMENT RETOOLING AND MANUFACTURING SUPPORT ACT OF 1992        

           DIVISION A--DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE AUTHORIZATIONS                        

                                    TITLE I--PROCUREMENT                          

         * * * * * * *                                                           

             SUBTITLE H--ARMAMENT RETOOLING AND MANUFACTURING SUPPORT INITIATIVE  

         * * * * * * *                                                           


          SEC. 193. ARMAMENT RETOOLING AND MANUFACTURING SUPPORT INITIATIVE.      

     (a) Authority for Initiative.--During fiscal years 1993 through 2001 
  2002, the Secretary of the Army may carry out a program to be known as  
  the ``Armament Retooling and Manufacturing Support Initiative''         
  (hereinafter in this subtitle referred to as the ``ARMS Initiative'').  
         * * * * * * *                                                           


     (d) Inclusion of Manufacturing Arsenals.--For purposes of this Act, a
  manufacturing arsenal of the Department of the Army shall be treated as 
  a Government-owned, contractor-operated manufacturing facility of the   
  Department of the Army.                                                 

         * * * * * * *                                                           

          SEC. 194. FACILITIES CONTRACTS.                                         

     (a) In General.--In the case of each Government-owned,               
  contractor-operated ammunition manufacturing facility of the Department 
  of the Army that is made available for the ARMS Initiative, the         
  Secretary of the Army may, by contract, authorize the facility          
  contractor--                                                            
       (1) to use the facility for one or more years consistent with the   
   purposes of the ARMS Initiative; and                                    
       (1) to use the facility for any period of time that the Secretary   
   determines is appropriate for the accomplishment of, and consistent     
   with, the needs of the Department of the Army and the purposes of the   
   ARMS Initiative; and                                                    
       (2) to enter into multiyear subcontracts for the commercial use of  
   the facility consistent with such purposes.                             
         * * * * * * *                                                           


     (c) Authority to Accept Non-Monetary Consideration for Use of        
  Facilities.--The Secretary may accept non-monetary consideration in lieu
  of rental payments for use of a facility under a contract entered into  
  under this section.                                                     

                                                                                 


                                TITLE 10, UNITED STATES CODE                      

         * * * * * * *                                                           

          Subtitle A--General Military Law                                        

         * * * * * * *                                                           

          PART I--ORGANIZATION AND GENERAL MILITARY POWERS                        

         * * * * * * *                                                           

                              CHAPTER 2--DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE                    

         * * * * * * *                                                           

                    117. Readiness reporting system: establishment; reporting to  
          congressional committees                                                
   (a)  * * *                                                             

         * * * * * * *                                                           

     (c) Capabilities.--The readiness reporting system shall measure such 
  factors relating to readiness as the Secretary prescribes, except that  
  the system shall include the capability to do each of the following:    
       (1) Measure, on a monthly basis, the capability of units (both as   
   elements of their respective armed force and as elements of joint       
   forces) to conduct their assigned wartime missions.                     
         * * * * * * *                                                           


       (7) Measure, on a quarterly basis, the extent to which units of the 
   armed forces remove serviceable parts, supplies, or equipment from one  
   vehicle, vessel, or aircraft in order to render a different vehicle,    
   vessel, or aircraft operational.                                        

         * * * * * * *                                                           

     (e) Submission to Congressional Committees.-- (1) The Secretary shall
  each month submit to the Committee on Armed Services and the Committee  
  on Appropriations of the Senate and the Committee on Armed Services and 
  the Committee on Appropriations of the House of Representatives a report
  in writing containing the results of the most recent joint readiness    
  review or monthly review conducted under subsection (d), including the  
  current information derived from the readiness reporting system. Each   
  such report                                                             

     (2) The monthly report submitted under paragraph (1) that covers the 
  first quarter of the then current fiscal year shall also include a      
  description of the funding proposed in the President's budget for the   
  next fiscal year, and for the subsequent fiscal years covered by the    
  most recent future-years defense program submitted under section 221 of 
  this title, to address each deficiency in readiness identified during   
  the joint readiness review conducted for the first quarter of the       
  current fiscal year.                                                    

     (3) Each report under this subsection shall be submitted in          
  unclassified form and may, as the Secretary determines necessary, also  
  be submitted in classified form.                                        
         * * * * * * *                                                           

                        CHAPTER 4--OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY OF DEFENSE             


 Sec.                                                                    

      131. Office of the Secretary of Defense.                                

         * * * * * * *                                                           


      144. Director of Mission-Essential Software Management.                 

         * * * * * * *                                                           


          144.  Director of Mission-Essential Software Management                 

     (a) The Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and  
  Logistics shall designate within the Office of the Under Secretary of   
  Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics a Director of        
  Mission-Essential Software Management.                                  
     (b) The Director of Mission-Essential Software Management shall      
  provide effective oversight of, and shall seek to improve mechanisms    
  for, the management, development, and maintenance of mission-essential  
  software for major defense acquisition programs described in subsection 
  (c).                                                                    
     (c) For purposes of this section, mission-essential software for     
  major defense acquisition programs is software--                        
       (1) that is an integral part of software-intensive major defense    
   acquisition programs; and                                               
       (2) that is physically part of, dedicated to, or essential to the   
   mission performance of a weapons system.                                
     (d) The Director of Mission-Essential Software Management shall be   
  responsible for--                                                       
       (1) reviewing the policies and practices of the military departments
   and Defense Agencies for developing software described in subsection    
   (c);                                                                    
       (2) reviewing planning and progress in the management of such       
   software; and                                                           
       (3) recommending goals and plans to improve management with respect 
   to such software.                                                       

         * * * * * * *                                                           

          223. Ballistic missile defense programs: program elements               

     (a) Program Elements Specified.--In the budget justification         
  materials submitted to Congress in support of the Department of Defense 
  budget for any fiscal year (as submitted with the budget of the         
  President under section 1105(a) of title 31), the amount requested for  
  activities of the Ballistic Missile Defense Organization shall be set   
  forth in accordance with the following program elements:                
    (1) * * *                                                              

         * * * * * * *                                                           

     (13) Airborne Laser program.                                          

         * * * * * * *                                                           

                         CHAPTER 7--BOARDS, COUNCILS, AND COMMITTEES              

         * * * * * * *                                                           


 Sec.                                                                    

      171. Armed Forces Policy Council.                                       

         * * * * * * *                                                           


      184. Regional Centers for Security Studies.                             

         * * * * * * *                                                           


          184. Regional Centers for Security Studies                              

     (a) In General.--(1) Subject to paragraph (2), the Secretary of      
  Defense may operate in the Department of Defense regional centers for   
  security studies, each of which is established for a specified          
  geographic region of the world. Any such regional center shall serve as 
  a forum for bilateral and multilateral communication and military and   
  civilian exchanges with nations in the region for which the center      

                    is established. A regional center may, as the Secretary       
          considers appropriate, use professional military education, civilian    
          defense education, and related academic and other activities to pursue  
          such communication and exchanges.                                       
     (2) After the date of the enactment of this section, a regional      
  center for security studies as described in paragraph (1) may not be    
  established in the Department of Defense until at least 90 days after   
  the date on which the Secretary of Defense submits to Congress a        
  notification of the intent of the Secretary to establish the center. The
  notification shall contain a description of the mission and functions of
  the proposed center and a justification for the proposed center.        
     (b) Employment and Compensation of Faculty.--Section 1595 of this    
  title provides authority for the Secretary of Defense to employ certain 
  civilian personnel at certain Department of Defense regional center for 
  security studies without regard to certain provisions of title 5.       
     (c) Acceptance of Foreign Gifts and Donations.--Section 2611 of this 
  title provides authority for the Secretary of Defense to accept foreign 
  gifts and donations in order to defray the costs of, or enhance the     
  operations of, certain Department of Defense regional centers for       
  security studies.                                                       
     (d) Annual Report to Congressional Committees.--The Secretary shall  
  submit to the Committee on Armed Services of the Senate and the         
  Committee on Armed Services of the House of Representatives an annual   
  report on the status, objectives, and operations of the Department of   
  Defense regional centers for security studies. Each such report shall   
  include information on international participation in the programs of   
  the centers and on foreign gifts and donations accepted under section   
  2611 of this title.                                                     
     (e) Provisions Relating Specifically to Marshall Center.--(1) The    
  Secretary of Defense may waive reimbursement of the costs of            
  conferences, seminars, courses of instruction, or similar educational   
  activities of the George C. Marshall European Center for Security       
  Studies for military officers and civilian officials of cooperation     
  partner states of the North Atlantic Cooperation Council or the         
  Partnership for Peace if the Secretary determines that attendance by    
  such personnel without reimbursement is in the national security        
  interest of the United States. Costs for which reimbursement is waived  
  pursuant to this paragraph shall be paid from appropriations available  
  for the Center.                                                         
     (2)(A) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the Secretary of  
  Defense may authorize participation by a European or Eurasian nation in 
  Marshall Center programs if the Secretary determines, after consultation
  with the Secretary of State, that such participation is in the national 
  interest of the United States.                                          
     (B) Not later than January 31 of each year, the Secretary shall      
  submit to Congress a report setting forth the names of the foreign      
  nations permitted to participate in programs of the Marshall Center     
  during the preceding year under paragraph (1). Each such report shall be
  prepared by the Secretary with the assistance of the Director of the    
  Marshall Center.                                                        

         * * * * * * *                                                           

                              CHAPTER 9--DEFENSE BUDGET MATTERS                   

         * * * * * * *                                                           

          230. Amounts for declassification of records                            

     The Secretary of Defense shall include in the budget justification   
  materials submitted to Congress in support of the Department of Defense 
  budget for any fiscal year (as submitted with the budget of the         
  President under section 1105(a) of title 31) specific identification, as
  a budgetary line item, of the amounts required to carry out programmed  
  activities during that fiscal year to declassify records pursuant to    
  Executive Order No. 12958 (50 U.S.C. 435 note) or any successor         
  Executive order or to comply with any statutory requirement, or any     
  request, to declassify Government records. Identification of such       
  amounts in such budget justification materials shall be in a single     
  display that shows the total amount for the Department of Defense and   
  the amount for each military department and Defense Agency.             
         * * * * * * *                                                           

          PART II--ORGANIZATION AND GENERAL MILITARY POWERS                       

         * * * * * * *                                                           

                        CHAPTER 23--MISCELLANEOUS STUDIES AND REPORTS             

         * * * * * * *                                                           

          483. Reports on transfers from high-priority readiness appropriations   

   (a)  * * *                                                             

         * * * * * * *                                                           

     (c) Matters To Be Included.--In each report under subsection (a) or  
  (b), the Secretary of Defense shall include for each covered budget     
  activity the following:                                                 
    (1)  * * *                                                             

         * * * * * * *                                                           

       (2) A detailed explanation of the transfers into, and out of, funds 
   available for that activity during the period covered by the report ,   
   including identification of the sources from which funds were           
   transferred into that activity and identification of the recipients of  
   the funds transferred out of that activity.                             
     (d) Covered Budget Activity Defined.--In this section, the term      
  ``covered budget activity'' means each of the following:                
    (1)  * * *                                                             

         * * * * * * *                                                           

       (5) The Air Operations and Combat Related Operations budget activity
   groups (known as ``subactivities'') within the Operating Forces budget  
   activity of the annual Operation and Maintenance, Air Force,            
   appropriation that are designated as follows:                           

    (A)  * * *                                                             

         * * * * * * *                                                           


    (G) Combat Enforcement Forces.                                         

    (H) Combat Communications.                                             


         * * * * * * *                                                           

     (e) Termination.--The requirements specified in subsections (a) and  
  (b) shall terminate upon the submission of the annual report under      
  subsection (a) covering fiscal year 2000.                               
         * * * * * * *                                                           

                                   CHAPTER 31--ENLISTMENTS                        

         * * * * * * *                                                           

          517. Authorized daily average: members in pay grades E 8 and E 9        

   (a) * * *                                                              

         * * * * * * *                                                           

     (c) Whenever under section 527 of this title the President may       
  suspend the operation of any provision of section 523, 525, or 526 of   
  this title, the Secretary of Defense may suspend the operation of any   
  provision of this section. Any such suspension shall, if not sooner     
  ended, end in the manner specified in section 527 for a suspension under
  that section.                                                           

         * * * * * * *                                                           

              CHAPTER 36--PROMOTION, SEPARATION, AND INVOLUNTARY RETIREMENT OF    
                        OFFICERS ON THE ACTIVE-DUTY LIST                          
         * * * * * * *                                                           

                               SUBCHAPTER I--SELECTION BOARDS                     

         * * * * * * *                                                           

          612. Composition of selection boards                                    

     (a)(1) Members of selection boards shall be appointed by the         
  Secretary of the military department concerned in accordance with this  
  section. A selection board shall consist of five or more officers who   
  are on the active-duty list of the same armed force as the officers     
  under consideration by the board. Each member of a selection board      
  (except as provided in paragraphs (2), (3), and (4)) shall be an officer
  on the active-duty list. Each member of a selection board must be       
  serving in a grade higher than the grade of the officers under          
  consideration by the board, except that no member of a board may be     
  serving in a grade below major or lieutenant commander.                 
         * * * * * * *                                                           

     (3) When reserve officers of an armed force are to be considered by a
  selection board, the membership of the board shall include at least one 
  reserve officer of that armed force, with the exact number of reserve   
  officers to be of that armed force on active duty (whether or not on the
  active-duty list). The actual number of reserve officers shall be       
  determined by the Secretary of the military department concerned, in his
  discretion, except that the Secretary's discretion. Notwithstanding the 
  first sentence of this paragraph, in the case of a board which is       
  considering officers in the grade of colonel or brigadier general or, in
  the case of officers of the Navy, captain or rear admiral (lower half), 
  no reserve officer need be included if there are no reserve officers of 
  that armed force on active duty in the next higher grade who are        
  eligible to serve on the board.                                         
         * * * * * * *                                                           

           SUBCHAPTER III--FAILURE OF SELECTION FOR PROMOTION AND RETIREMENT FOR  
                                YEARS OF SERVICE                                  
         * * * * * * *                                                           

          628. Special selection boards                                           

   (a)  * * *                                                             

         * * * * * * *                                                           

   (c)  Reports of Boards.--(1)  * * *                                    

     (2) The provisions of sections 617(b) and 618 of this title apply to 
  the report and proceedings of a special selection board convened under  
  this section in the same manner as they apply to the report and         
  proceedings of a selection board convened under section 611(a) of this  
  title. However, in the case of a board convened under this section to   
  consider a warrant officer or former warrant officer, the provisions of 
  sections 576(d) and 576(f) of this title (rather than the provisions of 
  section sections 617(b) and 618 of this title) apply to the report and  
  proceedings of the board in the same manner as they apply to the report 
  and proceedings of a selection board convened under section 573 of this 
  title.                                                                  
         * * * * * * *                                                           

              SUBCHAPTER IV--CONTINUATION ON ACTIVE DUTY AND SELECTIVE EARLY      
                                   RETIREMENT                                     
         * * * * * * *                                                           

                    638a. Modification to rules for continuation on active duty;  
          enhanced authority for selective early retirement and early discharges  
     (a) The Secretary of Defense may authorize the Secretary of a        
  military department, during the period beginning on October 1, 1990, and
  ending on September 30, 2001 December 31, 2001, to take any of the      
  actions set forth in subsection (b) with respect to officers of an armed
  force under the jurisdiction of that Secretary.                         
         * * * * * * *                                                           

          SUBCHAPTER V--ADDITIONAL PROVISIONS RELATING TO PROMOTION, SEPARATION,  
                                 AND RETIREMENT                                   
         * * * * * * *                                                           

          641. Applicability of chapter                                           

     Officers in the following categories are not subject to this chapter 
  (other than section 640 and, in the case of warrant officers, section   
  628):                                                                   
    (1) Reserve officers--                                                 

    (A) * * *                                                              

         * * * * * * *                                                           

       (D) on the reserve active-status list who are on active duty under  
   section 12301(d) of this title, other than as provided in subparagraph  
   (C), under a call or order to active duty specifying a period of three  
   years or less;                                                          
    (D)  (E) on active duty to pursue special work;                        

    (E)  (F) ordered to active duty under section 12304 of this title;     

       (F) (G) on active duty under section 10(b)(2) of the Military       
   Selective Service Act (50 U.S.C. App. 460(b)(2)) for the administration 
   of the Selective Service System; or                                     
    (G)  (H) on full-time National Guard duty.                             

         * * * * * * *                                                           

                                   CHAPTER 39--ACTIVE DUTY                        

         * * * * * * *                                                           

                    691. Permanent end strength levels to support two major       
          regional contingencies                                                  
   (a)  * * *                                                             

     (b) Unless otherwise provided by law, the number of members of the   
  armed forces (other than the Coast Guard) on active duty at the end of  
  any fiscal year shall be not less than the following:                   
    (1) For the Army, 480,000.                                             

    (2) For the Navy, 371,781  372,000.                                    

    (3) For the Marine Corps, 172,148  172,600.                            

    (4) For the Air Force, 360,877  357,000.                               

         * * * * * * *                                                           

     (e) For a fiscal year for which the active duty end strength         
  authorized by law pursuant to section 115(a)(1)(A) of this title for any
  of the armed forces is identical to or greater than the number          
  applicable to that armed force under subsection (b), the Secretary of   
  Defense may reduce that number by not more than 0.5 percent.            
         * * * * * * *                                                           

                                      CHAPTER 40--LEAVE                           

         * * * * * * *                                                           

          702. Cadets and midshipmen                                              

   (a)  * * *                                                             

     (b) Involuntary Leave Without Pay for Suspended Academy Cadets and   
  Midshipmen.--(1) * * *                                                  
         * * * * * * *                                                           


      (2) A cadet or midshipman placed on involuntary leave under paragraph
   (1) is not entitled to any pay under section 230(c) section 203(c) of   
   title 37 for the period of the leave.                                   
         * * * * * * *                                                           

                    706. Administration of leave required to be taken pending     
          review of certain court-martial convictions                             
   (a)  * * *                                                              

         * * * * * * *                                                           

      (c)(1) A member required to take leave under section 876a of this    
   title is not entitled to any right or benefit under chapter 43 of title 
   38 solely because of employment during the period of such leave.        
      (2) Section 974 of this title does not apply to a member required to 
   take leave under section 876a of this title during the period of such   
   leave.                                                                  
         * * * * * * *                                                           

                        CHAPTER 47--UNIFORM CODE OF MILITARY JUSTICE              

         * * * * * * *                                                           

              SUBCHAPTER IX--POST-TRIAL PROCEDURE AND REVIEW OF COURTS-MARTIAL    

         * * * * * * *                                                           

          874. Art. 74. Remission and suspension                                  

      (a) The Secretary concerned and, when designated by him, any Under   
   Secretary, Assistant Secretary, Judge Advocate General, or commanding   
   officer may remit or suspend any part or amount of the unexecuted part  
   of any sentence, including all uncollected forfeitures other than a     
   sentence approved by the President. However, in the case of a sentence  
   of confinement for life without eligibility for parole, after the       
   sentence is ordered executed, the authority of the Secretary concerned  
   under the preceding sentence (1) may not be delegated, and (2) may be   
   exercised only after the service of a period of confinement of not less 
   than 20 years.                                                          
         * * * * * * *                                                           

                        CHAPTER 53--MISCELLANEOUS RIGHTS AND BENEFITS             


 Sec.                                                                    

      1031. Administration of oath.                                           

         * * * * * * *                                                           

             1044d. Military testamentary instruments: requirement for        
      recognition by States.                                                  
         * * * * * * *                                                           


                    1034. Protected communications; prohibition of retaliatory    
          personnel actions                                                       
   (a)  * * *                                                              

         * * * * * * *                                                           

      (c) Inspector General Investigation of Allegations of Prohibited     
   Personnel Actions.--(1) * * *                                           
         * * * * * * *                                                           

      (3)(A) An Inspector General receiving an allegation as described in  
   paragraph (1) shall expeditiously determine , in accordance with        
   regulations prescribed under subsection (h), whether there is sufficient
   evidence to warrant an investigation of the allegation.                 
         * * * * * * *                                                           

   (i)  Definitions.--In this section:                                     

       (1) The term ``Member of Congress'' includes any Delegate or        
   Resident Commissioner to Congress.                                      
    (2) The term ``Inspector General'' means  any of the following:        

    (A) The Inspector General of the Department of Defense.                

         * * * * * * *                                                           


       (C) The Inspector General of the Army, in the case of a member of   
   the Army.                                                               
    (D) The Naval Inspector General, in the case of a member of the Navy.  

       (E) The Inspector General of the Air Force, in the case of a member 
   of the Air Force.                                                       
       (F) The Deputy Naval Inspector General for Marine Corps Matters, in 
   the case of a member of the Marine Corps.                               
       (G) An officer of the armed forces assigned or detailed under       
   regulations of the Secretary concerned to serve as an Inspector General 
   at any command level in one of the armed forces.                        

       (C) Any officer of the armed forces or employee of the Department of
   Defense who is assigned or detailed to serve as an Inspector General at 
   any level in the Department of Defense.                                 

         * * * * * * *                                                           


          1044. Legal assistance                                                  

      (a) Subject to the availability of legal staff resources, the        
   Secretary concerned may provide legal assistance in connection with     
   their personal civil legal affairs to the following persons:            
    (1) * * *                                                              

         * * * * * * *                                                           

       (4) Members of a reserve component not covered by paragraph (1) or  
   (2), but only during a period, following a release from active duty     
   under a call or order to active duty for more than 29 days under a      
   mobilization authority (as determined by the Secretary of Defense), that
   is not in excess of twice the length of time served on active duty.     
       (4) (5) Dependents of members and former members described in       
   paragraphs (1), (2), and (3) (3), and (4).                              
         * * * * * * *                                                           


                    1044d. Military testamentary instruments: requirement for     
          recognition by States                                                   
      (a) Testamentary Instruments To Be Given Legal Effect.--A military   
   testamentary instrument--                                               
       (1) is exempt from any requirement of form, formality, or recording 
   before probate that is provided for testamentary instruments under the  
   laws of a State; and                                                    
       (2) has the same legal effect as a testamentary instrument prepared 
   and executed in accordance with the laws of the State in which it is    
   presented for probate.                                                  
      (b) Military Testamentary Instruments.--For purposes of this section,
   a military testamentary instrument is an instrument that is prepared    
   with testamentary intent in accordance with regulations prescribed under
   this section and that--                                                 
       (1) is executed in accordance with subsection (c) by (or on behalf  
   of) a person, as a testator, who is eligible for military legal         
   assistance;                                                             
    (2) makes a disposition of property of the testator; and               

    (3) takes effect upon the death of the testator.                       

      (c) Requirements for Execution of Military Testamentary              
   Instruments.--An instrument is valid as a military testamentary         
   instrument only if--                                                    
       (1) the instrument is executed by the testator (or, if the testator 
   is unable to execute the instrument personally, the instrument is       
   executed in the presence of, by the direction of, and on behalf of the  
   testator);                                                              
       (2) the instrument is executed in the presence of a military legal  
   assistance counsel acting as presiding attorney;                        
       (3) the instrument is executed in the presence of at least two      
   disinterested witnesses (in addition to the presiding attorney), each of
   whom attests to witnessing the testator's execution of the instrument by
   signing it; and                                                         
       (4) the instrument is executed in accordance with such additional   
   requirements as may be provided in regulations prescribed under this    
   section.                                                                
      (d) Self-Proving Military Testamentary Instruments.--(1) If the      
   document setting forth a military testamentary instrument meets the     
   requirements of paragraph (2), then the signature of a person on the    
   document as the testator, an attesting witness, a notary, or the        
   presiding attorney, together with a written representation of the       
   person's status as such and the person's military grade (if any) or     
   other title, is prima facie evidence of the following:                  
    (A) That the signature is genuine.                                     

       (B) That the signatory had the represented status and title at the  
   time of the execution of the will.                                      
       (C) That the signature was executed in compliance with the          
   procedures required under the regulations prescribed under subsection   
   (f).                                                                    
      (2) A document setting forth a military testamentary instrument meets
   the requirements of this paragraph if it includes (or has attached to   
   it), in a form and content required under the regulations prescribed    
   under subsection (f), each of the following:                            
       (A) A certificate, executed by the testator, that includes the      
   testator's acknowledgment of the testamentary instrument.               

       (B) An affidavit, executed by each witness signing the testamentary 
   instrument, that attests to the circumstances under which the           
   testamentary instrument was executed.                                   
       (C) A notarization, including a certificate of any administration of
   an oath required under the regulations, that is signed by the notary or 
   other official administering the oath.                                  
     (e) Statement To Be Included.--(1) Under regulations prescribed under
  this section, each military testamentary instrument shall contain a     
  statement that sets forth the provisions of subsection (a).             
     (2) Paragraph (1) shall not be construed to make inapplicable the    
  provisions of subsection (a) to a testamentary instrument that does not 
  include a statement described in that paragraph.                        
     (f) Regulations.--Regulations for the purposes of this section shall 
  be prescribed jointly by the Secretary of Defense and by the Secretary  
  of Transportation with respect to the Coast Guard when it is not        
  operating as a service in the Department of the Navy.                   
   (g)  Definitions.--In this section:                                    

       (1) The term ``person eligible for military legal assistance'' means
   a person who is eligible for legal assistance under section 1044 of this
   title.                                                                  
    (2) The term ``military legal assistance counsel'' means--             

    (A) a judge advocate (as defined in section 801(13) of this title); or 

       (B) a civilian attorney serving as a legal assistance officer under 
   the provisions of section 1044 of this title.                           
       (3) The term ``State'' includes the District of Columbia, the       
   Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana   
   Islands, and each possession of the United States.                      

         * * * * * * *                                                           

                             CHAPTER 55--MEDICAL AND DENTAL CARE                  


 Sec.                                                                    

      1071. Purpose of this chapter.                                          

         * * * * * * *                                                           


      1074h. Medical and dental care: medal of honor recipients; dependents.  

      1074i. Reimbursement for certain travel expenses.                       


         * * * * * * *                                                           

      1095d. TRICARE program: waiver of certain deductibles.                  


            1095d. TRICARE program: waiver of certain deductibles; reduction  
      of catastrophic cap.                                                    

         * * * * * * *                                                           


      1095f. TRICARE program:  referrals for specialty health care.           

         * * * * * * *                                                           

      1110. Policies and procedures for immunization program.                 

         * * * * * * *                                                           


          1074. Medical and dental care for members and certain former members    

   (a)  * * *                                                             

         * * * * * * *                                                           

      (c)(1) Funds appropriated to a military department , the Department  
   of Transportation (with respect to the Coast Guard when it is not       
   operating as a service in the Navy), or the Department of Health and    
   Human Services (with respect to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric    
   Administration and the Public Health Service) may be used to provide    
   medical and dental care to persons entitled to such care by law or      
   regulations, including the provision of such care (other than elective  
   private treatment) in private facilities for members of the armed forces
   uniformed services. If a private facility or health care provider       
   providing care under this subsection is a health care provider under the
   Civilian Health and Medical Program of the Uniformed Services, the      
   Secretary of Defense, after consultation with the other administering   
   Secretaries, may by regulation require the private facility or health   
   care provider to provide such care in accordance with the same payment  
   rules (subject to any modifications considered appropriate by the       
   Secretary) as apply under that program.                                 
      (2)(A) Subject to such exceptions as the Secretary of Defense        
   considers necessary, coverage for medical care for members of the armed 
   forces uniformed services under this subsection, and standards with     
   respect to timely access to such care, shall be comparable to coverage  
   for medical care and standards for timely access to such care under the 
   managed care option of the TRICARE program known as TRICARE Prime.      
         * * * * * * *                                                           


       (C) The Secretary of Defense shall consult with the other           
   administering Secretaries in the administration of this paragraph.      

      (3)(A) The Secretary of Defense may not require a member of the armed
   forces described in subparagraph (B) A member of the uniformed services 
   described in subparagraph (B) may not be required to receive routine    
   primary medical care at a military medical treatment facility.          
      (B) A member referred to in subparagraph (A) is a member of the armed
   forces uniformed services on active duty who is entitled to medical care
   under this subsection and who--                                         
    (i)  * * *                                                             

         * * * * * * *                                                           

          1074g. Pharmacy benefits program                                        

   (a)  Pharmacy Benefits.--(1)  * * *                                     

         * * * * * * *                                                           

      (6) The Secretary, as part of the regulations established in the     
   regulations prescribed under subsection (g), may establish cost sharing 
   requirements (which may be established as a percentage or fixed dollar  
   amount) under the pharmacy benefits program for generic, formulary, and 
   nonformulary agents. For nonformulary agents, cost sharing shall be     
   consistent with common industry practice and not in excess of amounts   
   generally comparable to 20 percent for beneficiaries covered by section 
   1079 of this title or 25 percent for beneficiaries covered by section   
   1086 of this title.                                                     
      (7) The Secretary shall establish procedures for eligible covered    
   beneficiaries to receive pharmaceutical agents not included on the      
   uniform formulary, but, that are not included on the uniform formulary  
   but that are considered to be clinically necessary. Such procedures     
   shall include peer review procedures under which the Secretary may      
   determine that there is a clinical justification for the use of a       
   pharmaceutical agent that is not on the uniform formulary, in which case
   the pharmaceutical agent shall be provided under the same terms and     
   conditions as an agent on the uniform formulary. Such procedures shall  
   also include an expeditious appeals process for an eligible covered     
   beneficiary, or a network or uniformed provider on behalf of the        
   beneficiary, to establish clinical justification for the use of a       
   pharmaceutical agent that is not on the uniform formulary.              
         * * * * * * *                                                           

      (b) Establishment of Committee.--(1) The Secretary of Defense shall, 
   in consultation with the Secretaries of the military departments,       
   establish a Pharmacy and Therapeutics Committee for the purpose of      
   developing the uniform formulary of pharmaceutical agents required by   
   subsection (a), reviewing such formulary on a periodic basis, and making
   additional recommendations regarding the formulary as the committee     
   determines necessary and appropriate. The committee shall include       
   representatives of pharmacies of the uniformed services facilities,     
   contractors responsible for the TRICARE retail pharmacy program,        
   contractors responsible for the national mail-order pharmacy program,   
   providers in facilities of the uniformed services, and TRICARE network  
   providers. Committee members shall have expertise in treating the       
   medical needs of the populations served through such entities and in the
   range of pharmaceutical and biological medicines available for treating 
   such populations. The committee shall function under procedures         
   established by the Secretary under the regulations required by          
   subsection (g).                                                         
         * * * * * * *                                                           

   (d)  Procedures.--(1)  * * *                                            

      (2) Not later than 6 months after the date of the enactment of this  
   section, the Secretary shall utilize Effective not later than April 5,  
   2000, the Secretary shall use a modification to the bid price adjustment
   methodology in the current managed care support contracts to ensure     
   equitable and timely reimbursement to the TRICARE managed care support  
   contractors for pharmaceutical products delivered in the nonmilitary    
   environments. The methodology shall take into account the ``at-risk''   
   nature of the contracts as well as managed care support contractor      
   pharmacy costs attributable to changes to pharmacy service or formulary 
   management at military medical treatment facilities, and other military 
   activities and policies that affect costs of pharmacy benefits provided 
   through the Civilian Health and Medical Program of the Uniformed        
   Services. The methodology shall also account for military treatment     
   facility costs attributable to the delivery of pharmaceutical products  

                    in the military facility environment which were prescribed by 
          a network provider.                                                     
         * * * * * * *                                                           

      (e) Pharmacy Data Transaction Service.--Not later than April 1, 2000,
   the The Secretary of Defense shall implement the use of the Pharmacy    
   Data Transaction Service in all fixed facilities of the uniformed       
   services under the jurisdiction of the Secretary, in the TRICARE retail 
   pharmacy program, and in the national mail-order pharmacy program.      
   (f)  Definitions.--As used in this section--  In this section:          

       (1) the The term ``eligible covered beneficiary'' means a covered   
   beneficiary for whom eligibility to receive pharmacy benefits through   
   the means described in subsection (a)(2)(E) is established under this   
   chapter or another provision of law; and .                              
       (2) the The term ``pharmaceutical agent'' means drugs, biological   
   products, and medical devices under the regulatory authority of the Food
   and Drug Administration.                                                
      (g) Regulations.--The Secretary of Defense shall, after consultation 
   with the other administering Secretaries, promulgate prescribe          
   regulations to carry out this section.                                  
         * * * * * * *                                                           


          1074h. Medical and dental care: medal of honor recipients; dependents   

      (a) Medal of Honor Recipients.--A former member of the armed forces  
   who is a Medal of Honor recipient and who is not otherwise entitled to  
   medical and dental benefits under this chapter may, upon request, be    
   given medical and dental care provided by the administering Secretaries 
   in the same manner as if entitled to retired pay.                       
      (b) Dependents.--A person who is a dependent of a Medal of Honor     
   recipient and who is not otherwise entitled to medical and dental       
   benefits under this chapter may, upon request, be given medical and     
   dental care provided by the administering Secretaries in the same manner
   as if the Medal of Honor recipient were, or (if deceased) was at the    
   time of death, entitled to retired pay.                                 
   (c)  Definitions --In this section:                                     

       (1) The term ``Medal of Honor recipient'' means a member or former  
   member of the armed forces who has been awarded a medal of honor under  
   section 3741, 6241, or 8741 of this title or section 491 of title 14.   
       (2) The term ``dependent'' has the meaning given that term in       
   subparagraphs (A), (B), (C), and (D) of section 1072(2) of this title.  
          1074i.  Reimbursement for certain travel expenses                       

      In any case in which a covered beneficiary is referred by a primary  
   care physician to a specialty care provider who provides services more  
   than 100 miles from the location in which the primary care provider     
   provides services to the covered beneficiary, the Secretary shall       
   provide reimbursement for reasonable travel expenses for the covered    
   beneficiary.                                                            

         * * * * * * *                                                           

                    1076c. Dental insurance plan: certain retirees and their      
          surviving spouses and other dependents                                  
   (a)  * * *                                                              

         * * * * * * *                                                           


      (i) Disenrollment Process for TRICARE Retiree Dental Program.--With  
   respect to the provision of dental care to a retired member of the      
   uniformed services or the dependent of such a member under the TRICARE  
   program, the Secretary of Defense--                                     
       (A) shall require that any TRICARE dental insurance contract allow  
   for a period of up to 30 days, beginning on the date of the submission  
   of an application for enrollment by the member or dependent, during     
   which the member or dependent may disenroll;                            
       (B) shall provide for limited circumstances under which             
   disenrollment shall be permitted during the 24-month initial enrollment 
   period, without jeopardizing the fiscal integrity of the dental program.
   (2) The circumstances described in paragraph (1)(B) shall include--     

       (A) a case in which a retired member or dependent who is also a     
   Federal employee is assigned to a location overseas which prevents      
   utilization of dental benefits in the United States;                    
       (B) a case in which such a member or dependent provides medical     
   documentation with regard to a diagnosis of a serious or terminal       
   illness which precludes the member or dependent from obtaining dental   
   care;                                                                   
    (C) a case in which severe financial hardship would result; and        

    (D)  any other instances which the Secretary considers appropriate.    

   (3) A retired member or dependent described in paragraph (1)--          

       (A) shall make any initial requests for disenrollment under this    
   subsection to the TRICARE dental insurance contractor; and              
       (B) may appeal a decision by the contractor, or policies with       
   respect to the provision of dental care to retirees and their dependents
   under the TRICARE program, to the TRICARE Management Activity.          
      (4) In a case of an appeal described in paragraph (3)(B) the         
   contractor shall refer all relevant information collected by the        
   contractor to the TRICARE Management Activity.                          

   (i)  (j)  Definitions.--In this section:                                

       (1) The term ``eligible dependent'' means a dependent described in  
   subparagraph (A), (D), or (I) of section 1072(2) of this title.         
       (2) The term ``eligible child dependent'' means a dependent         
   described in subparagraph (D) or (I) of section 1072(2) of this title.  
    (3) The term ``retired pay'' includes retainer pay.                    

         * * * * * * *                                                           

          1079. Contracts for medical care for spouses and children: plans        

   (a)  * * *                                                              

         * * * * * * *                                                           

       (17) (A) The Secretary of Defense may establish a program for the   
   individual case management of a person covered by this section or       
   section 1086 of this title who has extraordinary medical or             
   psychological disorders and, under such a program, may waive benefit    
   limitations contained in paragraphs (5) and (13) of this subsection or  
   section 1077(b)(1) of this title and authorize the payment for          
   comprehensive home health care services, supplies, and equipment if the 
   Secretary determines that such a waiver is cost-effective and           
   appropriate.                                                            

       (B) The total amount expended under subparagraph (A) for a fiscal   
   year may not exceed $100,000,000.                                       

         * * * * * * *                                                           

   (h)(1)  * * *                                                           

         * * * * * * *                                                           


      (5) To assure access to care for all covered beneficiaries, the      
   Secretary of Defense, in consultation with the other administering      
   Secretaries, shall designate specific rates for reimbursement for       
   services in certain localities if the Secretary determines that without 
   payment of such rates access to health care services would be severely  
   impaired. Such a determination shall be based on consideration of the   
   number of providers in a locality who provide the services, the number  
   of such providers who are CHAMPUS participating providers, the number of
   covered beneficiaries under CHAMPUS in the locality, the availability of
   military providers in the location or a nearby location, and any other  
   factors determined to be relevant by the Secretary.                     
         * * * * * * *                                                           

      (p)(1) Subject to such exceptions as the Secretary of Defense        
   considers necessary, coverage for medical care under this section for   
   the dependents referred to in subsection (a) of a member of the         
   uniformed services referred to in section 1074(c)(3) of this title who  
   are residing with the member, and standards with respect to timely      
   access to such care, shall be comparable to coverage for medical care   
   and standards for timely access to such care under the managed care     
   option of the TRICARE program known as TRICARE Prime.                   
      (2) The Secretary of Defense shall enter into arrangements with      
   contractors under the TRICARE program or with other appropriate         
   contractors for the timely and efficient processing of claims under this
   subsection.                                                             
      (3) The Secretary of Defense shall consult with the other            
   administering Secretaries in the administration of this subsection.     

         * * * * * * *                                                           


          1091. Personal services contracts                                       

   (a)  Authority.--(1)  * * *                                            

     (2) The Secretary of Defense, and the Secretary of Transportation    
  with respect to the Coast Guard when it is not operating as a service in
  the Navy, may also enter into personal services contracts to carry out  
  other health care responsibilities of the Secretary (such as the        
  provision of medical screening examinations at Military Entrance        
  Processing Stations) at locations outside medical treatment facilities, 
  as determined necessary pursuant to regulations prescribed by the       
  Secretary. The Secretary may not enter into a contract under this       
  paragraph after December 31, 2000 December 31, 2002.                    
         * * * * * * *                                                           

          1095d. TRICARE program: waiver of certain deductibles                   


                    1095d. TRICARE program: waiver of certain deductibles;        
          reduction of catastrophic cap                                           

   (a)  * * *                                                             

         * * * * * * *                                                           


     (c) Reduction of Catastrophic Cap.--The Secretary shall reduce the   
  catastrophic cap for covered beneficiaries under TRICARE Standard and   
  TRICARE Extra to $3,000.                                                
         * * * * * * *                                                           

          1095f.  TRICARE program:  referrals for specialty health care           

     The Secretary of Defense shall provide that no contract for managed  
  care support under the TRICARE program shall require a managed care     
  support contractor to require a primary care provider or specialty care 
  provider to obtain prior authorization before referring a patient to a  
  specialty care provider that is part of the network of health care      
  providers or institutions of the contractor.                            

         * * * * * * *                                                           

          1097a. TRICARE Prime: automatic enrollments; payment options            

   (a)  * * *                                                             

         * * * * * * *                                                           


     (e) No Copayment for Immediate Family.--No copayment shall be charged
  a member for care provided under TRICARE Prime to a dependent of a      
  member of the uniformed services described in subparagraph (A), (D), or 
  (I) of section 1072(2) of this title.                                   

   (e)  (f)  Definitions.--In this section:                               

       (1) The term ``TRICARE Prime'' means the managed care option of the 
   TRICARE program.                                                        
       (2) The term ``catchment area'', with respect to a facility of a    
   uniformed service, means the service area of the facility, as designated
   under regulations prescribed by the administering Secretaries.          
         * * * * * * *                                                           


                    1108. Health care coverage through Federal Employees Health   
          Benefits program: demonstration project                                 
   (a) * * *                                                              

         * * * * * * *                                                           

     (c) Area of Demonstration Project.--The Secretary of Defense and the 
  Director of the Office of Personnel Management shall jointly identify   
  and select the geographic areas in which the demonstration project will 
  be conducted. The Secretary and the Director shall establish at least   
  six, but not more than ten, such demonstration areas. In establishing   
  the areas, the Secretary and Director shall include--                   
       (1) an area that includes the catchment area of one or more military
   medical treatment facilities;                                           
       (2) an area that is not located in the catchment area of a military 
   medical treatment facility;                                             
       (3) an area in which there is a Medicare Subvention Demonstration   
   project area under section 1896 of title XVIII of the Social Security   
   Act (42 U.S.C. 1395ggg); and                                            
    (4) not more than one area for each TRICARE region.                    

     In establishing the areas, the Secretary and the Director of the     
  Office of Personnel Management shall include an area that includes the  
  catchment area of one or more military medical treatment facilities, an 
  area that is not located in the catchment area of a military medical    
  treatment facility, an area in which there is a Medicare Subvention     
  Demonstration project area under section 1896 of title XVIII of the     
  Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1395ggg), and one area for each TRICARE  
  region.                                                                 
     (d) Duration of Demonstration Project.--(1) The Secretary of Defense 
  shall conduct the demonstration project during three four contract years
  under the Federal Employees Health Benefits program.                    
     (2) Eligible beneficiaries shall, as provided under the agreement    
  pursuant to subsection (a), be permitted to enroll in the demonstration 
  project during an open enrollment period for the year 2000 (conducted in
  the fall of 1999). The demonstration project shall terminate on December
  31, 2002 December 31, 2003.                                             
         * * * * * * *                                                           

     (f) Term of Enrollment in Project.--(1) Subject to paragraphs (2) and
  (3), the period of enrollment of an eligible beneficiary who enrolls in 
  the demonstration project during the open enrollment period for the year
  2000 shall be three] four years unless the beneficiary disenrolls before
  the termination of the project.                                         
         * * * * * * *                                                           

     (k) Comptroller General Report.--Not later than December 31, 2002    
  December 31, 2003, the Comptroller General shall submit to Congress a   
  report addressing the same matters required to be addressed under       
  subsection (j)(2). The report shall describe                            

                    any limitations with respect to the data contained in the     
          report as a result of the size and design of the demonstration project. 
     (l) Application of Medigap Protections to Demonstration Project      
  Enrollees.--(1) * * *                                                   
   (2) In applying paragraph (1)--                                        

       (A) any reference in clause (v) or (vi) of section 1882(s)(3)(B) of 
   such Act to 12 months is deemed a reference to 36 48 months; and        
       (B) the notification required under section 1882(s)(3)(D) of such   
   Act shall be provided in a manner specified by the Secretary of Defense 
   in consultation with the Director of the Office of Personnel Management.
         * * * * * * *                                                           


     (m) Expansion of Coverage for Retirees Over Age 65.--(1) Eligible    
  beneficiaries referred to in subsection (b)(1) shall be permitted to    
  enroll, or to extend a previous enrollment entered into under subsection
  (d)(2), during a period of open enrollment for the year 2003 (conducted 
  in the fall of 2002).                                                   
     (2) Subject to paragraphs (2) and (3) of subsection (f), the period  
  of enrollment, or extension of enrollment, of an eligible beneficiary   
  under paragraph (1) shall be one year unless the beneficiary disenrolls 
  before the termination of the demonstration project.                    

          1109. Organ and tissue donor program                                    

   (a)  * * *                                                             

     (b) Responsibilities of the Secretaries of the Military              
  Departments.--(1) The Secretaries of the military departments shall     
  ensure that--                                                           
    (1)  * * *                                                             

         * * * * * * *                                                           


          1110. Policies and procedures for immunization program                  

     (a) System and Procedures for Tracking Separations.--(1) The         
  Secretary of each military department shall establish a system for      
  tracking, recording, and reporting separations of members of the armed  
  forces that result from procedures initiated as a result of a refusal to
  participate in the anthrax vaccine immunization program.                
     (2) The Secretary of Defense shall consolidate the information       
  recorded under the system described in paragraph (1) and shall submit to
  the Committees on Armed Services of the House of Representatives and the
  Senate on an annual basis a report on such information. Such reports    
  shall include a description of--                                        
       (A) the number of personnel separated, categorized by military      
   department, rank, and active-duty or reserve status; and                
    (B) any other information determined appropriate by the Secretary.     

     (b) Emergency Essential Civilian Personnel.--The Secretary of Defense
  shall--                                                                 
       (1) prescribe regulations for the purpose of ensuring that any      
   civilian employee of the Department of Defense who is determined to be  
   an emergency essential employee and who is required to participate in   
   the anthrax vaccination program is notified of the requirement to       
   participate in the program and the consequences of a decision not to    
   participate; and                                                        
       (2) ensure that any individual who is being considered for a        
   position as such an employee is notified of the obligation to           
   participate in the program before being offered employment in such      
   position.                                                               
     (c) Procedures for Medical and Administrative Exemptions.--(1) The   
  Secretary of Defense shall establish uniform procedures under which     
  members of the armed forces may be exempted from participating in the   
  anthrax vaccination program for either administrative or medical        
  reasons.                                                                
     (2) The Secretaries of the military departments shall provide for    
  notification of all members of the armed forces of the procedures       
  described in paragraph (1).                                             
     (d) System for Monitoring Adverse Reactions.--(1) The Secretary of   
  Defense shall establish a system for monitoring adverse reactions of    
  members of the armed forces to the anthrax vaccine which shall include  
  the following:                                                          
       (A) Independent review of Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System    
   reports.                                                                
    (B) Periodic surveys of personnel to whom the vaccine is administered. 

       (C) A continuing longitudinal study of a pre-identified group of    
   members of the armed forces (including men and women and members from   
   all services).                                                          
       (D) Active surveillance of a sample of members to whom the anthrax  
   vaccine has been administered that is sufficient to identify, at the    
   earliest opportunity, any patterns of adverse reactions, the discovery  
   of which might be delayed by reliance solely on the Vaccine Adverse     
   Event Reporting System.                                                 
     (2) The Secretary may extend or expand any ongoing or planned study  
  or analysis of trends in adverse reactions of members of the armed      
  forces to the anthrax vaccine in order to meet any of the requirements  
  in paragraph (1).                                                       
     (3) The Secretary shall establish guidelines under which members of  
  the armed forces who are determined by an independent expert panel to be
  experiencing unexplained adverse reactions may obtain access to a       
  Department of Defense Center of Excellence treatment facility for       
  expedited treatment and follow up.                                      
     (e) Vaccine Development and Procurement.--(1) The Secretary of       
  Defense shall develop a plan, including milestones, for modernizing all 
  vaccines used or anticipated to be used as part of the protection       
  strategy for members of the armed forces.                               
   (2) The Secretary--                                                    

       (A) shall, to the maximum extent possible, be the sole purchaser of 
   a vaccine to immunize members of the armed forces and employees of all  
   Federal agencies;                                                       
       (B) shall, to the maximum extent possible, procure such a vaccine   
   from more than one manufacturer; and                                    
       (C) in any case in which the Secretary determines that sole source  
   procurement of such a vaccine is necessary, may not enter into a        
   contract to purchase such vaccine until 30 days after providing         
   notification to the Committees on Armed Services of the House of        
   Representatives and the Senate that the                                 

           Secretary intends to enter into a sole source contract for the vaccine.


         * * * * * * *                                                           


              CHAPTER 58--BENEFITS AND SERVICES FOR MEMBERS BEING SEPARATED OR    
                               RECENTLY SEPARATED                                 
         * * * * * * *                                                           

          1145. Health benefits                                                   

     (a) Transitional Health Care.--(1) For the applicable time period    
  described in paragraph (2), a member of the armed forces who is         
  involuntarily separated from active duty during the period beginning on 
  October 1, 1990, and ending on September 30, 2001 December 31, 2001 (and
  the dependents of the member), shall be entitled to receive--           
    (A) * * *                                                              

         * * * * * * *                                                           

     (c) Health Care for Certain Separated Members Not Otherwise          
  Eligible.--(1) Consistent with the authority of the Secretary concerned 
  to designate certain classes of persons as eligible to receive health   
  care at a military medical facility, the Secretary concerned should     
  consider authorizing, on an individual basis in cases of hardship, the  
  provision of that care for a member who is separated from the armed     
  forces during the period beginning on October 1, 1990, and ending on    
  September 30, 2001 December 31, 2001, and is ineligible for transitional
  health care under subsection (a) or does not obtain a conversion health 
  policy (or a dependent of the member).                                  
         * * * * * * *                                                           

     (e) Coast Guard.--The provisions of this section shall apply to      
  members of the Coast Guard (and their dependents) involuntarily         
  separated from active duty during the period beginning on October 1,    
  1994, and ending on September 30, 2001 December 31, 2001. The Secretary 
  of Transportation shall implement this section for the Coast Guard.     
          1146. Commissary and exchange benefits                                  

     The Secretary of Defense shall prescribe regulations to allow a      
  member of the armed forces who is involuntarily separated from active   
  duty during the period beginning on October 1, 1990, and ending on      
  September 30, 2001 December 31, 2001, to continue to use commissary and 
  exchange stores during the two-year period beginning on the date of the 
  involuntary separation of the member in the same manner as a member on  
  active duty. The Secretary of Transportation shall implement this       
  provision for Coast Guard members involuntarily separated during the    
  period beginning on October 1, 1994, and ending on September 30, 2001   
  December 31, 2001.                                                      
          1147. Use of military family housing                                    

     (a) Transition for Involuntarily Separated Members.--(1) The         
  Secretary of a military department may, pursuant to regulations         
  prescribed by the Secretary of Defense, permit individuals who are      
  involuntarily separated during the period beginning on October 1, 1990, 
  and ending on September 30, 2001 December 31, 2001, to continue for not 
  more than 180 days after the date of such separation to reside (along   
  with other members of the individual's household) in military family    
  housing provided or leased by the Department of Defense to such         
  individual as a member of the armed forces.                             
     (2) The Secretary of Transportation may prescribe regulations to     
  permit members of the Coast Guard who are involuntarily separated       
  thereof ``during the period beginning on October 1, 1994, and ending on 
  September 30, 2001 December 31, 2001, to continue for not more than 180 
  days after the date of such separation to reside (along with others of  
  the member's household) in military family housing provided or leased by
  the Coast Guard to the individual as a member of the armed forces.      
         * * * * * * *                                                           

                    1150. Affiliation with Guard and Reserve units: waiver of     
          certain limitations                                                     
     (a) Preference for Certain Persons.--A person who is separated from  
  the armed forces during the period beginning on October 1, 1990, and    
  ending on September 30, 2001 December 31, 2001, and who applies to      
  become a member of a National Guard or Reserve unit within one year     
  after the date of such separation shall be given preference over other  
  equally qualified applicants for existing or projected vacancies within 
  the unit to which the member applies.                                   
         * * * * * * *                                                           

                                   CHAPTER 59--SEPARATION                         

         * * * * * * *                                                           

                    1174. Separation pay upon involuntary discharge or release    
          from active duty                                                        
   (a) * * *                                                              

         * * * * * * *                                                           

   (c)  Other Members.--(1) * * *                                         

         * * * * * * *                                                           

     (4) The discharge or release from active duty of an officer under a  
  law or regulation requiring that an officer who has failed of selection 
  for promotion to the next higher grade for the second time, or who      
  declines continuation on active duty after such a failure, be discharged
  or released from active duty shall be considered to be involuntary for  
  purposes of paragraph (1)(A).                                           
          1174a. Special separation benefits programs                             

   (a) * * *                                                              

         * * * * * * *                                                           

     (h) Termination of Program.--(1) Except as provided in paragraph (2),
  the Secretary concerned may not conduct a program                       

          pursuant to this section after September 30, 2001  December 31, 2001.   

         * * * * * * *                                                           

          1175. Voluntary separation incentive                                    

   (a) * * *                                                              

         * * * * * * *                                                           

   (d)(1) * * *                                                           

         * * * * * * *                                                           

     (3) After September 30, 2001 December 31, 2001, the Secretary may not
  approve a request.                                                      
   (e)(1) * * *                                                           

         * * * * * * *                                                           

     (3) (A) A member who has received the voluntary separation incentive 
  and who qualifies for retired or retainer pay under this title shall    
  have deducted from each payment of such retired or retainer pay so much 
  of such pay as is based on the service for which he received the        
  voluntary separation incentive until the total amount deducted equals   
  the total amount of voluntary separation incentive received. If the     
  member elected to have a reduction in voluntary separation incentive for
  any period pursuant to paragraph (2), the deduction required under the  
  preceding sentence shall be reduced accordingly.                        

     (B) If a member is receiving simultaneous voluntary separation       
  incentive payments and retired or retainer pay, the member may elect to 
  terminate the receipt of voluntary separation incentive payments. Any   
  such election is permanent and irrevocable. The rate of monthly         
  recoupment from retired or retainer pay of voluntary separation         
  incentive payments received after such an election shall be reduced by a
  percentage that is equal to a fraction with a denominator equal to the  
  number of months that the voluntary separation incentive payments were  
  scheduled to be paid and a numerator equal to the number of months that 
  would not be paid as a result of the member's decision to terminate the 
  voluntary separation incentive.                                         

         * * * * * * *                                                           

                                  CHAPTER 69--RETIRED GRADE                       

         * * * * * * *                                                           

          1370. Commissioned officers: general rule; exceptions                   

     (a) Rule for Retirement in Highest Grade Held Satisfactorily.--(1) * 
  * *                                                                     
     (2)(A) In order to be eligible for voluntary retirement under any    
  provision of this title in a grade above major or lieutenant commander, 
  a commissioned officer of the Army, Navy, Air Force, or Marine Corps    
  must have served on active duty in that grade for not less than three   
  years, except that the Secretary of Defense may authorize the Secretary 
  of a military department to reduce such period to a period not less than
  two years in the case of retirements effective during the period        
  beginning on October 1, 1990, and ending on September 30, 2001 December 
  31, 2001.                                                               
   (d)  Reserve Officers.--(1) * * *                                      

         * * * * * * *                                                           

     (5) The Secretary of Defense may authorize the Secretary of a        
  military department to reduce the 3-year period required by paragraph   
  (3)(A) to a period not less than 2 years in the case of retirements     
  effective during the period beginning on October 17, 1998, and ending on
  September 30, 2001 December 31, 2001. The number of reserve commissioned
  officers of an armed force in the same grade for whom a reduction is    
  made during any fiscal year in the period of service-in-grade otherwise 
  required under this paragraph may not exceed the number equal to 2      
  percent of the strength authorized for that fiscal year for reserve     
  commissioned officers of that armed force in an active status in that   
  grade.                                                                  
         * * * * * * *                                                           

                   CHAPTER 73--ANNUITIES BASED ON RETIRED OR RETAINER PAY         

         * * * * * * *                                                           

                            SUBCHAPTER II--SURVIVOR BENEFIT PLAN                  

         * * * * * * *                                                           

          1448. Application of Plan                                               

   (a)  General Rules for Participation in the Plan.--                    

    (1) * * *                                                              

       (2) Participants in the plan.--The Plan applies to the following    
   persons, who shall be participants in the Plan:                         
    (A) * * *                                                              

       (B) Reserve-component annuity participants.--A person who (i) is    
   eligible to participate in the Plan under paragraph (1)(B), (ii) is     
   married or has a dependent child when he is notified under section      
   12731(d) of this title that he has completed the years of service       
   required for eligibility for reserve-component retired pay, and (iii)   
   elects to participate in the Plan (and makes a designation under        
   subsection (e)) before the end of the 90-day period beginning on the    
   date he receives such notification.                                     

       (B) Reserve-component annuity participants.--A person who (i) is    
   eligible to participate in the Plan under paragraph (1)(B), and (ii) is 
   married or has a dependent child when he is notified under section      
   12731(d) of this title that he has completed the years of service       
   required for eligibility for reserve-component retired pay, unless the  
   person elects (with his spouse's concurrence, if required under         
   paragraph (3)) not to participate in the Plan before the end of the     
   90-day period beginning on the date on which he receives that           
   notification.                                                           

      A person described in clauses (i) and (ii) of subparagraph (B) who   
   does not elect to participate in the Plan before the end of the 90-day  
   period referred to in that clause who elects under                      

                     subparagraph (B) not to participate in the Plan remains      
          eligible, upon reaching 60 years of age and otherwise becoming entitled 
          to retired pay, to participate in the Plan in accordance with           
          eligibility under paragraph (1)(A).                                     
    (3)  Elections.--                                                      

    (A)  * * *                                                             

       (B) Spousal consent for certain elections respecting                
   reserve-component annuity.--A married person who elects to provide who  
   is eligible to provide a reserve-component annuity may not without the  
   concurrence of the person's spouse elect--                              

    (i) not to participate in the Plan;                                    

       (ii) to designate under subsection (e)(2) the effective date for    
   commencement of annuity payments under the Plan in the event that the   
   member dies before becoming 60 years of age to be the 60th anniversary  
   of the member's birth (rather than the day after the date of the        
   member's death);                                                        

       (i) (iii) to provide an annuity for the person's spouse at less than
   the maximum level; or                                                   
       (ii) (iv) to provide an annuity for a dependent child but not for   
   the person's spouse.                                                    
    (4)  Irrevocability of elections.--                                    

       (A) Standard annuity.--An election under paragraph (2)(A) not to    
   participate in the Plan is irrevocable if not revoked before the date on
   which the person first becomes entitled to retired pay.                 
       (B) Reserve-component annuity.--An election under paragraph (2)(B)  
   to participate in the Plan is irrevocable if not revoked before the end 
   of the 90-day period referred to in that paragraph.                     
         * * * * * * *                                                           

   (b)  Insurable Interest and Former Spouse Coverage.--                  

    (1)  * * *                                                             

         * * * * * * *                                                           

    (3)  Former spouse coverage by persons already participating in plan.--

    (A)  * * *                                                             

         * * * * * * *                                                           

       (E) Effective date of election.--An election under this paragraph is
   effective as of--                                                       
    (i)  * * *                                                             

       (ii) in the case of a person required (as described in section      
   1450(f)(3)(B) of this title) to make the election by reason of a court  
   order or filing the date of which is after October 16, 1998,, the first 
   day of the first month which begins after the date of that court order  
   or filing.                                                              
         * * * * * * *                                                           

     (e) Designation for Commencement of Reserve-Component Annuity.--In   
  any case in which a person electing to participate in the Plan is       
  required to make a designation under this subsection, the person making 
  such election shall designate whether, in the event he dies before      
  becoming 60 years of age, the annuity provided shall become effective   
  on--                                                                    
    (1) the day after the date of his death; or                            

    (2) the 60th anniversary of his birth.                                 

         * * * * * * *                                                           

                       CHAPTER 77--POSTHUMOUS COMMISSIONS AND WARRANTS            

         * * * * * * *                                                           

          1521. Posthumous commissions                                            

     (a) The President may issue, or have issued, an appropriate          
  commission in the name of a member of the armed forces who, after       
  September 8, 1939--                                                     
    (1) * * *                                                              

         * * * * * * *                                                           

       (3) was officially recommended for appointment or promotion to a    
   commissioned grade and the recommendation for whose appointment or      
   promotion was approved by the Secretary concerned but was unable to     
   accept the promotion or appointment because of death in line of duty.   
         * * * * * * *                                                           

            CHAPTER 80--MISCELLANEOUS INVESTIGATION REQUIREMENTS AND OTHER DUTIES 


      Sec.                                                                    

            1561. Complaints of sexual harassment: investigation by commanding
      officers.                                                               
         * * * * * * *                                                           


            1563. Consideration of proposals for posthumous and honorary      
      promotions and appointments: procedures for review and recommendation.  
            1564. Military criminal investigations: probable cause required   
      for entry of names of subjects into official investigative reports.     
            1565. DNA identification information: collection from violent and 
      sexual offenders; use.                                                  

         * * * * * * *                                                           


                    1563. Consideration of proposals for posthumous and honorary  
          promotions and appointments: procedures for review and recommendation   
     (a) Review by Secretary Concerned.--Upon request of a Member of      
  Congress, the Secretary concerned shall review a proposal for the       
  posthumous or honorary promotion or appointment of a member or former   
  member of the armed forces, or any other person considered qualified,   
  that is not otherwise authorized by law. Based upon such review, the    
  Secretary shall make a determination as to the merits of approving the  
  posthumous or honorary promotion or appointment and the other           
  determinations necessary to comply with subsection (b).                 
     (b) Notice of Results of Review.--Upon making a determination under  
  subsection (a) as to the merits of approving the posthumous or honorary 
  promotion or appointment, the Secretary                                 

                    concerned shall submit to the Committee on Armed Services of  
          the Senate and the Committee on Armed Services of the House of          
          Representatives and to the requesting Member of Congress notice in      
          writing of one of the following:                                        
       (1) The posthumous or honorary promotion or appointment does not    
   warrant approval on the merits.                                         
       (2) The posthumous or honorary promotion or appointment warrants    
   approval and authorization by law for the promotion or appointment is   
   recommended.                                                            
       (3) The posthumous or honorary promotion or appointment warrants    
   approval on the merits and has been recommended to the President as an  
   exception to policy.                                                    
       (4) The posthumous or honorary promotion or appointment warrants    
   approval on the merits and authorization by law for the promotion or    
   appointment is required but is not recommended.                         
    A notice under paragraph (1) or (4) shall be accompanied by a         
  statement of the reasons for the decision of the Secretary.             
     (c) Definition.--In this section, the term ``Member of Congress''    
  means--                                                                 
    (1) a Senator; or                                                      

       (2) a Representative in, or a Delegate or Resident Commissioner to, 
   Congress.                                                               
                    1564. Military criminal investigations: probable cause        
          required for entry of names of subjects into official investigative     
          reports                                                                 
     (a) Probable Cause Required for ``Titling''.--The Secretary of       
  Defense shall require that an employee of a military criminal           
  investigative organization or a member of the armed forces assigned to a
  military criminal investigative organization, in connection with the    
  investigation of a reported crime, may not designate any person, by name
  or by any other identifying information, as a suspect in the case in any
  official investigative report, or in a central index for potential      
  retrieval and analysis by law enforcement organizations, unless there is
  probable cause to believe that that person committed the crime.         
     (b) Standard for Removal of ``Titling'' Information From             
  Records.--The Secretary of Defense shall establish a uniform standard   
  applicable throughout the Department of Defense for removal from an     
  official investigative report of a reported crime, and from any         
  applicable central index, of the name of a person (and any other        
  identifying information about that person) that was entered in the      
  report or index to designate that person as a suspect in the case when  
  it is subsequently determined that there is not probable cause to       
  believe that that person committed the crime.                           
     (c) Criminal Investigative Organization Defined.--In this section,   
  the term ``criminal investigative organization'' means any of the       
  following:                                                              
       (1) The Defense Criminal Investigative Service (or any successor to 
   that service).                                                          
       (2) The Army Criminal Investigation Command (or any successor to    
   that command).                                                          
       (3) The Naval Criminal Investigative Service (or any successor to   
   that service).                                                          
       (4) The Air Force Office of Special Investigations (or any successor
   to that office).                                                        
                    1565. DNA identification information: collection from violent 
          and sexual offenders; use                                               
     (a) Collection of DNA Samples.--The Secretary concerned shall collect
  a DNA sample from each member of the armed forces under the Secretary's 
  jurisdiction who is, or has been, convicted of a qualifying military    
  offense (as determined under subsection (e)).                           
     (b) Analysis of Samples.--The Secretary concerned shall furnish each 
  DNA sample collected under subsection (a) to the Secretary of Defense.  
  The Secretary of Defense shall carry out a DNA analysis on each such DNA
  sample.                                                                 
   (c)  Definitions.--In this section:                                    

       (1) The term ``DNA sample'' means a tissue, fluid, or other bodily  
   sample of an individual on which a DNA analysis can be carried out.     
       (2) The term ``DNA analysis'' means analysis of the deoxyribonucleic
   acid (DNA) identification information in a bodily sample.               
     (d) Use in CODIS.--(1) The Secretary of Defense shall furnish the    
  results of each DNA analysis carried out under subsection (b) to the    
  Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation for use in the Combined 
  DNA Index System (in this section referred to as ``CODIS'') of the      
  Federal Bureau of Investigation.                                        
     (2) The Secretary of Defense, in consultation with the Director of   
  the Federal Bureau of Investigation, shall establish procedures         
  providing that if a DNA sample has been collected from a person pursuant
  to subsection (a), and the Secretary receives notice that each          
  conviction of that person of a qualifying military offense has been     
  overturned, the Secretary shall promptly transmit a notice of that fact 
  to the Director in accordance with section 210304(d) of the Violent     
  Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994.                          
     (e) Qualifying Military Offenses.--(1) Subject to paragraph (2), the 
  Secretary of Defense, in consultation with the Attorney General, shall  
  determine those violent or sexual offenses under the Uniform Code of    
  Military Justice that shall be considered for purposes of this section  
  as qualifying military offenses.                                        
     (2) An offense under the Uniform Code of Military Justice that is    
  equivalent to a serious violent felony (as that term is defined in      
  section 3559(c)(2)(F) of title 18), as determined by the Secretary in   
  consultation with the Attorney General, shall be considered for purposes
  of this section as a qualifying military offense.                       
     (f) Waiver.--The Secretary of Defense may waive the requirement of   
  subsection (a) for a member if CODIS contains a DNA analysis with       
  respect to that member.                                                 
     (g) Regulations.--This section shall be carried out under regulations
  prescribed by the Secretary of Defense, in consultation with the        
  Secretary of Transportation and the Attorney General. Those regulations 
  shall apply, to the extent practicable, uniformly throughout the armed  
  forces.                                                                 

         * * * * * * *                                                           

                     CHAPTER 83--CIVILIAN DEFENSE INTELLIGENCE EMPLOYEES          

         * * * * * * *                                                           

                  SUBCHAPTER I--DEFENSE WIDE INTELLIGENCE PERSONNEL POLICY        

         * * * * * * *                                                           

                    1601. Civilian intelligence personnel: general authority to   
          establish excepted positions, appoint personnel, and fix rates of pay   
   (a)  General Authority.--The Secretary of Defense may--                

       (1) establish, as positions in the excepted service, such defense   
   intelligence positions in the intelligence components of the Department 
   of Defense and the military departments in the Department of Defense as 
   the Secretary determines necessary to carry out the intelligence        
   functions of those components and departments of the Department,        
   including--                                                             
       (A) Intelligence Senior Level positions designated under section    
   1607 of this title; and                                                 
    (B) positions in the Defense Intelligence Senior Executive Service;    

         * * * * * * *                                                           

                    1611. Postemployment assistance: certain terminated           
          intelligence employees                                                  
     (a) Authority.--Subject to subsection (c), the Secretary of Defense  
  may, in the case of any individual who is a qualified former            
  intelligence employee, use appropriated funds--                         
       (1) to assist that individual in finding and qualifying for         
   employment other than in an intelligence component of the Department of 
   Defense defense intelligence position;                                  
         * * * * * * *                                                           

     (b) Qualified Former Intelligence Employees.--For purposes of this   
  section, a qualified former intelligence employee is an individual who  
  was employed as a civilian employee of the Department of Defense in a   
  sensitive position in an intelligence component of the Department of    
  Defense sensitive defense intelligence position--                       
       (1) who has been found to be ineligible for continued access to     
   information designated as ``Sensitive Compartmented Information'' and   
   employment with the intelligence component in a defense intelligence    
   position; or                                                            
       (2) whose employment with the intelligence component in a defense   
   intelligence position has been terminated.                              
         * * * * * * *                                                           


     (d) Duration of Assistance.--Assistance may not be provided under    
  this section in the case of any individual after the end of the         
  five-year period beginning on the date of the termination of the        
  employment of the individual with an intelligence component of the      
  Department of Defense in a defense intelligence position.               
         * * * * * * *                                                           

     (f) Definition.--In this section, the term ``intelligence component  
  of the Department of Defense'' includes the National Reconnaissance     
  Office and any intelligence component of a military department.         
         * * * * * * *                                                           

          1614. Definitions                                                       

   In this subchapter:                                                    

       (1) The term ``defense intelligence position'' means a civilian     
   position as an intelligence officer or intelligence employee of an      
   intelligence component of the Department of Defense or of a military    
   department of the Department of Defense.                                
         * * * * * * *                                                           

          PART III--TRAINING AND EDUCATION                                        

         * * * * * * *                                                           

                    CHAPTER 102--JUNIOR RESERVE OFFICERS' TRAINING CORPS          

         * * * * * * *                                                           

          2033. Contingent funding increase                                       

     If for any fiscal year the amount appropriated for appropriated      
  directly to the Secretary of Defense for the National Guard Challenge   
  Program under section 509 of title 32 is in excess of $62,500,000, the  
  Secretary of Defense shall (notwithstanding any other provision of law) 
  make the amount in excess of $62,500,000 available for the Junior       
  Reserve Officers' Training Corps program under section 2031 of this     
  title, and such excess amount may not be used for any other purpose.    
         * * * * * * *                                                           

             CHAPTER 105--ARMED FORCES HEALTH PROFESSIONS FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE    
                                    PROGRAMS                                      
         * * * * * * *                                                           

                  SUBCHAPTER II--NURSE OFFICER CANDIDATE ACCESSION PROGRAM        

         * * * * * * *                                                           

          2130a. Financial assistance: nurse officer candidates                   

     (a) Bonus Authorized.--(1) A person described in subsection (b) who, 
  during the period beginning on November 29, 1989, and ending on December
  31, 2000 December 31, 2001, executes a written agreement in accordance  
  with subsection (c) to accept an appointment as a nurse officer may,    
  upon the acceptance of the agreement by the Secretary concerned, be paid
  an accession bonus of not more than $5,000. The bonus shall be paid in  
  periodic installments, as determined by the Secretary concerned at the  
  time the agreement is accepted, except that the first installment may   
  not exceed $2,500.                                                      
         * * * * * * *                                                           

                         CHAPTER 108--DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE SCHOOLS               


 Sec.                                                                    

      2161. Joint Military Intelligence College: academic degrees.            

         * * * * * * *                                                           


      2166. Defense Institute for Hemispheric Security Cooperation.           


         * * * * * * *                                                           

                    2164. Department of Defense domestic dependent elementary and 
          secondary schools                                                       
   (a)  * * *                                                             

         * * * * * * *                                                           

     (c) Eligibility of Dependents of Federal Employees and Other         
  Persons.--(1) * * *                                                     
         * * * * * * *                                                           


     (3)(A) The Secretary may authorize the dependent of an American Red  
  Cross employee described in subparagraph (B) to enroll in an education  
  program provided by the Secretary pursuant to subsection (a) if the     
  American Red Cross agrees to reimburse the Secretary for the educational
  services so provided.                                                   
     (B) An employee referred to in subparagraph (A) is an American Red   
  Cross employee who--                                                    
    (i) resides in Puerto Rico; and                                        

       (ii) performs, on a full-time basis, emergency services on behalf of
   members of the armed forces.                                            
     (C) Amounts received under this paragraph as reimbursement for       
  educational services shall be treated in the same manner as amounts     
  received under subsection (g).                                          

         * * * * * * *                                                           

          2165. National Defense University: component institutions               

   (a)  * * *                                                             

     (b) Component Institutions.--The National Defense University consists
  of the following institutions:                                          
    (1)  * * *                                                             

         * * * * * * *                                                           

    (3) The Armed Forces Staff College  Joint Forces Staff College.        

         * * * * * * *                                                           


          2166. Defense Institute for Hemispheric Security Cooperation            

     (a) Authority.--The Secretary of Defense may operate an education and
  training facility known as the ``Defense Institute for Hemispheric      
  Security Cooperation''. The Secretary of Defense may designate the      
  Secretary of the Army as the Department of Defense executive agent for  
  carrying out the responsibilities of the Secretary of Defense under this
  section.                                                                
     (b) Purpose.--(1) The Institute shall be operated for the purpose of 
  providing education and training to military, law enforcement, and      
  civilian personnel of nations of the Western Hemisphere in defense and  
  security matters.                                                       
     (2) For purposes of paragraph (1), defense and security matters      
  include--                                                               
    (A) professional military education;                                   

    (B) leadership development;                                            

    (C) counter-drug operations;                                           

    (D) peace support operations; and                                      

    (E) disaster relief.                                                   

     (c) Curriculum.--The education and training programs provided by the 
  Institute shall include (for each person attending the Institute under  
  subsection (b)) instruction totaling not less than eight hours relating 
  to each of the following subjects:                                      
    (1) Human rights.                                                      

    (2) The rule of law.                                                   

    (3) Due process.                                                       

    (4) Civilian control of the military.                                  

    (5) The role of the military in a democratic society.                  

     (d) Board of Visitors.--(1) There is a Board of Visitors for the     
  Institute. The Board shall be composed of members appointed by the      
  Secretary of Defense (or the Secretary of the Army as the Secretary's   
  designee). In selecting members of the Board, the Secretary shall       
  consider recommendations by--                                           
       (A) the Speaker and the minority leader of the House of             
   Representatives;                                                        
    (B) the majority leader and the minority leader of the Senate;         

    (C) the Secretary of State;                                            

       (D) the commander of the unified command with geographic            
   responsibility for Latin America; and                                   
       (E) representatives from academic institutions, religious           
   institutions, and human rights organizations.                           
   (2) Members shall serve for two years and shall meet at least annually.

   (3)(A) The Board shall inquire into--                                  

       (i) the curriculum, instruction, physical equipment, fiscal affairs,
   academic methods, and other matters relating to the Institute that the  
   Board decides to consider; and                                          
       (ii) any other matters relating to the Institute that the Secretary 
   considers appropriate.                                                  
     (B) The Board shall review the curriculum of the Institute to ensure 
  that the curriculum--                                                   
    (i) complies with applicable United States law and regulations;        


       (ii) is consistent with United States policy goals toward Latin     
   America and the Caribbean; and                                          
    (iii) adheres to current United States doctrine.                       

     (4)(A) Not later than 60 days after its annual meeting, the Board    
  shall submit to the Secretary a written report of its action and of its 
  views and recommendations pertaining to the Institute.                  
     (B) Within 30 days of receipt of the Board's report for any year, the
  Secretary shall transmit the report, with the Secretary's comments, to  
  Congress.                                                               
     (5) While performing duties as a member of or adviser to the Board,  
  each member of the Board and each adviser shall be reimbursed for travel
  expenses under Government travel regulations. Board members shall not be
  compensated by reason of service on the Board.                          
     (e) Source of Funds.--The fixed costs of operating and maintaining   
  the Institute may be paid from funds available for operation and        
  maintenance.                                                            
     (f) Tuition.--Tuition fees charged for persons who attend the        
  Institute may not include the fixed costs of operating and maintaining  
  the Institute.                                                          

         * * * * * * *                                                           

          PART IV--SERVICE, SUPPLY, AND PROCUREMENT                               

         * * * * * * *                                                           

                           CHAPTER 131--PLANNING AND COORDINATION                 

         * * * * * * *                                                           

          2218.  National Defense Sealift Fund                                    

   (a) * * *                                                              

         * * * * * * *                                                           

     (k) Contracts for Incorporation of Defense Features in Commercial    
  Vessels.--(1) The head of an agency may enter into a contract with a    
  company submitting an offer for that company to install and maintain    
  defense features for national defense purposes in one or more commercial
  vessels owned or controlled by that company in accordance with the      
  purpose for which funds in the National Defense Sealift Fund are        
  available under subsection (c)(1)(C). The head of the agency may enter  
  into such a contract only after the head of the agency makes a          
  determination of the economic soundness of the offer. As consideration  
  for a contract with the Secretary of Defense or the Secretary of a      
  military department under this subsection, the company entering into the
  contract shall agree with the Secretary to make any vessel covered by   
  the contract available to the Secretary, fully crewed and ready for sea,
  at any time at any port determined by the Secretary, and for whatever   
  duration the Secretary determines necessary.                            
     (2) The head of an agency may make advance payments to the contractor
  under a contract under paragraph (1) in a lump sum, in annual payments, 
  or in a combination thereof for costs associated with the installation  
  and maintenance of the defense features on a vessel covered by the      
  contract, as follows:                                                   
    (A) * * *                                                              

         * * * * * * *                                                           

       (E) Payments of such sums as the Government would otherwise expend, 
   if the vessel were placed in the Ready Reserve Fleet, for maintaining   
   the vessel in the status designated as `ROS 4 status' in the Ready      
   Reserve Fleet for 25 years.                                             

         * * * * * * *                                                           

                    CHAPTER 136--PROVISIONS RELATING TO SPECIFIC PROGRAMS         


      Sec.                                                                    

      2281. Global Positioning System.                                        


      2282. B 2 bomber: annual report on operational status.                  


         * * * * * * *                                                           


          2282. B 2 bomber: annual report on operational status                   

     Not later than March 1 of each year, the Secretary of Defense shall  
  submit to the Committee on Armed Services of the Senate and the         
  Committee on Armed Services of the House of Representatives a report on 
  the operational status of the B 2 bomber. Each such report shall include
  the following:                                                          
       (1) An assessment as to whether the B 2 aircraft has a high         
   probability of being able to perform its intended missions.             
       (2) Identification of all planned or ongoing development of         
   technologies to enhance B 2 aircraft capabilities for which funds are   
   programmed in the future years defense program and an assessment as to  
   whether those technologies--                                            
       (A) are consistent with the Air Force bomber roadmap in effect at   
   the time of the report;                                                 
       (B) are consistent with the recommendations of the report of the    
   Long-Range Air Power panel established by section 8131 of the Department
   of Defense Appropriations Act, 1998 (Public Law 105 56); and            
       (C) will be sufficient to assure that the B 2 aircraft will have a  
   high probability of being able to perform its intended missions in the  
   future.                                                                 
       (3) Definition of any additional technology development required to 
   assure that the B 2 aircraft will retain a high probability of being    
   able to perform its intended missions and an estimate of the funding    
   required to develop those additional technologies.                      
       (4) An assessment as to whether the technologies identified pursuant
   to paragraph (2) are adequately funded in the budget request for the    
   next fiscal year and whether funds have been identified throughout the  
   future years defense program to continue those technology developments  
   at an adequate level.                                                   

         * * * * * * *                                                           

                             CHAPTER 137--PROCUREMENT GENERALLY                   

         * * * * * * *                                                           


 Sec.                                                                    

      [2301.  Repealed.]                                                      

         * * * * * * *                                                           

      2306b.  Multiyear contracts: acquisition of property.                   


      2306b. Multiyear contracts:  acquisition of property or services.       

         * * * * * * *                                                           


          2306. Kinds of contracts                                                

   (a)  * * *                                                             

         * * * * * * *                                                           

   (g)(1)  * * *                                                          

         * * * * * * *                                                           

     (3) In the event funds are not made available for the continuation of
  such a contract into a subsequent fiscal year, the contract shall be    
  canceled or terminated, and the costs of cancellation or termination may
  be paid from--                                                          
       (A) appropriations originally available for the performance of the  
   contract concerned;                                                     
       (B) appropriations currently available for procurement of the type  
   of services concerned, and not otherwise obligated; or                  
    (C) funds appropriated for those payments.                             


     (3) Additional provisions regarding mulityear contracts for the      
  purchase of services are provided in section 2306b of this title.       

         * * * * * * *                                                           

          2306b. Multiyear contracts: acquisition of property  or services        

     (a) In General.--To the extent that funds are otherwise available for
  obligation, the head of an agency may enter into multiyear contracts for
  the purchase of property whenever the head of that agency finds each of 
  the following:                                                          
    (1)  * * *                                                             

       (2) That the minimum need for the property or services to be        
   purchased is expected to remain substantially unchanged during the      
   contemplated contract period in terms of production rate, procurement   
   rate, and total quantities.                                             
         * * * * * * *                                                           

       (4) That In the case of a contract for the purchase of property,    
   that there is a stable design for the property to be acquired and that  
   the technical risks associated with such property or services are not   
   excessive.                                                              
         * * * * * * *                                                           

     (f) Cancellation or Termination for Insufficient Funding.--In the    
  event funds are not made available for the continuation of a contract   
  made under this section into a subsequent fiscal year, the contract     
  shall be canceled or terminated. The costs of cancellation or           
  termination may be paid from--                                          
       (1) appropriations originally available for the performance of the  
   contract concerned;                                                     
       (2) appropriations currently available for procurement of the type  
   of property or services concerned, and not otherwise obligated; or      

    (3) funds appropriated for those payments.                             

         * * * * * * *                                                           

          2320. Rights in technical data                                          

   (a)(1)  * * *                                                          

   (2) Such regulations shall include the following provisions:           

    (A)  * * *                                                             

         * * * * * * *                                                           

    (C) Subparagraph (B) does not apply to technical data that--           

    (i)  * * *                                                             

         * * * * * * *                                                           

       (iii) is necessary for operation, maintenance, installation, or     
   training (other than detailed manufacturing or process data); or        

       (iii) is necessary for normal operation (other than detailed        
   manufacturing or processing data), maintenance, installation, or        
   training when such services are to be provided by an entity other than  
   the contractor or its subcontractor;                                    
       (iv) is necessary for critical operation, maintenance, installation 
   of deployed equipment, or training, when such services are to be        
   provided by an entity other than the contractor or its subcontractor; or

       (iv) (v) is otherwise publicly available or has been released or    
   disclosed by the contractor or subcontractor without restriction on     
   further release or disclosure.                                          
         * * * * * * *                                                           

       (F) A contractor or subcontractor (or a prospective contractor or   
   subcontractor) may not be required, as a condition of being responsive  
   to a solicitation or as a condition for the award of a contract--       
       (i) to sell or otherwise relinquish to the United States any rights 
   in technical data except--                                              
       (I) rights in technical data described in clause (i), (ii), (iv), or
   (v) of subparagraph (C); or                                             
    (II) under the conditions described in subparagraph (D); or            


       (III) under the conditions described in subsection (a)(2)(C)(iii),  
   reaching agreement in negotiations concerning provision of the rights   
   involved may not be required as a condition of being responsive to a    
   solicitation, but may be a condition for the award of a contract; or    
         * * * * * * *                                                           

       (H) In a case described in subparagraph (C)(iii), the provision of  
   the rights involved shall be subject to negotiations between the        
   Government and the contractor or contractors involved.                  
       (I) A description of the difference between ``normal operation'' and
   ``critical operation'', as such terms are used in subparagraph (C).     

         * * * * * * *                                                           

                      CHAPTER 141--MISCELLANEOUS PROCUREMENT PROVISIONS           

         * * * * * * *                                                           

                    2401. Requirement for authorization by law of certain         
          contracts relating to vessels and aircraft                              
   (a)(1)  * * *                                                          

         * * * * * * *                                                           

     (b)(1) The Secretary may make a contract described in subsection     
  (a)(1) if--                                                             
    (A)  * * *                                                             

       (B) before a solicitation for proposals for the contract was issued 
   the Secretary notified the Committee on Armed Services and the Committee
   on Appropriations of the Senate and the Committee on Armed Services and 
   the Committees on Appropriations Committee on Appropriations of the     
   House of Representatives of the Secretary's intention to issue such a   
   solicitation; and                                                       
         * * * * * * *                                                           

             CHAPTER 146--CONTRACTING FOR PERFORMANCE OF CIVILIAN COMMERCIAL OR   
                            INDUSTRIAL TYPE FUNCTIONS                             

      Sec.                                                                    

      2460. Definition of depot-level maintenance and repair.                 

         * * * * * * *                                                           


            2475. Consolidation of functions or activities and reengineering  
      or restructuring of organizations, functions, or activities: required   
      studies and reports before manpower reductions.                         
         * * * * * * *                                                           


                    2461. Commercial or industrial type functions: required       
          studies and reports before conversion to contractor performance         
   (a)  * * *                                                             

     (b) Notification and Elements of Analysis.--(1) Before commencing to 
  analyze a commercial or industrial type function described in subsection
  (a) for possible change to performance by the private sector, the       
  Secretary of Defense shall submit to Congress a report containing the   
  following:                                                              
    (A)  * * *                                                             

       (D) The anticipated length and cost of the analysis , and a         
   certification that funds are specifically budgeted to pay for the cost  
   of the analysis.                                                        
         * * * * * * *                                                           

     (c) Notification of Decision.--(1) If, as a result of the completion 
  of the examinations under subsection (b)(3), a decision is made to      
  change the commercial or industrial type function that was the subject  
  of the analysis to performance by the private sector, the Secretary of  
  Defense shall submit to Congress a report describing that decision. The 
  report shall contain the following:                                     

       (A) The date when the analysis of that commercial or industrial type
   function for possible change to performance by the private sector was   
   commenced.                                                              

       (A) (B) An indication that the examinations required under          
   subsection (b)(3) have been completed.                                  
       (B) (C) The Secretary's certification that the Government           
   calculation of the cost of performance of the function by Department of 
   Defense civilian employees is based on an estimate of the most cost     
   effective manner for performance of the function by Department of       
   Defense civilian employees.                                             
       (C) (D) The Secretary's certification that the examination required 
   by subsection (b)(3)(A) as part of the analysis demonstrates that the   
   performance of the function by the private sector will result in savings
   to the Government over the life of the contract.                        

       (E) The number of Department of Defense civilian employees who were 
   performing the function when the analysis was commenced and the number  
   of such employees whose employment was terminated or otherwise adversely
   affected in implementing the most efficient organization of the function
   or whose employment will be terminated or otherwise adversely affected  
   by the change to performance of the function by the private sector.     

       (D) (F) The Secretary's certification that the entire analysis is   
   available for examination.                                              
       (E) (G) A schedule for completing the change to performance of the  
   function by the private sector.                                         
         * * * * * * *                                                           


                    2475. Consolidation of functions or activities and            
          reengineering or restructuring of organizations, functions, or          
          activities: required studies and reports before manpower reductions     
     (a) Reporting and Analysis Requirements as Precondition to Manpower  
  Reductions.--The Secretary of Defense may not initiate manpower         
  reductions at organizations or activities, or within functions, that are
  commercial, commercial exempt from competition, military essential, or  
  inherently governmental until the Secretary fully complies with the     
  reporting and analysis requirements specified in subsections (b) and    
  (c).                                                                    
     (b) Notification and Elements of Analysis.--Before commencing to     
  analyze any commercial, commercial exempt from competition, military    
  essential, or inherently governmental organization, function, or        
  activity for the consolidation, restructuring, or reengineering of      
  military personnel or Department of Defense civilian employees, the     
  Secretary of Defense shall submit to Congress a report containing the   
  following:                                                              

       (1) The organization, function, or activity to be analyzed for      
   possible consolidation, restructuring, or reengineering.                
       (2) The location or locations at which military personnel or        
   Department of Defense civilian employees would be affected.             
       (3) The number of military personnel or Department of Defense       
   civilian employee positions potentially affected.                       
       (4) A description of the organization, function, or activity to be  
   analyzed for possible consolidation, restructuring, or reengineering,   
   including a description of all missions, duties, or military            
   requirements that might be affected.                                    
       (5) An examination of the cost incurred by the Department of Defense
   to perform the function or to operate the organization or activity that 
   will be analyzed.                                                       
       (6) A certification that a proposed consolidation, restructuring, or
   reengineering of a commercial, commercial exempt from competition,      
   military essential, or inherently governmental organization, function,  
   or activity is not a result of a decision by an official of a military  
   department or Defense Agency to impose predetermined constraints or     
   limitations on the number of military personnel or Department of Defense
   civilian employees.                                                     
     (c) Notification of Decision.--If, as a result of the completion of  
  an analysis carried out consistent with the requirements of subsection  
  (b), a decision is made to consolidate, restructure, or reengineer an   
  organization, function, or activity, the Secretary of Defense shall     
  submit to the Committee on Armed Services of the House of               
  Representatives and the Committee on Armed Services of the Senate a     
  report describing that decision. The report shall contain the following:
       (1) The Secretary's certification that the consolidation,           
   restructuring, or reengineering that was analyzed will yield savings to 
   the Department of Defense.                                              
       (2) A projection of the savings that will be realized as a result of
   the consolidation, restructuring, or reengineering, compared with the   
   cost incurred by the Department of Defense to perform the function or to
   operate the organization or activity prior to such proposed             
   consolidation, restructuring, or reengineering.                         
       (3) A description of all missions, duties, or military requirements 
   that will be affected as a result of the decision to consolidate,       
   restructure, or reengineer the organization, function, or activity that 
   was analyzed.                                                           
       (4) The Secretary's certification that the consolidation,           
   restructuring or reengineering will not result in any diminution of     
   military readiness.                                                     
       (5) A schedule for performing the consolidation, restructuring or   
   reengineering.                                                          
       (6) The Secretary's certification that the entire analysis is       
   available for examination.                                              
     (d) Delegation.--The responsibility to prepare reports under         
  subsections (b) and (c) may be delegated to the Deputy Under Secretary  
  of Defense for Installations.                                           
     (e) Commencement; Waiver for Small Functions.--(1) The consolidation,
  restructuring, or reengineering of an organization, function, or        
  activity for which a report is required under subsection (c) shall not  
  begin until at least 45 days after the submission of the report to the  
  Committee on Armed Services of the House of Representatives and the     
  Committee on Armed Services of the Senate.                              
     (2) Subsection (c) shall not apply to a consolidation, restructuring,
  or reengineering that will result in the elimination of 10 or fewer     
  military or Department of Defense civilian employee positions.          
     (f) Comptroller General Review.--Not later than March 1 of each year,
  the Comptroller General shall submit to Congress a report reviewing     
  decisions taken by the Secretary of Defense to consolidate, restructure,
  or reengineer organizations, functions, or activities during the        
  previous year and assessing the Secretary's compliance with this        
  section. The report shall include a detailed assessment by the          
  Comptroller General of whether the savings projected by the Secretary to
  result from such decisions are likely to be realized, and whether any   
  decision taken by the Secretary is likely to result in a diminution of  
  military readiness. The report shall also include detailed audits of    
  selected analyses performed by the Secretary.                           
     (g) Relation to Other Law.--Nothing in this section shall be         
  construed to obviate the requirements set forth in section 1597 of this 
  title.                                                                  

         * * * * * * *                                                           

           CHAPTER 147--COMMISSARIES AND EXCHANGES AND OTHER MORALE, WELFARE, AND 
                              RECREATION ACTIVITIES                               

 Sec.                                                                    

      [2481.  Transferred.]                                                   

         * * * * * * *                                                           

      2484. Commissary stores: expenses.                                      


            2484. Commissary stores: use of appropriated funds to cover       
      operating expenses.                                                     

         * * * * * * *                                                           

          2484. Commissary stores: expenses                                       

     (a) Except to the extent authorized in regulations prescribed by the 
  Secretary of a military department and approved by the Secretary of     
  Defense and except as provided in subsection (b), funds available to the
  Department of Defense may not be used to pay, in connection with the    
  operation of any commissary store--                                     
       (1) the cost of purchases (including commercial transportation in   
   the United States to the place of sale) and the cost of maintenance of  
   operating equipment and supplies;                                       
       (2) the actual or estimated cost of utilities furnished by the      
   United States;                                                          
       (3) the actual or estimated cost of shrinkage, spoilage, and        
   pilferage of merchandise under the control of the commissary store; or  
       (4) costs incurred in connection with obtaining the face value      
   amount of manufacturer or vendor cents-off discount coupons by the      
   commissary store (or other entity acting on behalf of the commissary    
   store).                                                                 
     (b) Appropriated funds may be used to pay any costs described in     
  subsection (a) but only to the extent that appropriation accounts used  
  to pay such costs are reimbursed for the payment of such costs,         
  including, in the case of any costs incurred in connection with discount
  coupons referred to in subsection (a)(4), all fees or moneys received   
  for handling or processing such coupons. The sales prices in commissary 
  stores shall be adjusted to the extent necessary to provide sufficient  
  gross revenues from the sales of such stores to make such               
  reimbursements. Such adjustments shall be made under regulations        
  prescribed by the Secretary of the military department concerned and    
  approved by the Secretary of Defense.                                   
     (c) Under regulations prescribed by the Secretary of Defense,        
  utilities may be furnished without cost to a commissary store outside   
  the United States or in Alaska or Hawaii.                               
     (d) Transportation outside the United States may be furnished in     
  connection with the operation of commissary stores outside the United   
  States.                                                                 

                    2484. Commissary stores: use of appropriated funds to cover   
          operating expenses                                                      
     (a) Operation of Agency and System.--Except as otherwise provided in 
  this title, the operation of the Defense Commissary Agency and the      
  defense commissary system may be funded using such amounts as are       
  appropriated for such purpose.                                          
     (b) Operating Expenses of Commissary Stores.--Appropriated funds may 
  be used to cover the expenses of operating commissary stores and central
  product processing facilities of the defense commissary system. For     
  purposes of this subsection, operating expenses include the following:  
       (1) Salaries of employees of the United States, host nations, and   
   contractors supporting commissary store operations.                     
    (2) Utilities.                                                         

    (3) Communications.                                                    

    (4) Operating supplies and services.                                   

       (5) Second destination transportation costs within or outside the   
   United States.                                                          
       (6) Any cost associated with above-store level management or other  
   indirect support of a commissary store or a central product processing  
   facility, including equipment maintenance and information technology    
   costs.                                                                  

         * * * * * * *                                                           

                    2486. Commissary stores: merchandise that may be sold; uniform
          surcharges and pricing                                                  
   (a)  * * *                                                             

     (b) Authorized Commissary Merchandise Categories.--Merchandise sold  
  in, at, or by commissary stores may include items only in the following 
  categories:                                                             
    (1)  * * *                                                             

         * * * * * * *                                                           


    (11) Magazines and other periodicals.                                  


       (11) (12) Such other merchandise categories as the Secretary of     
   Defense may prescribe, except that the Secretary shall submit to        
   Congress, not later than March 1 of each year, a report describing--    

       (A) any addition of, or change in, a merchandise category proposed  
   to be made under this paragraph during the one-year period beginning on 
   that date; and                                                          
       (B) those additions and changes in merchandise categories actually  
   made during the preceding one-year period.                              
     (c) Uniform Sales Price Surcharge or Adjustment.--An adjustment of or
  surcharge on sales prices in commissary stores under section 2484(b) or 
  subsection (d) or section 2685(a) of this title or for any other purpose
  shall be applied as a uniform percentage of the sales price of all      
  merchandise sold in, at, or by commissary stores. Effective on November 
  18, 1997, the uniform percentage shall be equal to five percent and may 
  not be changed except by a law enacted after such date.                 
     (d) Sales Price Establishment.--(1) The Secretary of Defense shall   
  establish the sales price of each item of merchandise sold in, at, or by
  commissary stores at the level that will recoup the actual product cost 
  of the item (consistent with this section and sections 2484 and section 
  2685 of this title).                                                    
         * * * * * * *                                                           


     (3) The sales price of merchandise and services sold in, at, or by   
  commissary stores shall be adjusted to cover the following:             
       (A) The cost of first destination commercial transportation of the  
   merchandise in the United States to the place of sale.                  
       (B) The actual or estimated cost of shrinkage, spoilage, and        
   pilferage of merchandise under the control of commissary stores.        

         * * * * * * *                                                           

     (f) Special Rules for Certain Merchandise.--(1) Notwithstanding the  
  general requirement that merchandise sold in, at, or by commissary      
  stores be commissary store inventory, the Secretary of Defense may      
  authorize the sale of items in the merchandise categories specified in  
  paragraph (2) tobacco products as noncommissary store inventory.        
  Subsections (c) and (d) shall not apply to the pricing of such          
  merchandise items.                                                      
     (2) The merchandise categories referred to in paragraph (1) are as   
  follows:                                                                
    (A) Magazines and other periodicals.                                   

    (B) Tobacco products.                                                  

         * * * * * * *                                                           

                    2488. Nonappropriated fund instrumentalities: purchase of     
          alcoholic beverages                                                     
   (a)  * * *                                                             

         * * * * * * *                                                           

     (c)(1) In the case of covered alcoholic beverage purchases of        
  distilled spirits, to determine whether a nonappropriated fund          
  instrumentality of the Department of Defense provides the most          
  economical method of distribution to package stores, the Secretary of   
  Defense shall consider all components of the distribution costs incurred
  by the nonappropriated fund instrumentality, such as overhead costs     
  (including costs associated with management, logistics, administration, 
  depreciation, and utilities), the costs of carrying inventory, and      
  handling and distribution costs.                                        
     (2) If the use of a private distributor would subject covered        
  alcoholic beverage purchases of distilled spirits to direct or indirect 
  State taxation, a nonappropriated fund instrumentality shall be         
  considered to be the most economical method of distribution regardless  
  of the results of the determination under paragraph (1).                
     (3) (2) The Secretary shall use the agencies performing audit        
  functions on behalf of the armed forces and the Inspector General of the
  Department of Defense to make determinations under this subsection.     
         * * * * * * *                                                           

           CHAPTER 148--NATIONAL DEFENSE TECHNOLOGY AND INDUSTRIAL BASE, DEFENSE  
                      REINVESTMENT, AND DEFENSE CONVERSION                        
         * * * * * * *                                                           

              SUBCHAPTER V--MISCELLANEOUS TECHNOLOGY BASE POLICIES AND PROGRAMS   

         * * * * * * *                                                           

                    2534. Miscellaneous limitations on the procurement of goods   
          other than United States goods                                          
     (a) Limitation on Certain Procurements.--The Secretary of Defense may
  procure any of the following items only if the manufacturer of the item 
  satisfies the requirements of subsection (b):                           
    (1)  * * *                                                             

         * * * * * * *                                                           


       (6) Polyacrylonitrile carbon fiber.--Polyacrylonitrile carbon fiber 
   in accordance with subpart 225.71 of part 225 of the Defense Federal    
   Acquisition Regulation Supplement, as in effect on April 1, 2000.       

         * * * * * * *                                                           

   (c)  Applicability to Certain Items.--                                 

    (1)  * * *                                                             

         * * * * * * *                                                           

    (2)  Valves and machine tools.--(A)  * * *                             

         * * * * * * *                                                           

       (C) Subsection (a)(4) and this paragraph shall cease to be effective
   on October 1, 1996.                                                     

       (C)(i) Subsection (a)(4)(B), subparagraph (B), and this clause shall
   cease to be effective on October 1, 1996.                               
       (ii) Subsection (a)(4)(A), subparagraph (A), and this clause shall  
   cease to be effective on October 1, 2003.                               

       (3) Ball bearings and roller bearings.--Subsection (a)(5) and this  
   paragraph shall cease to be effective on October 1, 2000.               
       (4) (3) Vessel propellers.--Subsection (a)(3)(A)(iii) and this      
   paragraph shall cease to be effective on February 10, 1998.             

       (4) Polyacrylonitrile carbon fiber.--Subsection (a)(6) and this     
   paragraph shall cease to be effective on October 1, 2003.               

         * * * * * * *                                                           

                        SUBCHAPTER VI--DEFENSE EXPORT LOAN GUARANTEES             

         * * * * * * *                                                           

          2540c. Fees charged and collected                                       

   (a)  * * *                                                             

         * * * * * * *                                                           

     (d) Administrative Fees.-- (1) The Secretary of Defense shall charge 
  a fee for each guarantee issued under this subchapter to reflect the    
  additional administrative costs of the Department of Defense that are   
  directly attributable to the administration of the program under this   
  subchapter. Such fees shall be credited to a special account in the     
  Treasury. Amounts in the special account shall be available, to the     
  extent and in amounts provided in appropriations Acts, for paying the   
  costs of administrative expenses of the Department of Defense that are  
  attributable to the loan guarantee program under this subchapter.       

     (2)(A) If for any fiscal year amounts in the special account         
  established under paragraph (1) are not available (or are not           
  anticipated to be available) in a sufficient amount for administrative  
  expenses of the Department of Defense for that fiscal year that are     
  directly attributable to the administration of the program under this   
  subchapter, the Secretary may use amounts currently available for       
  operations and maintenance for Defense-wide activities, not to exceed   
  $500,000 in any fiscal year, for those expenses.                        
     (B) The Secretary shall, from funds in the special account           
  established under paragraph (1), replenish operations and maintenance   
  accounts for amounts expended under subparagraph (A) as soon as the     
  Secretary determines practicable.                                       

         * * * * * * *                                                           

           CHAPTER 153--EXCHANGE OF MATERIAL AND DISPOSAL OF OBSOLETE, SURPLUS, OR
                               UNCLAIMED PROPERTY                                 

 Sec.                                                                    

      2571. Interchange of property and services.                             

         * * * * * * *                                                           


            2573. Significant military equipment: continued authority to      
      require demilitarization after disposal.                                
         * * * * * * *                                                           

            2582. Military equipment identified on United States munitions    
      list: annual report of public sales.                                    
         * * * * * * *                                                           


                    2573. Significant military equipment: continued authority to  
          require demilitarization after disposal                                 
     (a) Authority To Require Demilitarization.--The Secretary of Defense 
  may require any person in possession of significant military equipment  
  formerly owned by the Department of Defense--                           

    (1) to demilitarize the equipment,                                     

    (2) to have the equipment demilitarized by a third party; or           

    (3) to return the equipment to the Government for demilitarization.    

     (b) Cost and Validation of Demilitarization.--When the               
  demilitarization of significant military equipment is carried out by the
  person in possession of the equipment pursuant to paragraph (1) or (2)  
  of subsection (a), the person shall be solely responsible for all       
  demilitarization costs, and the United States shall have the right to   
  validate that the equipment has been demilitarized.                     
     (c) Return of Equipment to Government.--When the Secretary of Defense
  requires the return of significant military equipment for               
  demilitarization by the Government, the Secretary shall bear all costs  
  to transport and demilitarize the equipment. If the person in possession
  of the significant military equipment obtained the property in the      
  manner authorized by law or regulation and the Secretary determines that
  the cost to demilitarize and return the property to the person is       
  prohibitive, the Secretary shall reimburse the person for the purchase  
  cost of the property and for the reasonable transportation costs        
  incurred by the person to purchase the equipment.                       
     (d) Establishment of Demilitarization Standards.--The Secretary of   
  Defense shall prescribe by regulation what constitutes demilitarization 
  for each type of significant military equipment.                        
     (e) Exception for Government Contracts.--This section does not apply 
  when a person is in possession of significant military equipment        
  formerly owned by the Department of Defense for the purpose of          
  demilitarizing the equipment pursuant to a Government contract.         
     (f) Definition of Significant Military Equipment.--In this section,  
  the term ``significant military equipment'' means--                     
       (1) an article for which special export controls are warranted under
   the Arms Export Control Act (22 U.S.C. 2751 et seq.) because of its     
   capacity for substantial military utility or capability, as identified  
   on the United States Munitions List maintained under section 121.1 of   
   title 22, Code of Federal Regulations; and                              
       (2) any other article designated by the Department of Defense as    
   requiring demilitarization before its disposal.                         
         * * * * * * *                                                           

                    2582. Military equipment identified on United States munitions
          list: annual report of public sales                                     
     (a) Report Required.--The Secretary of Defense shall prepare an      
  annual report identifying each public sale conducted by a military      
  department or Defense Agency of military items that are--               
       (1) identified on the United States Munitions List maintained under 
   section 121.1 of title 22, Code of Federal Regulations; and             
    (2) assigned a demilitarization code of ``B'' or its equivalent.       

     (b) Elements of Report.--(1) A report under this section shall cover 
  all public sales described in subsection (a) that were conducted during 
  the preceding fiscal year.                                              
   (2) The report shall specify the following for each sale:              

    (A) The date of the sale.                                              

    (B) The military department or Defense Agency conducting the sale.     

    (C) The manner in which the sale was conducted.                        

       (D) The military items described in subsection (a) that were sold or
   offered for sale.                                                       
    (E) The purchaser of each item.                                        

    (F) The stated end-use of each item sold.                              

     (c) Submission of Report.--Not later than March 31 of each year, the 
  Secretary of Defense shall submit to the Committee on Armed Services of 
  the House of Representatives and the Committee on Armed Services of the 
  Senate the report required by this section for the preceding fiscal     
  year.                                                                   
         * * * * * * *                                                           

                        CHAPTER 155--ACCEPTANCE OF GIFTS AND SERVICES             


 Sec.                                                                    

      2601. General gift funds.                                               

         * * * * * * *                                                           

            2611. Asia-Pacific Center for Security Studies: acceptance of     
      foreign gifts and donations.                                            

            2611. Regional centers for security studies: acceptance of foreign
      gifts and donations.                                                    

         * * * * * * *                                                           

                    2611. Asia-Pacific Center for Security Studies: acceptance of 
          foreign gifts and donations                                             
     (a) Authority To Accept Foreign Gifts and Donations.--(1) Subject to 
  subsection (b), the Secretary of Defense may accept, on behalf of the   
  Asia-Pacific Center, foreign gifts or donations in order to defray the  
  costs of, or enhance the operation of, the Asia-Pacific Center.         
     (2) In this section, the term ``Asia-Pacific Center'' means the      
  Department of Defense organization within the United States Pacific     
  Command known as the Asia-Pacific Center for Security Studies.          

                    2611. Regional centers for security studies: acceptance of    
          foreign gifts and donations                                             
     (a) Authority To Accept Foreign Gifts and Donations.--(1) Subject to 
  subsection (b), the Secretary of Defense may accept foreign gifts or    
  donations in order to defray the costs of, or enhance the operation of, 
  one of the specified defense regional centers for security studies.     
     (2) For purposes of this section, a specified defense regional center
  for security studies is any of the following:                           
    (A) The Asia-Pacific Center for Security Studies.                      

    (B) The George C. Marshall European Center for Security Studies.       


         * * * * * * *                                                           

     (d) Crediting of Funds.--Funds accepted by the Secretary under       
  subsection (a) shall be credited to appropriations available to the     
  Department of Defense for the Asia-Pacific Center the regional center   
  intended to benefit from the gift or donation of such funds. Funds so   
  credited shall be merged with the appropriations to which credited and  
  shall be available to the Asia-Pacific Center such regional center for  
  the same purposes and same period as the appropriations with which      
  merged.                                                                 
     (e) Notice to Congress.--If the total amount of funds accepted under 
  subsection (a) in any fiscal year with respect to a defense regional    
  center for security studies exceeds $2,000,000, the Secretary shall     
  notify Congress of the amount of those donations for that fiscal year.  
  Any such notice shall list each of the contributors of such amounts and 
  the amount of each contribution in that fiscal year.                    
         * * * * * * *                                                           

                                 CHAPTER 157--TRANSPORTATION                      


 Sec.                                                                    

      2631. Supplies: preference to United States vessels.                    

         * * * * * * *                                                           


            2647. Reimbursement for expenses incurred in connection with leave
      canceled due to contingency operations.                                 
         * * * * * * *                                                           


                    2647. Reimbursement for expenses incurred in connection with  
          leave canceled due to contingency operations                            
     (a) Authorization To Reimburse.--The Secretary concerned may         
  reimburse a member of the armed forces under the jurisdiction of the    
  Secretary for travel and related expenses (to the extent not otherwise  
  reimbursable under law) incurred by the member as a result of the       
  cancellation of previously approved leave when the leave is canceled in 
  connection with the member's participation in a contingency operation   
  and the cancellation occurs within 48 hours of the time the leave would 
  have commenced.                                                         
     (b) Regulations.--The Secretary of Defense shall prescribe           
  regulations to establish the criteria for the applicability of          
  subsection (a).                                                         
     (c) Conclusiveness of Settlement.--The settlement of an application  
  for reimbursement under subsection (a) is final and conclusive.         

         * * * * * * *                                                           


            CHAPTER 159--REAL PROPERTY; RELATED PERSONAL PROPERTY; AND LEASE OF   
                               NONEXCESS PROPERTY                                 
         * * * * * * *                                                           

          2661. Miscellaneous administrative provisions relating to real property 

     (a) Availability of Operation and Maintenance Funds.--Appropriations 
  for operation and maintenance of the active forces shall be available   
  for the following:                                                      
    (1) The repair of facilities.                                          


    (2) The installation of equipment in public and private plants.        

     (b) General Leasing Authority; Maintenance of Defense Access         
  Roads.--The Secretary of Defense and the Secretary of each military     
  department may provide for the following:                               
    (1)  * * *                                                             

         * * * * * * *                                                           


     (c) Plan To Address Maintenance and Repair Backlog.--(1) The         
  Secretary of Defense shall develop, and update annually thereafter, a   
  strategic plan to reduce the backlog in maintenance and repair needs of 
  facilities and infrastructure under the jurisdiction of the Department  
  of Defense or a military department. At a minimum, the plan shall       
  include or address the following:                                       
       (A) A comprehensive strategy for the repair and revitalization of   
   facilities and infrastructure, or for the demolition and replacement of 
   unusable facilities, carried as backlog by the Secretary concerned.     
       (B) Measurable goals, over specified time frames, for achieving the 
   objectives of the strategy.                                             
       (C) Expected funding for each military department and Defense Agency
   to carry out the strategy during the period covered by the most recent  
   future-years defense program submitted to Congress pursuant to section  
   221 of this title.                                                      
       (D) The cost of the current backlog in maintenance and repair for   
   each military department and Defense Agency, which shall be determined  
   using the standard costs to standard facility categories in the         
   Department of Defense Facilities Cost Factors Handbook, shown both in   
   the aggregate and individually for each major military installation.    
       (E) The total number of square feet of building space of each       
   military department and Defense Agency to be demolished or proposed for 
   demolition under the plan, shown both in the aggregate and individually 
   for each major military installation.                                   
       (F) The initiatives underway to identify facility and infrastructure
   requirements at military installation to accommodate new and developing 
   weapons systems and to prepare installations to accommodate these       
   systems.                                                                
     (2) Not later than March 15, 2001, the Secretary shall submit the    
  strategic plan to Congress. The annual updates shall be submitted to    
  Congress each year at or about the time that the President's budget is  
  submitted to Congress that year under section 1105(a) of title 31.      

         * * * * * * *                                                           

          2662. Real property transactions: reports to congressional committees   

     (a) General Notice and Wait Requirements.--The Secretary of a        
  military department, or his designee, may not enter into any of the     
  following listed transactions by or for the use of that department until
  after the expiration of 30 days from the date upon which a report of the
  facts concerning the proposed transaction is submitted to the Committee 
  on Armed Services of the Senate and the Committee on Armed Services of  
  the House of Representatives:                                           
       (1) An acquisition of fee title to any real property, if the        
   estimated price is more than $200,000 $500,000.                         
       (2) A lease of any real property to the United States, if the       
   estimated annual rental is more than $200,000 $500,000.                 
       (3) A lease or license of real property owned by the United States, 
   if the estimated annual fair market rental value of the property is more
   than $200,000 $500,000.                                                 
       (4) A transfer of real property owned by the United States to       
   another Federal agency or another military department or to a State, if 
   the estimated value is more than $200,000 $500,000.                     
       (5) A report of excess real property owned by the United States to a
   disposal agency, if the estimated value is more than $200,000 $500,000. 
         * * * * * * *                                                           

     (b) Annual Reports on Certain Minor Transactions.--The Secretary of  
  each military department shall submit annually to the congressional     
  committees named in subsection (a) a report on transactions described in
  subsection (a) that involve an estimated value of more than the         
  simplified acquisition threshold under section 2304(g) of this title    
  specified in section 4(11) of the Office of Federal Procurement Policy  
  Act (41 U.S.C. 403(11)), but not more than $200,000 $500,000.           
         * * * * * * *                                                           

     (e) Notice and Wait Regarding Leases of Space for DoD by GSA.--No    
  element of the Department of Defense shall occupy any general purpose   
  space leased for it by the General Services Administration at an annual 
  rental in excess of $200,000 $500,000 (excluding the cost of utilities  
  and other operation and maintenance services), if the effect of such    
  occupancy is to increase the total amount of such leased space occupied 
  by all elements of the Department of Defense, until the expiration of   
  thirty days from the date upon which a report of the facts concerning   
  the proposed occupancy is submitted to the congressional committees     
  named in subsection (a).                                                
         * * * * * * *                                                           

          2667. Leases: non-excess property of military departments               

     (a) Whenever the Secretary of a military department considers it     
  advantageous to the United States, he may lease to such lessee and upon 
  such terms as he considers will promote the national defense or be in   
  the public interest, real or personal property that is--                
    (1) under the control of that department;  and                         

    (2) not for the time needed for public use; and                        

       (3) (2) not excess property, as defined by section 3 of the Federal 
   Property and Administrative Services Act of 1949 (40 U.S.C. 472).       
   (b) A lease under subsection (a)--                                     

    (1) * * *                                                              

         * * * * * * *                                                           

       (5) may provide, notwithstanding section 321 of the Act of June 30, 
   1932 (40 U.S.C. 303b), or any other provision of law, for the           
   improvement, maintenance, protection, repair, or restoration,           
   alteration, repair, or improvement, by the lessee, of the property      
   leased, or of the entire unit or installation where a substantial part  
   of it is leased, as the payment of part or all of the consideration for 
   the lease.                                                              

     (c)(1) In addition to any in-kind consideration accepted under       
  subsection (b)(5), in-kind consideration accepted with respect to a     
  lease under subsection (b) may include the following:                   
       (A) Maintenance, protection, alteration, repair, improvement, or    
   restoration (including environmental restoration) of property or        
   facilities under the control of the Secretary concerned.                
    (B) Provision of facilities for use by the Secretary concerned.        

    (C) Facilities operation support for the Secretary concerned.          

       (D) Provision of such other services relating to activities that    
   will occur on the leased property as the Secretary concerned considers  
   appropriate.                                                            
     (2) In-kind consideration under paragraph (1) may be accepted at any 
  property or facilities under the control of the Secretary concerned that
  are selected for that purpose by the Secretary concerned.               
     (3) The Secretary concerned may not accept in-kind consideration     
  during a fiscal year with respect to leases under subsection (a) until  
  the Comptroller General certifies to the Secretary concerned that the   
  total received by the Secretary concerned as money rentals for that     
  fiscal year under such leases is equal to the total money rentals under 
  such leases received by the Secretary concerned during fiscal year 2000.
     (4) In the case of a lease for which all or part of the consideration
  proposed to be accepted by the Secretary concerned under this subsection
  is in-kind consideration with a value in excess of $500,000, the        
  Secretary concerned may not enter into the lease until 30 days after the
  date on which a report on the facts of the lease is submitted to the    
  congressional defense committees.                                       

   (d)(1)(A) * * *                                                        

     (B) Sums deposited in a military department's special account        
  pursuant to subparagraph (A) shall be available to such military        
  department, as provided in appropriation Acts, as follows:              
       (i) 50 percent of such amount shall be available for facility       
   maintenance and repair or environmental restoration at the military     
   installation where the leased property is located.                      
       (ii) 50 percent of such amount shall be available for facility      
   maintenance and repair and for environmental restoration by the military
   department concerned.                                                   

     (B) Subject to subparagraphs (C) and (D), the amounts deposited in   
  the special account of a military department pursuant to subparagraph   
  (A) shall be available to the Secretary of that military department, in 
  such amounts as provided in appropriation Acts, for the following:      
       (i) Maintenance, protection, alteration, repair, improvement, or    
   restoration (including environmental restoration) of property or        
   facilities.                                                             

    (ii) Lease of facilities.                                              

    (iii) Facilities operation support.                                    

     (C) At least 50 percent of the amounts deposited in the special      
  account of a military department under subparagraph (A) by reason of a  
  lease shall be available for activities described in subparagraph (B)   
  only at the military installation where the leased property is located. 
     (D) The Secretary concerned may not expend under subparagraph (B) an 
  amount in excess of $500,000 at a single installation until 30 days     
  after the date on which a report on the facts of the proposed           
  expenditure is submitted to the congressional defense committees.       
         * * * * * * *                                                           


     (3) As part of the request for authorizations of appropriations      
  submitted to the Committee on Armed Services of the Senate and the      
  Committee on Armed Services of the House of Representatives for each    
  fiscal year, the Secretary of Defense Not later than March 15 each year,
  the Secretary of Defense shall submit to the congressional defense      
  committees a report which shall include--                               
       (A) an accounting of the receipt and use of all money rentals that  
   were deposited and expended under this subsection during the fiscal year
   preceding the fiscal year in which the request report is made; and      
         * * * * * * *                                                           

   (f)(1) * * *                                                           

         * * * * * * *                                                           

     (4) The Secretary concerned may accept under subsection (b)(5)       
  services of a lessee for an entire installation to be closed or         
  realigned under a base closure law, or for any part of such             
  installation, without regard to the requirement in subsection (b)(5)    
  that a substantial part of the installation be leased.                  
     (5) (4)(A) Notwithstanding the National Environmental Policy Act of  
  1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.), the scope of any environmental impact    
  analysis necessary to support an interim lease of property under this   
  subsection shall be limited to the environmental consequences of        
  activities authorized under the proposed lease and the cumulative       
  impacts of other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future       
  actions during the period of the proposed lease.                        
         * * * * * * *                                                           

     (h) In this section, the term ``base closure law'' means each of the 
  following:                                                              
       (1) The Defense Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990 (part A of 
   title XXIX of Public Law 101 510; 10 U.S.C. 2687 note).                 
       (2) Title II of the Defense Authorization Amendments and Base       
   Closure and Realignment Act (Public Law 100 526; 10 U.S.C. 2687 note).  
    (3) Section 2687 of this title.                                        


   (h) In this section:                                                   

    (1) The term ``congressional defense committees'' means:               

       (A) The Committee on Armed Services and the Committee on            
   Appropriations of the Senate.                                           
       (B) The Committee on Armed Services and the Committee on            
   Appropriations of the House of Representatives.                         
    (2) The term ``base closure law'' means the following:                 

    (A) Section 2687 of this title.                                        

       (B) The Defense Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990 (part A of 
   title XXIX of Public Law 101 510; 10 U.S.C. 2687 note).                 
       (C) Title II of the Defense Authorization Amendments and Base       
   Closure and Realignment Act (Public Law 100 526; 10 U.S.C. 2687 note).  
       (3) The term ``military installation'' has the meaning given such   
   term in section 2687(e)(1) of this title.                               

     (c) (i) This section does not apply to oil, mineral, or phosphate    
  lands.                                                                  
         * * * * * * *                                                           

                    2685. Adjustment of or surcharge on selling prices in         
          commissary stores to provide funds for construction and improvement of  
          commissary store facilities                                             
     (a) Adjustment or Surcharge Authorized.--Notwithstanding any other   
  provision of law, the Secretary of a military department, under         
  regulations established by him and approved by the Secretary of Defense,
  Secretary of Defense may, for the purposes of this section, provide for 
  an adjustment of, or surcharge on, sales prices of goods and services   
  sold in commissary store facilities.                                    
     (b) Use for Construction and Improvement of Facilities.--The         
  Secretary of a military department, under regulations established by him
  and approved by the Secretary of Defense, may use the proceeds from the 
  adjustments or surcharges authorized by subsection (a) to acquire,      
  construct, convert, expand, install, or otherwise improve commissary    
  store facilities at defense installations and for related environmental 
  evaluation and construction costs, including surveys, administration,   
  overhead, planning, and design.                                         

     (b) Use for Construction, Repair, Improvement, and Maintenance.--(1) 
  The Secretary of Defense may use the proceeds from the adjustments or   
  surcharges authorized by subsection (a) only--                          
       (A) to acquire (including acquisition by lease), construct, convert,
   expand, improve, repair, maintain, and equip the physical infrastructure
   of commissary stores and central product processing facilities of the   
   defense commissary system; and                                          
       (B) to cover environmental evaluation and construction costs,       
   including surveys, administration, overhead, planning, and design,      
   related to activities described in paragraph (1).                       
     (2) In paragraph (1), the term ``physical infrastructure'' includes  
  real property, utilities, and equipment (installed and free standing and
  including computer equipment), necessary to provide a complete and      
  usable commissary store or central product processing facility.         

     (c) Advance Obligation.--The Secretary of a military department, with
  the approval of the Secretary of Defense and Secretary of Defense, with 
  the approval of the Director of the Office of Management and Budget, may
  obligate anticipated proceeds from the adjustments or surcharges        
  authorized by subsection (a) for any use specified in subsection (b) or 
  (d), without regard to fiscal year limitations, if the Secretary of the 
  military department determines Secretary determines that such obligation
  is necessary to carry out any use of such adjustments or surcharges     
  specified in subsection (b) or (d).                                     
     (d) Cooperation With Nonappropriated Fund Instrumentalities.--(1) The
  Secretary of a military department Secretary of Defense may authorize a 
  nonappropriated fund instrumentality of the United States to enter into 
  a contract for construction of a shopping mall or similar facility for a
  commissary store and one or more nonappropriated fund instrumentality   
  activities. The Secretary may use the proceeds of adjustments or        
  surcharges authorized by subsection (a) to reimburse the nonappropriated
  fund instrumentality for the portion of the cost of the contract that is
  attributable to construction of the commissary store or to pay the      
  contractor directly for that portion of such cost.                      
         * * * * * * *                                                           

          2688. Utility systems: conveyance authority                             

   (a) * * *                                                              

     (b) Selection of Conveyee.--If more than one utility or entity       
  referred to in subsection (a) notifies the Secretary concerned of an    
  interest in a conveyance under such subsection, the Secretary shall     
  carry out the conveyance through the use of competitive procedures.     

     (b) Selection of Conveyee or Awardee.--(1) The Secretary concerned   
  shall comply with the competition requirements of section 2304 of this  
  title in conveying a utility system under this section and in awarding  
  any utility services contract related to the conveyance of the utility  
  system.                                                                 
     (2) A conveyance or award may be made under paragraph (1) only if the
  Secretary concerned determines that the conveyance or award complies    
  with State laws, regulations, rulings, and policies governing the       
  provision of utility services. Such State laws, regulations, rulings,   
  and policies shall apply to the conveyee or awardee notwithstanding the 
  existence of exclusive federal legislative jurisdiction as to any       
  parcels of land served by the utility system.                           

         * * * * * * *                                                           

                           CHAPTER 160--ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION                 

         * * * * * * *                                                           

          2703. Environmental restoration accounts                                

   (a)  * * *                                                             

         * * * * * * *                                                           

     (b) Obligation of Authorized Amounts.--Funds authorized for deposit  
  in an account under subsection (a) may be obligated or expended from the
  account only in order to carry out the environmental restoration        
  functions of the Secretary of Defense and the                           

                    Secretaries of the military departments under this chapter and
          under any other provision of law. Funds so authorized shall remain      
          available until expended.                                               

     (b) Obligation of Authorized Amounts.--(1) Funds authorized for      
  deposit in an account under subsection (a) may be obligated or expended 
  from the account only--                                                 
       (A) to carry out the environmental restoration functions of the     
   Secretary of Defense and the Secretaries of the military departments    
   under this chapter and under any other provision of law; and            
       (B) to relocate activities from defense sites, including sites      
   formerly used by the Department of Defense that are released from       
   Federal Government control, at which the Secretary is responsible for   
   environmental restoration functions.                                    
     (2) The authority provided by paragraph (1)(B) expires September 30, 
  2003. Not more than five percent of the funds deposited in an account   
  under subsection (a) for a fiscal year may be used for activities under 
  paragraph (1)(B).                                                       
     (3) If relocation assistance under paragraph (1)(B) is to be provided
  with respect to a site formerly used by the Department of Defense, but  
  now released from Federal Government control, the Secretary of Defense  
  or the Secretary of the military department concerned may use only fund 
  transfer mechanisms otherwise available to the Secretary. The Secretary 
  may not provide assistance under such paragraph for permanent relocation
  from the affected site unless the Secretary determines that permanent   
  relocation is the most cost effective method of dealing with the        
  activities located at the affected site and notifies the Congress of the
  determination before providing the assistance.                          
     (4) Funds authorized for deposit in an account under subsection (a)  
  shall remain available until expended.                                  

         * * * * * * *                                                           

               CHAPTER 169--MILITARY CONSTRUCTION AND MILITARY FAMILY HOUSING     

         * * * * * * *                                                           

                           SUBCHAPTER II--MILITARY FAMILY HOUSING                 

         * * * * * * *                                                           

          2826. Limitations on space by pay grade                                 

     (a) In the construction, acquisition, and improvement of military    
  family housing units, the following are the space limitations for the   
  applicable numbers of bedrooms permitted for each pay grade:            

                                                                                                          

Pay grade                                                  Number of bedrooms    Net floor area (square feet)  

O 7 and above                                                               4                           2,100  
O 6                                                                         4                           1,700  
O 4 and O 5                                                                 4                           1,550  
                                                                            3                           1,400  
O 1 through O 3; W 1 through W 4; and E 7 through E 9                       5                           1,550  
                                                                            4                           1,450  
                                                                            3                           1,350  
                                                                            2                             950  
 1 through E 6                                                              5                           1,550  
                                                                            4                           1,350  
                                                                            3                           1,200  
                                                                            2                             950  



     (b) The applicable maximum net floor area prescribed by subsection   
  (a) may be increased by 10 percent for the housing unit of an officer   
  holding a special command position (as designated by the Secretary of   
  Defense), for the housing unit of the commanding officer of a military  
  installation, and for the senior noncommissioned officer of a military  
  installation.                                                           
     (c) The maximum net floor area prescribed by subsection (a) may be   
  increased in any case by 5 percent if the Secretary concerned determines
  that the increase is in the best interest of the Government (1) to      
  permit award of a turnkey construction contract to the contractor       
  offering the most satisfactory proposal, or (2) to permit purchase,     
  lease, or conversion of housing units. An increase in the maximum net   
  floor area of a housing unit under subsection (b) when combined with an 
  increase in the maximum net floor area of such unit under this          
  subsection may not exceed 10 percent of the otherwise applicable        
  limitation prescribed by subsection (a).                                
     (d) The applicable maximum net floor area prescribed by subsection   
  (a) may be increased by 300 square feet for a family housing unit in a  
  location where harsh climatological conditions severely restrict outdoor
  activity for a significant part of each year, as determined by the      
  Secretary concerned pursuant to regulations prescribed by the Secretary 
  of Defense. The regulations shall apply uniformly to the armed forces.  
     (e) In the case of the acquisition by purchase of military family    
  housing units for members of the armed forces in pay grades below pay   
  grade O 6, the applicable maximum net floor area prescribed by          
  subsection (a) may be increased by 20 percent if the Secretary concerned
  determines that the purchase of larger units is cost effective when     
  compared to available units within the space limitations specified in   
  that subsection.                                                        
     (f)(1) The Secretary concerned may waive the provisions of subsection
  (a) with respect to a family housing unit leased in a foreign country if
  a suitable family housing unit within the applicable maximum net floor  
  area prescribed by such subsection cannot be obtained.                  
     (2) Subsection (a) does not apply to family housing units in foreign 
  countries constructed or acquired by the Secretary of State for         
  occupancy by members of the armed forces.                               
     (g) The maximum net floor areas prescribed by this section apply to  
  family housing provided to civilian personnel based upon civilian pay   
  scale comparability with military pay grades, as determined by the      
  Secretary of Defense.                                                   
     (h) In this section, the term ``net floor area'' means the total     
  number of square feet of the floor space inside the exterior walls of a 
  structure, excluding the floor area of an unfinished basement, an       
  unfinished attic, a utility space, a garage, a carport, an open or      
  insect-screened porch, a stairwell, and any space used for a            
  solar-energy system.                                                    
     (i)(1) The Secretary concerned may waive the provisions of subsection
  (a) with respect to military family housing units constructed, acquired,
  or improved during the five-year period beginning on February 10, 1996. 
     (2) The total number of military family housing units constructed,   
  acquired, or improved during any fiscal year in the period referred to  
  in paragraph (1) shall be the total number of such units authorized by  
  law for that fiscal year.                                               

          2826. Limitations on space by pay grade                                 

     In the construction, acquisition, and improvement of military family 
  housing units, the Secretary concerned shall ensure that the room       
  patterns and floor areas are generally comparable to the room patterns  
  and floor areas of similar housing units in the locality concerned.     

         * * * * * * *                                                           

          2828. Leasing of military family housing                                

   (a) * * *                                                              

   (b)(1) * * *                                                           

         * * * * * * *                                                           

     (4) (A) The Secretary of the Army may lease not more than eight      
  housing units in the vicinity of Miami, Florida, for key and essential  
  personnel, as designated by the Secretary, for the United States        
  Southern Command for which the expenditure for the rental of such units 
  (including the cost of utilities, maintenance, and operation, including 
  security enhancements) exceeds the expenditure limitations in paragraphs
  (2) and (3). The total amount for all leases under this paragraph may   
  not exceed $280,000 per year, and no lease on any individual housing    
  unit may exceed $60,000 per year and the lease payments shall be made   
  out of annual appropriations for that year. A lease under this paragraph
  may not exceed five years.                                              
     (B) At the beginning of each fiscal year, the Secretary of the Army  
  shall adjust the maximum amount provided for leases under subparagraph  
  (A) for the previous fiscal year by the percentage (if any) by which the
  basic allowance for housing under section 403 of title 37 for the Miami 
  metropolitan area during the preceding fiscal year exceeded such basic  
  allowance for housing for the second preceding fiscal year.             
     (5) At the beginning of each fiscal year, the Secretary concerned    
  shall adjust the maximum lease amount provided for under paragraphs (2),
  (3), and (4) paragraphs (2) and (3) for the previous fiscal year by the 
  percentage (if any) by which the Consumer Price Index for All Urban     
  Consumers, published by the Bureau of Labor Statistics, during the      
  preceding fiscal year exceeds such Consumer Price Index for the fiscal  
  year before such preceding fiscal year.                                 
         * * * * * * *                                                           


           SUBCHAPTER IV--ALTERNATIVE AUTHORITY FOR ACQUISITION AND IMPROVEMENT OF
                                MILITARY HOUSING                                  
         * * * * * * *                                                           

          2885. Expiration of authority                                           

     The authority to enter into a contract under this subchapter shall   
  expire on February 10, 2001 2006.                                       
         * * * * * * *                                                           

          Subtitle B--Army                                                        

         * * * * * * *                                                           

          PART II--PERSONNEL                                                      

         * * * * * * *                                                           

                        CHAPTER 367--RETIREMENT FOR LENGTH OF SERVICE             

         * * * * * * *                                                           

          3911. Twenty years or more: regular or reserve commissioned officers    

   (a) * * *                                                              

     (b) The Secretary of Defense may authorize the Secretary of the Army,
  during the period beginning on October 1, 1990, and ending on September 
  30, 2001 December 31, 2001, to reduce the requirement under subsection  
  (a) for at least 10 years of active service as a commissioned officer to
  a period (determined by the Secretary of the Army) of not less than     
  eight years.                                                            
         * * * * * * *                                                           

                                 CHAPTER 369--RETIRED GRADE                       

         * * * * * * *                                                           

          3961. General rule                                                      

     (a) The retired grade of a regular commissioned officer of the Army  
  who retires other than for physical disability, and the retired grade of
  a reserve commissioned officer of the Army who retires other than for   
  physical disability or for nonregular service under chapter 1223 of this
  title, is determined under section 1370 of this title.                  
         * * * * * * *                                                           

                               CHAPTER 373--CIVILIAN EMPLOYEES                    


 Sec.                                                                    

            4021. Army War College and United States Army Command and General 
      Staff College: civilian faculty members.                                
         * * * * * * *                                                           

             4027. Civilian special agents of the Criminal Investigation      
      Command: authority to execute warrants and make arrests.                

         * * * * * * *                                                           


                    4027. Civilian special agents of the Criminal Investigation   
          Command: authority to execute warrants and make arrests                 
     (a) Authority.--The Secretary of the Army may authorize any          
  Department of the Army civilian employee described in subsection (b) to 
  have the same authority to execute and serve warrants and other         
  processes issued under the authority of the United States and to make   
  arrests without a warrant as may be authorized under section 1585a of   
  this title for special agents of the Defense Criminal Investigative     
  Service.                                                                
     (b) Agents To Have Authority.--Subsection (a) applies to any employee
  of the Department of the Army who is a special agent of the Army        
  Criminal Investigation Command (or a successor to that command) whose   
  duties include conducting, supervising, or coordinating investigations  
  of criminal activity in programs and operations of the Department of the
  Army.                                                                   
     (c) Guidelines for Exercise of Authority.--The authority provided    
  under subsection (a) shall be exercised in accordance with guidelines   
  prescribed by the Secretary of the Army and approved by the Secretary of
  Defense and the Attorney General and any other applicable guidelines    
  prescribed by the Secretary of the Army, the Secretary of Defense, or   
  the Attorney General.                                                   

         * * * * * * *                                                           

          PART III--TRAINING                                                      

         * * * * * * *                                                           

                               CHAPTER 407--SCHOOLS AND CAMPS                     


 Sec.                                                                    

      4411. Establishment: purpose.                                           

         * * * * * * *                                                           

      4415. United States Army School of the Americas.                        

         * * * * * * *                                                           


          4415. United States Army School of the Americas                         

     (a) The Secretary of the Army may operate the military education and 
  training facility known as the United States Army School of the         
  Americas.                                                               
     (b) The School of the Americas shall be operated for the purpose of  
  providing military education and training to military personnel of      
  Central and South American countries and Caribbean countries.           
     (c) The fixed costs of operating and maintaining the School of the   
  Americas may be paid from funds available for operation and maintenance 
  of the Army.                                                            
     (d) Tuition fees charged for personnel receiving military education  
  and training from the school may not include the fixed costs of         
  operating and maintaining the school.                                   
         * * * * * * *                                                           

          Subtitle C--Navy and Marine Corps                                       

         * * * * * * *                                                           

          PART I--ORGANIZATION                                                    

         * * * * * * *                                                           

                           CHAPTER 506--HEADQUARTERS, MARINE CORPS                


      Sec.                                                                    

      5041. Headquarters, Marine Corps: function; composition.                

         * * * * * * *                                                           

      5045. Chief of Staff; Deputy and Assistant Chiefs of Staff.             


      5045. Deputy Commandants.                                               


         * * * * * * *                                                           

          5041. Headquarters, Marine Corps: function; composition                 

   (a)  * * *                                                             

   (b) The Headquarters, Marine Corps, is composed of the following:      

    (1)  * * *                                                             

         * * * * * * *                                                           

    (3) The Chief of Staff of the Marine Corps.                            

    (4) The Deputy Chiefs of Staff.                                        

    (5) The Assistant Chiefs of Staff.                                     


    (3) The Deputy Commandants.                                            


       (6) (4) Other members of the Navy and Marine Corps assigned or      
   detailed to the Headquarters, Marine Corps.                             
       (7) (5) Civilian employees in the Department of the Navy assigned or
   detailed to the Headquarters, Marine Corps.                             
         * * * * * * *                                                           

          5045. Chief of Staff; Deputy and Assistant Chiefs of Staff              

     There are in the Headquarters, Marine Corps, a Chief of Staff, not   
  more than five Deputy Chiefs of Staff, and not more than three Assistant
  Chiefs of Staff, detailed by the Secretary of the Navy from officers on 
  the active-duty list of the Marine Corps.                               

          5045. Deputy Commandants                                                

     There are in the Headquarters Marine Corps, not more than five Deputy
  Commandants, detailed by the Secretary of the Navy from officers on the 
  active-duty list of the Marine Corps.                                   

         * * * * * * *                                                           

                 CHAPTER 513--BUREAUS; OFFICE OF THE JUDGE ADVOCATE GENERAL       

         * * * * * * *                                                           

          5143. Office of Naval Reserve: appointment of Chief                     

   (a)  * * *                                                             

         * * * * * * *                                                           


   (c)  Grade.--(1) * * *                                                 

     (2) The Chief of Naval Reserve, while so serving, has a grade has the
  grade of rear admiral, without vacating the officer's permanent grade.  
  However, if selected in accordance with section 12505 of this title, he 
  may be appointed in the grade of vice admiral.                          
         * * * * * * *                                                           

          5144. Office of Marine Forces Reserve: appointment of Commander         

   (a)  * * *                                                             

         * * * * * * *                                                           

   (c)                                                                    

         * * * * * * *                                                           

     (2) The Commander, Marine Forces Reserve, while so serving, has a    
  grade has the grade of major general, without vacating the officer's    
  permanent grade. However, if selected in accordance with section 12505  
  of this title, he may be appointed in the grade of lieutenant general.  
         * * * * * * *                                                           

          PART II--PERSONNEL                                                      

         * * * * * * *                                                           


                                 CHAPTER 555--ADMINISTRATION                      


 Sec.                                                                    

      6011. Navy Regulations.                                                 

         * * * * * * *                                                           

             6035. Female members: congressional review period for assignment 
      to duty on submarines or for reconfiguration of submarines.             

                    6035. Female members: congressional review period for         
          assignment to duty on submarines or for reconfiguration of submarines   
     (a) No change in the Department of the Navy policy limiting service  
  on submarines to males, as in effect on May 10, 2000, may take effect   
  until--                                                                 
       (1) the Secretary of Defense submits to Congress written notice of  
   the proposed change; and                                                
       (2) a period of 120 days of continuous session of Congress expires  
   following the date on which the notice is received.                     
     (b) No funds available to the Department of the Navy may be expended 
  to reconfigure any existing submarine, or to design any new submarine,  
  to accommodate female crew members until--                              
       (1) the Secretary of Defense submits to Congress written notice of  
   the proposed reconfiguration or design; and                             
       (2) a period of 120 days of continuous session of Congress expires  
   following the date on which the notice is received.                     
   (c) For purposes of this section--                                     

       (1) the continuity of a session of Congress is broken only by an    
   adjournment of the Congress sine die; and                               
       (2) the days on which either House of Congress is not in session    
   because of an adjournment of more than three days to a day certain are  
   excluded in the computation of such 120-day period.                     

         * * * * * * *                                                           

                              CHAPTER 571--VOLUNTARY RETIREMENT                   

         * * * * * * *                                                           

          6323. Officers: 20 years                                                

   (a)(1) * * *                                                           

     (2) The Secretary of Defense may authorize the Secretary of the Navy,
  during the period beginning on October 1, 1990, and ending on September 
  30, 2001 December 31, 2001, to reduce the requirement under paragraph   
  (1) for at least 10 years of active service as a commissioned officer to
  a period (determined by the Secretary) of not less than eight years.    
         * * * * * * *                                                           

          PART III--EDUCATION AND TRAINING                                        

         * * * * * * *                                                           

                    CHAPTER 605--UNITED STATES NAVAL POSTGRADUATE SCHOOL          


 Sec.                                                                    

      7041. Function.                                                         

         * * * * * * *                                                           

             7049. Defense industry civilians: admission to defense product   
      development program.                                                    
         * * * * * * *                                                           


                    7049. Defense industry civilians: admission to defense product
          development program                                                     
     (a) Authority for Admission.--The Secretary of the Navy may permit   
  eligible defense industry employees to receive instruction at the Naval 
  Postgraduate School in accordance with this section. Any such defense   
  industry employee may only be enrolled in, and may only be provided     
  instruction in, a program leading to a masters's degree in a curriculum 
  related to defense product development. No more than 10 such defense    
  industry employees may be enrolled at any one time. Upon successful     
  completion of the course of instruction in which enrolled, any such     
  defense industry employee may be awarded an appropriate degree under    
  section 7048 of this title.                                             
     (b) Eligible Defense Industry Employees.--For purposes of this       
  section, an eligible defense industry employee is an individual employed
  by a private firm that is engaged in providing to the Department of     
  Defense significant and substantial defense-related systems, products,  
  or services. A defense industry employee admitted for instruction at the
  school remains eligible for such instruction only so long at that person
  remains employed by the same firm.                                      
     (c) Annual Certification by the Secretary of the Navy.--Defense      
  industry employees may receive instruction at the school during any     
  academic year only if, before the start of that academic year, the      
  Secretary of the Navy determines, and certifies to the Committee on     
  Armed Services of the Senate and the Committee on Armed Services of the 
  House of Representatives, that providing instruction to defense industry
  employees under this section during that year--                         
    (1) will further the military mission of the school;                   

       (2) will enhance the ability of the Department of Defense and       
   defense-oriented private sector contractors engaged in the design and   
   development of defense systems to reduce the product and project lead   
   times required to bring such systems to initial operational capability; 
   and                                                                     
       (3) will be done on a space-available basis and not require an      
   increase in the size of the faculty of the school, an increase in the   
   course offerings of the school, or an increase in the laboratory        
   facilities or other infrastructure of the school.                       
     (d) Program Requirements.--The Secretary of the Navy shall ensure    
  that--                                                                  
       (1) the curriculum for the defense product development program in   
   which defense industry employees may be enrolled under this section is  
   not readily available through other schools and concentrates on defense 
   product development functions that are conducted by military            
   organizations and defense contractors working in close cooperation; and 
       (2) the course offerings at the school continue to be determined    
   solely by the needs of the Department of Defense.                       
     (e) Tuition.--The Superintendent of the school shall charge tuition  
  for students enrolled under this section at a rate not less than the    
  rate charged for employees of the United States outside the Department  
  of the Navy.                                                            
     (f) Standards of Conduct.--While receiving instruction at the school,
  students enrolled under this section, to the extent practicable, are    
  subject to the same regulations governing academic performance,         
  attendance, norms of behavior, and enrollment as apply to Government    
  civilian employees receiving instruction at the school.                 
     (g) Use of Funds.--Amounts received by the school for instruction of 
  students enrolled under this section shall be retained by the school to 
  defray the costs of such instruction. The source, and the disposition,  
  of such funds shall be specifically identified in records of the school.
          PART IV--GENERAL ADMINISTRATION                                         

         * * * * * * *                                                           

                               CHAPTER 643--CIVILIAN EMPLOYEES                    


 Sec.                                                                    


      7472. Physical examination: employees engaged in hazardous occupations. 

         * * * * * * *                                                           


            7451. Special agents of the Naval Criminal Investigative Service: 
      authority to execute warrants and make arrests.                         

         * * * * * * *                                                           


                    7451. Special agents of the Naval Criminal Investigative      
          Service: authority to execute warrants and make arrests                 
     (a) Authority.--The Secretary of the Navy may authorize any          
  Department of the Navy civilian employee described in subsection (b) to 
  have the same authority to execute and serve warrants and other         
  processes issued under the authority of the United States and to make   
  arrests without a warrant as may be authorized under section 1585a of   
  this title for special agents of the Defense Criminal Investigative     
  Service.                                                                
     (b) Agents To Have Authority.--Subsection (a) applies to any employee
  of the Department of the Navy who is a special agent of the Naval       
  Criminal Investigative Service (or any successor to that service) whose 
  duties include conducting, supervising, or coordinating investigations  
  of criminal activity in programs and operations of the Department of the
  Navy.                                                                   
     (c) Guidelines for Exercise of Authority.--The authority provided    
  under subsection (a) shall be exercised in accordance with guidelines   
  prescribed by the Secretary of the Navy and approved by the Secretary of
  Defense and the Attorney General and any other applicable guidelines    
  prescribed by the Secretary of the Navy, the Secretary of Defense, or   
  the Attorney General.                                                   

         * * * * * * *                                                           


          Subtitle D--Air Force                                                   

         * * * * * * *                                                           

          PART II--PERSONNEL                                                      

         * * * * * * *                                                           

                        CHAPTER 867--RETIREMENT FOR LENGTH OF SERVICE             

         * * * * * * *                                                           

          8911. Twenty years or more: regular or reserve commissioned officers    

   (a) * * *                                                              

     (b) The Secretary of Defense may authorize the Secretary of the Air  
  Force, during the period beginning on October 1, 1990, and ending on    
  September 30, 2001 December 31, 2001, to reduce the requirement under   
  subsection (a) for at least 10 years of active service as a commissioned
  officer to a period (determined by the Secretary of the Air Force) of   
  not less than eight years.                                              
         * * * * * * *                                                           

                               CHAPTER 873--CIVILIAN EMPLOYEES                    


 Sec.                                                                    

      9021. Air University: civilian faculty members.                         

         * * * * * * *                                                           

             9027. Civilian special agents of the Office of Special           
      Investigations: authority to execute warrants and make arrests.         

         * * * * * * *                                                           


                    9027. Civilian special agents of the Office of Special        
          Investigations: authority to execute warrants and make arrests          
     (a) Authority.--The Secretary of the Air Force may authorize any     
  Department of the Air Force civilian employee described in subsection   
  (b) to have the same authority to execute and serve warrants and other  
  processes issued under the authority of the United States and to make   
  arrests without a warrant as may be authorized under section 1585a of   
  this title for special agents of the Defense Criminal Investigative     
  Service.                                                                
     (b) Agents To Have Authority.--Subsection (a) applies to any employee
  of the Department of the Air Force who is a special agent of the Air    
  Force Office of Special Investigations (or a successor to that office)  
  whose duties include conducting, supervising, or coordinating           
  investigations of criminal activity in programs and operations of the   
  Department of the Air Force.                                            
     (c) Guidelines for Exercise of Authority.--The authority provided    
  under subsection (a) shall be exercised in accordance with guidelines   
  prescribed by the Secretary of the Air Force and approved by the        
  Secretary of Defense and the Attorney General and any other applicable  
  guidelines prescribed by the Secretary of the Air Force, the Secretary  
  of Defense, or the Attorney General.                                    

         * * * * * * *                                                           

          PART III--TRAINING                                                      

         * * * * * * *                                                           

                                CHAPTER 909--CIVIL AIR PATROL                     


 Sec.                                                                    

      9441. Status: support by Air Force; employment.                         

      9442. Assistance by other agencies.                                     


          9441. Status: support by Air Force; employment                          

     (a) The Civil Air Patrol is a volunteer civilian auxiliary of the Air
  Force.                                                                  
     (b) To assist the Civil Air Patrol in the fulfillment of its         
  objectives as set forth in section 40302 of title 36, the Secretary of  
  the Air Force may, under regulations prescribed by him with the approval
  of the Secretary of Defense--                                           
       (1) give, lend, or sell to the Civil Air Patrol without regard to   
   the Federal Property and Administrative Services Act of 1949, as amended
   (40 U.S.C. 471 et seq.)--                                               
       (A) major items of equipment, including aircraft, motor vehicles,   
   and communication equipment; and                                        
    (B) necessary related supplies and training aids;                      

   that are excess to the military departments;                            

       (2) permit the use of such services and facilities of the Air Force 
   as he considers to be needed by the Civil Air Patrol to carry out its   
   mission;                                                                
       (3) furnish such quantities of fuel and lubricants to the Civil Air 
   Patrol as are needed by it to carry out any mission assigned to it by   
   the Air Force, including unit capability testing missions and training  
   missions;                                                               
       (4) establish, maintain, and supply liaison offices of the Air Force
   at the National, State, and Territorial headquarters, and at not more   
   than eight regional headquarters, of the Civil Air Patrol;              
       (5) detail or assign any member of the Air Force or any officer or  
   employee of the Department of the Air Force to any liaison office at the
   National, State, or Territorial headquarters, and at not more than eight
   regional headquarters, of the Civil Air Patrol;                         
       (6) detail any member of the Air Force or any officer or employee of
   the Department of the Air Force to any unit or installation of the Civil
   Air Patrol to assist in the training program of the Civil Air Patrol;   
       (7) in time of war, or of national emergency declared after May 27, 
   1954, by Congress or the President, authorize the payment of travel     
   expenses and allowances, in accordance with subchapter I of chapter 57  
   of title 5, to members of the Civil Air Patrol while carrying out any   
   mission specifically assigned by the Air Force;                         
       (8) provide funds for the national headquarters of the Civil Air    
   Patrol, including funds for the payment of staff compensation and       
   benefits, administrative expenses, travel, per diem and allowances, rent
   and utilities, and other operational expenses;                          
       (9) authorize the payment of aircraft maintenance expenses relating 
   to operational missions, unit capability testing missions, and training 
   missions;                                                               
       (10) authorize the payment of expenses of placing into serviceable  
   condition major items of equipment (including aircraft, motor vehicles, 
   and communications equipment) owned by the Civil Air Patrol;            
       (11) reimburse the Civil Air Patrol for costs incurred for the      
   purchase of such major items of equipment as the Secretary considers    
   needed by the Civil Air Patrol to carry out its missions; and           
       (12) furnish articles of the Air Force uniform to Civil Air Patrol  
   cadets without cost to such cadets.                                     
     (c) The Secretary may use the services of the Civil Air Patrol in    
  fulfilling the noncombat mission of the Department of the Air Force, and
  for purposes of determining the civil liability of the Civil Air Patrol 
  (or any member thereof) with respect to any act or omission committed by
  the Civil Air Patrol (or any member thereof) in fulfilling such mission,
  the Civil Air Patrol shall be deemed to be an instrumentality of the    
  United States.                                                          

     (d)(1) The Secretary of the Air Force may authorize the Civil Air    
  Patrol to employ, as administrators and liaison officers, persons       
  retired from service in the Air Force whose qualifications are approved 
  under regulations prescribed by the Secretary and who request such      
  employment.                                                             
     (2) A person employed pursuant to paragraph (1) may receive the      
  person's retired pay and an additional amount for such employment that  
  is not more than the difference between the person's retired pay and the
  pay and allowances the person would be entitled to receive if ordered to
  active duty in the grade in which the person retired from service in the
  Air Force. The additional amount shall be paid to the Civil Air Patrol  
  by the Secretary from funds appropriated for that purpose.              
     (3) A person employed pursuant to paragraph (1) may not, while so    
  employed, be considered to be on active duty or inactive-duty training  
  for any purpose.                                                        
          9442. Assistance by other agencies                                      

     The Secretary of the Air Force may arrange for the use by the Civil  
  Air Patrol of such facilities and services under the jurisdiction of the
  Secretry of the Army, the Secretary of the Navy, or the head of any     
  other department or agency of the United States as the Secretary of the 
  Air Force considers to be needed by the Civil Air Patrol to carry out   
  its mission. Any such arrangements shall be made under regulations      
  prescribed by the Secretary of the Air Force with the approval of the   
  Secretary of Defense and shall be subject to the agreement of the other 
  military department or other department or agency of the United States  
  furnishing the facilities or services.                                  

                                CHAPTER 909--CIVIL AIR PATROL                     


 Sec.                                                                    

      9441. Status as federally chartered corporation; purposes.              

      9442. Status as volunteer civilian auxiliary of the Air Force.          

      9443. Activities not performed as auxiliary of the Air Force.           

      9444. Activities performed as auxiliary of the Air Force.               

      9445. Funds appropriated for the Civil Air Patrol.                      

      9446. Miscellaneous personnel authorities.                              

      9447. Board of Governors.                                               

      9448. Regulations.                                                      


          9441. Status as federally chartered corporation; purposes               

     (a) Status.--(1) The Civil Air Patrol is a nonprofit corporation that
  is federally chartered under section 40301 of title 36.                 
     (2) Except as provided in section 9442(b)(2) of this title, the Civil
  Air Patrol is not an instrumentality of the Federal Government for any  
  purpose.                                                                
     (b) Purposes.--The purposes of the Civil Air Patrol are set forth in 
  section 40302 of title 36.                                              
          9442. Status as volunteer civilian auxiliary of the Air Force           

     (a) Volunteer Civilian Auxiliary.--The Civil Air Patrol is a         
  volunteer civilian auxiliary of the Air Force when the services of the  
  Civil Air Patrol are used by any department or agency in any branch of  
  the Federal Government.                                                 
     (b) Use by Air Force.--(1) The Secretary of the Air Force may use the
  services of the Civil Air Patrol to fulfill the noncombat programs and  
  missions of the Department of the Air Force.                            
     (2) The Civil Air Patrol shall be deemed to be an instrumentality of 
  the United States with respect to any act or omission of the Civil Air  
  Patrol, including any member of the Civil Air Patrol, in carrying out a 
  mission assigned by the Secretary of the Air Force.                     
          9443. Activities not performed as auxiliary of the Air Force            

     (a) Support for State and Local Authorities.--The Civil Air Patrol   
  may, in its status as a federally chartered nonprofit corporation and   
  not as an auxiliary of the Air Force, provide assistance requested by   
  State or local governmental authorities to perform disaster relief      
  missions and activities, other emergency missions and activities, and   
  nonemergency missions and activities. Missions and activities carried   
  out under this section shall be consistent with the purposes of the     
  Civil Air Patrol.                                                       
     (b) Use of Federally Provided Resources.--(1) To perform any mission 
  or activity authorized under subsection (a), the Civil Air Patrol may   
  use any equipment, supplies, and other resources provided to it by the  
  Air Force or by any other department or agency of the Federal Government
  or acquired by or for the Civil Air Patrol with appropriated funds,     
  without regard to whether the Civil Air Patrol has reimbursed the       
  Federal Government source for the equipment, supplies, other resources, 
  or funds, as the case may be.                                           
     (2) The use of equipment, supplies, or other resources under         
  paragraph (1) is subject to--                                           
       (A) the terms and conditions of the applicable agreement entered    
   into under chapter 63 of title 31; and                                  
       (B) the laws and regulations that govern the use by nonprofit       
   corporations of federally provided assets or of assets purchased with   
   appropriated funds, as the case may be.                                 
     (c) Authority Not Contingent on Reimbursement.--The authority for the
  Civil Air Patrol to provide assistance under subsections (a) and (b) is 
  not contingent on the Civil Air Patrol being reimbursed for the cost of 
  providing the assistance. If the Civil Air Patrol requires reimbursement
  for the provision of assistance under such subsections, the Civil Air   
  Patrol may establish the reimbursement rate at a rate less than the     
  rates charged by private sector sources for equivalent services.        
     (d) Liability Insurance.--The Secretary of the Air Force may provide 
  the Civil Air Patrol with funds for paying the cost of liability        
  insurance for missions and activities carried out under this section.   
          9444. Activities performed as auxiliary of the Air Force                

     (a) Air Force Support for Activities.--The Secretary of the Air Force
  may furnish to the Civil Air Patrol in accordance with this section any 
  equipment, supplies, and other resources that the Secretary determines  
  necessary to enable the Civil Air Patrol to fulfill the missions        
  assigned by the Secretary to the Civil Air Patrol as an auxiliary of the
  Air Force.                                                              
     (b) Forms of Air Force Support.--The Secretary of the Air Force may, 
  under subsection (a)--                                                  
       (1) give, lend, or sell to the Civil Air Patrol without regard to   
   the Federal Property and Administrative Services Act of 1949 (40 U.S.C. 
   471 et seq.)--                                                          
       (A) major items of equipment (including aircraft, motor vehicles,   
   computers, and communications equipment) that are excess to the military
   departments; and                                                        
       (B) necessary related supplies and training aids that are excess to 
   the military departments;                                               
       (2) permit the use, with or without charge, of services and         
   facilities of the Air Force;                                            
       (3) furnish supplies (including fuel, lubricants, and other items   
   required for vehicle and aircraft operations) or provide funds for the  
   acquisition of supplies;                                                
       (4) establish, maintain, and supply liaison officers of the Air     
   Force at the national, regional, State, and territorial headquarters of 
   the Civil Air Patrol;                                                   
       (5) detail or assign any member of the Air Force or any officer,    
   employee, or contractor of the Department of the Air Force to any       
   liaison office at the national, regional, State, or territorial         
   headquarters of the Civil Air Patrol;                                   
       (6) detail any member of the Air Force or any officer, employee, or 
   contractor of the Department of the Air Force to any unit or            
   installation of the Civil Air Patrol to assist in the training programs 
   of the Civil Air Patrol;                                                
       (7) authorize the payment of travel expenses and allowances, at     
   rates not to exceed those paid to employees of the United States under  
   subchapter I of chapter 57 of title 5, to members of the Civil Air      
   Patrol while the members are carrying out programs or missions          
   specifically assigned by the Air Force;                                 
       (8) provide funds for the national headquarters of the Civil Air    
   Patrol, including--                                                     
       (A) funds for the payment of staff compensation and benefits,       
   administrative expenses, travel, per diem and allowances, rent,         
   utilities, other operational expenses of the national headquarters; and 
       (B) to the extent considered necessary by the Secretary of the Air  
   Force to fulfill Air Force requirements, funds for the payment of       
   compensation and benefits for key staff at regional, State, or          
   territorial headquarters;                                               
       (9) authorize the payment of expenses of placing into serviceable   
   condition, improving, and maintaining equipment (including aircraft,    
   motor vehicles, computers, and communications equipment) owned or leased
   by the Civil Air Patrol;                                                
       (10) provide funds for the lease or purchase of items of equipment  
   that the Secretary determines necessary for the Civil Air Patrol;       
    (11) support the Civil Air Patrol cadet program by furnishing--        

    (A) articles of the Air Force uniform to cadets without cost; and      

       (B) any other support that the Secretary of the Air Force determines
   is consistent with Air Force missions and objectives; and               

       (12) provide support, including appropriated funds, for the Civil   
   Air Patrol aerospace education program to the extent that the Secretary 
   of the Air Force determines appropriate for furthering the fulfillment  
   of Air Force missions and objectives.                                   
     (c) Assistance by Other Agencies.--(1) The Secretary of the Air Force
  may arrange for the use by the Civil Air Patrol of such facilities and  
  services under the jurisdiction of the Secretary of the Army, the       
  Secretary of the Navy, or the head of any other department or agency of 
  the United States as the Secretary of the Air Force considers to be     
  needed by the Civil Air Patrol to carry out its mission.                
     (2) An arrangement for use of facilities or services of a military   
  department or other department or agency under this subsection shall be 
  subject to the agreement of the Secretary of the military department or 
  head of the other department or agency, as the case may be.             
     (3) Each arrangement under this subsection shall be made in          
  accordance with regulations prescribed under section 9448 of this title.
          9445. Funds appropriated for the Civil Air Patrol                       

     Funds appropriated for the Civil Air Patrol shall be available only  
  for the exclusive use of the Civil Air Patrol.                          
          9446. Miscellaneous personnel authorities                               

     (a) Use of Retired Air Force Personnel.--(1) Upon the request of a   
  person retired from service in the Air Force, the Secretary of the Air  
  Force may enter into a personal services contract with that person      
  providing for the person to serve as an administrator or liaison officer
  for the Civil Air Patrol. The qualifications of a person to provide the 
  services shall be determined and approved in accordance with regulations
  prescribed under section 9448 of this title.                            
     (2) To the extent provided in a contract under paragraph (1), a      
  person providing services under the contract may accept services on     
  behalf of the Air Force and commit and obligate appropriated funds as   
  necessary to perform the services.                                      
     (3) A person, while providing services under a contract authorized   
  under paragraph (1), may receive the person's retired pay and an        
  additional amount for such services that is not less than the amount    
  equal to the excess of--                                                
       (A) the pay and allowances that the person would be entitled to     
   receive if ordered to active duty in the grade in which the person      
   retired from service in the Air Force, over                             
    (B) the amount of the person's retired pay.                            

     (4) A person, while providing services under a contract authorized   
  under paragraph (1), may not be considered to be on active duty or      
  inactive-duty training for any purpose.                                 
     (b) Use of Civil Air Patrol Chaplains.--The Secretary of the Air     
  Force may use the services of Civil Air Patrol chaplains in support of  
  the Air Force active duty and reserve component forces to the extent and
  under conditions that the Secretary determines appropriate.             
          9447. Board of Governors                                                

     (a) Governing Body.--The Board of Governors of the Civil Air Patrol  
  is the governing body of the Civil Air Patrol.                          
     (b) Composition.--The Board of Governors is composed of 11 members as
  follows:                                                                
       (1) Four members appointed by the Secretary of the Air Force, who   
   may be active or retired officers of the Air Force (including reserve   
   components of the Air Force), employees of the United States, or private
   citizens.                                                               
       (2) Four members of the Civil Air Patrol, elected from among the    
   members of the Civil Air Patrol in the manner provided in regulations   
   prescribed under section 9448 of this title.                            
       (3) Three members appointed or selected as provided in subsection   
   (c) from among personnel of any Federal Government agencies, public     
   corporations, nonprofit associations, and other organizations that have 
   an interest and expertise in civil aviation and the Civil Air Patrol    
   mission.                                                                
     (c) Appointments From Interested Organizations.--(1) Subject to      
  paragraph (2), the members of the Board of Governors referred to in     
  subsection (b)(3) shall be appointed jointly by the Secretary of the Air
  Force and the National Commander of the Civil Air Patrol.               
     (2) Any vacancy in the position of a member referred to in paragraph 
  (1) that is not filled under that paragraph within 90 days shall be     
  filled by majority vote of the other members of the Board.              
     (d) Chairperson.--(1) The Chairperson of the Board of Governors shall
  be chosen by the members of the Board of Governors from among the       
  members of the Board eligible for selection under paragraph (2) and     
  shall serve for a term of two years.                                    
     (2) The position of Chairperson shall be held on a rotating basis,   
  first by a member of the Board selected from among those appointed by   
  the Secretary of the Air Force under paragraph (1) of subsection (b) and
  then by a member of the Board selected from among the members elected by
  the Civil Air Patrol under paragraph (2) of that subsection. Upon the   
  expiration of the term of a Chairperson selected from among the members 
  referred to in one of those paragraphs, the selection of a successor to 
  that position shall be made from among the members who are referred to  
  in the other paragraph.                                                 
     (e) Powers.--(1) The Board of Governors shall, subject to paragraphs 
  (2) and (3), exercise the powers granted under section 40304 of title   
  36.                                                                     
     (2) Any exercise by the Board of the power to amend the constitution 
  or bylaws of the Civil Air Patrol or to adopt a new constitution or     
  bylaws shall be subject to approval by a majority of the members of the 
  Board.                                                                  
     (3) Neither the Board of Governors nor any other component of the    
  Civil Air Patrol may modify or terminate any requirement or authority   
  set forth in this section.                                              
     (f) Personal Liability for Breach of a Fiduciary Duty.--(1) The Board
  of Governors shall, subject to paragraph (2), take such action as is    
  necessary to eliminate or limit the personal liability of a member of   
  the Board of Governors to the Civil Air Patrol or to any of its members 
  for monetary damages for a breach of fiduciary duty while serving as a  
  member of the Board.                                                    
     (2) The Board may not eliminate or limit the liability of a member of
  the Board of Governors to the Civil Air Patrol or to any of its members 
  for monetary damages for any of the following:                          
       (A) A breach of the member's duty of loyalty to the Civil Air Patrol
   or its members.                                                         
       (B) Any act or omission that is not in good faith or that involves  
   intentional misconduct or a knowing violation of law.                   
       (C) Participation in any transaction from which the member directly 
   or indirectly derives an improper personal benefit.                     
     (3) Nothing in this subsection shall be construed as rendering       
  section 207 or 208 of title 18 inapplicable in any respect to a member  
  of the Board of Governors who is a member of the Air Force on active    
  duty, an officer on a retired list of the Air Force, or an employee of  
  the United States.                                                      
     (g) Personal Liability for Breach of a Fiduciary Duty.--(1) Except as
  provided in paragraph (2), no member of the Board of Governors or       
  officer of the Civil Air Patrol shall be personally liable for damages  
  for any injury or death or loss or damage of property resulting from a  
  tortious act or omission of an employee or member of the Civil Air      
  Patrol.                                                                 
     (2) Paragraph (1) does not apply to a member of the Board of         
  Governors or officer of the Civil Air Patrol for a tortious act or      
  omission in which the member or officer, as the case may be, was        
  personally involved, whether in breach of a civil duty or in commission 
  of a criminal offense.                                                  
     (3) Nothing in this subsection shall be construed to restrict the    
  applicability of common law protections and rights that a member of the 
  Board of Governors or officer of the Civil Air Patrol may have.         
     (4) The protections provided under this subsection are in addition to
  the protections provided under subsection (f).                          
          9448. Regulations                                                       

     (a) Authority.--The Secretary of the Air Force shall prescribe       
  regulations for the administration of this chapter.                     
     (b) Required Regulations.--The regulations shall include the         
  following:                                                              
       (1) Regulations governing the conduct of the activities of the Civil
   Air Patrol when it is performing its duties as a volunteer civilian     
   auxiliary of the Air Force under section 9442 of this title.            
       (2) Regulations for providing support by the Air Force and for      
   arranging assistance by other agencies under section 9444 of this title.
       (3) Regulations governing the qualifications of retired Air Force   
   personnel to serve as an administrator or liaison officer for the Civil 
   Air Patrol under a personal services contract entered into under section
   9446(a) of this title.                                                  
       (4) Procedures and requirements for the election of members of the  
   Board of Governors under section 9447(b)(2) of this title.              

     (c) Approval by Secretary of Defense.--The regulations required by   
  subsection (b)(2) shall be subject to the approval of the Secretary of  
  Defense.                                                                

         * * * * * * *                                                           

          Subtitle E--Reserve Components                                          

         * * * * * * *                                                           

          PART I--ORGANIZATION AND ADMINISTRATION                                 

         * * * * * * *                                                           

                     CHAPTER 1007--ADMINISTRATION OF RESERVE COMPONENTS           

         * * * * * * *                                                           

                    10218. Army and Air Force Reserve technicians: conditions for 
          retention; mandatory retirement under civil service laws                
     (a) Separation and Retirement of Military Technicians ( Dual Status  
  ).--(1) An individual employed by the Army Reserve or the Air Force     
  Reserve as a military technician (dual status) who after the date of the
  enactment of this section October 5, 1999, loses dual status is subject 
  to paragraph (2) or (3), as the case may be.                            
     (2) If a technician described in paragraph (1) is eligible at the    
  time dual status is lost for an unreduced annuity and is age 60 or older
  at that time, the technician shall be separated not later than 30 days  
  after the date on which dual status is lost.                            
     (3)(A) If a technician described in paragraph (1) is not eligible at 
  the time dual status is lost for an unreduced annuity or is under age 60
  at that time, the technician shall be offered the opportunity to--      
       (i) reapply for, and if qualified be appointed to, a position as a  
   military technician (dual status); or                                   
       (ii) apply for a civil service position that is not a technician    
   position.                                                               
     (B) If such a technician continues employment with the Army Reserve  
  or the Air Force Reserve as a non-dual status technician, the           
  technician--                                                            
       (i) shall not be permitted, after the end of the one-year period    
   beginning on the date of the enactment of this subsection October 5,    
   2000, to apply for any voluntary personnel action; and                  
    (ii) shall be separated or retired--                                   

       (I) in the case of a technician first hired as a military technician
   (dual status) on or before February 10, 1996, not later than 30 days    
   after becoming eligible for an unreduced annuity and becoming 60 years  
   of age; and                                                             
         * * * * * * *                                                           

     (b) Non-Dual Status Technicians.--(1) An individual who on the date  
  of the enactment of this section October 5, 1999, is employed by the    
  Army Reserve or the Air Force Reserve as a non-dual status technician   
  and who on that date is eligible for an unreduced annuity and is age 60 
  or older shall be separated not later than six months after the date of 
  the enactment of this section April 5, 2000.                            
     (2)(A) An individual who on the date of the enactment of this section
  October 5, 1999, is employed by the Army Reserve or the Air Force       
  Reserve as a non-dual status technician and who on that date is not     
  eligible for an unreduced annuity or is under age 60 shall be offered   
  the opportunity to--                                                    
       (i) reapply for, and if qualified be appointed to, a position as a  
   military technician (dual status); or                                   
       (ii) apply for a civil service position that is not a technician    
   position.                                                               
     (B) If such a technician continues employment with the Army Reserve  
  or the Air Force Reserve as a non-dual status technician, the           
  technician--                                                            
       (i) shall not be permitted, after the end of the one-year period    
   beginning on the date of the enactment of this subsection October 5,    
   2000, to apply for any voluntary personnel action; and                  
    (ii) shall be separated or retired--                                   

       (I) in the case of a technician first hired as a technician on or   
   before February 10, 1996, and who on the date of the enactment of this  
   section October 5, 1999, is a non-dual status technician, not later than
   30 days after becoming eligible for an unreduced annuity and becoming 60
   years of age; and                                                       
       (II) in the case of a technician first hired as a technician after  
   February 10, 1996, and who on the date of the enactment of this section 
   October 5, 1999, is a non-dual status technician, not later than one    
   year after the date on which dual status is lost.                       
     (3) An individual employed by the Army Reserve or the Air Force      
  Reserve as a non-dual status technician who is ineligible for           
  appointment to a military technician (dual status) position, or who     
  decides not to apply for appointment to such a position, or who, within 
  six months of the date of the enactment of this section during the      
  period beginning on October 5, 1999, and ending on April 5, 2000, is not
  appointed to such a position, shall for reduction-in-force purposes be  
  in a separate competitive category from employees who are military      
  technicians (dual status).                                              
         * * * * * * *                                                           

          PART II--PERSONNEL GENERALLY                                            

         * * * * * * *                                                           

                        CHAPTER 1205--APPOINTMENT OF RESERVE OFFICERS             

         * * * * * * *                                                           

                    12005. Strength in grade: commissioned officers in grades     
          below brigadier general or rear admiral (lower half) in an active status
     (a)(1) Subject to paragraph (2), the authorized strength of the Army 
  and the Air Force in reserve commissioned officers in an active status  
  in each grade named in paragraph (2) is as prescribed by the Secretary  
  of the Army or the Secretary of the Air Force, respectively. A vacancy  
  in any grade may be filled by an authorized appointment in any lower    
  grade. Medical officers and dental officers shall be excluded in        
  computing and determining the authorized strengths under this           
  subsection.                                                             
         * * * * * * *                                                           

                    12011. Authorized strengths: reserve officers on active duty  
          or on full-time National Guard duty for administration of the reserves  
          or the National Guard                                                   
   (a) * * *                                                              

         * * * * * * *                                                           


     (c) Whenever under section 527 of this title the President may       
  suspend the operation of any provision of section 523, 525, or 526 of   
  this title, the Secretary of Defense may suspend the operation of any   
  provision of this section. Any such suspension shall, if not sooner     
  ended, end in the manner specified in section 527 for a suspension under
  that section.                                                           
     (d) Upon a determination by the Secretary of Defense that such action
  is in the national interest, the Secretary may increase the number of   
  officers serving in any grade for a fiscal year pursuant to subsection  
  (a) by not more than the percent authorized by the Secretary under      
  section 115(c)(2) of this title.                                        

                    12012. Authorized strengths: senior enlisted members on active
          duty or on full-time National Guard duty for administration of the      
          reserves or the National Guard                                          
   (a) * * *                                                              

         * * * * * * *                                                           


     (c) Whenever under section 527 of this title the President may       
  suspend the operation of any provision of section 523, 525, or 526 of   
  this title, the Secretary of Defense may suspend the operation of any   
  provision of this section. Any such suspension shall, if not sooner     
  ended, end in the manner specified in section 527 for a suspension under
  that section.                                                           
     (d) Upon a determination by the Secretary of Defense that such action
  is in the national interest, the Secretary may increase the number of   
  enlisted members serving in any grade for a fiscal year pursuant to     
  subsection (a) by not more than the percent authorized by the Secretary 
  under section 115(c)(2) of this title.                                  

         * * * * * * *                                                           


            CHAPTER 1213--SPECIAL APPOINTMENTS, ASSIGNMENTS, DETAILS, AND DUTIES  

         * * * * * * *                                                           

          12503. Ready Reserve: funeral honors duty                               

   (a) * * *                                                              

     (b) Service Credit.--A member ordered to funeral honors duty under   
  this section shall be required to perform a minimum of two hours of such
  duty in order to receive--                                              
    (1) service credit under section 12732(a)(2)(E) of this title; and     

       (2) if authorized by the Secretary concerned, the allowance under   
   section 435 of title 37 or compensation at the rate prescribed in       
   section 206 of title 37.                                                
         * * * * * * *                                                           

                   CHAPTER 1215--MISCELLANEOUS PROHIBITIONS AND PENALTIES         

         * * * * * * *                                                           

          12552. Funeral honors functions at funerals for veterans                

     Performance by a Reserve of funeral honors functions at the funeral  
  of a veteran (as defined in section 1491(h) of this title) may not be   
  considered to be a period of drill or training, but may be performed as 
  funeral honors duty under section 12503 of this title .                 
         * * * * * * *                                                           

                      CHAPTER 1223--RETIRED PAY FOR NON-REGULAR SERVICE           

         * * * * * * *                                                           

          12731. Age and service requirements                                     

   (a) * * *                                                              

         * * * * * * *                                                           

     (f) In the case of a person who completes the service requirements of
  subsection (a)(2) during the period beginning on October 5, 1994, and   
  ending on September 30, 2001 December 31, 2001, the provisions of       
  subsection (a)(3) shall be applied by substituting ``the last six       
  years'' for ``the last eight years''.                                   

          12731a. Temporary special retirement qualification authority            

     (a) Retirement With at Least 15 Years of Service.--For the purposes  
  of section 12731 of this title, the Secretary concerned may--           
       (1) during the period described in subsection (b), determine to     
   treat a member of the Selected Reserve of a reserve component of the    
   armed force under the jurisdiction of that Secretary as having met the  
   service requirements of subsection (a)(2) of that section and provide   
   the member with the notification required by subsection (d) of that     
   section if the member--                                                 
       (A) as of October 1, 1991 December 31, 2001, has completed at least 
   15, and less than 20, years of service computed under section 12732 of  
   this title; or                                                          
       (B) after that date and before October 1, 2001 December 31, 2001,   
   completes 15 years of service computed under that section; and          
         * * * * * * *                                                           

          12733. Computation of retired pay: computation of years of service      

     For the purpose of computing the retired pay of a person under this  
  chapter, the person's years of service and any fraction of such a year  
  are computed by dividing 360 into the sum of the following:             
    (1)  * * *                                                             

         * * * * * * *                                                           

       (3) One day for each point credited to the person under clause (B), 
   (C), or (D) of section 12732(a)(2) of this title, but not more than 60  
   days in any one year of service before the year of service that includes
   September 23, 1996, and not more than 75 days in any subsequent year of 
   service. but not more than--                                            

       (A) 60 days in any one year of service before the year of service   
   that includes September 23, 1996;                                       
       (B) 75 days in the year of service that includes September 23, 1996,
   and in any subsequent year of service before the year of service that   
   includes the date of the enactment of the National Defense Authorization
   Act for Fiscal Year 2001; and                                           
       (C) 90 days in the year of service that includes the date of the    
   enactment of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2001
   and in any subsequent year of service.                                  

         * * * * * * *                                                           

                    PART III--PROMOTION AND RETENTION OF OFFICERS ON THE RESERVE  
          ACTIVE-STATUS LIST                                                      
         * * * * * * *                                                           

            CHAPTER 1409--CONTINUATION OF OFFICERS ON THE RESERVE ACTIVE-STATUS   
                        LIST AND SELECTIVE EARLY REMOVAL                          
         * * * * * * *                                                           

                    14701. Selection of officers for continuation on the reserve  
          active-status list                                                      
     (a) Consideration for Continuation.--(1) Upon application, a reserve 
  officer A reserve officer of the Army, Navy, Air Force, or Marine Corps 
  who is required to be removed from the reserve active-status list under 
  section 14505, 14506, or 14507 of this title may, subject to the needs  
  of the service and to section 14509 of this title, be considered for    
  continuation on the reserve active-status list by a selection board     
  convened under section 14101(b) of this title.                          
         * * * * * * *                                                           

                    14703. Authority to retain chaplains and officers in medical  
          specialties until specified age                                         
     (a) Retention.--Notwithstanding any provision of chapter 1407 of this
  title and except for officers referred to in sections 14503, 14504,     
  14505, and 14506 of this title and under regulations prescribed by the  
  Secretary of Defense--                                                  
    (1) * * *                                                              

         * * * * * * *                                                           

       (3) the Secretary of the Air Force may, with the officer's consent, 
   retain in an active status any reserve officer who is designated as a   
   medical officer, dental officer, veterinary officer, Air Force nurse, or
   chaplain or who is designated as a biomedical sciences officer and is   
   qualified for service as a veterinarian, optometrist, or podiatrist. Air
   Force nurse, Medical Service Corps officer, biomedical sciences officer,
   or chaplain.                                                            
         * * * * * * *                                                           

                    PART IV--TRAINING FOR RESERVE COMPONENTS AND EDUCATIONAL      
          ASSISTANCE PROGRAMS                                                     
         * * * * * * *                                                           

              CHAPTER 1606--EDUCATIONAL ASSISTANCE FOR MEMBERS OF THE SELECTED    
                                     RESERVE                                      
         * * * * * * *                                                           

          16133. Time limitation for use of entitlement                           

   (a) * * *                                                              

   (b)(1) In the case of a person--                                       

       (A) who is separated from the Selected Reserve because of a         
   disability which was not the result of the individual's own willful     
   misconduct incurred on or after the date on which such person became    
   entitled to educational assistance under this chapter; or               
       (B) who, on or after the date on which such person became entitled  
   to educational assistance under this chapter ceases to be a member of   
   the Selected Reserve during the period beginning on October 1, 1991, and
   ending on September 30, 2001 December 31, 2001, by reason of the        
   inactivation of the person's unit of assignment or by reason of         
   involuntarily ceasing to be designated as a member of the Selected      
   Reserve pursuant to section 10143(a) of this title,                     
    the period for using entitlement prescribed by subsection (a) shall be
  determined without regard to clause (2) of such subsection.             
         * * * * * * *                                                           


                       CHAPTER 1609--EDUCATION LOAN REPAYMENT PROGRAMS            

         * * * * * * *                                                           

                    16302. Education loan repayment program: health professions   
          officers serving in Selected Reserve with wartime critical medical skill
          shortages                                                               
   (a)  * * *                                                             

         * * * * * * *                                                           

     (d) The authority provided in this section shall apply only in the   
  case of a person first appointed as a commissioned officer before       
  January 1, 2001 January 1, 2002.                                        
         * * * * * * *                                                           

                     CHAPTER 1611--OTHER EDUCATIONAL ASSISTANCE PROGRAMS          


      Sec.                                                                    

            16401. Marine Corps Platoon Leaders Class program: officer        
      candidates pursuing degrees.                                            

            16401. Marine Corps Platoon Leaders Class program: college tuition
      assistance program.                                                     

                    16401. Marine Corps Platoon Leaders Class program: officer    
          candidates pursuing degrees                                             

                    16401. Marine Corps Platoon Leaders Class program: college    
          tuition assistance program                                              

     (a) Authority for Financial College Tuition Assistance Program.--The 
  Secretary of the Navy may provide financial assistance to an eligible   
  enlisted a member of the Marine Corps Reserve for expenses of the member
  while the member is pursuing on a full-time basis at an institution of  
  higher education a program of education approved by the Secretary that  
  leads to--                                                              
    (1) a baccalaureate degree in less than five academic years; or        

       (2) a doctor of jurisprudence or bachelor of laws degree in not more
   than three four academic years.                                         
     (b) Eligibility.--(1) To be eligible for financial assistance under  
  this section, an enlisted a member of the Marine Corps Reserve must--   
       (A) be an officer candidate in a member of the Marine Corps Platoon 
   Leaders Class program and have successfully completed one six-week (or  
   longer) increment of military training required under that program;     
    (B) meet the applicable age requirement specified in paragraph (2);    

       (C) (B) be enrolled on a full-time basis in a program of education  
   referred to in subsection (a) at any institution of higher education;   
   and                                                                     
       (D) (C) enter into a written agreement with the Secretary described 
   in paragraph (3) (2).                                                   
     (2)(A) In the case of a member pursuing a baccalaureate degree, the  
  member meets the age requirements of this paragraph if the member will  
  be under 27 years of age on June 30 of the calendar year in which the   
  member is projected to be eligible for appointment as a commissioned    
  officer in the Marine Corps through the Marine Corps Platoon Leaders    
  Class program, except that if the member has served on active duty, the 
  member may, on such date, be any age under 30 years that exceeds 27     
  years by a number of months that is not more than the number of months  
  that the member served on active duty.                                  
     (B) In the case of a member pursuing a doctor of jurisprudence or    
  bachelor of laws degree, the member meets the age requirements of this  
  paragraph if the member will be under 31 years of age on June 30 of the 
  calendar year in which the member is projected to be eligible for       
  appointment as a commissioned officer in the Marine Corps through the   
  Marine Corps Platoon Leaders Class program, except that if the member   
  has served on active duty, the member may, on such date, be any age     
  under 35 years that exceeds 31 years by a number of months that is not  
  more than the number of months that the member served on active duty.   
     (3) (2) A written agreement referred to in paragraph (1)(D) is an    
  agreement between the member and the Secretary in which the member      
  agrees--                                                                
    (A) * * *                                                              

         * * * * * * *                                                           

     (f) Failure To Complete Program.--(1) A member An enlisted member who
  receives financial assistance under this section may be ordered to      
  active duty in the Marine Corps by the Secretary to serve in an         
  appropriate enlisted grade for such period as the Secretary prescribes, 
  but not for more than four years, if the member--                       
    (A) * * *                                                              

         * * * * * * *                                                           

          PART V--SERVICE, SUPPLY, AND PROCUREMENT                                

         * * * * * * *                                                           

                       CHAPTER 1803--FACILITIES FOR RESERVE COMPONENTS            

         * * * * * * *                                                           

          18232. Definitions                                                      

   In this chapter:                                                       

       (1) The term ``State'' means any of the States of the United States,
   the District of Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, and each     
   territory and possession of the United States and includes political    
   subdivisions and military units thereof and tax-supported agencies      
   therein.                                                                
       (2) The term ``facility'' includes any (A) interest in land, (B)    
   armory or other structure armory, readiness center, or other structure, 
   and (C) storage or other facility normally needed for the administration
   and training of any unit of the reserve components of the armed forces. 
       (3) The term ``armory'' means The terms ``armory'' and ``readiness  
   center'' mean a structure that houses one or more units of a reserve    
   component and is used for training and administering those units. It    
   includes a structure that is appurtenant to such a structure and houses 
   equipment used for that training and administration.                    
         * * * * * * *                                                           

          18236. Contributions to States; other use permitted by States           

   (a) * * *                                                              

     (b) A contribution made for an armory or readiness center under      
  paragraph (4) or (5) of section 18233(a) of this title may not exceed   
  the sum of--                                                            
    (1) * * *                                                              

         * * * * * * *                                                           

                                                                                 

              NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT FOR FISCAL YEARS 1990 AND 1991   

         * * * * * * *                                                           

           DIVISION A--DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE AUTHORIZATIONS                        

         * * * * * * *                                                           

                                    TITLE I--PROCUREMENT                          

         * * * * * * *                                                           

                               PART A--FUNDING AUTHORIZATIONS                     

         * * * * * * *                                                           

          SEC. 112. ANNUAL REPORT ON B 2 BOMBER AIRCRAFT PROGRAM.                 

     (a) Annual Reporting Requirement.--Not later than March 1 of each    
  year, the Secretary of Defense shall submit to the Committee on Armed   
  Services of the Senate and the Committee on National Security of the    
  House of Representatives a report that sets forth the finding of the    
  Secretary (as of January 1 of such year) on each of the following       
  matters:                                                                
       (1) Whether the performance milestones for the B 2 aircraft for the 
   previous fiscal year for both developmental test and evaluation and     
   operational test and evaluation (as contained in the Requirements       
   Correlation Matrix found in the user-defined Operational Requirements   
   Document (as contained in Attachment B to a letter from the Secretary of
   Defense to Congress dated October 14, 1993)) have been met.             

       (2) Whether the B 2 aircraft has a high probability of being able to
   perform its intended missions.                                          
       (3) Whether any proposed modification to the performance matrix     
   referred to in paragraph (1) will be provided in writing in advance to  
   the committees.                                                         
       (4) Whether the cost reduction initiatives established for the B 2  
   program can be achieved (together with details of the savings to be     
   realized).                                                              
       (5) Whether the quality assurance practices and fiscal management   
   controls of the prime contractor and major subcontractors associated    
   with the B 2 program meet or exceed accepted United States Government   
   standards.                                                              
     (b) First Report.--The Secretary shall submit the first annual report
  under subsection (a) not later than March 1, 1996.                      
         * * * * * * *                                                           

            TITLE VIII--ACQUISITION POLICY, ACQUISITION MANAGEMENT, AND RELATED   
                                     MATTERS                                      
         * * * * * * *                                                           

          PART D--PROVISIONS RELATING TO SMALL AND SMALL DISADVANTAGED BUSINESSES 

         * * * * * * *                                                           

                    SEC. 834. TEST PROGRAM FOR NEGOTIATION OF COMPREHENSIVE SMALL 
          BUSINESS SUBCONTRACTING PLANS.                                          
   (a)  * * *                                                             

         * * * * * * *                                                           

     (e) Test Program Period.--The test program authorized by subsection  
  (a) shall begin on October 1, 1990, unless Congress adopts a resolution 
  disapproving the test program. The test program shall terminate on      
  September 30, 2000..                                                    
         * * * * * * *                                                           

                              TITLE XXVIII--GENERAL PROVISIONS                    

         * * * * * * *                                                           

                                 PART B--LAND TRANSACTIONS                        

                    SEC. 2811. LAND CONVEYANCE AT MARINE CORPS AIR STATION, EL    
          TORO, CALIFORNIA, AND CONSTRUCTION OF FAMILY HOUSING AT MARINE CORPS AIR
          STATION, TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA.                                            
     (a) In General.--Subject to subsections (b) through (d), the         
  Secretary of the Navy may--                                             
       (1) convey to the County of Orange, California, or its designee, or 
   both, all right, title, and interest of the United States in and to     
   approximately 77 acres of real property, including improvements thereon,
   consisting of three severable parcels at Marine Corps Air Station, El   
   Toro, California; and                                                   
       (2) accept monetary consideration for such property and expend it   
   for the construction of additional military family housing units at     
   Marine Corps Air Station, Tustin, California and repair of roads, and   
   the development of Aerial Port of Embarkation facilities, at Marine     
   Corps Air Station, Miramar, California.                                 
         * * * * * * *                                                           

                                                                                 

                                TITLE 32, UNITED STATES CODE                      

                                   CHAPTER 1--ORGANIZATION                        

          115. Funeral honors duty performed as a Federal function                

   (a) * * *                                                              

     (b) Service Credit.--A member ordered to funeral honors duty under   
  this section shall be required to perform a minimum of two hours of such
  duty in order to receive--                                              
    (1) service credit under section 12732(a)(2)(E) of title 10; and       

       (2) if authorized by the Secretary concerned, the allowance under   
   section 435 of title 37 or compensation at the rate prescribed in       
   section 206 of title 37.                                                
         * * * * * * *                                                           

                                     CHAPTER 5--TRAINING                          

         * * * * * * *                                                           

          508. Assistance for certain youth and charitable organizations          

   (a)  * * *                                                             

         * * * * * * *                                                           

     (b) Authorized Services.--The services authorized to be provided     
  under subsection (a) are as follows:                                    
    (1)  * * *                                                             

       (2) Air transportation in support of Special Olympics or any other  
   youth or charitable organization designated by the Secretary of Defense.
         * * * * * * *                                                           

     (d) Eligible Organizations.--The organizations eligible to receive   
  services under this section are as follows:                             
    (1)  * * *                                                             

         * * * * * * *                                                           


    (14) Reach For Tomorrow.                                               


       (14) (15) Any other youth or charitable organization designated by  
   the Secretary of Defense.                                               
         * * * * * * *                                                           

                    509. National Guard Challenge Program of opportunities for    
          civilian youth                                                          
   (a) * * *                                                              

     (b) Conduct of the Program.-- (1) The Secretary of Defense shall     
  provide for the conduct of the National Guard Challenge Program in such 
  States as the Secretary considers to be appropriate, except that Federal
  expenditures under the program may not exceed $62,500,000 for any fiscal
  year.                                                                   
     (2) The Secretary shall carry out the National Guard Challenge       
  Program using funds appropriated directly to the Secretary for the      
  program and nondefense Federal funds made available or transferred to   
  the Secretary by other Federal agencies to support the program. However,
  the amount of funds appropriated directly to the Secretary of Defense   
  and expended for the program in a fiscal year may not exceed            
  $62,500,000.                                                            
         * * * * * * *                                                           


     (m) Regulations.--The Secretary of Defense shall prescribe           
  regulations to carry out the National Guard Challenge Program. The      
  regulations shall address at a minimum the following:                   
       (1) The terms to be included in the program agreements required by  
   subsection (d).                                                         
       (2) The qualifications for persons to participate in the program, as
   required by subsection (e).                                             
       (3) The benefits authorized for program participants, as required by
   subsection (f).                                                         
       (4) The status of National Guard personnel assigned to duty in      
   support of the program.                                                 
       (5) The conditions for the use of National Guard facilities and     
   equipment to carry out the program, as required by subsection (h).      
    (6) The status of program participants, as described in subsection (i).

       (7) The procedures to be used by the Secretary when communicating   
   with States about the program.                                          
         * * * * * * *                                                           


                                                                                 

                   NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT FOR FISCAL YEAR 1993        

           DIVISION A--DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE AUTHORIZATIONS                        

                                    TITLE I--PROCUREMENT                          

         * * * * * * *                                                           

                              SUBTITLE E--DEFENSE-WIDE PROGRAMS                   

         * * * * * * *                                                           

          SEC. 142. MH 47E/MH 60K HELICOPTER MODIFICATION PROGRAMS.               

     (a) Required Testing.--Notwithstanding the requirements of           
  subsections (a) (2) and (b) of section 2366 of title 10, United States  
  Code, and the requirements of subsection (a) of section 2399 of such    
  title--                                                                 
       (1) operational test and evaluation and survivability testing of the
   MH 60K helicopter under the MH 60K helicopter                           

                    modification program shall be completed prior to full materiel
          release of the MH 60K helicopters for operational use; and              
       (2) operational test and evaluation and survivability testing of the
   MH 47E helicopter under the MH 47E helicopter modification program shall
   be completed prior to full materiel release of the MH 47E helicopters   
   for operational use.                                                    
         * * * * * * *                                                           

            TITLE XLIV--PERSONNEL ADJUSTMENT, EDUCATION, AND TRAINING PROGRAMS     

                      SUBTITLE A--ACTIVE FORCES TRANSITION ENHANCEMENTS           

         * * * * * * *                                                           

          SEC. 4403. TEMPORARY EARLY RETIREMENT AUTHORITY.                        

   (a) * * *                                                              

         * * * * * * *                                                           

     (i) Active Force Drawdown Period.--For purposes of this section, the 
  active force drawdown period is the period beginning on the date of the 
  enactment of this Act and ending on October 1, 2001 December 31, 2001.  
         * * * * * * *                                                           

                    SUBTITLE B--GUARD AND RESERVE TRANSITION INITIATIVES          

          SEC. 4411. FORCE REDUCTION TRANSITION PERIOD DEFINED.                   

     In this subtitle, the term ``force reduction transition period''     
  means the period beginning on October 1, 1991, and ending on September  
  30, 2001 December 31, 2001.                                             
         * * * * * * *                                                           

          SEC. 4416. FORCE REDUCTION PERIOD RETIREMENTS.                          

   (a) * * *                                                              

     (b) Temporary Special Authority.--During the period referred to in   
  subsection (c), the Secretary concerned may grant a member of the       
  Selected Reserve under the age of 60 years the annual payments provided 
  for under this section if--                                             
       (1) as of October 1, 1991, that member has completed at least 20    
   years of service computed under section 1332 of title 10, United States 
   Code, or after that date and before October 1, 2001 December 31, 2001,  
   such member completes 20 years of service computed under that section or
   section 12732;                                                          
         * * * * * * *                                                           

           TITLE XLIV--PERSONNEL ADJUSTMENT, EDUCATION, AND TRAINING PROGRAMS      

         * * * * * * *                                                           

            SUBTITLE F--JOB TRAINING AND EMPLOYMENT AND EDUCATIONAL OPPORTUNITIES 

         * * * * * * *                                                           

                    SEC. 4463. PROGRAM OF EDUCATIONAL LEAVE RELATING TO CONTINUING
          PUBLIC AND COMMUNITY SERVICE.                                           
   (a) * * *                                                              

         * * * * * * *                                                           

     (f) Expiration.--The authority to grant a leave of absence under     
  subsection (a) shall expire on September 30, 2001] December 31, 2001.   
         * * * * * * *                                                           

                                                                                 

                                TITLE 37, UNITED STATES CODE                      

                                    CHAPTER 3--BASIC PAY                          

         * * * * * * *                                                           

          205. Computation: service creditable                                    

   (a) * * *                                                              

         * * * * * * *                                                           

     (f) Notwithstanding subsection (a), the periods of service of a      
  commissioned officer appointed under section 12209 12203 of title 10    
  after receiving financial assistance under section 16401 of such title  
  that are counted under this section may not include a period of service 
  after January 1, 2000, that the officer performed concurrently as a     
  member an enlisted member of the Marine Corps Platoon Leaders Class     
  program and the Marine Corps Reserve, except that service after that    
  date that the officer performed before commissioning (concurrently with 
  the period of service as a member of the Marine Corps Platoon Leaders   
  Class program) as an enlisted member on active duty or as a member of   
  the Selected Reserve may be so counted.                                 
         * * * * * * *                                                           

          209. Members of precommissioning programs                               

     (a) Senior ROTC Members in Advanced Training.-- (1) Except when on   
  active duty, a member of the Senior Reserve Officers' Training Corps who
  is selected for advanced training under section 2104 of title 10 is     
  entitled to a subsistence allowance of $200 a month monthly subsistence 
  allowance at a rate prescribed under paragraph (2) beginning on the day 
  he starts advanced training and ending upon the completion of his       
  instruction under that section, but in no event shall any member receive
  such pay for more than 30 months.                                       
     (2) The Secretary of Defense shall prescribe by regulation the       
  monthly rates for subsistence allowances provided under this section.   
  The rate may not be less than $250 per month, but may not exceed $600   
  per month. Subsistence                                                  
     (3) A subsistence allowance under this section may not be considered 
  financial assistance requiring additional service within the meaning of 
  the third sentence of section 6(d)(1) of the Military Selective Act (50 
  U.S.C App. 456(d)(1)).                                                  
     (b) Senior ROTC Members Appointed in Reserves.--Except when on active
  duty, a cadet or midshipman appointed under section 2107 of title 10 is 
  entitled to a monthly subsistence allowance in the amount provided in   
  subsection (a) at a rate prescribed under subsection (a)(2). A member   
  enrolled in the first two years of a four-year program is entitled to   
  receive subsistence for a maximum of twenty months. A member enrolled in
  the advanced course is entitled to subsistence as prescribed for a      
  member enrolled under section 2104 of title 10 as prescribed in         
  subsection (a).                                                         
     (c) Pay While Attending Training or Practice Cruise.--Each cadet or  
  midshipman in the Senior Reserve Officers' Training Corps, while he is  
  attending training or practice cruises under chapter 103 of title 10 if 
  the training or cruise is of at least four weeks duration and must be   
  completed before the cadet or midshipman is commissioned, and each      
  applicant for membership in the Senior Reserve Officers' Training Corps,
  while he is attending field training or practice cruises to satisfy the 
  requirements of section 2104(b)(6)(B) of title 10 for admission to      
  advanced training, is entitled, while so attending, to pay at the rate  
  prescribed for cadets and midshipmen at the United States Military,     
  Naval, and Air Force Academies under section 203(c) of this title.      
     (d) Members of Marine Corps Officer Candidate Program.--Except when  
  serving on active duty, a member who is enrolled in a Marine Corps      
  officer candidate program which requires a baccalaureate degree as a    
  prerequisite to being commissioned as an officer and who is not enrolled
  in a program established under chapter 103 of title 10 or an academy    
  established under chapter 403, 603, or 903 of title 10 may be paid a    
  subsistence allowance at the same rate as that prescribed by subsection 
  (a), the monthly rate prescribed under subsection (a)(2) for a member of
  the Senior Reserve Officers' Training Corps who is selected for advanced
  training under section 2104 of title 10.                                
         * * * * * * *                                                           

                            CHAPTER 5--SPECIAL AND INCENTIVE PAYS                 


      Sec.                                                                    


      301. Incentive pay: hazardous duty.                                     

         * * * * * * *                                                           


      309. Special pay: enlistment bonus.                                     

         * * * * * * *                                                           

            323. Special pay: retention incentives for members qualified in   
      critical military skill.                                                

         * * * * * * *                                                           

                    301b. Special pay: aviation career officers extending period  
          of active duty                                                          
      (a) Bonus Authorized.--An aviation officer described in subsection   
   (b) who, during the period beginning on January 1, 1989, and ending on  
   December 31, 2000, December 31, 2001, executes                          

                    a written agreement to remain on active duty in aviation      
          service for at least one year may, upon the acceptance of the agreement 
          by the Secretary concerned, be paid a retention bonus as provided in    
          this section.                                                           
         * * * * * * *                                                           

   (j)  Definitions.--In this section:                                     

       (1) The term ``aviation service'' means service performed by an     
   officer (except a flight surgeon or other medical officer) while holding
   an aeronautical rating or designation or while in training to receive an
   aeronautical rating or designation.                                     
       (2) The term ``operational flying duty'' has the meaning given such 
   term in section 301a(a)(6)(A) section 301a(a)(6)(B) of this title.      
         * * * * * * *                                                           

          302. Special pay: medical officers of the armed forces                  

   (a)  * * *                                                             

         * * * * * * *                                                           

     (h) Reserve Medical Officers Special Pay.--(1) A reserve medical     
  officer described in paragraph (2) is entitled to special pay at the    
  rate of $450 a month for each month of active duty , including active   
  duty in the form of annual training, active duty for training, and      
  active duty for special work.                                           
         * * * * * * *                                                           

          302a. Special pay: optometrists                                         

   (a)  * * *                                                             

      (b) Retention Special Pay.--(1) Under regulations prescribed under   
   section 303a(a) of this title, an officer described in paragraph (2) may
   be paid the Secretary concerned may pay an officer described in         
   paragraph (2) a retention special pay of not more than $6,000 for any   
   twelve-month period during which the officer is not undergoing an       
   internship or initial residency training.                               
         * * * * * * *                                                           

          302c. Special pay: psychologists and nonphysician health care providers 

   (a)  * * *                                                             

         * * * * * * *                                                           

      (d) Nonphysician Health Care Providers.--The Secretary concerned may 
   authorize the payment of special pay at the rates specified in          
   subsection (b) to an officer who--                                      
       (1) is an officer in the Medical Services Corps of the Army or Navy,
   a biomedical sciences officer in the Air Force, an officer in the Army  
   Medical Specialist Corps, an officer of the Nurse Corps of the Army or  
   Navy, an officer of the Air Force designated as a nurse, an officer in  
   the Coast Guard or Coast Guard Reserve designated as a physician        
   assistant, or an officer in the Regular or Reserve Corps of the Public  
   Health Service;                                                         
         * * * * * * *                                                           

          302d. Special pay: accession bonus for registered nurses                

      (a) Accession Bonus Authorized.--(1) A person who is a registered    
   nurse and who, during the period beginning on November 29, 1989, and    
   ending on December 31, 2000 December 31, 2001, executes a written       
   agreement described in subsection (c) to accept a commission as an      
   officer and remain on active duty for a period of not less than four    
   years may, upon the acceptance of the agreement by the Secretary        
   concerned, be paid an accession bonus in an amount determined by the    
   Secretary concerned.                                                    
         * * * * * * *                                                           

          302e. Special pay: nurse anesthetists                                   

      (a) Special Pay Authorized.--(1) An officer described in subsection  
   (b)(1) who, during the period beginning on November 29, 1989, and ending
   on December 31, 2000 December 31, 2001, executes a written agreement to 
   remain on active duty for a period of one year or more may, upon the    
   acceptance of the agreement by the Secretary concerned, be paid         
   incentive special pay in an amount not to exceed $15,000 for any        
   12-month period.                                                        
         * * * * * * *                                                           

   (b)  Covered Officers.--(1)  * * *                                      

      (2) The Secretary of Defense may extend the special pay authorized   
   under subsection (a) to officers of the armed forces who serve in a     
   nursing specialty (other than as nurse anesthetists) that--             
       (A) is designated by the Secretary the Secretary of the military    
   department concerned as critical to meet requirements (whether such     
   specialty is designated as critical to meet wartime or peacetime        
   requirements); and                                                      
         * * * * * * *                                                           

          302f. Special pay: reserve, recalled, or retained health care officers  

   (a)  * * *                                                             

         * * * * * * *                                                           

     (d) Special Rule for Reserve Medical Officer.--While a reserve       
  medical officer receives a special pay under section 302 of this title  
  by reason of subsection (a), the officer shall not be entitled to       
  special pay under subsection (h) of that section.                       

     (d) Exception.--While a reserve medical or dental officer receives a 
  special pay under section 302 or 302b of this title by reason of        
  subsection (a), the officer shall not be entitled to special pay under  
  section 302(h) or 302b(h) of this title.                                

         * * * * * * *                                                           


                    302g. Special pay: Selected Reserve health care professionals 
          in critically short wartime specialties                                 
   (a)  * * *                                                             

         * * * * * * *                                                           

     (f) Termination of Agreement Authority.--No agreement under this     
  section may be entered into after December 31, 2000 December 31, 2001.  
         * * * * * * *                                                           

          305a. Special pay: career sea pay                                       

     (a) Under regulations prescribed by the President, a member of a     
  uniformed service who is entitled to basic pay is also entitled, while  
  on sea duty, to special pay at the applicable rate under subsection (b).
     (b) The monthly rates for special pay under subsection (a) are as    
  follows:                                                                

                                ENLISTED MEMBERS                               

 Pay grade                                 Years of sea duty                              

               1 or less     Over 1     Over 2     Over 3     Over 4     Over 5     Over 6  

 4                   $50        $60       $120       $150       $160       $160       $160  
 5                    50         60        120        150        170        315        325  
 6                   100        100        120        150        170        315        325  
 7                   100        100        120        175        190        350        350  
 8                   100        100        120        175        190        350        350  
 9                   100        100        120        175        190        350        350  
            ------------  ---------  ---------  ---------  ---------  ---------  ---------  
                                                                                               
                       Over       Over       Over       Over       Over       Over       Over  
                                                                                               
            ------------  ---------  ---------  ---------  ---------  ---------  ---------  
 4                  $160       $160       $160       $160       $160       $160       $160  
 5                   350        350        350        350        350        350        350  
 6                   350        350        365        365        365        380        395  
 7                   375        390        400        400        410        420        450  
 8                   375        390        400        400        410        420        450  
 9                   375        390        400        400        410        420        450  
            ------------  ---------  ---------  ---------  ---------  ---------  ---------  
                       Over       Over       Over                                              
                                                                                    ---------  
            ------------  ---------  ---------             ---------  ---------             
 4                  $160       $160       $160                                              
 5                   350        350        350                                              
 6                   410        425        450                                              
 7                   475        500        500                                              
 8                   475        500        520                                              
 9                   475        520        520                                              


                                WARRANT OFFICERS                               

Pay grade                              Years of sea duty                           

              1 or less    Over 1    Over 2    Over 3    Over 4    Over 5    Over 6  

W 1                $130      $135      $140      $150      $170      $175       $00  
W 2                 150       150       150       150       170       260       265  
W 3                 150       150       150       150       170       270       280  
W 4                 150       150       150       150       170       290       310  
W 5                 150       150       150       150       170       290       310  
           ------------  --------  --------  --------  --------  --------  --------  
                      Over      Over      Over      Over      Over      Over      Over  
                                                                                        
           ------------  --------  --------  --------  --------  --------  --------  
W 1                $250      $270      $300      $325      $325      $340      $360  
W 2                 265       270       310       340       340       375       400  
W 3                 285       290       310       350       375       400       425  
W 4                 310       310       310       350       375       400       450  
W 5                 310       310       310       350       375       400       450  
           ------------  --------  --------  --------  --------  --------  --------  
                      Over      Over      Over                                          
                                                                                        
           ------------  --------  --------            --------  --------  --------  
W 1                $375      $375      $375                                          
W 2                 400       400       400                                          
W 3                 425       450       450                                          
W 4                 450       500       500                                          
W 5                 450       500       500  


                              COMMISSIONED OFFICERS                            

Pay grade                           Years of sea duty                          

             Over 3    Over 4    Over 5    Over 6    Over 7    Over 8    Over 9  

O 1            $150      $160      $185      $190      $195      $205      $215  
O 2             150       160       185       190       195       205       215  
O 3             150       160       185       190       195       205       215  
O 4             185       190       200       205       215       220       220  
O 5             225       225       225       225       280       245       250  
O 6             225       230       230       240       255       265       280  
           --------  --------  --------  --------  --------  --------  --------  
                  Over      Over      Over      Over      Over      Over      Over  
                                                                                    
           --------  --------  --------  --------  --------  --------  --------  
O 1            $225      $225      $240      $250      $260      $270      $280  
O 2             225       225       240       250       260       270       280  
O 3             225       225       240       260       270       280       290  
O 4             225       225       240       270       280       290       300  
O 5             260       265       265       285       300       315       340  
O 6             290       300       310       325       340       355       380  

      (c) Under regulations prescribed by the President, a member of a     
   uniformed service who is entitled to career sea pay under this section  
   who has served 36 consecutive months of sea duty (other than an enlisted
   member in a pay grade above E 4 with more than five years of sea duty)  
   is entitled to a career sea pay premium of $100 a month for the         
   thirty-seventh consecutive month and each subsequent consecutive month  
   of sea duty served by such member.                                      

     (a) Availability of Special Pay.--A member of a uniformed service who
  is entitled to basic pay is also entitled, while on sea duty, to career 
  sea pay at a monthly rate prescribed by the Secretary concerned, but not
  to exceed $750 per month.                                               
     (b) Eligibility for Premium.--A member of a uniformed service        
  entitled to career sea pay under subsection (a) who has served 36       
  consecutive months of sea duty is also entitled to a career sea pay     
  premium for the 37th consecutive month and each subsequent consecutive  
  month of sea duty served by the member. The monthly amount of the       
  premium shall be prescribed by the Secretary concerned, but may not     
  exceed $350 per month.                                                  
     (c) Regulations.--The Secretaries concerned shall prescribe          
  regulations to carry out this section. Regulations prescribed by the    
  Secretary of a military department shall be subject to the approval of  
  the Secretary of Defense.                                               

     (d) Definition of Sea Duty.--(1) In this section, the term ``sea     
  duty'' means duty performed by a member--                               
    (A)  * * *                                                             

         * * * * * * *                                                           

          307. Special pay: special duty assignment pay for enlisted members      

     (a) An enlisted member who is entitled to basic pay and is performing
  duties which have been designated under subsection (b) as extremely     
  difficult or as involving an unusual degree of responsibility in a      
  military skill may, in addition to other pay or allowances to which he  
  is entitled, be paid special duty assignment pay at a monthly rate not  
  to exceed $275 $600. In the case of a member who is serving as a        
  military recruiter and is eligible for special duty assignment pay under
  this subsection on account of such duty, the Secretary concerned may    
  increase the monthly rate of special duty assignment pay for the member 
  to not more than $375.                                                  
         * * * * * * *                                                           

          308. Special pay: reenlistment bonus                                    

   (a)  * * *                                                             

         * * * * * * *                                                           

     (g) No bonus shall be paid under this section with respect to any    
  reenlistment, or voluntary extension of an active-duty reenlistment, in 
  the armed forces entered into after December 31, 2000 December 31, 2001.
          308a. Special pay: enlistment bonus                                     

   (a) * * *                                                              

         * * * * * * *                                                           

     (d) Termination of Authority.--No bonus shall be paid under this     
  section with respect to any enlistment or extension of an initial period
  of active duty in the armed forces made after December 31, 2000         
  September 30, 2001.                                                     

                    308b. Special pay: reenlistment bonus for members of the      
          Selected Reserve                                                        
   (a)  * * *                                                             

         * * * * * * *                                                           

     (f) Termination of Authority.--No bonus may be paid under this       
  section to any enlisted member who, after December 31, 2000 December 31,
  2001, reenlists or voluntarily extends his enlistment in a reserve      
  component.                                                              
          308c. Special pay: bonus for enlistment in the Selected Reserve         

   (a)  * * *                                                              

         * * * * * * *                                                           

     (e) No bonus may be paid under this section to any enlisted member   
  who, after December 31, 2000 December 31, 2001, enlists in the Selected 
  Reserve of the Ready Reserve of an armed force.                         
         * * * * * * *                                                           

                    308d. Special pay: enlisted members of the Selected Reserve   
          assigned to certain high priority units                                 
   (a)  * * *                                                              

         * * * * * * *                                                           

      (c) Additional compensation may not be paid under this section for   
   inactive duty performed after December 31, 2000 December 31, 2001.      
          308e. Special pay: bonus for reserve affiliation agreement              

   (a)  * * *                                                             

         * * * * * * *                                                           

     (e) No bonus may be paid under this section to any person for a      
  reserve obligation agreement entered into after December 31, 2000       
  December 31, 2001.                                                      
         * * * * * * *                                                           

          308f. Special pay: bonus for enlistment in the Army                     

   (a) * * *                                                              

         * * * * * * *                                                           

     (c) No bonus may be paid under this section with respect to an       
  enlistment in the Army after December 31, 2000 September 30, 2001.      
         * * * * * * *                                                           

                    308h. Special pay: bonus for reenlistment, enlistment, or     
          voluntary extension of enlistment in elements of the Ready Reserve other
          than the Selected Reserve                                               
   (a)  * * *                                                             

         * * * * * * *                                                           

     (g) A bonus may not be paid under this section to any person for a   
  reenlistment, enlistment, or voluntary extension of an enlistment after 
  December 31, 2000 December 31, 2001.                                    
          308i. Special pay: prior service enlistment bonus                       

   (a)  * * *                                                             

         * * * * * * *                                                           

     (f) Termination of Authority.--No bonus may be paid under this       
  section to any person for an enlistment after December 31, 2000 December
  31, 2001.                                                               
         * * * * * * *                                                           


          309. Special pay: enlistment bonus                                      

     (a) Bonus Authorized; Bonus Amount.--A person who enlists in an armed
  force for a period of at least two years may be paid a bonus in an      
  amount not to exceed $20,000. The bonus may be paid in a single lump sum
  or in periodic installments.                                            
     (b) Repayment of Bonus.--(1) A member of the armed forces who        
  voluntarily, or because of the member's misconduct, does not complete   
  the term of enlistment for which a bonus was paid under this section, or
  a member who is not technically qualified in the skill for which the    
  bonus was paid, if any (other than a member who is not qualified because
  of injury, illness, or other impairment not the result of the member's  
  misconduct), shall refund to the United States that percentage of the   
  bonus that the unexpired part of member's enlistment is of the total    
  enlistment period for which the bonus was paid.                         
     (2) An obligation to reimburse the United States imposed under       
  paragraph (1) is for all purposes a debt owed to the United States.     
     (3) A discharge in bankruptcy under title 11 that is entered less    
  than five years after the termination of an enlistment for which a bonus
  was paid under this section does not discharge the person receiving the 
  bonus from the debt arising under paragraph (1).                        
     (c) Relation to Prohibition on Bounties.--The enlistment bonus       
  authorized by this section is not a bounty for purposes of section      
  514(a) of title 10.                                                     
     (d) Regulations.--This section shall be administered under           
  regulations prescribed by the Secretary of Defense for the armed forces 
  under the jurisdiction of the Secretary of Defense and by the Secretary 
  of Transportation for the Coast Guard when the Coast Guard is not       
  operating as a service in the Navy.                                     
     (e) Duration of Authority.--No bonus shall be paid under this section
  with respect to any enlistment in the armed forces made before October  
  1, 2001, or after December 31, 2001.                                    

         * * * * * * *                                                           

                    312. Special pay: nuclear-qualified officers extending period 
          of active duty                                                          
   (a)  * * *                                                             

         * * * * * * *                                                           

     (e) The provisions of this section shall be effective only in the    
  case of officers who, on or before December 31, 2000 December 31, 2001, 
  execute the required written agreement to remain in active service.     
         * * * * * * *                                                           

          312b. Special pay: nuclear career accession bonus                       

   (a)  * * *                                                             

         * * * * * * *                                                           

     (c) The provisions of this section shall be effective only in the    
  case of officers who, on or before December 31, 2000 December 31, 2001, 
  have been accepted for training for duty in connection with the         
  supervision, operation, and maintenance of naval nuclear propulsion     
  plants.                                                                 
          312c. Special pay: nuclear career annual incentive bonus                

   (a)  * * *                                                             

         * * * * * * *                                                           

     (d) For the purposes of this section, a ``nuclear service year'' is  
  any fiscal year beginning before December 31, 2000 December 31, 2001.   
         * * * * * * *                                                           


                    323. Special pay: retention incentives for members qualified  
          in a critical military skill                                            
     (a) Retention Bonus Authorized.--An officer or enlisted member of the
  armed forces who is serving on active duty and is qualified in a        
  designated critical military skill may be paid a retention bonus as     
  provided in this section if--                                           
       (1) in the case of an officer, the member executes a written        
   agreement to remain on active duty for at least one year; or            
       (2) in the case of an enlisted member, the member reenlists or      
   voluntarily extends the member's enlistment for a period of at least one
   year.                                                                   
     (b) Designation of Critical Skills.--(1) A designated critical       
  military skill referred to in subsection (a) is a military skill        
  designated as critical by the Secretary of Defense, or by the Secretary 
  of Transportation with respect to the Coast Guard when it is not        
  operating as a service in the Navy.                                     
     (2) The Secretary of Defense, and the Secretary of Transportation    
  with respect to the Coast Guard when it is not operating as a service in
  the Navy, shall notify Congress, in advance, of each military skill to  
  be designated by the Secretary as critical for purposes of this section.
  The notice shall be submitted at least 90 days before any bonus with    
  regard to that critical skill is offered under subsection (a) and shall 
  include a discussion of the necessity for the bonus, the amount and     
  method of payment of the bonus, and the retention results that the bonus
  is expected to achieve.                                                 
     (c) Payment Methods.--A bonus under this section may be paid in a    
  single lump sum or in periodic installments.                            
     (d) Maximum Bonus Amount.--A member may enter into an agreement under
  this section, or reenlist or voluntarily extend the member's enlistment,
  more than once to receive a bonus under this                            

                    section. However, a member may not receive a total of more    
          than $200,000 in payments under this section.                           
     (e) Certain Members Ineligible.--A retention bonus may not be        
  provided under subsection (a) to a member of the armed forces who--     
    (1) has completed more than 25 years of active duty; or                

       (2) will complete the member's 25th year of active duty before the  
   end of the period of active duty for which the bonus is being offered.  
     (f) Relationship to Other Incentives.--A retention bonus paid under  
  this section is in addition to any other pay and allowances to which a  
  member is entitled.                                                     
     (g) Repayment of Bonus.--(1) If an officer who has entered into a    
  written agreement under subsection (a) fails to complete the total      
  period of active duty specified in the agreement, or an enlisted member 
  who voluntarily or because of misconduct does not complete the term of  
  enlistment for which a bonus was paid under this section, the Secretary 
  of Defense, and the Secretary of Transportation with respect to members 
  of the Coast Guard when it is not operating as a service in the Navy,   
  may require the member to repay the United States, on a pro rata basis  
  and to the extent that the Secretary determines conditions and          
  circumstances warrant, all sums paid under this section.                
     (2) An obligation to repay the United States imposed under paragraph 
  (1) is for all purposes a debt owed to the United States.               
     (3) A discharge in bankruptcy under title 11 that is entered less    
  than five years after the termination of a written agreement entered    
  into under subsection (a) does not discharge the member from a debt     
  arising under paragraph (2).                                            
     (h) Annual Report.--Not later than February 15 of each year, the     
  Secretary of Defense and the Secretary of Transportation shall submit to
  Congress a report--                                                     
       (1) analyzing the effect, during the preceding fiscal year, of the  
   provision of bonuses under this section on the retention of members     
   qualified in the critical military skills for which the bonuses were    
   offered; and                                                            
       (2) describing the intentions of the Secretary regarding the        
   continued use of the bonus authority during the current and next fiscal 
   years.                                                                  
     (i) Termination of Bonus Authority.--No bonus may be paid under this 
  section with respect to any reenlistment, or voluntary extension of an  
  enlistment, in the armed forces entered into after December 31, 2001,   
  and no agreement under this section may be entered into after that date.
                                    CHAPTER 7--ALLOWANCES                         


      Sec.                                                                    

      401. Definitions.                                                       

      402. Basic allowance for subsistence.                                   

             402a. Supplemental subsistence allowance for low-income members  
      with dependents.                                                        
         * * * * * * *                                                           


      411i. Travel and transportation allowances: parking expenses.           


       435. Funeral honors duty: allowance.                                   

      435  436. Per diem allowance for lengthy or numerous deployments.       


         * * * * * * *                                                           

          402. Basic allowance for subsistence                                    

   (a)  * * *                                                             

     (b) Rates of Allowance Based on Food Costs.--(1) The monthly rate of 
  basic allowance for subsistence to be in effect for an enlisted member  
  for a year (beginning on January 1 of that year) shall be the amount    
  that is halfway between the following amounts, which are determined by  
  the Secretary of Agriculture as of October 1 of the preceding year:     
       (A) The amount equal to the monthly cost of a moderate-cost food    
   plan for a male in the United States who is between 20 and 50 years of  
   age.                                                                    
       (B) The amount equal to the monthly cost of a liberal food plan for 
   a male in the United States who is between 20 and 50 years of age.      
     (1) The monthly rate of basic allowance for subsistence to be in     
  effect for an enlisted member for a year (beginning on January 1 of that
  year) shall be equal to the sum of--                                    

       (A) the monthly rate of basic allowance for subsistence that was in 
   effect for an enlisted member for the preceding year; plus              
       (B) the product of the monthly rate under subparagraph (A) and the  
   percentage increase in the monthly cost of a liberal food plan for a    
   male in the United States who is between 20 and 50 years of age over the
   preceding fiscal year, as determined by the Secretary of Agriculture    
   each October 1.                                                         

         * * * * * * *                                                           


                    402a. Supplemental subsistence allowance for low-income       
          members with dependents                                                 
     (a) Supplemental Allowance Authorized.--(1) The Secretary concerned  
  may increase the basic allowance for subsistence to which a member of   
  the armed forces described in subsection (b) is otherwise entitled under
  section 402 of this title by an amount (in this section referred to as  
  the ``supplemental subsistence allowance'') designed to remove the      
  member's household from eligibility for benefits under the food stamp   
  program.                                                                
     (2) The supplemental subsistence allowance may not exceed $500 per   
  month. In establishing the amount of the supplemental subsistence       
  allowance to be paid an eligible member under this paragraph, the       
  Secretary shall take into consideration the amount of the basic         
  allowance for housing that the member receives under section 403 of this
  title or would otherwise receive under such section, in the case of a   
  member who is not entitled to that allowance as a result of assignment  
  to quarters of the United States or a housing facility under the        
  jurisdiction of a uniformed service.                                    
     (3) In the case of a member described in subsection (b) who          
  establishes to the satisfaction of the Secretary concerned that the     
  allotment of the member's household under the food stamp program,       
  calculated in the absence of the supplemental subsistence allowance,    
  would exceed the amount established by the Secretary concerned under    
  paragraph (2), the amount of the supplemental subsistence allowance for 
  the member shall be equal to the lesser of the following:               
    (A) The value of that allotment.                                       

    (B) $500.                                                              

     (b) Eligible Members.--(1) Subject to subsection (d), a member of the
  armed forces is eligible to receive the supplemental subsistence        
  allowance if the Secretary concerned determines that the member's       
  income, together with the income of the rest of the member's household  
  (if any), is within the highest income standard of eligibility, as then 
  in effect under section 5(c) of the Food Stamp Act of 1977 (7 U.S.C.    
  2014(c)) and without regard to paragraph (1) of such section, for       
  participation in the food stamp program.                                
     (2) In determining whether a member meets the eligibility criteria   
  under paragraph (1), the Secretary--                                    
       (A) shall not take into consideration the amount of the supplemental
   subsistence allowance payable under this section; but                   
       (B) shall take into consideration the amount of the basic allowance 
   for housing that the member receives under section 403 of this title or 
   would otherwise receive under such section, in the case of a member who 
   is not entitled to that allowance as a result of assignment to quarters 
   of the United States or a housing facility under the jurisdiction of a  
   uniformed service.                                                      
     (c) Application for Allowance.--To request the supplemental          
  subsistence allowance, a member shall submit an application to the      
  Secretary concerned in such form and containing such information as the 
  Secretary concerned may prescribe. A member applying for the            
  supplemental subsistence allowance shall furnish such evidence regarding
  the member's satisfaction of the eligibility criteria under subsection  
  (b) as the Secretary concerned may require.                             
     (d) Effective Period.--The eligibility of a member to receive the    
  supplemental subsistence allowance terminates upon the occurrence of any
  of the following events, even though the member continues to meet the   
  eligibility criteria described in subsection (b):                       
       (1) Payment of the supplemental subsistence allowance for 12        
   consecutive months.                                                     
    (2) Promotion of the member to a higher grade.                         

    (3) Transfer of the member in a permanent change of station.           

     (e) Reapplication.--Upon the termination of the effective period of  
  the supplemental subsistence allowance for a member, or in anticipation 
  of the imminent termination of the allowance, a member may reapply for  
  the allowance under subsection (c) if the member continues to meet, or  
  once again meets, the eligibility criteria described in subsection (b). 
     (f) Reporting Requirement.--Not later than March 1 of each year after
  2001, the Secretary of Defense shall submit to Congress a report        
  specifying the number of members of the armed forces who received, at   
  any time during the preceding year, the supplemental subsistence        
  allowance. In preparing the report, the Secretary of Defense shall      
  consult with the Secretary of Transportation. No report is required     
  under this subsection after March 1, 2006.                              
   (g)  Definitions.--In this section:                                    


       (1) The term ``Secretary concerned'' means the Secretary of Defense,
   and the Secretary of Transportation, with respect to the Coast Guard    
   when it is not operating as a service in the Navy.                      
       (2) The terms ``allotment'' and ``household'' have the meanings     
   given those terms in section 3 of the Food Stamp Act of 1977 (7 U.S.C.  
   2012).                                                                  
       (3) The term ``food stamp program'' means the program established   
   pursuant to section 4 of the Food Stamp Act of 1977 (7 U.S.C. 2013).    
     (h) Termination of Authority.--No supplemental subsistence allowance 
  may be made under this section after September 30, 2006.                

          403. Basic allowance for housing                                        

   (a)  * * *                                                             

     (b) Basic Allowance for Housing Inside the United States.--(1) The   
  Secretary of Defense shall determine the costs of adequate housing in a 
  military housing area in the United States for all members of the       
  uniformed services entitled to a basic allowance for housing in that    
  area. The Secretary shall base the determination upon the costs of      
  adequate housing for civilians with comparable income levels in the same
  area. In determining what constitutes adequate housing for members, the 
  Secretary may not differentiate between members with dependents in pay  
  grades E 1 through E 4.                                                 
     (2) Subject to paragraph (3), the monthly amount of a basic allowance
  for housing for an area of the United States for a member of a uniformed
  service is equal to the difference between--                            
       (A) the monthly cost of adequate housing in that area, as determined
   by the Secretary of Defense, for members of the uniformed services      
   serving in the same pay grade and with the same dependency status as the
   member; and                                                             
       (B) 15 percent of the national average monthly cost of adequate     
   housing in the United States, as determined by the Secretary, for       
   members of the uniformed services serving in the same pay grade and with
   the same dependency status as the member.                               
     (3) The rates of basic allowance for housing shall be reduced as     
  necessary to comply with this paragraph. The total amount that may be   
  paid for a fiscal year for the basic allowance for housing under this   
  subsection is the product of--                                          
       (A) the total amount authorized to be paid for such allowance for   
   the preceding fiscal year (as adjusted under paragraph (5)); and        
    (B) a fraction--                                                       

       (i) the numerator of which is the index of the national average     
   monthly cost of housing for June of the preceding fiscal year; and      
       (ii) the denominator of which is the index of the national average  
   monthly cost of housing for June of the fiscal year before the preceding
   fiscal year.                                                            

     (2) The Secretary of Defense shall prescribe the monthly amount of   
  the basic allowance for housing for a member of a uniformed service who 
  is entitled to the allowance in a military housing area in the United   
  States at a rate based upon the costs of adequate housing in the area   
  determined under paragraph (1).                                         
     (3) The total amount that may be paid for a fiscal year for the basic
  allowance for housing under this subsection may not be less than the    
  product of--                                                            
       (A) the total amount authorized to be paid for such allowance for   
   the preceding fiscal year; and                                          
    (B) a fraction--                                                       

       (i) the numerator of which is the index of the national average     
   monthly cost of housing for June of the preceding fiscal year; and      
       (ii) the denominator of which is the index of the national average  
   monthly cost of housing for June of the second preceding fiscal year.   

         * * * * * * *                                                           

     (5) In making a determination under paragraph (3) for a fiscal year, 
  the amount authorized to be paid for the preceding fiscal year for the  
  basic allowance for housing shall be adjusted to reflect changes during 
  the year for which the determination is made in the number, grade       
  distribution, geographic distribution in the United States, and         
  dependency status of members of the uniformed services entitled to the  
  allowance from the number of such members during the preceding fiscal   
  year.                                                                   

     (5) The Secretary shall establish a single monthly rate for members  
  of the uniformed services with dependents in pay grades E 1 through E 4 
  in the same military housing area. The rate shall be consistent with the
  rates paid to members in pay grades other than pay grades E 1 through E 
  4 and shall be based on the following:                                  
       (A) The average cost of a two-bedroom apartment in that military    
   housing area.                                                           
       (B) One-half of the difference between the average cost of a        
   two-bedroom townhouse in that area and the amount determined in         
   subparagraph (A).                                                       

     (6) So long as a member of a uniformed service retains uninterrupted 
  eligibility to receive a basic allowance for housing within an area of  
  the United States, the monthly amount of the allowance for the member   
  may not be reduced as a result of changes in housing costs in the area, 
  changes in the national average monthly cost of housing, or the         
  promotion of the member.                                                
         * * * * * * *                                                           

   (f)  Ineligibility During Initial Field Duty or Sea Duty.--(1)  * * *  

   (2)(A)  * * *                                                          

     (B) Under regulations prescribed by the Secretary concerned, the     
  Secretary may authorize the payment of a basic allowance for housing to 
  a member of a uniformed service without dependents who is serving in pay
  grade E 4 or E 5 and is assigned to sea duty. In prescribing regulations
  under this subparagraph, the Secretary concerned shall consider the     
  availability of quarters for members serving in pay grade E 4 or E 5.   
         * * * * * * *                                                           

     (m) Members Paying Child Support.--(1) A member of a uniformed       
  service with dependents may not be paid a basic allowance for housing at
  the with dependents rate solely by reason of the payment of child       
  support by the member if--                                              
    (A)  * * *                                                             

       (B) the member is assigned to sea duty, and elects not to occupy    
   assigned quarters for unaccompanied personnel, unless the member is in a
   pay grade above E 4 E 3.                                                
         * * * * * * *                                                           

          404. Travel and transportation allowances: general                      

   (a) * * *                                                              

   (b)(1)  * * *                                                          

     (2) In prescribing such conditions and allowances, the Secretaries   
  concerned shall provide that a member who is performing travel under    
  orders away from his designated post of duty and who is authorized a per
  diem under clause (2) of subsection (d) shall be paid for the meals     
  portion of that per diem in a cash amount at a rate that is not less    
  than the rate established under section 1011(a) of this title for meals 
  sold to members. The preceding sentence shall not apply with respect to 
  a member on field duty or sea duty (as defined in regulations prescribed
  under section 402(e) section 403(f)(3) of this title) or a member of a  
  unit with respect to which the Secretary concerned has determined that  
  unit messing is essential to the accomplishment of the unit's training  
  and readiness.                                                          
         * * * * * * *                                                           

     (c)(1) Under uniform regulations prescribed by the Secretaries       
  concerned and as provided in paragraph (2), a member who--              
    (A) * * *                                                              

         * * * * * * *                                                           

       (C) is involuntarily separated from active duty during the period   
   beginning on October 1, 1990, and ending on September 30, 2001 December 
   31, 2001,                                                               
         * * * * * * *                                                           

   (f)(1) * * *                                                           

   (2)(A) * * *                                                           

   (B) Subparagraph (A) does not apply to a member--                      

    (i) * * *                                                              

         * * * * * * *                                                           

       (v) who is involuntarily separated from active duty during the      
   period beginning on October 1, 1990, and ending on September 30, 2001   
   December 31, 2001.                                                      
         * * * * * * *                                                           

          404a. Travel and transportation allowances: temporary lodging expenses  

     (a) Under regulations prescribed by the Secretaries concerned, a     
  member of a uniformed service who is ordered to make a change of        
  permanent station--                                                     

       (1) from any duty station to a duty station in the United States    
   (other than Hawaii or Alaska);                                          
       (2) from a duty station in the United States (other than Hawaii or  
   Alaska) to a duty station outside the United States or in Hawaii or     
   Alaska; or                                                              
       (3) in the case of an enlisted member who is reporting to the       
   member's first permanent duty station, from the member's home of record 
   or initial technical school to that first permanent duty station;       
    shall be paid or reimbursed for subsistence expenses actually incurred
  by the member and the member's dependents while occupying temporary     
  quarters incident to that change of permanent station. In the case of a 
  change of permanent station described in paragraph (1) or (3), the      
  period for which such expenses are to be paid or reimbursed may not     
  exceed 10 days. In the case of a change of permanent station described  
  in paragraph (2), the period for which such expenses are to be paid or  
  reimbursed may not exceed five days and such payment or reimbursement   
  may be provided only for expenses incurred before leaving the United    
  States (other than Hawaii or Alaska).                                   

     (a) Payment or Reimbursement of Subsistence Expenses.--(1) Under     
  regulations prescribed by the Secretaries concerned, a member of a      
  uniformed service who is ordered to make a change of permanent station  
  described in paragraph (2) shall be paid or reimbursed for subsistence  
  expenses of the member and the member's dependents for the period       
  (subject to subsection (c)) for which the member and dependents occupy  
  temporary quarters incident to that change of permanent station.        
   (2) Paragraph (1) applies to the following:                            

       (A) A permanent change of station from any duty station to a duty   
   station in the United States (other than Hawaii or Alaska).             
       (B) A permanent change of station from a duty station in the United 
   States (other than Hawaii or Alaska) to a duty station outside the      
   United States or in Hawaii or Alaska.                                   
       (C) In the case of an enlisted member who is reporting to the       
   member's first permanent duty station, the change from the member's home
   of record or initial technical school to that first permanent duty      
   station.                                                                
     (b) Payment in Advance.--The Secretary concerned may make any payment
  for subsistence expenses to a member under this section in advance of   
  the member actually incurring the expenses. The amount of an advance    
  payment made to a member shall be computed on the basis of the          
  Secretary's determination of the average number of days that members and
  their dependents occupy temporary quarters under the circumstances      
  applicable to the member and the member's dependents.                   
     (c) Maximum Payment Period.--(1) In the case of a change of permanent
  station described in subparagraph (A) or (C) of subsection (a)(2), the  
  period for which subsistence expenses are to be paid or reimbursed under
  this section may not exceed 10 days.                                    
     (2) In the case of a change of permanent station described in        
  subsection (a)(2)(B)--                                                  
       (A) the period for which such expenses are to be paid or reimbursed 
   under this section may not exceed five days; and                        
       (B) such payment or reimbursement may be provided only for expenses 
   incurred before leaving the United States (other than Hawaii or Alaska).

     (b) (d) Daily Subsistence Rates.--Regulations prescribed under       
  subsection (a) shall prescribe average daily subsistence rates for      
  purposes of this section for the member and for each dependent. Such    
  rates may not exceed the maximum per diem rates prescribed under section
  404(d) of this title for the area where the temporary quarters are      
  located.                                                                
     (c) (e) Maximum Daily Payment.--A member may not be paid or          
  reimbursed more that $110 a day under this section.                     
                    405. Travel and transportation allowances: per diem while on  
          duty outside the United States or in Hawaii or Alaska                   
     (a) Without regard to the monetary limitation of this title, the     
  Secretaries concerned may authorize the payment of a per diem,          
  considering all elements of the cost of living to members of the        
  uniformed services under their jurisdiction and their dependents        
  including the cost of quarters, subsistence, and other necessary        
  incidental expenses, to such a member who is on duty outside of the     
  United States or in Hawaii or Alaska, whether or not he is in a travel  
  status. However, dependents may not be considered in determining the per
  diem allowance for a member in a travel status.                         
     (b) Housing cost and allowance may be disregarded in prescribing a   
  station cost of living allowance under this section.                    

                    405. Travel and transportation allowances: per diem while on  
          duty outside the United States or in Hawaii or Alaska                   
     (a) Per Diem Authorized.--Without regard to the monetary limitation  
  of this title, the Secretary concerned may pay a per diem to a member of
  the uniformed services who is on duty outside of the United States or in
  Hawaii or Alaska, whether or not the member is in a travel status. The  
  Secretary may pay the per diem in advance of the accrual of the per     
  diem.                                                                   
     (b) Determination of Per Diem.--In determining the per diem to be    
  paid under this section, the Secretary concerned shall consider all     
  elements of the cost of living to members of the uniformed services     
  under the Secretary's jurisdiction and their dependents, including the  
  cost of quarters, subsistence, and other necessary incidental expenses. 
  However, dependents may not be considered in determining the per diem   
  allowance for a member in a travel status.                              
     (c) Treatment of Housing Cost and Allowance.--Housing cost and       
  allowance may be disregarded in prescribing a station cost of living    
  allowance under this section.                                           

                    406. Travel and transportation allowances: dependents; baggage
          and household effects                                                   
     (a)(1) Except as provided in paragraph (2), a member of a uniformed  
  service who is ordered to make a change of permanent station is entitled
  to transportation in kind, reimbursement therefor, or a monetary        
  allowance in place of the cost of transportation, plus a per diem, for  
  the member's dependents at rates prescribed by the Secretaries          
  concerned, but not more than the rate authorized under section 404(d) of
  this title. The Secretary concerned may also reimburse the member for   
  mandatory pet quarantine fees for household pets, but not to exceed $275
  per change of station, when the member incurs the fees incident to such 
  change of station.                                                      
   (2)(A) * * *                                                           

   (B) Subparagraph (A) does not apply to a member--                      

    (i) * * *                                                              

         * * * * * * *                                                           

       (v) who is involuntarily separated from active duty during the      
   period beginning on October 1, 1990, and ending on September 30, 2001   
   December 31, 2001.                                                      
         * * * * * * *                                                           

     (g)(1) Under uniform regulations prescribed by the Secretaries       
  concerned, a member who--                                               
    (A) * * *                                                              

         * * * * * * *                                                           

       (C) is involuntarily separated from active duty during the period   
   beginning on October 1, 1990, and ending on September 30, 2001 December 
   31, 2001,                                                               
         * * * * * * *                                                           

          407. Travel and transportation allowances: dislocation allowance        

   (a)  * * *                                                             

         * * * * * * *                                                           

     (c) Dislocation Allowance Rates.--(1) The amount of the dislocation  
  allowance to be paid under this section to a member shall be based on   
  the member's pay grade and dependency status at the time the member     
  becomes entitled to the allowance , except that the Secretary concerned 
  may not differentiate between members with dependents in pay grades E 1 
  through E 5 .                                                           
     (2) The initial rate for the dislocation allowance, for each pay     
  grade and dependency status, shall be equal to the rate in effect for   
  that pay grade and dependency status on December 31, 1997, as adjusted  
  by the average percentage increase in the rates of basic pay for        
  calendar year 1998. Effective on the same date that the monthly rates of
  basic pay for members are increased for a subsequent calendar year, the 
  Secretary of Defense shall adjust the rates for the dislocation         
  allowance for that calendar year by the percentage equal to the average 
  percentage increase in the rates of basic pay for that calendar year ,  
  except that the Secretary concerned may not differentiate between       
  members with dependents in pay grades E 1 through E 5.                  
         * * * * * * *                                                           


          411i. Travel and transportation allowances: parking expenses            

      (a) Reimbursement Authority.--The Secretary of Defense may reimburse 
   a member of the Army, Navy, Air Force, or Marine Corps described in     
   subsection (b) for expenses incurred by the member in parking a         
   privately owned vehicle being used by the member to commute to the      
   member's place of duty.                                                 
      (b) Eligible Members.--A member referred to in subsection (a) is a   
   member who is--                                                         
    (1) assigned to duty as a recruiter for any of the armed forces;       

       (2) assigned to duty with a military entrance processing facility of
   the armed forces; or                                                    
       (3) detailed for instructional and administrative duties at any     
   institution where a unit of the Senior Reserve Officers' Training Corps 
   is maintained.                                                          
      (c) Inclusion of Certain Civilian Employees.--The Secretary of       
   Defense may extend the reimbursement authority provided by subsection   
   (a) to civilian employees of the Department of Defense whose employment 
   responsibilities include performing activities related to the duties    
   specified in subsection (b).                                            

         * * * * * * *                                                           

          414. Personal money allowance                                           

      (a) Allowance for Officers Serving in Certain Ranks or Positions.--In
   addition to other pay or allowances authorized by this title, an officer
   who is entitled to basic pay is entitled to a personal money allowance  
   of--                                                                    
    (1) * * *                                                              

         * * * * * * *                                                           

      (b) Allowance for Certain Naval Officers.--In addition to other pay  
   or allowances authorized by law, an officer who is serving in one of the
   following positions is entitled to the amount set forth for that        
   position, to be paid annually out of naval appropriations for pay, and  
   to be spent in his discretion for the contingencies of his position--   
    (1) * * *                                                              

         * * * * * * *                                                           


      (c) Allowance for Senior Enlisted Members.--In addition to other pay 
   or allowances authorized by this title, a noncommissioned officer is    
   entitled to a personal money allowance of $2,000 a year while serving as
   the Sergeant Major of the Army, the Master Chief Petty Officer of the   
   Navy, the Chief Master Sergeant of the Air Force, the Sergeant Major of 
   the Marine Corps, or the Master Chief Petty Officer of the Coast Guard. 

         * * * * * * *                                                           

          415. Uniform allowance: officers; initial allowance                     

      (a) Subject to subsection (b), an officer of an armed force is       
   entitled to an initial allowance of not more than $200 $400 as          
   reimbursement for the purchase of required uniforms and equipment--     
    (1)  * * *                                                             

         * * * * * * *                                                           

          416. Uniform allowance: officers; additional allowances                 

      (a) In addition to the allowance provided by section 415 of this     
   title, a reserve officer of an armed force, an officer of the Army or   
   the Air Force without specification of component, or a regular officer  
   of an armed force appointed under section 2106 or 2107 of title 10 is   
   entitled to not more than $100 $200 as reimbursement for additional     
   uniforms and equipment required on that duty, for each time that the    
   officer enters on active duty for a period of more than 90 days.        
         * * * * * * *                                                           

                    430. Travel and transportation: dependent children of members 
          stationed overseas                                                      
      (a) Under regulations to be prescribed by the Secretary of Defense, a
   member of a uniformed service who--                                     
    (1)  * * *                                                             

         * * * * * * *                                                           

       (3) has a dependent child who is under 23 years of age attending a  
   school in the continental United States for the purpose of obtaining a  
   secondary or undergraduate college education for the purpose of         
   obtaining a formal education, may be paid the allowance set forth in    
   subsection (b) if he otherwise qualifies for such allowance.            
      (b)(1) A member described in subsection (a) may be paid a            
   transportation allowance for each unmarried dependent child, who is     
   under 23 years of age and is attending a school in the continental      
   United States for the purpose of obtaining a secondary or undergraduate 
   college education for the purpose of obtaining a formal education, of   
   one annual trip between the school being attended and the member's duty 
   station outside the continental United States and return. The allowance 
   authorized by this section may be transportation in kind or             
   reimbursement therefor, as prescribed by the Secretaries concerned.     
   However, the transportation authorized by this section may not be paid a
   member for a child attending a school in the continental United States  
   for the purpose of obtaining a secondary education if the child is      
   eligible to attend a secondary school for dependents that is located at 
   or in the vicinity of the duty station of the member and is operated    
   under the Defense Dependents' Education Act of 1978 (20 U.S.C. 921 et   
   seq.).                                                                  
   (f) In this section, the term  In this section:                         

       (1) The term ``continental United States'' means the 48 contiguous  
   States and the District of Columbia.                                    

    (2) The term ``formal education'' means the following:                 

    (A) A secondary education.                                             

    (B) An undergraduate college education.                                

       (C) A graduate education pursued on a full-time basis at an         
   institution of higher education (as defined in section 101 of the Higher
   Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 1001)).                                
       (D) Vocational education pursued on a full-time basis at a          
   post-secondary vocational institution (as defined in section 102(c) of  
   the Higher Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 1002(c))).                  

         * * * * * * *                                                           

          435. Funeral honors duty: allowance                                     

   (a) * * *                                                               

         * * * * * * *                                                           

      (c) Full Compensation.--Except for expenses reimbursed under         
   subsection (c) of section 12503 of title 10 or subsection (c) of section
   115 of title 32, the allowance paid under this section is the only      
   monetary compensation authorized to be paid a member for the performance
   of funeral honors duty pursuant to such section, regardless of the grade
   in which the member is serving, and shall constitute payment in full to 
   the member.                                                             
          435.  436. Per diem allowance for lengthy or numerous deployments       

      (a) Per Diem Required.--The Secretary of the military department     
   concerned shall pay a high-deployment per diem allowance to a member of 
   the armed forces under the Secretary's jurisdiction for each day on     
   which the member (1) is deployed, and (2) has, as of that day, been     
   deployed 251 days or more out of the preceding 365 days.                
         * * * * * * *                                                           

                                 CHAPTER 19--ADMINISTRATION                       

         * * * * * * *                                                           

                    1012. Disbursement and accounting: pay of enlisted members of 
          the National Guard                                                      
      Amounts appropriated for the pay, under subsections (a), (b), and (d)
   of section 206, section 301(f), section 402(b)(3) section 402(e), and   
   section 1002 of this title, of enlisted members of the Army National    
   Guard of the United States or the Air National Guard of the United      
   States for attending regular periods of duty and instruction shall be   
   disbursed and accounted for by the Secretary of Defense. All such       
   disbursements shall be made for 3-month periods for units of the Army   
   National Guard or Air National Guard under regulations prescribed by the
   Secretary of Defense, and on pay rolls prepared and authenticated as    
   prescribed in those regulations.                                        
         * * * * * * *                                                           

                                                                                 


            SECTION 503(C) OF THE NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT FOR FISCAL   
                                    YEAR 1991                                     
                    SEC. 503. TRAVEL AND TRANSPORTATION ALLOWANCES RELATING TO    
          MEMBERS INVOLUNTARILY SEPARATED.                                        
   (a) * * *                                                               

         * * * * * * *                                                           

      (c) Storage of Household Effects.--(1) The Secretary of a military   
   department shall exercise the authority provided by section 406 of title
   37, United States Code, to provide nontemporary storage of baggage and  
   household effects for a period not longer than one year in the case of  
   individuals who are involuntarily separated during the period beginning 
   on October 1, 1990, and ending on September 30, 2001 December 31, 2001. 
         * * * * * * *                                                           

                                                                                 

                          DEFENSE DEPENDENTS' EDUCATION ACT OF 1978               

          ADMINISTRATION OF DEFENSE DEPENDENTS' EDUCATION SYSTEM         

    Sec.  1403. (a)  * * *                                                 

         * * * * * * *                                                           

   (c) The Director shall--                                                

    (1)  * * *                                                             

         * * * * * * *                                                           

       (6) perform such other functions as may be required or delegated by 
   the Secretary of Defense or the the Assistant Secretary of Defense      
   designated under subsection (a).                                        
         * * * * * * *                                                           

              SCHOOL SYSTEM FOR DEPENDENTS IN OVERSEAS AREAS             

       Sec. 1407. (a) The Secretary of Defense shall establish and operate 
   a school system for dependents in overseas areas as part of the defense 
   dependents' education system.                                           
         * * * * * * *                                                           

      (c) Continuation of Enrollment for Certain Dependents of Members of  
   the Armed Forces Involuntarily Separated.--(1) A member of the Armed    
   Forces serving on active duty on September 30, 1990, who is             
   involuntarily separated during the period beginning on October 1, 1990, 
   and ending on September 30, 2001 December 31, 2001, and who has a       
   dependent described in paragraph (2) who is enrolled in a school of the 
   defense dependents' education system (or a school for which tuition is  
   provided under subsection (b)) on the date of that separation shall be  
   eligible to enroll or continue the enrollment of that dependent at that 
   school (or another school serving the same community) for the final year
   of secondary education of that dependent in the same manner as if the   
   member were still on active duty.                                       
         * * * * * * *                                                           

                                                                                 

            SECTION 811 OF THE ANTITERRORISM AND EFFECTIVE DEATH PENALTY ACT OF   
                                      1996                                        
          SEC. 811. FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION.                              

   (a)  In General.--With funds made available pursuant to subsection (c)--

    (1) the Attorney General shall--                                       

    (A) * * *                                                              

         * * * * * * *                                                           

    (F) increase personnel to support counterterrorism activities; and     

       (2) the Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation may expand  
   the combined DNA Identification System (CODIS) to include Federal crimes
   and crimes committed in the District of Columbia. ; and                 
       (3) the Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation shall expand
   the combined DNA Identification System (CODIS) to include analyses of   
   DNA samples collected from members of the Armed Forces convicted of a   
   qualifying military offense in accordance with section 1563 of title 10,
   United States Code.                                                     
         * * * * * * *                                                           

                                                                                 

           SECTION 210304 OF THE VIOLENT CRIME CONTROL AND LAW ENFORCEMENT ACT OF 
                                      1994                                        
                    SEC. 210304. INDEX TO FACILITATE LAW ENFORCEMENT EXCHANGE OF  
          DNA IDENTIFICATION INFORMATION.                                         
      (a) Establishment of Index.--The Director of the Federal Bureau of   
   Investigation may establish an index of--                               
    (1)  DNA identification records of persons convicted of crimes;        

    (2) analyses of DNA samples recovered from crime scenes;               

       (3) analyses of DNA samples recovered from unidentified human       
   remains; and                                                            
       (4) analyses of DNA samples voluntarily contributed from relatives  
   of missing persons. ; and                                               
       (5) analyses of DNA samples collected from members of the Armed     
   Forces convicted of a qualifying military offense in accordance with    
   section 1563 of title 10, United States Code.                           
      (b) Information.--The index described in subsection (a) shall include
   only information on DNA identification records and DNA analyses that    
   are--                                                                   
    (1) * * *                                                              

       (2) prepared by laboratories, and DNA analysts, that undergo, at    
   regular intervals of not to exceed 180 days, semiannual external        
   proficiency testing by a DNA proficiency testing program meeting the    
   standards issued under section 210303; and                              
         * * * * * * *                                                           


      (d) Expungement of Records of Military Offenders.--If the Director of
   the Federal Bureau of Investigation receives a notice transmitted under 
   section 1563(d)(2) of title 10, United States Code, the Director shall  
   promptly expunge from the index described in subsection (a) any DNA     
   analysis furnished under section 1563(d)(1) of such title with respect  
   to the person described in the notice.                                  

                                                                                 

                   NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT FOR FISCAL YEAR 1998        

         * * * * * * *                                                           

           DIVISION A--DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE AUTHORIZATIONS                        

         * * * * * * *                                                           

           TITLE VI--COMPENSATION AND OTHER PERSONNEL BENEFITS                     

         * * * * * * *                                                           

           Subtitle A--Pay and Allowances                                          

         * * * * * * *                                                           

          SEC. 602. REFORM OF BASIC ALLOWANCE FOR SUBSISTENCE.                    

   (a)  * * *                                                              

         * * * * * * *                                                           

   (d)  Transitional Entitlement to Allowance.--                           

    (1)  Enlisted members.--                                               

       (A) Types of entitlement.--An enlisted member is entitled to the    
   basic allowance for subsistence, on a daily basis, of under one or more 
   of the following circumstances:                                         
    (i) * * *                                                              

         * * * * * * *                                                           

                    SEC. 603. CONSOLIDATION OF BASIC ALLOWANCE FOR QUARTERS,      
          VARIABLE HOUSING ALLOWANCE, AND OVERSEAS HOUSING ALLOWANCES.            
   (a)  * * *                                                              

      (b) Transition to Basic Allowance for Housing.--The Secretary of     
   Defense shall develop and implement a plan to incrementally manage the  
   rate of growth of the various components of the basic allowance for     
   housing authorized by section 403 of title 37, United States Code (as   
   amended by subsection (a)), during a                                    

                    transition period of not more than six years eight years.     
          During the transition period, the Secretary may continue to use the     
          authorities provided under sections 403, 403a, 405(b), and 427(a) of    
          title 37, United States Code (as in effect on the day before the date of
          the enactment of this Act), but subject to such modifications as the    
          Secretary considers necessary, to provide allowances for members of the 
          uniformed services.                                                     
         * * * * * * *                                                           

                    SEC. 731. IMPROVEMENTS IN HEALTH CARE COVERAGE AND ACCESS FOR 
          MEMBERS ASSIGNED TO CERTAIN DUTY LOCATIONS FAR FROM SOURCES OF CARE.    
   (a)  * * *                                                             

         * * * * * * *                                                           

     (b) Temporary Authority for Managed Care Expansion to Members on     
  Active Duty at Certain Remote Locations.--(1) A member of the Armed     
  Forces uniformed services described in subsection (c) is entitled to    
  receive care under the Civilian Health and Medical Program of the       
  Uniformed Services. In connection with such care, the Secretary of      
  Defense shall waive the obligation of the member to pay a deductible,   
  copayment, or annual fee that would otherwise be applicable under that  
  program for care provided to the members under the program. A dependent 
  of the member, as described in subparagraph (A), (D), or (I) of section 
  1072(2) of title 10, United States Code, who is residing with the member
  shall have the same entitlement to care and to waiver of charges as the 
  member.                                                                 
     (2) A member or dependent of the member, as the case may be, who is  
  entitled under paragraph (1) to receive health care services under      
  CHAMPUS shall receive such care from a network provider under the       
  TRICARE program if such a provider is available in the service area of  
  the member.                                                             
         * * * * * * *                                                           


     (4) The Secretary of Defense shall consult with the other            
  administering Secretaries in the administration of this subsection.     

     (c) Eligible Members.--A member referred to in subsection (b) is a   
  member of the Armed Forces uniformed services on active duty who--      
    (1)  * * *                                                             

         * * * * * * *                                                           

     (d) Duty Assignments Covered.--A duty assignment referred to in      
  subsection (c)(1) means any of the following:                           
    (1)  * * *                                                             

         * * * * * * *                                                           

       (3) Permanent duty as a full-time adviser to a unit of a reserve    
   component of the Armed Forces uniformed services.                       
         * * * * * * *                                                           

   (f)  Definitions.--In this section:                                    

    (1)  * * *                                                             

         * * * * * * *                                                           


       (3) The terms ``uniformed services'' and ``administering            
   Secretaries'' have the meanings given those terms in section 1072 of    
   title 10, United States Code.                                           

         * * * * * * *                                                           

                        TITLE XII--MATTERS RELATING TO OTHER NATIONS              

         * * * * * * *                                                           

                                  SUBTITLE C--OTHER MATTERS                       

          SEC. 1221. DEFENSE BURDENSHARING.                                       

     (a) Efforts To Increase Allied Burdensharing.--The President shall   
  seek to have each nation that has cooperative military relations with   
  the United States (including security agreements, basing arrangements,  
  or mutual participation in multinational military organizations or      
  operations) take one or more of the following actions:                  
    (1)  * * *                                                             

         * * * * * * *                                                           

       (3) Increase its annual budgetary outlays for foreign assistance (to
   promote democratization, governmental accountability and transparency,  
   economic stabilization and development, defense economic conversion,    
   respect for the rule of law and internationally recognized human rights,
   and humanitarian relief efforts)) by 10 percent or to provide such      
   foreign assistance at an annual rate that is not less than one percent  
   of its gross domestic product, by September 30, 1999.                   
         * * * * * * *                                                           

                                                                                 

                   NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT FOR FISCAL YEAR 1991        

         * * * * * * *                                                           

           DIVISION A--DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE AUTHORIZATIONS                        

         * * * * * * *                                                           

                     TITLE VI--COMPENSATION AND OTHER PERSONNEL BENEFITS          

         * * * * * * *                                                           

                       PART B--BONUSES AND SPECIAL AND INCENTIVE PAY              

         * * * * * * *                                                           

                    SEC. 614. EXTENSION OF SPECIAL PAY FOR NURSE ANESTHETISTS TO  
          OTHER NURSING SPECIALTIES.                                              
   (a)  * * *                                                             

         * * * * * * *                                                           

     (c) Implementation of Amendment.--The Secretary of Defense may not   
  implement subsection (b)(2) of section 302e of title 37, United States  
  Code (as added by subsection (a)), unless the Secretary submits to the  
  Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and House of Representatives 
  a report--                                                              
       (1) justifying the need of the departments for the authority        
   provided in such subsection; and                                        
    (2) describing the manner in which that authority will be implemented. 

         * * * * * * *                                                           

          SEC. 617. RETENTION BONUS FOR OPTOMETRISTS.                             

   (a)  * * *                                                             

     (b) Implementation of Amendment.--The Secretary of Defense may not   
  implement subsection (b) of section 302a of title 37, United States Code
  (as added by subsection (a)), unless the Secretary submits to the       
  Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and House of Representatives 
  a report--                                                              
       (1) justifying the need of the military departments for the         
   authority provided in such subsection; and                              
    (2) describing the manner in which that authority will be implemented. 

         * * * * * * *                                                           

                                                                                 

                   NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2000        

         * * * * * * *                                                           

           TITLE VII--HEALTH CARE PROVISIONS                                       

           Subtitle A--Health Care Services                                        

         * * * * * * *                                                           

           TITLE VI--COMPENSATION AND OTHER PERSONNEL BENEFITS                     

           Subtitle A--Pay and Allowances                                          

                    SEC. 601. FISCAL YEAR 2000 INCREASE IN MILITARY BASIC PAY AND 
          REFORM OF BASIC PAY RATES.                                              
   (a)  * * *                                                             

         * * * * * * *                                                           

     (c) Reform of Basic Pay Rates.--Effective on July 1, 2000, the rates 
  of monthly basic pay for members of the uniformed services within each  
  pay grade are as follows:                                               


                            COMMISSIONED OFFICERS\1\                           
   Years of service computed under section 205 of title 37, United States Code 

Pay Grade      2 or less         Over 2         Over 3         Over 4        Over 6  

O 10\2\            $0.00          $0.00          $0.00          $0.00         $0.00  
O 9                 0.00           0.00           0.00           0.00          0.00  
O 8             6,594.30       6,810.30       6,953.10       6,993.30      7,171.80  
O 7             5,479.50       5,851.80       5,851.80       5,894.40      6,114.60  
O 6             4,061.10       4,461.60       4,754.40       4,754.40      4,772.40  
O 5             3,248.40       3,813.90       4,077.90       4,127.70      4,291.80  
O 4             2,737.80       3,333.90       3,556.20       3,606.00      3,812.40  
O 3\3\          2,544.00       2,884.20       3,112.80       3,364.80      3,525.90  
O 2\3\          2,218.80       2,527.20       2,910.90       3,009.00      3,071.10  
O 1\3\          1,926.30       2,004.90       2,423.10       2,423.10      2,423.10  
             -----------  -------------  -------------  -------------  ------------  
                     Over 8        Over 10        Over 12        Over 14       Over 16  
             -----------  -------------  -------------  -------------  ------------  
O 10\2\            $0.00          $0.00          $0.00          $0.00         $0.00  
O 9                 0.00           0.00           0.00           0.00          0.00  
O 8             7,471.50       7,540.80       7,824.60       7,906.20      8,150.10  
O 7             6,282.00       6,475.80       6,669.00       6,863.10      7,471.50  
O 6             4,976.70       5,004.00       5,004.00       5,169.30      5,791.20  
O 5             4,291.80       4,420.80       4,659.30       4,971.90      5,286.00  
O 4             3,980.40       4,252.50       4,464.00       4,611.00      4,758.90  
O 3\3\          3,702.60       3,850.20       4,040.40       4,139.10      4,139.10  
O 2\3\          3,071.10       3,071.10       3,071.10       3,071.10      3,071.10  
O 1\3\          2,423.10       2,423.10       2,423.10       2,423.10      2,423.10  
             -----------  -------------  -------------  -------------  ------------  
                    Over 18        Over 20        Over 22        Over 24       Over 26  
             -----------  -------------  -------------  -------------  ------------  
O 10\2\            $0.00     $10,655.10     $10,707.60     $10,930.20    $11,318.40  
O 9                 0.00       9,319.50       9,453.60       9,647.70      9,986.40  
O 8             8,503.80       8,830.20       9,048.00       9,048.00      9,048.00  
O 7             7,985.40       7,985.40       7,985.40       7,985.40      8,025.60  
O 6             6,086.10       6,381.30       6,549.00       6,719.10      7,049.10  
O 5             5,436.00       5,583.60       5,751.90       5,751.90      5,751.90  
O 4             4,808.70       4,808.70       4,808.70       4,808.70      4,808.70  
O 3\3\          4,139.10       4,139.10       4,139.10       4,139.10      4,139.10  
O 2\3\          3,071.10       3,071.10       3,071.10       3,071.10      3,071.10  
O 1\3\          2,423.10       2,423.10       2,423.10       2,423.10      2,423.10  

\1\Notwithstanding the pay rates specified in this table, the actual basic pay for commissioned officers in grades O 7 through O 10 may not exceed the rate of pay for level III of the Executive Schedule and the actual basic pay for all other officers, including warrant officers, may not exceed the rate of pay for level V of the Executive Schedule.                                                                                         
\2\Subject to the preceding footnote, while serving as Chairman or Vice Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Chief of Staff of the Army, Chief of Naval Operations, Chief of Staff of the Air Force, Commandant of the Marine Corps, or Commandant of the Coast Guard, basic pay for this grade is calculated to be $12,441.00  $12,488.70 , regardless of cumulative years of service computed under section 205 of title 37, United States Code.  
\3\This table does not apply to commissioned officers in the grade O 1, O 2, or O 3 who have been credited with over 4 years of active duty service as an enlisted member or warrant officer.                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                         


         * * * * * * *                                                           


                               ENLISTED MEMBERS\1\                             
   Years of service computed under section 205 of title 37, United States Code 

Pay Grade          2 or less        Over 2        Over 3        Over 4       Over 6  

 9\2\                  $0.00         $0.00         $0.00         $0.00        $0.00  
 8                      0.00          0.00          0.00          0.00         0.00  
 7                  1,765.80      1,927.80      2,001.00      2,073.00     2,147.70  
 6                  1,518.90      1,678.20      1,752.60      1,824.30     1,899.30  
 5                  1,332.60      1,494.00      1,566.00      1,640.40     1,714.50  
 4                  1,242.90      1,373.10      1,447.20      1,520.10     1,593.90  
 3                  1,171.50      1,260.60      1,334.10      1,335.90     1,335.90  
 2                  1,127.40      1,127.40      1,127.40      1,127.40     1,127.40  
 1              \3\ 1,005.60      1,005.60      1,005.60      1,005.60     1,005.60  
             ---------------  ------------  ------------  ------------  -----------  
                         Over 8       Over 10       Over 12       Over 14      Over 16  
             ---------------  ------------  ------------  ------------  -----------  
 9\2\                  $0.00     $3,015.30     $3,083.40     $3,169.80    $3,271.50  
 8                  2,528.40      2,601.60      2,669.70      2,751.60     2,840.10  
 7                  2,220.90      2,294.10      2,367.30      2,439.30     2,514.00  
 6                  1,973.10      2,047.20      2,118.60      2,191.50     2,244.60  
 5                  1,789.50      1,861.50      1,936.20      1,936.20     1,936.20  
 4                  1,593.90      1,593.90      1,593.90      1,593.90     1,593.90  
 3                  1,335.90      1,335.90      1,335.90      1,335.90     1,335.90  
 2                  1,127.40      1,127.40      1,127.40      1,127.40     1,127.40  
 1                  1,005.60      1,005.60      1,005.60      1,005.60     1,005.60  
             ---------------  ------------  ------------  ------------  -----------  
                        Over 18       Over 20       Over 22       Over 24      Over 26  
             ---------------  ------------  ------------  ------------  -----------  
 9\2\              $3,373.20     $3,473.40     $3,609.30     $3,744.00    $3,915.90  
 8                  2,932.50      3,026.10      3,161.10      3,295.50     3,483.60  
 7                  2,588.10      2,660.40      2,787.60      2,926.20     3,134.40  
 6                  2,283.30      2,283.30      2,285.70      2,285.70     2,285.70  
 5                  1,936.20      1,936.20      1,936.20      1,936.20     1,936.20  
 4                  1,593.90      1,593.90      1,593.90      1,593.90     1,593.90  
 3                  1,335.90      1,335.90      1,335.90      1,335.90     1,335.90  
 2                  1,127.40      1,127.40      1,127.40      1,123.20     1,127.40  
 1                  1,005.60      1,005.60      1,005.60      1,005.60     1,005.60  

\1\Notwithstanding the pay rates specified in this table, the actual basic pay for enlisted members may not exceed the rate of pay for level V of the Executive Schedule.                                                                                                                                                                                                                                         
\2\Subject to the preceding footnote, while serving as Sergeant Major of the Army, Master Chief Petty Officer of the Navy, Chief Master Sergeant of the Air Force, Sergeant Major of the Marine Corps, or Master Chief Petty Officer of the Coast Guard, basic pay for this grade is $4,701.00  $4,719.00, regardless of cumulative years of service computed under section 205 of title 37, United States Code.  
\3\In the case of members in the grade E 1 who have served less than 4 months on active duty, basic pay is $930.30.                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               


         * * * * * * *                                                           

           TITLE VII--HEALTH CARE PROVISIONS                                       

           Subtitle A--Health Care Services                                        

         * * * * * * *                                                           

                    SEC. 703. PROVISION OF DOMICILIARY AND CUSTODIAL CARE FOR     
          CERTAIN CHAMPUS BENEFICIARIES.                                          
   (a)  Continuation of Care.--(1)  * * *                                 

         * * * * * * *                                                           


     (4) The Secretary may provide payment for domiciliary or custodial   
  care services provided to an eligible beneficiary for which payment was 
  discontinued by reason of section 1086(d) of title 10, United States    
  Code, and subsequently reestablished under other legal authority. Such  
  payment is authorized for the period beginning on the date of           
  discontinuation of payment for domiciliary or custodial care services   
  and ending on the date of reestablishment of payment for such services. 
         * * * * * * *                                                           

     (e) Cost Limitation.--The total amount paid for services for eligible
  beneficiaries under subsection (a) for a fiscal year (together with the 
  costs of administering the authority under that subsection) shall be    
  included in the expenditures limited by section 1079(a)(17)(B) of title 
  10, United States Code.                                                 

         * * * * * * *                                                           

                    SEC. 706. HEALTH CARE AT FORMER UNIFORMED SERVICES TREATMENT  
          FACILITIES FOR ACTIVE DUTY MEMBERS STATIONED AT CERTAIN REMOTE          
          LOCATIONS.                                                              
   (a)  * * *                                                             

     (b) Eligibility.--A member of the Armed Forces uniformed services (as
  defined in section 1072(1) of title 10, United States Code) is eligible 
  for health care under subsection (a) if the member is a member described
  in section 731(c) of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal  
  Year 1998 (Public Law 105 85; 111 Stat. 1811; 10 U.S.C. 1074 note).     
         * * * * * * *                                                           

           TITLE X--GENERAL PROVISIONS                                             

         * * * * * * *                                                           

           Subtitle D--Miscellaneous Report Requirements and Repeals               

         * * * * * * *                                                           

                    SEC. 1035. REPORT ON ASSESSMENTS OF READINESS TO EXECUTE THE  
          NATIONAL MILITARY STRATEGY.                                             
     (a) Report.--Not later than 180 days after the date of the enactment 
  of this Act Not later than April 1 each year, the Secretary of Defense  
  shall submit to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the  
  House of Representatives a report in unclassified form assessing the    
  effect of continued operations in the Balkans region on--               
    (1) * * *                                                              

         * * * * * * *                                                           

     (b) Matters To Be Included.--The Each report under subsection (a)    
  shall include the following:                                            
    (1) * * *                                                              

         * * * * * * *                                                           

     (d) Consultation.--In preparing the a report under this section, the 
  Secretary of Defense shall consult with the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs
  of Staff, the commanders of the unified commands, the Secretaries of the
  military departments, and the heads of the combat support agencies and  
  other such entities within the Department of Defense as the Secretary   
  considers necessary.                                                    
         * * * * * * *                                                           

                                                                                 


           STROM THURMOND NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT FOR FISCAL YEAR 1999 

         * * * * * * *                                                           

           DIVISION A--DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE AUTHORIZATIONS                        

         * * * * * * *                                                           

           TITLE V--MILITARY PERSONNEL POLICY                                      

         * * * * * * *                                                           

           Subtitle A--Officer Personnel Policy                                    

         * * * * * * *                                                           

          SEC. 503. STREAMLINED SELECTIVE RETENTION PROCESS FOR REGULAR OFFICERS. 

     (a) Repeal of Requirement for Duplicative Board.--Section 1183 of    
  title 10, United States Code, is repealed.                              
     (b) Conforming Amendments.--(1) Section 1182(c) of such title is     
  amended by striking out ``send the record of its proceedings to a board 
  of review convened under section 1183 of this title'' and inserting in  
  lieu thereof ``recommend to the Secretary concerned that the officer not
  be retained on active duty''.                                           
         * * * * * * *                                                           

           TITLE VI--COMPENSATION AND OTHER PERSONNEL BENEFITS                     

         * * * * * * *                                                           

           Subtitle D--Retired Pay, Survivor Benefits, and Related Matters         

         * * * * * * *                                                           

                    SEC. 645. RECOVERY, CARE, AND DISPOSITION OF REMAINS OF       
          MEDICALLY RETIRED MEMBER WHO DIES DURING HOSPITALIZATION THAT BEGINS    
          WHILE ON ACTIVE DUTY.                                                   
   (a)  * * *                                                             

         * * * * * * *                                                           

     (b) Repeal of Obsolete Terminology.--Paragraph (1) of such section is
  amended by striking out ``, or a member member of an armed force without
  component,''.                                                           
         * * * * * * *                                                           

           TITLE VII--HEALTH CARE PROVISIONS                                       

         * * * * * * *                                                           

           Subtitle A--Health Care Services                                        

          SEC. 701. DEPENDENTS' DENTAL PROGRAM.                                   

     (a) Premium Increase.-- (1) Section 1076a(b)(2) of title 10, United  
  States Code, is amended--                                               
    (A)  * * *                                                             

         * * * * * * *                                                           

     (b) Limitation on Reduction of Benefits.--Section 1076a of such title
  is further amended by adding at the end the following new subsection:   
         * * * * * * *                                                           

                      Subtitle C--Health Care Services for Medicare-Eligible       
           Department of Defense Beneficiaries                                     
         * * * * * * *                                                           

          SEC. 722. TRICARE AS SUPPLEMENT TO MEDICARE DEMONSTRATION.              

   (a)  In General.--(1) * * *                                            

     (2) The Secretary shall commence the demonstration project not later 
  than January 1, 2000, and shall terminate the demonstration project not 
  later than December 31, 2002 December 31, 2003.                         
         * * * * * * *                                                           

          SEC. 723. IMPLEMENTATION OF REDESIGN OF PHARMACY SYSTEM.                

     (a) In General.--Not later than October 1, 1999 April 1, 2001, the   
  Secretary of Defense shall implement, with respect to eligible          
  individuals described in subsection (e) who reside in an area selected  
  under subsection (f), the redesign of the pharmacy system under TRICARE 
  (including the mail-order and retail pharmacy benefit under TRICARE) to 
  incorporate ``best business practices'' of the private sector in        
  providing pharmaceuticals, as developed under the plan described in     
  section 703.                                                            
     (b) Collection of Premiums and Other Charges.--The Secretary of      
  Defense may collect from eligible individuals described in subsection   
  (e) who participate in the redesigned pharmacy system any premiums,     
  deductibles, copayments, or other charges that the Secretary would      
  otherwise collect from individuals similar to such individuals.         

     (b) Program Requirements.--The same coverage for pharmacy services   
  and the same procedures for cost sharing and reimbursement as are       
  applicable under section 1086 of title 10, United States Code, shall    
  apply with respect to the program required by subsection (a).           

         * * * * * * *                                                           

     (d) Reports.--The Secretary shall submit two reports on the results  
  of the evaluation under subsection (c), together with the evaluation, to
  the Committee on Armed Services of the Senate and the Committee on      
  National Security of the House of Representatives. The first report     
  shall be submitted not later than December 31, 2000 December 31, 2001,  
  and the second report shall be submitted not later than December 31,    
  2002 December 31, 2003.                                                 
     (e) Eligible Individuals.--(1) An individual is eligible to          
  participate under this section if the individual is a member or former  
  member of the uniformed services described in section 1074(b) of title  
  10, United States Code, a dependent of the member described in section  
  1076(a)(2)(B) or 1076(b) of that title, or a dependent of a member of   
  the uniformed services who died while on active duty for a period of    
  more than 30 days, who--                                                
    (A)  * * *                                                             

       (B) is entitled to hospital insurance benefits under part A of title
   XVIII of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1395c et seq.); and         
       (C) except as provided in paragraph (2), is enrolled in the         
   supplemental medical insurance program under part B of such title XVIII 
   (42 U.S.C. 1395j et seq.); and .                                        
    (D) resides in an area selected by the Secretary under subsection (f). 

     (2) Paragraph (1)(C) shall not apply in the case of an individual who
  at the time of attaining the age of 65 lived within 100 miles of the    
  catchment area of a military medical treatment facility before April 1, 
  2001, has attained the age of 65 and did not enroll in the program      
  described in such paragraph.                                            
     (f) Areas of Implementation.--(1) The Secretary shall carry out the  
  implementation of the redesign of the pharmacy system under TRICARE in  
  two separate areas selected by the Secretary.                           
     (2) The areas selected by the Secretary under paragraph (1) shall be 
  as follows:                                                             
       (A) One area shall be an area outside the catchment area of a       
   military medical treatment facility in which--                          
       (i) no eligible organization has a contract in effect under section 
   1876 of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1395mm) and no               
   Medicare+Choice organization has a contract in effect under part C of   
   title XVIII of that Act (42 U.S.C. 1395w 21); or                        
       (ii) the aggregate number of enrollees with an eligible organization
   with a contract in effect under section 1876 of that Act or with a      
   Medicare+Choice organization with a contract in effect under part C of  
   title XVIII of that Act is less than 2.5 percent of the total number of 
   individuals in the area who are entitled to hospital insurance benefits 
   under part A of title XVIII of that Act.                                
       (B) The other area shall be an area outside the catchment area of a 
   military medical treatment facility in which--                          
       (i) at least one eligible organization has a contract in effect     
   under section 1876 of that Act or one Medicare+Choice organization has a
   contract in effect under part C of title XVIII of that Act; and         

       (ii) the aggregate number of enrollees with an eligible organization
   with a contract in effect under section 1876 of that Act or with a      
   Medicare+Choice organization with a contract in effect under part C of  
   title XVIII of that Act exceeds 10 percent of the total number of       
   individuals in the area who are entitled to hospital insurance benefits 
   under part A of title XVIII of that Act.                                
         * * * * * * *                                                           

                    SEC. 724. COMPREHENSIVE EVALUATION OF IMPLEMENTATION OF       
          DEMONSTRATION PROJECTS AND TRICARE PHARMACY REDESIGN.                   
     Not later than March 31, 2003, the Comptroller General shall submit  
  to the Committee on Armed Services of the Senate and the Committee on   
  National Security of the House of Representatives a report containing a 
  comprehensive comparative analysis of the FEHBP demonstration project   
  conducted under section 1108 of title 10, United States Code (as added  
  by section 721), the TRICARE Senior Supplement under section 722, the   
  demonstration project conducted under section 1896 of the Social        
  Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1395ggg), and the redesign of the TRICARE       
  pharmacy system under section 723. The comprehensive analysis shall     
  incorporate the findings of the evaluation submitted under section      
  723(c) and the report submitted under subsection (j) of such section    
  1108.                                                                   
         * * * * * * *                                                           

                      TITLE VIII--ACQUISITION POLICY, ACQUISITION MANAGEMENT, AND  
           RELATED MATTERS                                                         
         * * * * * * *                                                           

                      Subtitle A--Amendments to General Contracting Authorities,   
           Procedures, and Limitations                                             
         * * * * * * *                                                           

                    SEC. 802. DISTRIBUTION OF ASSISTANCE UNDER THE PROCUREMENT    
          TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT PROGRAM.                     
   (a)  * * *                                                             

         * * * * * * *                                                           

     (b) Technical Amendment.--Section 2415 of such title is amended by   
  striking out ``Defense Contract Administrative Administration Services''
  and inserting in lieu thereof ``Department of Defense contract          
  administrative services''.                                              
         * * * * * * *                                                           

           TITLE XI--DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE CIVILIAN PERSONNEL                      

         * * * * * * *                                                           

                    SEC. 1101. DEFENSE ADVANCED RESEARCH PROJECTS AGENCY          
          EXPERIMENTAL PERSONNEL MANAGEMENT PROGRAM FOR TECHNICAL PERSONNEL.      
   (a)  * * *                                                             

         * * * * * * *                                                           

     (e) Period of Program.--(1) The program authorized under this section
  shall terminate at the end of the 5-year period referred to in          
  subsection (a).                                                         
   (2) After the termination of the program--                             

    (A)  * * *                                                             

         * * * * * * *                                                           

       (C) no period of service may be extended under subsection (c)(1)    
   subsection (c)(2).                                                      
         * * * * * * *                                                           

                                                                                 

                           SECTION 1896 OF THE SOCIAL SECURITY ACT                

     MEDICARE SUBVENTION DEMONSTRATION PROJECT FOR MILITARY RETIREES     

    Sec. 1896. (a) * * *                                                  

   (b)  Demonstration Project.--                                          

    (1) * * *                                                              

         * * * * * * *                                                           

       (4) Duration.--The administering Secretaries shall conduct the      
   demonstration project during the 3-year period beginning on January 1,  
   1998 period beginning on January 1, 1998, and ending on December 31,    
   2003.                                                                   
         * * * * * * *                                                           


       (6) Utilization review procedures.--The Secretary of Defense shall  
   develop and implement procedures to review utilization of health care   
   services by medicare-eligible military retirees and dependents under    
   this section in order to enable the Secretary of Defense to more        
   effectively manage the use of military medical treatment facilities by  
   such retirees and dependents.                                           

         * * * * * * *                                                           

   (k)  Evaluation and Reports.--                                         

       (1) Independent evaluation.--The Comptroller General of the United  
   States shall conduct an evaluation of the demonstration project, and    
   shall submit annual reports on the demonstration project to the         
   administering Secretaries and to the committees of jurisdiction in the  
   Congress. The first report shall be submitted not later than 12 months  
   after the date on which the demonstration project begins operation, and 
   the final report not later than 3\1/2\ 4\1/2\ years after that date. The
   evaluation and reports shall include an assessment, based on the        
   agreement entered into under subsection (b), of the following:          
       (A) Any savings or costs to the medicare program under this title   
   resulting from the demonstration project.                               
         * * * * * * *                                                           


       (P) Which interagency funding mechanisms would be most appropriate  
   if the project under this section is made permanent.                    
       (Q) The ability of the Department of Defense to operate an effective
   and efficient managed care system for medicare beneficiaries.           
       (R) The ability of the Department of Defense to meet the managed    
   care access and quality of care standards under medicare.               
       (S) The adequacy of the data systems of the Department of Defense   
   for providing timely, necessary, and accurate information required to   
   properly manage the demonstration project.                              

                                                                                 

           SECTION 715 OF THE NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT FOR FISCAL YEAR  
                                      1996                                        
                    SEC. 715. TRAINING IN HEALTH CARE MANAGEMENT AND              
          ADMINISTRATION FOR TRICARE LEAD AGENTS.                                 
     (a) Provision of Training.--Not later than six months after the date 
  of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Defense shall implement a
  professional educational program to provide appropriate training in     
  health care management and administration--                             
       (1) to each commander , deputy commander, and managed care          
   coordinator of a military medical treatment facility of the Department  
   of Defense and any other person who is selected to serve as a lead agent
   to coordinate the delivery of health care by military and civilian      
   providers under the TRICARE program; and                                
       (2) to appropriate members of the support staff of the treatment    
   facility who will be responsible for daily operation of the TRICARE     
   program.                                                                

     (b) Limitation on Assignment Until Completion of Training.--No person
  may be assigned as the commander, deputy commander, or managed care     
  coordinator of a military medical treatment facility or as a TRICARE    
  lead agent or senior member of the staff of a TRICARE lead agent office 
  until the Secretary of the military department concerned submits a      
  certification to the Secretary of Defense that such person has completed
  the training described in subsection (a).                               

     (b) (c) Report on Implementation.--Not later than six months after   
  the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary                    

                    of Defense shall submit to Congress a report describing the   
          professional educational program implemented pursuant to this section.  
                                                                                 

           SECTION 142 OF THE NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT FOR FISCAL YEAR  
                                      1993                                        
          SEC. 142. MH 47E/MH 60K HELICOPTER MODIFICATION PROGRAMS.               

     (a) Required Testing.--Notwithstanding the requirements of           
  subsections (a) (2) and (b) of section 2366 of title 10, United States  
  Code, and the requirements of subsection (a) of section 2399 of such    
  title--                                                                 
       (1) operational test and evaluation and survivability testing of the
   MH 60K helicopter under the MH 60K helicopter modification program shall
   be completed prior to full materiel release of the MH 60K helicopters   
   for operational use; and                                                
       (2) operational test and evaluation and survivability testing of the
   MH 47E helicopter under the MH 47E helicopter modification program shall
   be completed prior to full materiel release of the MH 47E helicopters   
   for operational use.                                                    
         * * * * * * *                                                           

                                                                                 

                   NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT FOR FISCAL YEAR 1994        

         * * * * * * *                                                           

           TITLE V--MILITARY PERSONNEL POLICY                                      

         * * * * * * *                                                           

           Subtitle D--Women in the Service                                        

         * * * * * * *                                                           

                    SEC. 542. NOTICE TO CONGRESS OF PROPOSED CHANGES IN COMBAT    
          ASSIGNMENTS TO WHICH FEMALE MEMBERS MAY BE ASSIGNED.                    
     (a) In General.--(1) Except in a case covered by subsection (b) or by
  section 6035 of title 10, United States Code, whenever the Secretary of 
  Defense proposes to change military personnel policies in order to make 
  available to female members of the Armed Forces assignment to any type  
  of combat unit, class of combat vessel, or type of combat platform that 
  is not open to such assignments, the Secretary shall, not less than 30  
  days before such change is implemented, transmit to the Committees on   
  Armed Services of the Senate and House of Representatives notice of the 
  proposed change in personnel policy.                                    
         * * * * * * *                                                           

                      TITLE VIII--ACQUISITION POLICY, ACQUISITION MANAGEMENT, AND  
           RELATED MATTERS                                                         
         * * * * * * *                                                           

           Subtitle E--Other Matters                                               

         * * * * * * *                                                           

                    SEC. 845. AUTHORITY OF THE DEFENSE ADVANCED RESEARCH PROJECTS 
          AGENCY TO CARRY OUT CERTAIN PROTOTYPE PROJECTS.                         
   (a)  * * *                                                             

         * * * * * * *                                                           

     (c) Period of Authority.--The authority to carry out projects under  
  subsection (a) shall terminate at the end of September 30, 1999         
  September 30, 2004.                                                     
                                                                                 

                SECTION 1502 OF THE ARMED FORCES RETIREMENT HOME ACT OF 1991      

          SEC. 1502. DEFINITIONS.                                                 

   For purposes of this title:                                            

    (1)  * * *                                                             

         * * * * * * *                                                           

    (7) The term ``chief personnel officers'' means--                      

    (A)  * * *                                                             

         * * * * * * *                                                           

    (D) the Deputy Chief of Staff for Manpower of the Marine Corps.        


       (D) the Deputy Commandant of the Marine Corps with responsibility   
   for personnel matters.                                                  

         * * * * * * *                                                           

                                                                                 


                         CHAPTER 403 OF TITLE 36, UNITED STATES CODE              

         * * * * * * *                                                           

                                CHAPTER 403--CIVIL AIR PATROL                     


      Sec.                                                                    

      40301.  Organization.                                                   

         * * * * * * *                                                           

      40303.  Membership.                                                     


      40303.  Membership and governing body.                                  


         * * * * * * *                                                           

          40302. Purposes                                                         

   The purposes of the corporation are to--  as follows:                  

    (1)  To provide an organization to--                                   

       (A) encourage and aid citizens of the United States in contributing 
   their efforts, services, and resources in developing aviation and in    
   maintaining air supremacy; and                                          
       (B) encourage and develop by example the voluntary contribution of  
   private citizens to the public welfare; .                               
       (2) To provide aviation education and training especially to its    
   senior and cadet members; .                                             
    (3)  To encourage and foster civil aviation in local communities; and .

       (4) To provide an organization of private citizens with adequate    
   facilities to assist in meeting local and national emergencies.         

       (5) To assist the Department of the Air Force in fulfilling its     
   noncombat programs and missions.                                        

          40303. Membership                                                       


          40303. Membership and governing body                                    


     (a) Membership.--Eligibility for membership in the corporation and   
  the rights and privileges of members are as provided in the constitution
  and bylaws of the corporation.                                          

     (b) Governing Body.--The Civil Air Patrol has a Board of Governors.  
  The composition and responsibilities of the Board of Governors are set  
  forth in section 9447 of title 10.                                      

         * * * * * * *                                                           

                                                                                 

                   NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT FOR FISCAL YEAR 1997        

         * * * * * * *                                                           

           DIVISION A--DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE AUTHORIZATIONS                        

           TITLE I--PROCUREMENT                                                    

         * * * * * * *                                                           

           Subtitle C--Navy Programs                                               

         * * * * * * *                                                           

          SEC. 122. ARLEIGH BURKE CLASS DESTROYER PROGRAM.                        

   (a)  * * *                                                             

         * * * * * * *                                                           

     (b) Authority for Multiyear Procurement of 18 Vessels.--The Secretary
  of the Navy is authorized, pursuant to section 2306b of title 10, United
  States Code, to enter into multiyear contracts for the procurement of a 
  total of 18 Arleigh Burke class destroyers at a procurement rate of     
  three ships in each of fiscal years 1998, 1999, 2000, 2001, 2002, and   
  2003 Arleigh Burke class                                                

                    destroyers in accordance with this subsection and subsection  
          (a)(4), subject to the availability of appropriations for such          
          destroyers. Vessels authorized under this subsection shall be acquired  
          at a procurement rate of three ships per year in each of fiscal years   
          1998 through 2001 and up to three ships per year in each of fiscal years
          2002 through 2005. A contract for construction of one or more vessels   
          that is entered into in accordance with this subsection shall include a 
          clause that limits the liability of the Government to the contractor for
          any termination of the contract.                                        
         * * * * * * *                                                           

           TITLE X--GENERAL PROVISIONS                                             

         * * * * * * *                                                           

           Subtitle F--Other Matters                                               

         * * * * * * *                                                           

                    SEC. 1065. GEORGE C. MARSHALL EUROPEAN CENTER FOR STRATEGIC   
          SECURITY STUDIES.                                                       
     (a) Authority To Accept Foreign Gifts and Donations.--(1) The        
  Secretary of Defense may, on behalf of the George C. Marshall European  
  Center for Strategic Security Studies (in this section referred to as   
  the ``Marshall Center''), accept foreign gifts or donations in order to 
  defray the costs of, or enhance the operation of, the Marshall Center.  
     (2) Funds received by the Secretary under paragraph (1) shall be     
  credited to appropriations available for the Department of Defense for  
  the Marshall Center. Funds so credited shall be merged with the         
  appropriations to which credited and shall be available for the Marshall
  Center for the same purposes and same period as the appropriations with 
  which merged.                                                           
     (3) The Secretary of Defense shall notify Congress if the total      
  amount of money accepted under paragraph (1) exceeds $2,000,000 in any  
  fiscal year. Any such notice shall list each of the contributors of such
  amounts and the amount of each contribution in such fiscal year.        
     (4) For purposes of this subsection, a foreign gift or donation is a 
  gift or donation of funds, materials (including research materials),    
  property, or services (including lecture services and faculty services) 
  from a foreign government, a foundation or other charitable organization
  in a foreign country, or an individual in a foreign country.            
     (b) Marshall Center Participation by Foreign Nations.--(1)           
  Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the Secretary of Defense may
  authorize participation by a European or Eurasian nation in Marshall    
  Center programs if the Secretary determines, after consultation with the
  Secretary of State, that such participation is in the national interest 
  of the United States.                                                   
     (2) Not later than January 31 of each year, the Secretary of Defense 
  shall submit to Congress a report setting forth the names of the foreign
  nations permitted to participate in programs of the Marshall Center     
  during the preceding year under paragraph (1). Each such report shall be
  prepared by the Secretary with the assistance of the Director of the    
  Marshall Center.                                                        

     (a) Definition.--In this section, the term ``Marshall Center Board of
  Visitors'' means the Board of Visitors of the George C. Marshall        
  European Center for Security Studies                                    

     (c) (b) Exemptions for Members of Marshall Center Board of Visitors  
  From Certain Requirements.--(1) In the case of any person invited to    
  serve without compensation on the Marshall Center Board of Visitors, the
  Secretary of Defense may waive any requirement for financial disclosure 
  that                                                                    

                                                                                 

                              SECTIONS 305 AND 306 OF H.R. 3425                   

             (As enacted into law by section 1005(a)(5) of P.L. 106 113)            

     Sec. 305. Notwithstanding section 3324 of title 31, United States    
  Code, and section 1006(h) of title 37, United States Code, the basic pay
  and allowances that accrues to members of the Army, Navy, Marine Corps, 
  and Air Force for the pay period ending on September 30, 2000, shall be 
  paid, whether by electronic transfer of funds or otherwise, no earlier  
  than October 1, 2000.                                                   
     Sec. 306. The pay of any Federal officer or employee that would be   
  payable on September 29, 2000, or September 30, 2000, for the preceding 
  applicable pay period (if not for this section) shall be paid, whether  
  by electronic transfer of funds or otherwise, on October 1, 2000.       
                                                                                 

                        SECTION 1001 OF THE ACT OF NOVEMBER 29, 1999              

                         AN ACT Making consolidated appropriations for the fiscal   
            year ending September 30, 2000, and for other purposes.                 
     Sec. 1001. Paygo Adjustments. (a) Notwithstanding Rule 3 of the      
  Budget Scorekeeping Guidelines set forth in the joint explanatory       
  statement of the committee of conference accompanying Conference Report 
  No. 105 217, legislation enacted in this division by reference in the   
  paragraphs after paragraph 4 of subsection 1000(a) paragraph (5) of     
  section 1000(a), and the provisions of titles V, VI, and VII of the     
  legislation enacted in this division by reference in such paragraph (5),
  that would have been estimated by the Office of Management and Budget as
  changing direct spending or receipts under section 252 of the Balanced  
  Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985 were it included in an 
  Act other than an appropriations Act shall be treated as direct spending
  or receipts legislation as appropriate, under section 252 of the        
  Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985, but shall be 
  subject to subsection (b).                                              
         * * * * * * *                                                           

                                                                                 

           SECTIONS 8175 AND 8176 OF THE DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE APPROPRIATIONS ACT,
                                      2000                                        
     Sec. 8175. Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the Department
  of Defense shall make progress payments based on progress no less than  
  12 days after receiving a valid billing and the Department of Defense   
  shall make progress payments based on cost no less than 19 days after   
  receiving a valid billing: Provided, That this provision shall be       
  effective only with respect to billings received during the last month  
  of the fiscal year.                                                     
     Sec. 8176. Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the Department
  of Defense shall make adjustments in payment procedures and policies to 
  ensure that payments are made no earlier than one day before the date on
  which the payments would otherwise be due under any other provision of  
  law: Provided, That this provision shall be effective only with respect 
  to invoices received during the last month of the fiscal year.          
                                                                                 

            SECTION 2905 OF THE DEFENSE BASE CLOSURE AND REALIGNMENT ACT OF 1990  

          SEC. 2905. IMPLEMENTATION.                                              

   (a)  * * *                                                             

   (b)  Management and Disposal of Property.--(1)  * * *                  

         * * * * * * *                                                           

     (4)(A) The Secretary may transfer real property and personal property
  located at a military installation to be closed or realigned under this 
  part to the redevelopment authority with respect to the installation for
  purposes of job generation on the installation. This paragraph also     
  applies to real property at the installation that is initially          
  transferred to another Federal agency as excess property under the      
  authority of this part, but is subsequently determined to be excess to  
  the needs of that agency, if--                                          

       (i) the excess property is adjacent to property that was conveyed to
   the redevelopment authority with respect to the installation;           
       (ii) the acreage of the excess property is equal to less than 10    
   percent of the other acreage conveyed to the redevelopment authority;   
   and                                                                     
       (iii) the property has been screened for further Federal use as     
   provided in section 2696 of title 10, United States Code,               
   notwithstanding subsection (e)(3) of such section.                      
         * * * * * * *                                                           


     (G) The provisions of section 120(h) of the Comprehensive            
  Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980 (42     
  U.S.C. 9620(h)) shall apply to any transfer of real property under this 
  paragraph.                                                              

   (H)(i)  * * *                                                          

         * * * * * * *                                                           

     (G) The provisions of section 120(h) of the Comprehensive            
  Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980 (42     

                    U.S.C. 9620(h)) shall apply to any transfer of real property  
          under this paragraph.                                                   
         * * * * * * *                                                           

                                                                                 


                         SECTION 686 OF TITLE 14, UNITED STATES CODE              

          686. Assignment of members of the armed forces to housing units         

   (a)  * * *                                                             

     (b) Effect of Certain Assignments on Entitlement to Housing          
  Allowances.--(1) Except as provided in paragraph (2), housing referred  
  to in subsection (a) shall be considered as quarters of the United      
  States or a housing facility under the jurisdiction of a uniformed      
  service for purposes of section 403(b) section 403(e) of title 37.      
     (2) A member of the armed forces who is assigned in accordance with  
  subsection (a) to a housing unit not owned or leased by the United      
  States shall be entitled to a basic allowance for quarters under section
  403 of title 37, and, if in a high housing cost area, a variable housing
  allowance under section 403a of that title a basic allowance for housing
  under section 403 of title 37.                                          
         * * * * * * *                                                           

                                                                                 

           SECTION 405 OF THE DEPARTMENTS OF LABOR, HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES, AND
            EDUCATION, AND RELATED AGENCIES APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 1999              
          SEC. 405. CONFORMING AMENDMENTS.                                        

   (a)  * * *                                                             

         * * * * * * *                                                           

   (f)  References to Job Training Partnership Act Subsequent to Repeal.--

    (1) * * *                                                              

         * * * * * * *                                                           

    (6)  National defense authorization act for fiscal year 1993.--        

    (A)  * * *                                                             

       (B) Section 4461.--Section 4461(1) of the National Defense          
   Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1993 (10 U.S.C. 1143 note) is amended 
   by striking ``The Job Training Partnership Act of title Act or title''  
   and inserting ``Title''.                                                
         * * * * * * *                                                           

                                                                                 

                        SECTION 224 OF THE ATOMIC ENERGY ACT OF 1954              

     Sec. 224. Communication of Restricted Data.--Whoever, lawfully or    
  unlawfully, having possession of, access to, control over, or being     
  entrusted with any document, writing, sketch, photograph, plan, model,  
  instrument, appliance, note, or information involving or incorporating  
  Restricted Data--                                                       
    a.  * * *                                                              

       b. communicates, transmits, or discloses the same to any individual 
   or person, or attempts or conspires to do any of the foregoing, with    
   reason to believe such data will be utilized to injure the United States
   or to secure an advantage to any foreign nation, shall, upon conviction,
   be punished by a fine of not more than $500,000 $50,000 or imprisonment 
   for not more than ten years, or both.                                   
                                                                                 


                                 TITLE 5, UNITED STATES CODE                      

         * * * * * * *                                                           

          PART III--EMPLOYEES                                                     

         * * * * * * *                                                           

          Subpart B--Employment and Retention                                     

                            CHAPTER 31--AUTHORITY FOR EMPLOYMENT                  

         * * * * * * *                                                           


           SUBCHAPTER IV--EMPLOYMENT AND COMPENSATION FOR EMPLOYEES OF TEMPORARY  
               ORGANIZATIONS ESTABLISHED BY LAW OR EXECUTIVE ORDER                
      3161. Temporary organizations established by law or Executive order.    


           SUBCHAPTER IV--EMPLOYMENT AND COMPENSATION FOR EMPLOYEES OF TEMPORARY  
   ORGANIZATIONS IN THE EXECUTIVE BRANCH ESTABLISHED BY LAW OR EXECUTIVE ORDER    
          3161. Temporary organizations established by law or Executive order     

     (a) Definition of Temporary Organization.--For the purposes of this  
  subchapter, the term ``temporary organization'' means an organization   
  such as a commission, committee, or board that is established by law in 
  the legislative or executive branches, or by Executive order in the     
  executive branch, for a specific period, which shall not exceed 5 years,
  for the purpose of performing specific projects or studies.             
     (b) Hiring Authority.--Notwithstanding the provisions of chapter 51, 
  the head of a temporary organization may employ such numbers and types  
  of employees as required to perform the functions required of the       
  temporary organization. Employees may be appointed for a period of 5    
  years or the life of the temporary organization, whichever is less.     
     (c) Status of Positions and Appointments.--Positions of employment in
  a temporary organization are excepted from the competitive service.     
     (d) Compensation.--(1) The basic pay of an employee of a temporary   
  organization may be set without regard to the provisions of chapter 51  
  or subchapter III of chapter 53, except that--                          
       (A) basic pay for an executive level position (such as a            
   chairperson, member, or executive or staff director), and, in           
   exceptional cases, for senior staff shall be capped at the maximum rate 
   of basic pay established for the Senior Executive Service under         
   subchapter VIII of chapter 53; and                                      
       (B) basic pay for other staff may not exceed the maximum rate of    
   basic pay for GS 15 of the General Schedule.                            
     (2) An employee whose rate of basic pay is set under paragraph (1)   
  shall be entitled to locality-based comparability payments, as provided 
  under section 5304.                                                     
     (e) Travel Expenses.--An employee of a temporary organization,       
  whether employed on a full-time or part-time basis, may be entitled to  
  travel and transportation allowances, including per diem allowances,    
  authorized for employees under subchapter I of chapter 57, while        
  traveling away from the regular place of business of the employee in the
  performance of services for the temporary organization,                 
  career-conditional appointment, or the equivalent, who transfers to or  
  converts to an appointment in a temporary organization with the consent 
  of the head of the agency (or the designee of the agency head) in which 
  the employee was serving is entitled to be returned to a position of    
  like seniority, status, and pay (without grade or pay retention) as the 
  former position in the agency from which employed immediately preceding 
  employment with the temporary organization if--                         
       (1) the employee is being separated from the temporary organization 
   for reasons other than misconduct, neglect of duty, or malfeasance; and 
       (2) the employee applies for return rights not later than 30 days   
   before the end of the employment in the temporary organization, or the  
   termination of the temporary organization, whichever is earlier.        
     (g) Procurement of Temporary and Intermittent Services.--The head of 
  the temporary organization may procure temporary and intermittent       
  services under section 3109(b).                                         
     (h) Acceptance of Volunteer Services.--(1) The head of a temporary   
  organization may accept volunteer services relating to the duties of the
  temporary organization without regard to section 1342 of title 31,      
  including service as advisers, experts, members, or in other capacities 
  determined appropriate by the head of the temporary organization. The   
  head of the temporary organization--                                    
       (A) shall assure that all persons accepted as volunteers are        
   notified of the scope of the voluntary services accepted;               
       (B) shall supervise volunteers to the same extent as employees      
   receiving compensation for similar services; and                        
       (C) shall ensure that volunteers have appropriate credentials or are
   otherwise qualified to perform in the capacities for which they are     
   accepted.                                                               
       (2) A person providing volunteer services under this subsection     
   shall be considered an employee of the Federal Government for the       
   purposes of chapters 73 and 81, chapter 171 of title                    

                    28, chapter 11 of title 18, and part 2635 of title 5 of the   
          Code of Federal regulations.                                            
     (i) Detailees.--Upon request of the head of the temporary            
  organization, the head of any department or agency of the United States 
  may detail, on a nonreimbursable basis, any personnel of the department 
  or agency to the temporary organization to assist in carrying out its   
  duties.                                                                 

         * * * * * * *                                                           

               CHAPTER 35--RETENTION PREFERENCE, RESTORATION, AND REEMPLOYMENT    

         * * * * * * *                                                           

                             SUBCHAPTER I--RETENTION PREFERENCE                   

         * * * * * * *                                                           

          3502. Order of retention                                                

   (a) * * *                                                              

         * * * * * * *                                                           

   (f)(1) * * *                                                           

         * * * * * * *                                                           

     (5) No authority under paragraph (1) may be exercised after September
  30, 2001 September 30, 2005.                                            
         * * * * * * *                                                           

          Subpart C--Employee Performance                                         

                                    CHAPTER 41--TRAINING                          

         * * * * * * *                                                           

          4107. Restriction on degree training                                    

     (a) Except as provided in subsection (b) subsections (b) and (c) of  
  this section, this chapter does not authorize the selection and         
  assignment of an employee for training, or the payment or reimbursement 
  of the costs of training, for--                                         
    (1) * * *                                                              

         * * * * * * *                                                           

     (b)(1) The regulations prescribed under section 4118 of this title   
  shall include provisions under which the head of an agency may provide  
  training, or payment or reimbursement for the costs of any training, not
  otherwise allowable under subsection (a) subsections (a) or (c) of this 
  section, if necessary to assist in the recruitment or retention of      
  employees in occupations in which the Government has or anticipates a   
  shortage of qualified personnel, especially in occupations involving    
  critical skills (as defined under such regulations).                    
         * * * * * * *                                                           


   (c) With respect to an employee of the Department of Defense--         

       (1) this chapter does not authorize, except as provided in          
   subsection (b) of this section, the selection and assignment of the     
   employee for training, or the payment or reimbursement of the costs of  
   training, for--                                                         
       (A) the purpose of providing an opportunity to the employee to      
   obtain an academic degree in order to qualify for appointment to a      
   particular position for which the academic degree is a basic            
   requirement; or                                                         
       (B) the sole purpose of providing an opportunity to the employee to 
   obtain one or more academic degrees, unless such opportunity is part of 
   a planned, systematic, and coordinated program of professional          
   development endorsed by the Department of Defense; and                  
       (2) any course of post-secondary education delivered through        
   classroom, electronic, or other means shall be administered or conducted
   by an institution recognized under standards implemented by a national  
   or regional accrediting body, except in a case in which such standards  
   do not exist or would not be appropriate.                               

         * * * * * * *                                                           

                                                                                 


             SECTION 1505 OF THE WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION CONTROL ACT OF 1992  

          SEC. 1505. INTERNATIONAL NONPROLIFERATION INITIATIVE.                   

     (a) Assistance for International Nonproliferation                    
  Activities.--Subject to the limitations and requirements provided in    
  this section, the Secretary of Defense, under the guidance of the       
  President, may provide assistance to support international              
  nonproliferation activities.                                            
         * * * * * * *                                                           

     (f) Termination of Authority.--The authority of the Secretary of     
  Defense to provide assistance under this section terminates at the close
  of fiscal year 2000] 2001.                                              
                                                                                 


           SECTION 1206 OF THE NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT FOR FISCAL YEAR 
                                      1996                                        
          SEC. 1206.  REPORT ON ACCOUNTING FOR UNITED STATES ASSISTANCE.          

   (a) * * *                                                              

         * * * * * * *                                                           

     (c) Comptroller General Assessment.--Not later than 30 90 days after 
  the date on which a report of the Secretary under subsection (a) is     
  submitted to Congress, the Comptroller General of the United States     
  shall submit to Congress a report giving the Comptroller General's      
  assessment of the report and making any recommendations that the        
  Comptroller General considers appropriate.                              
                                                                                 


                MILITARY CONSTRUCTION AUTHORIZATION ACT FOR FISCAL YEAR 1999      

           DIVISION B--MILITARY CONSTRUCTION AUTHORIZATIONS                        

         * * * * * * *                                                           

           TITLE XXI--ARMY                                                         

         * * * * * * *                                                           

          SEC. 2101. AUTHORIZED ARMY CONSTRUCTION AND LAND ACQUISITION PROJECTS.  

     (a) Inside the United States.--Using amounts appropriated pursuant to
  the authorization of appropriations in section 2104(a)(1), the Secretary
  of the Army may acquire real property and carry out military            
  construction projects for the installations and locations inside the    
  United States, and in the amounts, set forth in the following table:    
                                                                                 


                                       Army: Inside the United States                                      

 State                                                Installation or location                          Amount  

Alabama                                              Anniston Army Depot                            $3,550,000  
    *       *       *       *       *       *       *                                                               
Texas                                                Fort Bliss                                     $4,100,000  
                                                        Fort Hood                        $32,500,000  $45,300,000  
                                                                                                                   
    *       *       *       *       *       *       *                                 ----------------------------  
                                                                                                                
xl                                                     Total                        $768,781,000  $781,581,000  


         * * * * * * *                                                           

          SEC. 2104. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS, ARMY.                       

     (a) In General.--Funds are hereby authorized to be appropriated for  
  fiscal years beginning after September 30, 1998, for military           
  construction, land acquisition, and military family housing functions of
  the Department of the Army in the total amount of $2,098,713,000        
  $2,111,513,000 as follows:                                              
       (1) For military construction projects inside the United States     
   authorized by section 2101(a), $609,076,000 $622,581,000.               
         * * * * * * *                                                           


            SECTION 204 OF THE DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION AMENDMENTS AND BASE CLOSURE  
                               AND REALIGNMENT ACT                                
          SEC. 204. IMPLEMENTATION.                                               

   (a)  * * *                                                             

         * * * * * * *                                                           

   (b)  Management and Disposal of Property.--(1)  * * *                  

         * * * * * * *                                                           

   (4)(A)  * * *                                                          

         * * * * * * *                                                           

     (E) The Secretary may require any additional terms and conditions in 
  connection with a transfer under this paragraph as such Secretary       
  considers appropriate to protect the interests of the United States.    
  This paragraph also applies to real property at the installation that is
  initially transferred to another Federal agency as excess property under
  the authority of this title, but is subsequently determined to be excess
  to the needs of that agency, if--                                       

       (i) the excess property is adjacent to property that was conveyed to
   the redevelopment authority with respect to the installation;           
       (ii) the acreage of the excess property is equal to less than 10    
   percent of the other acreage conveyed to the redevelopment authority;   
   and                                                                     
       (iii) the property has been screened for further Federal use as     
   provided in section 2696 of title 10, United States Code,               
   notwithstanding subsection (e)(2) of such section.                      

         * * * * * * *                                                           

                                                                                 

                MILITARY CONSTRUCTION AUTHORIZATION ACT FOR FISCAL YEAR 1995      

         * * * * * * *                                                           

           TITLE XXVIII--GENERAL PROVISIONS                                        

         * * * * * * *                                                           

           Subtitle D--Land Conveyances                                            

         * * * * * * *                                                           

                    SEC. 2843. AUTHORITY FOR OXNARD HARBOR DISTRICT, PORT HUENEME,
          CALIFORNIA, TO USE CERTAIN NAVY PROPERTY.                               
   (a)  * * *                                                             

         * * * * * * *                                                           

     (c) Restrictions on Use.--The agreement authorized under subsection  
  (a) shall require the District--                                        
       (1) to suspend operations under the agreement in the event Navy     
   contingency operations are conducted at the Center; and                 
       (2) to use the property covered by the agreement in a manner        
   consistent with Navy operations conducted at the Center.                
     (d) Consideration.--(1) As consideration for the use of the property 
  covered by the agreement under subsection (a), the District shall pay to
  the Navy an amount equal to the fair market rental value of the         
  property, as determined by the Secretary taking into consideration the  
  District's use of the property.                                         
     (2) The Secretary may include a provision in the agreement requiring 
  the District--                                                          
       (A) to pay the Navy an amount (as determined by the Secretary) to   
   cover the costs of replacing at the Center any facilities vacated by the
   Navy on account of the agreement or to construct suitable replacement   
   facilities for the Navy; and                                            
       (B) to pay the Navy an amount (as determined by the Secretary) for  
   the costs of relocating Navy operations from the vacated facilities to  
   the replacement facilities.                                             

     (c) Restrictions on Use.--The District's use of the property covered 
  by an agreement under subsection (a) is subject to the following        
  conditions:                                                             
       (1) The District shall suspend operations under the agreement upon  
   notification by the commanding officer of the Center that the property  
   is needed to support mission essential naval vessel support requirements
   or Navy contingency operations, including combat missions, natural      
   disasters, and humanitarian missions.                                   
       (2) The District shall use the property covered by the agreement in 
   a manner consistent with Navy operations at the Center, including       
   cooperating with the Navy for the purpose of assisting the Navy to meet 
   its through-put requirements at the Center for the expeditious movement 
   of military cargo.                                                      
       (3) The commanding officer of the Center may require the District to
   remove any of its personal property at the Center that the commanding   
   officer determines may interfere with military operations at the Center.
   If the District cannot expeditiously remove the property, the commanding
   officer may provide for the removal of the property at District expense.
     (d) Consideration.--(1) As consideration for the use of the property 
  covered by an agreement under subsection (a), the District shall pay to 
  the Navy an amount that is mutually agreeable to the parties to the     
  agreement, taking into account the nature and extent of the District's  
  use of the property.                                                    
     The Secretary may accept in-kind consideration under paragraph (1),  
  including consideration in the form of--                                
       (A) the District's maintenance, preservation, improvement,          
   protection, repair, or restoration of all or any portion of the property
   covered by the agreement;                                               
       (B) the construction of new facilities, the modification of existing
   facilities, or the replacement of facilities vacated by the Navy on     
   account of the agreement; and                                           

       (C) covering the cost of relocation of the operations of the Navy   
   from the vacated facilities to the replacement facilities.              
     (3) All cash consideration received under paragraph (1) shall be     
  deposited in the special account in the Treasury established for the    
  Navy under section 2667(d) of title 10, United States Code. The amounts 
  deposited in the special account pursuant to this paragraph shall be    
  available, as provided in appropriation Acts, for general supervision,  
  administration, overhead expenses, and Center operations and for the    
  maintenance preservation, improvement, protection, repair, or           
  restoration of property at the Center.                                  

         * * * * * * *                                                           

     (f) Use of Payment.--(1) In such amounts as is provided in advance in
  appropriation Acts, the Secretary may use amounts paid under subsection 
  (d)(1) to pay for general supervision, administration, and overhead     
  expenses and for improvement, maintenance, repair, construction, or     
  restoration to the port operations area (or to roads and railways       
  serving the area) at the Center.                                        
     (2) In such amounts as is provided in advance in appropriation Acts, 
  the Secretary may use amounts paid under subsection (d)(2) to pay for   
  constructing new facilities, or making modifications to existing        
  facilities, that are necessary to replace facilities vacated by the Navy
  on account of the agreement under subsection (a) and for relocating     
  operations of the Navy from the vacated facilities to replacement       
  facilities.                                                             
     (g) (f) Construction by District.--The Secretary may authorize the   
  District to demolish existing facilities located on the property covered
  by the agreement under subsection (a) and, consistent with the          
  restriction specified in subsection (c)(2), construct new facilities on 
  the property for joint use by the District and the Navy.                
     (h) (g) Additional Terms and Conditions.--The Secretary may require  
  such additional terms and conditions in connection with the agreement   
  authorized under subsection (a) as the Secretary considers appropriate  
  to protect the interests of the United States.                          
         * * * * * * *                                                           

           Subtitle E--Other Matters                                               

                    SEC. 2851. JOINT CONSTRUCTION CONTRACTING FOR COMMISSARIES AND
          NONAPPROPRIATED FUND INSTRUMENTALITY FACILITIES.                        
   (a)  * * *                                                             

         * * * * * * *                                                           


     (f) Exemption for Certain Leased Lands.--(1) Section 303 of title 49,
  and section 138 of title 23, United States Code, shall not apply to any 
  approval by the Secretary of Transportation of the use by State Route   
  241 of parkland within Camp Pendleton that is leased by the State of    
  California, where the lease reserved to the United States the right to  
  establish rights-of-way.                                                
     (2) The Agency shall be responsible for the implementation of any    
  measures required by the Secretary of Transportation to mitigate the    
  impact of the Agency's use of parkland within Camp Pendleton for State  
  Route 241. With the exception of those mitigation measures directly     
  related to park functions, the measures shall be located outside the    
  boundaries of Camp Pendleton. The required mitigation measures related  
  to park functions shall be implemented in accordance with the terms of  
  the lease referred to in paragraph (1).                                 

         * * * * * * *                                                           

                                                                                 

                   SECTION 6 OF THE NATIONAL MARITIME HERITAGE ACT OF 1994        

          SEC. 6. FUNDING.                                                        

   (a)  * * *                                                             

         * * * * * * *                                                           

   (c)  Disposals of Vessels.--                                           

       (1) Requirement.--The Secretary of Transportation shall dispose of  
   all vessels described in paragraph (2)--                                
    (A) by September 30, 2001  2006;                                       

       (B) in a manner that maximizes the return on the vessels to the     
   United States; and                                                      
       (C) in accordance with subject to subparagraph (D), in accordance   
   with the plan of the Department of Transportation for disposal of those 
   vessels and requirements under sections 508 and 510(i) of the Merchant  
   Marine Act, 1936 (46 App. U.S.C. 1158, 1160(i)). ; and                  

       (D) to the maximum extent possible, by scrapping outside of the     
   United States.                                                          

         * * * * * * *                                                           


                   ADDITIONAL VIEWS OF REPRESENTATIVE JOHN M. SPRATT, JR.         

      Mr. Chairman, I would like to take this opportunity to add my voice  
   to those who have taken note of this, Chairman Spence's last markup as  
   chairman of our Committee. I have served in Congress and on the Armed   
   Services Committee since 1983. For all this time, Floyd Spence has been 
   my colleague in Congress and on this committee, and I would be remiss   
   not to note for the record my appreciation for his distinguished        
   service.                                                                
      Since he was first elected in 1970, and since he served first as a   
   member of the committee and then as Chairman, Floyd Spence has been a   
   tireless advocate for the armed forces. As Chairman, he has always      
   conducted himself with grace, collegiality, and good humor, and has     
   presided over defense authorization bills that have consistently passed 
   with bipartisan support--an all too rare occurrence in Congress over the
   past several years. I would like to commend our Chairman as we wrap up  
   the Fiscal Year 2001 National Defense Authorization Act, and express my 
   admiration for the good work he has done.                               
      The committee's markup of the Fiscal Year 2001 National Defense      
   Authorization Act was indeed a bipartisan bill, and I was happy to      
   support it. Nevertheless, I do have concerns with certain elements of   
   the bill, most of which I spoke to during our markup session.           
                   Cooperative Threat Reduction Program                  

      I remain concerned with certain provisions in H.R. 4205 relating to  
   the CTR program. The Chemical Weapons Destruction program request of $35
   million is completely eliminated, and use of CTR funds for construction 
   of a fossil fuel energy facility in Russia, a necessary component of the
   U.S. effort to reduce the production of weapons-usable plutonium, is    
   prohibited.                                                             
      Progress toward construction of the chemical weapons destruction     
   facility has been slow, and I understand that Russia may not have put   
   forward an effort or funds commensurate with the U.S. level of effort,  
   but the construction of a facility to destroy these dangerous weapons of
   mass destruction is an important element of our national security       
   strategy. I believe there are better ways to legislate improvements in  
   the chemical weapons de-militarization program than to discontinue      
   funding entirely, and hope that this issue can be addressed in          
   conference with the Senate.                                             
      I am also concerned that the committee chose to include a prohibition
   on the use of CTR funds to construct a fossil fuel plant in Russia. If  
   the United States is to succeed in encouraging Russia to slow its       
   production of weapons-usable plutonium, we must be willing to consider  
   the concomitant need for electricity in Russia's nuclear cities. Their  
   need for electricity is currently met by the nuclear reactors whose     
   cores we have previously sought to convert; shutting them down will     
   automatically create a need for new source of energy. For the U.S. to   
   categorically refuse to assist with the construction of the alternative 
   source of energy is counterproductive to our goal of stopping plutonium 
   production.                                                             
                         Arms Control Provisions                         

      I also have concerns about cuts in funding to the Arms Control       
   Implementation account of the Pentagon, although I appreciate the       
   Committee's willingness to work with me to mitigate the funding         
   limitations that were to be imposed on the Arms Control Implementation  
   programs. I still do not agree with the $11.5 million cut to this       
   important $219 million set of programs, but the most objectionable      
   aspects of the original proposed language--to narrowly target the cuts  
   at specific treaty compliance efforts--has been dropped.                
      The United States has the responsibility to fully implement all      
   treaties, such as the ABM Treaty and START I. Under the original        
   proposal, funds would have been eliminated from certain START I         
   compliance activities. This could have led to treaty violations. Also,  
   the funds to be deleted from the ABM compliance efforts would have      
   deprived the department of needed resources to be used in conducting    
   studies on ongoing weapon system development programs such as the       
   Airborne Laser. This would needlessly delay these programs and lead to  
   increased costs. While I still support the original budget request for  
   Arms Control Implementation and hope that this full funding level will  
   be agreed to in conference, I think the committee has moved in the right
   direction in not trying to micro-manage these activities.               
                              Airborne Laser                             

      I appreciate the willingness of Rep. Weldon to address some of my    
   concerns regarding the transfer of the Airborne Laser (ABL) from the Air
   Force to the Ballistic Missile Defense Organization (BMDO). I had       
   planned to offer an amendment in committee to block the transfer, but   
   given Rep. Weldon's willingness to address some of my concerns and to   
   keep an open mind on the matter, I did not offer the amendment.         
      The committee believes the transfer will better ensure funding for   
   the ABL program, but I disagree. The BMDO budget is much smaller and    
   less flexible than the Air Force's. Moreover, BMDO has many difficult   
   technical problems to deal with in the next couple of years in          
   developing both a national missile defense and several theater missile  
   defense systems.                                                        

                     We are already transferring one challenging program to BMDO, 
          SBIRS-Low. I believe it is unwise to push another program on to BMDO at 
          this time, especially since the ABL deals with a number of very         
          different technologies than the other systems they are presently        
          managing. Let us allow them to remain focused on their core mission.    
      The Air Force still opposes the transfer. Gen. Michael Ryan, Air     
   Force Chief of Staff, wrote the committee on May 8th, stating that ABL  
   ``was born in the Air Force, brought up in the Air Force, and deserves  
   to be fielded by the Air Force.'' I agree with Gen. Ryan, and although I
   appreciate Rep. Weldon's good-faith efforts to reach a compromise, I    
   will continue my efforts to reverse the committee position during the   
   conference on the bill with the Senate.                                 
                          START I Warhead Levels                         

      Last year, the committee enacted a provision that prohibits DOD to go
   below START-I force levels for strategic weapons until START II enters  
   into force. Part of the rationale for this prohibition was to encourage 
   the Russian Duma to ratify START II, which the Duma did this year, eight
   years after it was negotiated and four years after Senate ratification. 
   Rep. Tom Allen offered an amendment in committee to strike this         
   prohibition and give the DOD flexibility to go below these levels or to 
   have a different mix of forces than the prohibition prescribes. The     
   Allen amendment was permissive in nature and did not mandate reductions.
   Gen. Henry Shelton, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, has testified
   that the Department would like the flexibility to field the most        
   militarily useful and cost-effective force and opposes the prohibition. 
   Unfortunately, the committee rejected the Allen amendment. I believe    
   this is a mistake, and hope the committee will reconsider the issue     
   either on the House floor or in conference with the Senate.             
             FORMERLY UTILIZED SITES REMEDIAL ACTION PROGRAM             

      Although the committee added $4.5 billion to the President's budget  
   request for defense, several requested programs were cut. One of these  
   programs is the Formerly Utilized Sites Remedial Action Program,        
   (``FUSRAP''). FUSRAP is a program to clean up sites that were           
   contaminated by the Manhattan project and other early atomic            
   energy-related activities by the government. The committee did not      
   authorize FUSRAP, presumably because it does not believe it should be   
   considered a defense activity. As I indicated in a statement in         
   committee, I will keep an open mind on the proper classification of this
   program. However, simply not authorizing the funding is not the answer. 
   The committee should either work through the Budget Committees to       
   convince the Office of Management and budget to reclassify FUSRAP as a  
   non-defense program, or acknowledge the liability of the U.S. Government
   for these contaminated sites and authorize their clean up.              
                         NATIONAL MISSILE DEFENSE                        

      Section 232 of the Chairman's mark is a non-binding ``Sense of the   
   Congress'' than urges the President to abide by H.R. 4, a bill that     
   states that the policy of the United States is to deploy a limited      
   national missile defense system. I was a co-author of the original House
   version of this bill, and while I preferred the original version, I     
   supported the final bill as amended by the Senate and signed into law by
   the President. I consider this ``Sense of the Congress'' to be          
   unnecessary, as the Administration is following a rational course about 
   deployment and is seeking to modify the ABM Treaty in order to deploy   
   without disrupting our relationship with Russia, but I do not object to 
   it. However, I believe the assertion in this section that ``An effective
   National Missile Defense system is technologically feasible'' has yet to
   be demonstrated.                                                        
      First, we need to have many more tests of the system currently being 
   developed before we can declare it technologically feasible. Second,    
   this system is to counter a limited strike. It will not be able to      
   defend against a large strike or even the unauthorized launch of a      
   boatload of Russian SSBN's. To say an effective national missile defense
   system is technologically feasible without any qualification is plainly 
   inaccurate.                                                             

         John M. Spratt,  Jr.                                                   


                  ADDITIONAL VIEWS OF REPRESENTATIVE STEVEN T. KUYKENDALL         

      Thank you Mr. Chairman for producing a bill that is fair and attempts
   to balance the military's many legitimate needs with the limited funds  
   under the jurisdiction of this committee. I especially appreciate the   
   efforts of this committee to address health-care issues facing both our 
   active duty and retired veterans. The ramifications of not having       
   quality, accessible and affordable health care are far reaching. In     
   these days of economic prosperity, sustaining an all-voluntary military 
   force is challenging. Add to that a disgruntled population of retired   
   veterans, who have been an important recruitment vehicle in the past,   
   and sustaining appropriate levels of manning becomes nearly impossible. 
   Your willingness to address these difficult issues, in spite of the     
   enormous costs associated with these problems, stands as a testament to 
   all veterans, that this committee takes seriously veterans concerns, and
   recognizes the role they continue to play in their service to this      
   country.                                                                
      I applaud the leadership you have provided as this committee         
   determines what our future armed forces should look like. Modernization 
   is difficult when the only question is replacing old equipment with     
   similar new equipment. However, advances in technology and manufacturing
   cause everyone in defense to revisit how we perform R&D and procurement 
   in a manner that keeps pace with advances in technology. As always, we  
   must provide our soldiers, sailors, airmen, and marines with modern     
   equipment, ensuring that they continue to succeed on today's            
   battlefield.                                                            
      I fully support the objectives and provisions of this bill. However, 
   I remain concerned about the military abortion issue. Last year, I      
   introduced an amendment that corrects the disparity that exists         
   concerning access to abortion in cases of pregnancy resulting from rape 
   or incest. Currently, women in the military, both service members and   
   dependents, assigned overseas are not being afforded the same access to 
   medical treatment as we provide in other federal programs. These        
   military women should have the same medical treatment options that are  
   available to women who reside in the United States and in fact, receive 
   fewer health benefits than their male colleagues. This amendment which  
   prevailed at subcommittee during consideration of the FY00 Defense Bill,
   remained in the bill through full committee and floor consideration. It 
   was dropped, regrettably during the House-Senate conference. I chose not
   to offer this amendment again this year because there is no reason to   
   think the issue would be resolved differently--neither of the committees
   has changed since last May. If we are serious about closing the gender  
   gap that exists in the service, this is one of the many issues we will  
   have to resolve.                                                        

                ADDITIONAL VIEWS ON H.R. 4205, THE FISCAL YEAR 2001 DEFENSE       
                               AUTHORIZATION BILL                                 
         ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT CONVEYANCE FOR NON-BRAC FACILITIES         

      Although the bill as a whole is strong, I would like to call         
   attention to an important measure not included in this bill. This year, 
   I requested that this Committee establish fair procedures for           
   communities that, because of accidents of history, have lost military   
   installations and now cannot take advantage of a new Department of      
   Defense economic development program. Statutory language I proposed to  
   the Committee would allow no cost economic development conveyances for  
   military installations closed outside Base Realignment and Closure      
   (BRAC) processes, such as the Indiana Army Ammunition Plant (INAAP), a  
   facility in my district.                                                
      Last year, Congress gave BRAC communities a real boost by allowing   
   them to renegotiate special economic development conveyances (EDCs). I  
   believe it is only fair to extend that same consideration to other      
   facilities and their home communities. All communities deserve this     
   opportunity.                                                            
      We all know losing a military installation can hurt the economy of a 
   community. All communities that lose military installations should be   
   able to reclaim the closed property at minimal expense and use it to    
   create jobs and industry.                                               
      In April of last year, the Clinton Administration requested that     
   Congress pass legislation authorizing the Department of Defense to      
   provide no cost EDCs to communities with BRAC installations. There was  
   an important condition attached. The communities have to use their      
   closed bases for economic development and job creation.                 
      Although this Committee did not include the proposal in its Defense  
   Authorization bill, the Senate did. The EDC language remained in the    
   Conference report and passed the Congress in the FY 2000 National       
   Defense Authorization Act. The President subsequently signed it into    
   law. Section 2821(a) of the Act allows no cost conveyance at            
   installations closed or realigned under the base closure laws by        
   amending the Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990.                  
      Communities are taking advantage of this opportunity. Kelly Air Force
   Base is a BRAC facility near San Antonio, Texas. It is scheduled to     
   close next year. In March, Secretary Cohen visited Kelly Air Force Base 
   to announce the government had forgiven a debt of $103 million owed by  
   the Greater Kelly Development Authority. That action freed up millions  
   of dollars the community can now use to rebuild the industry lost when  
   the base was ordered closed.                                            
      There are non-BRAC installations that close and are conveyed using   
   procedures similar to those allowed for the conveyance of Kelly Air     
   Force Base. These old installations hold the same potential for economic
   development and job creation--and the same challenges. Reduced activity 
   at these places has a profound effect on local economies, but last      
   year's legislation does not help non-BRAC installations.                
      I have such a site in my district, the Indiana Army Ammunition Plant.
   Although there are 80 rent-paying tenants at INAAP, it is not yet a     
   profitable venture.                                                     
      Section 2843 of Public Law 105 261, the Strom Thurmond National      
   Defense Authorization Act of 1999, provides for conveyance of 4,660     
   acres of the INAPP to a reuse authority.                                
      This closure and the conveyance are outside of Base Realignment and  
   Closure procedures. Although my predecessor originally pursued no cost  
   conveyance, the language of the legislation calls on the reuse authority
   to pay, in one lump sum, ``fair market value'' for the 4,660 acre parcel
   at INAAP at the end of a 10-year period.                                
      A no cost conveyance for INAAP would free up much needed funds to    
   help the reuse authority in Clark County push ahead with economic       
   development and make the facility more attractive to private industry.  
      This is one example, but I did not propose this language specifically
   for my district. Facilities like the Volunteer Army Ammunition Plant in 
   Chattanooga, Tennessee fall into the same category. I want all former   
   military communities to be able to benefit from the fair deal we have   
   already given BRAC communities.                                         
      This is a good bill. It strengthens our national defense in numerous,
   important ways. It boosts benefits for our fighting men and women. But I
   urge the Committee to help create opportunities for communities that,   
   because of accidents of history, lost military installations but can't  
   take advantage of common sense legislation Congress has already passed. 
   It is nothing more than a simple matter of fairness.                    

         Baron P. Hill.                                                         


          ADDITIONAL VIEWS OF REPRESENTATIVES JOSEPH R. PITTS AND JOHN M. SPRATT, 
                                       JR.                                        
                            ELECTRONIC WARFARE                           

      Electronic warfare (EW) played a key role in the success of Operation
   Allied Force last year. U.S. jamming aircraft, most notably the Navy's  
   EA 6B Prowler, provided continuous protection of all alliance aircraft  
   penetrating Yugoslav airspace. As a result, only two aircraft were lost 
   in 12,000 sorties, and the sole U.S. loss was directly attributable to  
   lack of EW coverage.                                                    
      U.S. military supremacy in the twenty-first century promises to be   
   even more dependent upon control of the electromagnetic spectrum than it
   was in the closing decades of the last century. The Kosovo operation    
   made clear that America's EW aircraft are a low-density/high-demand     
   asset in need of significant enhancements if they are to meet the demand
   of a new century. Unfortunately, EW requirements have not received      
   focused attention in the Armed Services or the Congress. With this in   
   mind, we formed the EW Working Group last year to encourage awareness of
   and support for EW capabilities. We have worked and consulted with the  
   Services, Members of Congress, and the defense industry to advance the  
   EW mission and identify key requirements.                               
      We are very pleased that the FY 2001 National Defense Authorization  
   Act contains funding for several important EW priorities, specifically  
   the $23 million in upgrades for the EA 6B Prowler. The procurement of   
   124 AN/ASW 41 automatic flight control systems will provide automatic   
   speed, attitude, and altitude control capabilities for the Prowler,     
   which will increase mission capability, improve reliability, and reduce 
   maintenance. The Prowler fleet is overcommitted and aging fast, and     
   maintenance is frequently deferred. The Defense Authorization bill will 
   go a long way in restoring our Prowler fleet so that adequate EW        
   airborne jamming support can be provided to our Armed Forces aircraft.  
      We thank Chairman Spence for his leadership and the Members of the   
   Armed Service Committee for their support for EW assets and capabilities
   in the Authorization bill. We look forward to working with Members of   
   the Committee in the future to assure that America's EW edge is         
   preserved.                                                              

    Joseph R. Pitts.                                                        

    John M. Spratt,  Jr.                                                    


          ADDITIONAL VIEWS OF REPRESENTATIVES UNDERWOOD, ABERCROMBIE, ORTIZ, ALLEN
                                    AND REYES                                     
      We are disappointed that the Committee was not able to do more in    
   terms of reviewing the Department of Defense's over reliance on         
   outsourcing, privatization and commercial activities studies. By 2005,  
   the Department of Defense (DoD) expects to compete more than 200,000    
   jobs with savings pegged at approximately $11.2 billion. These estimates
   are sheer mathematical conjuring. The Pentagon has long assumed these   
   savings. Indeed the individual services often do not even account for   
   the cost of performing the study, which in most cases comes from the O &
   M accounts. These costs can include the paying of the cost-comparison   
   study itself as well as associated costs for voluntary separation       
   incentive pay, early retirement benefits, and general reductions in     
   forces (RiFs).                                                          
      The zeal with which the DoD employs to invent savings has evolved    
   into the mythical search for the holy grail. The DoD has invested       
   heavily, both in manpower and funding, in order to implement outsourcing
   endeavors and conduct public/private competitions, but these efforts may
   never realize the anticipated savings.                                  
      In the coming weeks, the DoD will be announcing their intentions to  
   employ other means to convert work from the public sector to the private
   sector. In an all but blessed initiative, the DoD has been encouraging  
   the military to look at alternatives to the traditional A 76            
   competitions, known as strategic sourcing. By their own admissions, the 
   DoD has utilized the A 76 process in lieu of base closure authority to  
   reap fiscal savings. While their arguments may raise some interesting   
   concerns, their premise is completely wrong.                            
      No doubt, the DoD has been hamstrung by declining budgets and        
   increased operational demands. Indeed we appreciate the challenging     
   fiscal position that the DoD must contend with. Nevertheless, it seems  
   ill conceived to purely exploit savings from the hides of the civil     
   service workforce.                                                      
      The Department has been fostering the notion that they are earnestly 
   devising better methods to perform tasks--the so-called                 
   performance-based and results-based assessments. In reality though,     
   there is no accurate means to account for the type of savings that can  
   be reaped from the re-engineering of work tasks. This means that the    
   only verifiable method that the DoD can employ to immediately show      
   savings, is to contract out hundreds of positions. Systemically, this   
   may be creating a serious problem; the military, it seems, is risking   
   short term savings at the expense of long term readiness.               
      We are not opposed to savings or efficiency. In many instances we    
   recognize the colossal waste in the Pentagon as well as opportunities to
   improve the methods of operating and maintaining our infrastructure.    
   However, what we are opposed to is when readiness and strategic         
   forethought take a back seat to fiscal aggressiveness. We need to think 
   hard when many of the military's rising stars earn Meritorious Service  
   Medals or Legion of Merits because they were able to save $300 million  
   by laying off a thousand employees.                                     
      It is important to remember that the first duty of the military is to
   plan, prepare, fight and win our nation's wars. The military is not a   
   business and thus will not always have a balanced spreadsheet. The      
   Department's accountants cannot place a dollar figure on readiness. That
   is a political and strategic decision that both the Congress and the    
   President must make. We hope that a more prudent and fiscally viable    
   approach to this intractable problem can be brokered out before the     
   Department's civilian workforce readiness erodes any further.           

    Robert A. Underwood.                                                    

    Silvestre Reyes.                                                        

    Neil Abercrombie.                                                       

    Solomon P. Ortiz.                                                       

    Thomas H. Allen.                                                        


                                      ADDITIONAL VIEWS                            

      We regret the Committee's failure to repeal the statutory prohibition
   on abortions in overseas military hospitals. If enacted, women stationed
   overseas would be permitted to use their own funds to obtain abortion   
   services. No federal funds would have been used and health care         
   professionals who are opposed to performing abortions as a matter of    
   conscience or moral principle would not be required to do so.           
      This is an issue of fundamental fairness. Servicewomen and military  
   dependents stationed abroad do not expect special treatment, only the   
   right to receive the same legally protected medical services that women 
   in the United States receive. We had the opportunity to finally put a   
   stop to the misguided law that has endangered our servicewomen's lives  
   for far too long.                                                       
      The Department of Defense, American Public Health Association, the   
   American Medical Women's Association, the American College of           
   Obstetricians and Gynecologists, and the Planned Parenthood Federation  
   of America have all indicated their support for the amendment.          
      If we are to attract the best and brightest of our nation's young    
   people to our Armed Forces we must act to restore this fundamental      
   right. We cannot expect to attain our readiness and recruitment goals   
   when potential soldiers know they will not have the same right to access
   to health care when they are stationed overseas.                        
      It is our responsibility to restore the right of freedom of choice to
   women serving overseas in our nation's Armed Forces. Members of the     
   military and their families already give up many freedoms and risk their
   lives to defend our country. They should not have to sacrifice their    
   privacy, their health or their basic constitutional rights because of a 
   policy with no valid military purpose.                                  

    Loretta Sanchez.                                                        

    Neil Abercrombie.                                                       

    Lane Evans.                                                             

    Patrick J. Kennedy.                                                     

    Thomas H. Allen.                                                        

    Ellen O. Tauscher.                                                      

    Mike Thompson.                                                          

    Adam Smith.                                                             

    Robert E. Andrews.                                                      


                                      ADDITIONAL VIEWS                            

                           Vieques, Puerto Rico                          

      In accordance with the Presidential Directives concerning Vieques,   
   Puerto Rico, federal and local law enforcement officers recently removed
   the peaceful civil demonstrators who had been blocking the Navy's access
   to the bombing range in Vieques.                                        
      As a result of this removal, the Navy has regained control and access
   to the range. In fact, the U.S. Navy warplanes resumed training on the  
   Atlantic Fleet bombing range in Vieques using air-to-ground inert       
   ordnance.                                                               
      We are disappointed that the Committee has amended this sensible     
   framework that could disrupt the process already underway, and further  
   polarize all parties involved. The directives ensure the safety of the  
   disfranchised U.S. citizens of Vieques and provide a sensible framework 
   that allows the Navy to continue its training operations.               
      The year-long peaceful civil disobedience on Vieques evidences the   
   turbulent history between the Navy and the U.S. citizens of Vieques, as 
   well as the overwhelming sentiments of frustration, self worth and      
   neglect by the American citizens of Puerto Rico.                        
      Now that the two parties involved have come to agreement, it is this 
   Committee's responsibility to implement the Presidential Directives. The
   directives offer the most effective resolution to the Vieques ordeal.   
   Namely to respond to the needs and concerns of the American citizens who
   live in Vieques while meeting vital National security needs.            
      The President, the Navy and the Governor of Puerto Rico have all     
   stood by the Presidential Directives. It is now up to the House Armed   
   Services Committee and Congress to guarantee further fulfillment of the 
   Presidential Directives.                                                
   Very truly yours,                                                       

    Loretta Sanchez.                                                        

    Neil Abercrombie.                                                       

    Ike Skelton.                                                            

    Robert Underwood.                                                       

    Robert A. Brady.                                                        

    Patrick J. Kennedy.