[House Report 108-491]
[From the U.S. Government Printing Office]




108th Congress                                                    Report
                         HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES                 
  2d Session                                                      108-491
========================================================================

 
        NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2005

                               ----------                              

                              R E P O R T

                                 OF THE

                      COMMITTEE ON ARMED SERVICES
                        HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                                   ON

                               H.R. 4200

                             together with

                            ADDITIONAL VIEWS

                  [Including committee cost estimate]

                                     

                                     
  May 14, 2004.--Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the 
              State of the Union and ordered to be printed
                                     


108th Congress                                                    Report
                         HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES                 
  2d Session                                                      108-491
========================================================================

        NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2005

                               __________

                              R E P O R T

                                 OF THE

                      COMMITTEE ON ARMED SERVICES

                        HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                                   ON

                               H.R. 4200

                             together with

                            ADDITIONAL VIEWS

                  [Including committee cost estimate]
                                     

                                     
  May 14, 2004.--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 Eighth Congress

                  DUNCAN HUNTER, California, Chairman
CURT WELDON, Pennsylvania            IKE SKELTON, Missouri
JOEL HEFLEY, Colorado                JOHN SPRATT, South Carolina
JIM SAXTON, New Jersey               SOLOMON P. ORTIZ, Texas
JOHN M. McHUGH, New York             LANE EVANS, Illinois
TERRY EVERETT, Alabama               GENE TAYLOR, Mississippi
ROSCOE G. BARTLETT, Maryland         NEIL ABERCROMBIE, Hawaii
HOWARD P. ``BUCK'' McKEON,           MARTY MEEHAN, Massachusetts
    California                       SILVESTRE REYES, Texas
MAC THORNBERRY, Texas                VIC SNYDER, Arkansas
JOHN N. HOSTETTLER, Indiana          JIM TURNER, Texas
WALTER B. JONES, North Carolina      ADAM SMITH, Washington
JIM RYUN, Kansas                     LORETTA SANCHEZ, California
JIM GIBBONS, Nevada                  MIKE McINTYRE, North Carolina
ROBIN HAYES, North Carolina          CIRO D. RODRIGUEZ, Texas
HEATHER WILSON, New Mexico           ELLEN O. TAUSCHER, California
KEN CALVERT, California              ROBERT A. BRADY, Pennsylvania
ROB SIMMONS, Connecticut             BARON P. HILL, Indiana
JO ANN DAVIS, Virginia               JOHN B. LARSON, Connecticut
ED SCHROCK, Virginia                 SUSAN A. DAVIS, California
W. TODD AKIN, Missouri               JAMES R. LANGEVIN, Rhode Island
J. RANDY FORBES, Virginia            STEVE ISRAEL, New York
JEFF MILLER, Florida                 RICK LARSEN, Washington
JOE WILSON, South Carolina           JIM COOPER, Tennessee
FRANK A. LoBIONDO, New Jersey        JIM MARSHALL, Georgia
TOM COLE, Oklahoma                   KENDRICK B. MEEK, Florida
JEB BRADLEY, New Hampshire           MADELEINE Z. BORDALLO, Guam
ROB BISHOP, Utah                     RODNEY ALEXANDER, Louisiana
MICHAEL TURNER, Ohio                 TIM RYAN, Ohio
JOHN KLINE, Minnesota
CANDICE S. MILLER, Michigan
PHIL GINGREY, Georgia
MIKE ROGERS, Alabama
TRENT FRANKS, Arizona
                    Robert S. Rangel, Staff Director



                            C O N T E N T S

                              ----------                              
                                                                   Page

Explanation of the Committee Amendments..........................     1
Purpose..........................................................     2
Relationship of Authorization to Appropriations..................     2
Summary of Authorization in the Bill.............................     2
  Summary Table of Authorizations................................     3
Rationale for the Committee Bill.................................    12
Hearings.........................................................    14

DIVISION A--DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION..................    14

TITLE I--PROCUREMENT.............................................    14
  OVERVIEW.......................................................    14
    Aircraft Procurement, Army...................................    17
      Overview...................................................    17
      Items of Special Interest..................................    20
        Airborne communications..................................    20
        Blackhawk helicopter de-icing system upgrade.............    20
        Cashworthy crew seats....................................    20
        Modern signal processing unit............................    20
    Missile Procurement, Army....................................    21
      Overview...................................................    21
    Weapons and Tracked Combat Vehicles, Army....................    24
      Overview...................................................    24
      Items of Special Interest..................................    28
        Air-droppable, lightweight armored direct fires system...    28
        Armor and vehicle protection kits........................    28
        Bradley fighting vehicle integrated management...........    28
        M1A2 system enhancement package..........................    28
        M777 lightweight 155 millimeter howitzer.................    29
    Ammunition Procurement, Army.................................    29
      Overview...................................................    29
      Items of Special Interest..................................    33
        Ammunition production base upgrades......................    33
        Conventional munitions demilitarization..................    33
    Other Procurement, Army......................................    34
      Overview...................................................    34
      Items of Special Interest..................................    44
        Common system open architecture..........................    44
        Digital soldier..........................................    44
        Distributed common ground system.........................    44
        Logistics support vessel.................................    45
        Physical security systems................................    46
        Movement tracking system.................................    46
        Shortstop electronic protection system...................    46
        Small Tugs...............................................    47
        Tactical unmanned aerial vehicle.........................    47
    Aircraft Procurement, Navy...................................    47
      Overview...................................................    47
      Items of Special Interest..................................    52
        AN/USC-42 miniaturized-demand assigned multiple access 
          terminals..............................................    52
        F/A-18E/F shared reconnaissance pod......................    52
        H-1 series modifications.................................    52
        Joint primary air training system........................    53
        Metrology and calibration program........................    53
        P-3 series modifications.................................    53
        T-45TS and T-48..........................................    54
    Weapons Procurement, Navy....................................    54
      Overview...................................................    54
      Items of Special Interest..................................    58
        Close-in weapon system block 1B..........................    58
        Evolved sea sparrow missile..............................    58
        Hellfire II missile......................................    58
        Pioneer unmanned aerial vehicle..........................    59
        Tomahawk missile.........................................    59
    Ammunition Procurement, Navy & Marine Corps..................    59
      Overview...................................................    59
    Shipbuilding and Conversion, Navy............................    63
      Overview...................................................    63
      Items of Special Interest..................................    66
        Aft ramp range retriever craft...........................    66
        Amphibious assault ship replacement program..............    66
    Other Procurement, Navy......................................    66
      Overview...................................................    66
      Items of Special Interest..................................    75
        Chemical biological defense for aviation and explosive 
          ordnance disposal......................................    75
        Complementary acoustic system improvements...............    75
        CVN replacement propeller program........................    75
        Envelop protective covers................................    76
        Integrated bridge system.................................    76
        Integrated condition assessment system...................    76
        Man overboard identification program.....................    76
        Multi-climate protection clothing system.................    77
        Programmable integrated communications terminal..........    77
        Serial number tracking system............................    77
        Weapons elevator automation..............................    77
    Procurement, Marine Corps....................................    78
      Overview...................................................    78
      Items of Special Interest..................................    84
        Assault breacher vehicle.................................    84
        Improved recovery vehicle................................    84
        Marines global command and control systems and integrated 
          imagery and intelligence analysis system...............    84
        Nitrile rubber collapsible storage units.................    84
    Aircraft Procurement, Air Force..............................    85
      Overview...................................................    85
      Items of Special Interest..................................    91
        Advanced targeting pod...................................    91
        B-1B modifications.......................................    91
        C-5 modifications........................................    92
        C-17.....................................................    92
        C-17 maintenance training system.........................    92
        C-130E engine upgrades...................................    93
        F-15 modifications.......................................    93
        F-16 air national guard force structure..................    93
        F-16 modifications.......................................    94
        KC-767 aerial refueling tanker aircraft..................    94
        Predator unmanned aerial vehicle.........................    96
        Senior scout permanent carrier...........................    96
        T-38 modifications.......................................    96
    Ammunition Procurement, Air Force............................    97
      Overview...................................................    97
    Missile Procurement, Air Force...............................    99
      Overview...................................................    99
      Items of Special Interest..................................   103
        Advanced extremely high frequency satellite..............   103
        Evolved expendable launch vehicle........................   103
    Other Procurement, Air Force.................................   103
      Overview...................................................   103
      Items of Special Interest..................................   110
        Combat training ranges...................................   110
        Advanced compression of tactical sensor information......   110
        Fixed aircrew standardized seats.........................   110
        General information technology...........................   110
        Point of maintenance and combat ammunition system 
          initiative.............................................   111
    Procurement, Defense-Wide....................................   111
      Overview...................................................   111
      Items of Special Interest..................................   117
        Chemical agents and munitions destruction................   117
        Chemical and biological defense procurement program......   118
        Countering improvised explosive devices..................   119
        Guard and Reserve equipment..............................   119
        Indexing of class A mishaps..............................   119
        Joint threat work station, ground signals intelligence 
          kits...................................................   120
        Military specifications for radomes......................   120
        Special Operations Forces binocular goggle system........   120
        Special Operations Forces MH-47 infrared engine exhaust 
          suppressor.............................................   121
        Use of capability-based acquisition......................   121
  LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS.........................................   122
    Subtitle A--Authorization of Appropriations..................   122
      Sections 101-104--Authorization of Appropriations..........   122
    Subtitle B--Program Matters..................................   122
      Section 111--Multiyear procurement authority for the M777 
        lightweight 155mm howitzer program.......................   122
      Section 112--DDG-51 Modernization Program..................   122
      Section 113--Repeal of Authority for Pilot Program for 
        Flexible Funding of Cruiser Conversions and Overhauls....   124
      Section 114--Force Protection for Asymmetric Threat 
        Environment..............................................   124
      Section 115--Allocation of Equipment Authorized by this 
        Title to be Made on Basis of Units Deployed or Preparing 
        to Deploy................................................   124
      Section 116--KC-767 Tanker Multiyear Procurement...........   124
      Section 117--Other Matters Relating to KC-767 Tanker 
        Acquisition Program......................................   125

TITLE II--RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST, AND EVALUATION............   125
  OVERVIEW.......................................................   125
    Army Research, Development, Test, & Evaluation...............   129
      Overview...................................................   129
      Items of Special Interest..................................   140
        Advanced amputee treatment research and development......   140
        Advanced battery technology initiative...................   140
        Advanced carbon nano technology..........................   141
        Advanced weapons technology..............................   141
        Aerostat joint project office............................   141
        Applied communications and information networking........   142
        Center for rotorcraft innovation.........................   142
        Center for tribology.....................................   143
        Centers of excellence....................................   143
        Combat vehicle electronics...............................   143
        Defense language institute/foreign language center.......   143
        Digital array radar technology development...............   144
        Electronic flight planning...............................   144
        Flexible display initiative..............................   144
        Force XXI battle command brigade and below blue force 
          tracking system........................................   145
        Future combat systems....................................   145
        Geospatial information decision support for single 
          integrated air picture.................................   145
        Human systems integration................................   146
        Hydrogen proton exchange membrane........................   146
        Information dominance center.............................   147
        Institute for creative technologies......................   147
        Integrated communications navigation identification 
          avionics program.......................................   147
        Joint and combined communications test tool product suite   148
        JP-8 soldier fuel cell...................................   148
        LEAN munitions...........................................   148
        Light unmanned aerial vehicle weaponization..............   148
        Light utility vehicle....................................   149
        Lightweight structures initiative........................   149
        Low cost course correction...............................   149
        M5 high performance fiber for personnel armor systems....   149
        Medical technology applied research initiative...........   150
          Clinical research programs.............................   150
        Medium tactical truck development........................   151
        Miniature sensor development for small and tactical 
          unmanned aerial vehicles...............................   151
        Modeling and analysis of the response of structures......   151
        Night vision fusion......................................   151
        Patient monitor with defibrillator.......................   152
        Portable and mobile emergency broadband system...........   152
        Shadow tactical unmanned aerial vehicle..................   152
        Smart responsive nanocomposites..........................   152
        Space and missile defense architecture analysis program..   153
        Strategic materials strategic manufacturing initiative...   153
        Titanium alloy powder....................................   153
        Titanium extraction, mining, and process engineering 
          research...............................................   153
        Unmanned systems initiative..............................   153
    Navy Research, Development, Test & Evaluation................   154
      Overview...................................................   154
      Items of Special Interest..................................   166
        Advanced composite structures program....................   166
        Advanced gun system for DD(X) multi-mission destroyer....   166
        Advanced laser diode arrays..............................   166
        Advanced mine detection program..........................   167
        Advanced processor build integration.....................   167
        Aegis open architecture..................................   167
        Affordable towed array construction......................   168
        Affordable weapon system.................................   168
        Airborne mine neutralization system......................   169
        Airborne reconnaissance systems..........................   169
        AN/BLQ-10 test and support...............................   170
        Anti-torpedo torpedo.....................................   170
        Automatic radar periscope detection and discrimination...   170
        Aviation ship integration center.........................   171
        Aviation shipboard information technology initiative.....   171
        Biomedical research imaging..............................   172
        Center for critical infrastructure protection............   172
        Claymore marine..........................................   172
        Common submarine radio room..............................   172
        Composite ceramic unmanned underwater vehicle............   173
        Consolidated undersea situational awareness..............   173
        DD(X) multi-mission destroyer............................   174
        Deployable joint command and control.....................   175
        Digital modular radio....................................   176
        DP-2 thrust vectoring system.............................   176
        Electromagnetic gun program..............................   176
        Embedded national tactical receiver integration with 
          advanced anti-radiation guided missile.................   177
        Emerging/critical interconnection technology.............   177
        Enterprise resource planning.............................   178
        Enterprise targeting and strike system...................   178
        Evolved sea sparrow missile capability for large decks...   178
        Formable aligned carbon thermosets.......................   179
        Gallium nitride radio-frequency power technology.........   179
        Hemoglobin-based oxygen carrier..........................   180
        High temperature superconducting AC synchronous ship 
          propulsion motor.......................................   180
        Hybrid POSS composites development.......................   181
        Integrated personnel protection system...................   181
        Integrated radar optical surveillance and sighting system   181
        Intermediate modulus carbon fiber qualification..........   182
        Interrogator for high-speed retro-reflective 
          communications.........................................   182
        Joint integrated systems technology......................   183
        Joint Strike Fighter.....................................   183
        Laser radar data exploitation............................   183
        Littoral combat ship.....................................   184
        Littoral support craft-experimental......................   185
        Low acoustic signature motor/propulsor...................   185
        Low-cost terminal imaging seeker.........................   186
        Low-power mega-performance unmanned aerial vehicle 
          processing engines.....................................   186
        Marine mammal research program...........................   186
        Nanoscience and nanomaterials............................   187
        One megawatt molten carbonate fuel cell demonstrator.....   187
        Open architecture warfare systems........................   187
        Open architecture wireless sensors.......................   188
        Organ transplant technology..............................   188
        Project M................................................   189
        Rapid deployment fortification wall......................   189
        Real-time precision targeting radar......................   189
        Reduced risk ordnance....................................   190
        Remote ocean surveillance system.........................   190
        Ship system component development........................   191
        Spectral beam combining fiber lasers.....................   191
        Submarine payloads and sensors program...................   191
        Superconducting direct current homopolar motor...........   192
        Tactical E-field buoy development........................   192
        Task force anti-submarine warfare........................   192
        Theater undersea warfare initiative......................   193
        Ultrasonic detection equipment...........................   193
        VH-XX executive helicopter development...................   194
        Virginia class multi-mission modules.....................   194
        Virtual at-sea training initiative.......................   195
        Wide band gap semiconductor power electronics............   195
    Air Force Research, Development, Test, & Evaluation..........   195
      Overview...................................................   195
      Items of Special Interest..................................   206
        Advanced vehicle and propulsion center and engineering 
          research lab equipment upgrade.........................   206
        Advanced wideband signals intelligence geo-processor.....   206
        B-2 development..........................................   206
        Blue MAJIC...............................................   207
        Cobra Ball...............................................   207
        Combat optical receiver for smart and loitering standoff 
          weapons................................................   207
        Collaborative information technologies...................   208
        Common aero vehicle......................................   208
        Defensive electro-optical tracker countermeasures 
          technologies...........................................   208
        Distributed mission interoperability toolkit.............   208
        Enterprise availability and cost optimization system.....   208
        F-15C/D active electronically scanned array radar........   209
        Global Hawk United States Southern Command demonstration.   209
        Global positioning system................................   210
        High accuracy network determination system...............   210
        Identification of time critical targets..................   210
        Integrated cooling and power system magnetic bearing 
          technology.............................................   211
        Integrated control for autonomous space systems..........   211
        Intelligent free space optical satellite communication 
          node...................................................   211
        Joint surveillance target attack radar system blue force 
          tracking and combat identification.....................   211
        KC-10 global air traffic management development..........   212
        Lightweight modular support jammer.......................   212
        Metals affordability.....................................   212
        Next generation bomber program...........................   213
        Operationally responsive launch..........................   213
        Satellite simulation toolkit.............................   214
        Satellite tool kit technical integration concept of 
          operations for tactical satellite......................   214
        Space-based infrared system..............................   214
        Space-based radar........................................   215
        Space cadre..............................................   215
        Space situational awareness initiative...................   215
        Streaker small launch vehicle............................   215
        Transformational satellite communications................   216
        Ultra short pulse laser technology.......................   216
        Upper stage engine technology............................   216
        Wideband gapfiller system................................   216
        Worldwide infrastructure security environment............   217
    Defense-Wide Research, Development, Test, & Evaluation.......   217
      Overview...................................................   217
      Items of Special Interest..................................   228
        Accelerating transition and fielding of advanced 
          technologies for emerging critical operational needs...   228
        Advanced metal casting technology........................   229
        Advanced sensor applications program.....................   229
        Advanced tactical laser program..........................   229
        Anti-radiation drug and trials program...................   230
        Asymmetric protocols for biological defense..............   230
        Ballistic missile defense................................   231
          Advanced concepts......................................   231
          Boost defense segment..................................   231
          Core...................................................   231
          Midcourse defense segment..............................   232
          Post Ramos Project.....................................   232
          Products...............................................   232
          Sensors................................................   232
          System interceptor.....................................   233
          Technology.............................................   234
          Terminal defense segment...............................   234
        Business management modernization program................   234
        Chemical/biological defense research, development, test 
            and evaluation program...............................   235
          Accelerating the research, development, and acquisition 
            of medical countermeasures against biological warfare 
            agents...............................................   235
          Chemical/biological defense basic research initiative..   236
          Chemical/biological defense applied research initiative   237
          Chemical/biological defense advanced technology 
            development initiative...............................   237
          Joint biological point detection system................   237
          Joint service lightweight standoff chemical agent 
            detector.............................................   237
        Connectory for rapid identification of technology 
          resources..............................................   238
        Counter-terrorism technology support.....................   238
        Defense advanced research projects agency................   238
        Defense science and technology funding...................   240
        Expanding the role of small businesses in the defense 
          acquisition process....................................   241
        High-speed/hypersonic reusable demonstration.............   242
        Horizontal fusion........................................   242
        Implementation of defense biomedical countermeasures.....   243
        Man portable air defense system defense program..........   243
        Measures and signatures intelligence consortium..........   244
        Medical free electron laser..............................   244
        Multi-wavelength surface scanning biologics sensor.......   244
        National Defense University technology pilot program.....   245
        Nuclear weapons effects applied research.................   245
        Operationally responsive satellite.......................   246
        Smart machine platform initiative........................   246
        Space and missile defense command simulation center......   246
        Special operations advanced technology development.......   247
        Special operations technology development................   247
        Stimulated isomer energy release.........................   248
        Tasking, processing, exploitation, and dissemination of 
          SYERS-2 data...........................................   248
        Use of research and development funds to procure systems.   248
        Walrus...................................................   249
    Operational Test and Evaluation, Defense.....................   250
      Overview...................................................   250
  LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS.........................................   252
    Subtitle A--Authorization of Appropriations..................   252
      Section 201--Authorization of Appropriations...............   252
      Section 202--Amount for Defense Science and Technology.....   252
    Subtitle B--Program Requirements, Restrictions, and 
      Limitations................................................   252
      Section 211--Future Combat Systems Program Strategy........   252
      Section 212--Collaborative Program for Research and 
        Development of Vacuum Electronics Technologies...........   253
      Section 213--Annual Comptroller General Report on Joint 
        Strike Fighter Program...................................   254
      Section 214--Amounts for United States Joint Forces Command 
        to be Derived Only from Defense-wide Amounts.............   254
      Section 215--Authority of Director of Defense Research and 
        Engineering to Award Prizes for Advanced Technology 
        Achievements.............................................   255
      Section 216--Space Based Radar.............................   255
      Section 217--Mark-54 Torpedo Product Improvement Program...   255
    Subtitle C--Ballistic Missile Defense........................   255
      Section 221--Fielding of Ballistic Missile Defense 
        Capabilities.............................................   255

TITLE III--OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE.............................   256
  OVERVIEW.......................................................   256
  ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST......................................   290
    Budget Request Adjustments--Readiness........................   290
      Commercial Technologies for Maintenance Activities.........   291
      Mid-Range Financial Improvement Plan.......................   291
      Paralyzed Veterans of America..............................   291
      Spare Engines..............................................   291
      Working Capital Funds......................................   292
    Information Technology Issues................................   292
      Overview...................................................   292
      Information Technology Specific Reductions.................   293
        Enterprise Resource Planning Program--Army National Guard   294
        Nationwide Dedicated Fiber Optic Network.................   294
      Navy Marine Corps Intranet.................................   295
    Other Matters................................................   295
      Core Logistics Capability..................................   295
      Fire Emergency and Services Program........................   296
      Jinapsan Beach Properties in Guam..........................   296
      Moving Household Goods--Families First.....................   296
      New Mexico Training Range Initiative.......................   297
      Tents......................................................   297
  LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS.........................................   297
    Subtitle A--Authorization of Appropriations..................   297
      Section 301--Operation and Maintenance Funding.............   297
      Section 302--Working Capital Funds.........................   297
      Section 303--Other Department of Defense Programs..........   297
      Section 304--Reimbursement of Members of the Armed Forces 
        Who Purchased Protective Body Armor during Shortage of 
        Defense Stocks of Body Armor.............................   297
    Subtitle B--Environmental Provisions.........................   298
      Section 311--Report Regarding Encroachment Issues Affecting 
        Utah Test and Training Range, Utah.......................   298
    Subtitle C--Workplace and Depot Issues.......................   298
      Section 321--Simplification of Annual Reporting 
        Requirements Concerning Funds Expended for Depot 
        Maintenance and Repair Workloads.........................   298
      Section 322--Repeal of Annual Reporting Requirement 
        Concerning Management of Depot Employees.................   298
      Section 323--Public-Private Competition for Work Performed 
        by Civilian Employees of Department of Defense...........   298
      Section 324--Public-Private Competition Pilot Program......   299
      Section 325--Sense of Congress on Equitable Legal Standing 
        for Civilian Employees...................................   299
      Section 326--Competitive Sourcing Reporting Requirement....   299
    Subtitle D--Information Technology...........................   300
      Section 331--Preparation of Department of Defense Plan for 
        Transition to Internet Protocol Version 6................   300
      Section 332--Defense Business Enterprise Architecture, 
        System Accountability, and Conditions for Obligation of 
        Funds for Defense Business System Modernization..........   300
      Section 333--Establishment of Joint Program Office to 
        Improve Interoperability of Battlefield Management 
        Command and Control Systems..............................   301
    Subtitle E--Readiness Reporting Requirements.................   301
      Section 341--Annual Report on Department of Defense 
        Operation and Financial Support for Military Museums.....   301
      Section 342--Report on Department of Defense Programs for 
        Prepositioning of Material and Equipment.................   302
    Subtitle F--Other Matters....................................   302
      Section 351--Extension of the Arsenal Support Program 
        Initiative...............................................   302
      Section 352--Limitation on Preparation or Implementation of 
        Mid-Range Financial Improvement Plan.....................   302
      Section 353--Procurement of Follow-On Contracts for the 
        Operation of Five Champion-Class T-5 Tank Vessels........   303
      Section 354--Sense of Congress on America's National World 
        War I Museum.............................................   303

TITLE IV--MILITARY PERSONNEL AUTHORIZATIONS......................   303
  ITEM OF SPECIAL INTEREST.......................................   303
      Study of High Demand Low Density Military Units and 
        Personnel................................................   303
  LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS.........................................   304
    Subtitle A--Active Forces....................................   304
      Section 401--End Strengths for Active Forces...............   304
      Section 402--Revision in Permanent Active Duty End Strength 
        Minimum Levels...........................................   304
      Section 403--Maximum Number of Reserve Personnel Authorized 
        to be on Active Duty for Operational Support.............   304
      Section 404--Accounting and Mangement of Reserve Component 
        Personnel Performing Active Duty or Full-Time National 
        Guard Duty for Operations Support........................   304
    Subtitle B--Reserve Forces...................................   305
      Section 411--End Strengths for Selected Reserve............   305
      Section 412--End Strengths for Reserves on Active Duty in 
        Support of the Reserves..................................   305
      Section 413--End Strengths for Military Technicians (Dual 
        Status)..................................................   306
      Section 414--Fiscal Year 2005 Limitation on Number of Non-
        Dual Satus Technicians...................................   306
    Subtitle C--Authorization of Appropriations..................   306
      Section 421--Military Personnel............................   306
      Section 422--Armed Forces Retirement Home..................   307
TITLE V--MILITARY PERSONNEL POLICY...............................   307
  OVERVIEW.......................................................   307
  ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST......................................   308
      Civilianization or Contracting Out of Military Chaplain 
        Positions................................................   308
      Curricula for Post-conflict Resolution.....................   308
      Federal Voting Assistance Program..........................   308
      Joint Advertising and Market Research......................   309
      Meeting Department of Defense Requirements for Personnel 
        with Foreign Language and Regional Expertise.............   310
      National Program for Citizen Soldier Support...............   310
  LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS.........................................   311
    Subtitle A--General and Flag Officer Matters.................   311
      Section 501--Length of Service for Service Chiefs..........   311
      Section 502--Repeal of Requirement that Deputy Chiefs and 
        Assistant Chiefs of Naval Operations Be Selected from 
        Officers in the Line of the Navy.........................   311
      Section 503--Increase in Age Limit for Deferral of 
        Mandatory Retirement for Up to 10 Senior General and Flag 
        Officers.................................................   311
      Section 504--Increased Flexibility for Voluntary Retirement 
        for Military Officers....................................   311
      Section 505--Repeal of Requirement that No More than 50 
        Percent of Active Duty General and Flag Officers be in 
        Grades Above Brigadier General and Rear Admiral (Lower 
        Half)....................................................   312
      Section 506--Revision to Terms for Assistants to the 
        Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff for National Guard 
        and Reserve Matters......................................   312
      Section 507--Succession for Position of Chief, National 
        Guard Bureau.............................................   312
      Section 508--Title of Vice Chief of the National Guard 
        Bureau Changed to Director of the Joint Staff of the 
        National Guard Bureau....................................   312
      Section 509--Two-Year Extension of Authority to Waive 
        Requirement that Reserve Chiefs and National Guard 
        Directors Have Significant Joint Duty Experience.........   313
      Section 510--Repeal of Distribution Requirements for Naval 
        Reserve Flag Officers....................................   313
    Subtitle B--Other Officer Personnel Policy Matters...........   313
      Section 511--Transition of the Active-Duty List Officer 
        Force to All Regular Status..............................   313
      Section 512--Mandatory Retention on Active duty to Qualify 
        for Retired Pay..........................................   313
      Section 513--Distribution in Grade of Marine Corps Reserve 
        Officers in an Active Status in Grades Below Brigadier 
        General..................................................   314
      Section 514--Tuition Assistance for Officers...............   314
    Subtitle C--Reserve Component Matters........................   314
      Section 521--Revision to Statutory Purpose of the Reserve 
        Components...............................................   314
      Section 522--Improved Access to Reserve Component Members 
        for Enhanced Training....................................   314
      Section 523--Status Under Disability Retirement System for 
        Reserve Members Released from Active Duty Due to 
        Inability to Perform within 30 Days of Call to Active 
        Duty.....................................................   315
      Section 524--Federal Civil Service Military Leave for 
        Reserve and National Guard Civilian Technicians..........   315
      Section 525--Expanded Educational Assistance Authority for 
        Officers Commissioned Through ROTC Program at Military 
        Junior College...........................................   315
      Section 526--Effect of Appointment or Commission as Officer 
        on Eligibility for Selected Reserve Education Loan 
        Repayment Program for Enlisted Members...................   315
      Section 527--Number of Starbase Academies in a State.......   315
      Section 528--Comptroller General Assessment of Integration 
        of Active and Reserve Components of the Navy.............   315
      Section 529--Operational Activities Conducted by the 
        National Guard Under Authority of Title 32...............   316
      Section 530--Army Program for Assignment of Active 
        Component Advisers to Units of the Selected Reserve......   316
    Subtitle D--Joint Officer Management.........................   316
      Section 531--Strategic Plan to Link Joint Officer 
        Development to Overall Missions and Goals of Department 
        of Defense...............................................   316
      Section 532--Joint Requirements for Promotion to Flag or 
        General Officer Grade....................................   317
      Section 533--Clarification of Tours of Duty Qualifying as a 
        Joint Duty Assignment....................................   317
      Section 534--Reserve Joint Special Officer Qualifications..   317
    Subtitle E--Professional Military Education..................   318
      Section 541--Improvement to Professional Military Education 
        in the Department of Defense.............................   318
      Section 542--Ribbons to Recognize Completion of Joint 
        Professional Military Education..........................   319
      Section 543--Increase in Number of Private-Sector Civilians 
        Who May Be Enrolled for Instruction at National Defense 
        University...............................................   319
      Section 544--Requirement for Completion of Phase I Joint 
        Professional Military Education before Promotion to 
        Colonel or Navy Captain..................................   320
    Subtitle F--Other Education and Training Matters.............   320
      Section 551--College First Delayed Enlistment Program......   320
      Section 552--Standardization of Authority to Confer Degrees 
        on Graduates of Community College of the Air Force with 
        Authority for Other Schools of Air University............   320
      Section 553--Change in Titles of Heads of the Naval 
        Postgraduate School......................................   320
      Section 554--Increase from Two Years to Three Years in 
        Period for which Educational Leave of Absence May Be 
        Authorized...............................................   320
      Section 555--Correction to Disparate Treatment of 
        Disabilities Sustained During Accession Training.........   320
      Section 556--Prayer at Military Service Academy Activities.   321
      Section 557--Revision to Conditions on Service of Officers 
        as Service Academy Superintendents.......................   321
      Section 558--Codification of Prohibition on Imposition of 
        Certain Charges and Fees at Service Academies............   321
      Section 559--Qualifications of the Dean of the Faculty of 
        United States Air Force Academy..........................   321
    Subtitle G--Medals and Decorations and Special Promotions and 
      Appointments...............................................   322
      Section 561--Separate Military Campaign Medals to Recognize 
        Service in Operation Enduring Freedom and Service in 
        Operation Iraqi Freedom..................................   322
      Section 562--Eligibility of All Uniformed Services 
        Personnel for National Defense Service Medal.............   322
      Section 563--Authority to Appoint Brigadier General Charles 
        E. Yeager, United States Air Force (retired), to the 
        Grade of Major General on the Retired List...............   322
      Section 564--Posthumous Commission of William Mitchell in 
        the Grade of Major General in the Army...................   322
    Subtitle H--Military Justice Matters.........................   322
      Section 571--Review on How Sexual Offenses Are Covered by 
        Uniformed Code of Military Justice.......................   322
      Section 572--Service Time Not Lost When Confined in 
        Connection with Trial if Confinement Excused as 
        Unavoidable..............................................   322
      Section 573--Clarification of Authority of Military Legal 
        Assistance Counsel to Provide Military Legal Assistance 
        without Regard to Licensing Requirements.................   323
    Subtitle I--Administrative and Management Matters............   323
      Section 581--Three-Year Extension of Limitation on 
        Reductions of Personnel of Agencies Responsible for 
        Review and Correction of Military Records................   323
      Section 582--Staffing and Funding for Defense Prisoner of 
        War/Missing Personnel Office.............................   323
      Section 583--Permanent ID Cards for Retiree Dependents Age 
        70 and Older.............................................   324
      Section 584--Authority to Provide Civilian Clothing to 
        Members Traveling in Connection with Medical Evacuation..   324
      Section 585--Authority to Accept Donation of Frequent Flyer 
        Miles, Credits, and Tickets to Facilitate Rest and 
        Recuperation Travel of Deployed Members of the Armed 
        Forces and Their Families................................   324
      Section 586--Limitation on Amendment or Cancellation of 
        Department of Defense Directive Relating to Reasonable 
        Access to Military Installations for Certain Personal 
        Commercial Solicitation..................................   324
      Section 587--Annual Identification of Reasons for 
        Discharges from the Armed Services During Preceding 
        Fiscal Years.............................................   324
      Section 588--Authority for Federal Recognition of National 
        Guard Commissioned Officers Appointed from Former Coast 
        Guard Personnel..........................................   325
      Section 589--Study of Blended Wing Concept for the Air 
        Force....................................................   325
      Section 590--Continuation of Impact Aid Assistance on 
        Behalf of Dependents of Certain Members Despite Change in 
        Status of Member.........................................   325
    Subtitle J--Other Matters....................................
      Section 591--Employment Preferences for Spouses of Certain 
        Department of Defense Civilian Employees Subject to 
        Relocation Agreements....................................   325
      Section 592--Repeal of Requirement to Conduct Electronic 
        Voting Demonstration Project for the Federal Election to 
        be Held in November 2004.................................   326
      Section 593--Examination of Sexual Assault in the Armed 
        Forces by the Defense Task Force Established to Examine 
        Sexual Harassment and Violence at the Military Service 
        Academies................................................   326
      Section 594--Renewal of Pilot Program for Treating GED and 
        Home School Diploma Recipients as High School Graduates 
        for Determinations of Eligibility for Enlistment.........   326
      Section 595--Assistance to Local Educational Agencies that 
        Benefit Dependents of Members of the Armed Forces and 
        Department of Defense Civilian Employees.................   327
      Section 596--Senior Reserve Officer Training Corps and 
        Recruiter Access at Institutions of Higher Education.....   327
      Section 597--Reports on Transformation Milestones..........   327

TITLE VI--COMPENSATION AND OTHER PERSONNEL BENEFITS..............   327
  OVERVIEW.......................................................   327
  ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST......................................   328
      Combat-Related Special Compensation........................   328
      Commissary Funding After Closure of a Store................   328
      Consolidation of the Military Exchanges....................   328
      Homestead Air Reserve Base, Florida, Combined Commissary 
        and Exchange Store.......................................   329
  LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS.........................................   329
    Subtitle A--Pay and Allowances...............................   329
      Section 601--Increase in Basic Pay for Fiscal Year 2005....   329
      Section 602--Authority to Provide Family Separation Basic 
        Allowance for Housing....................................   329
      Section 603--Geographic Basis for Basic Allowance for 
        Housing during Short Changes of Station for Professional 
        Military Education or Training...........................   329
      Section 604--Immediate Lump-Sum Reimbursement for Unusual 
        Nonrecurring Expenses Incurred by Members Serving Outside 
        Continental United States................................   330
      Section 605--Income Replacement Payments for Reserves 
        Experiencing Extended and Frequent Mobilization for 
        Active Duty Service......................................   330
      Section 606--Authority for Certain Members Deployed in 
        Combat Zones to Receive Limited Advances on Their Future 
        Base Pay.................................................   330
    Subtitle B--Bonuses and Special and Incentive Pays...........   330
      Section 611--One-Year Extension of Bonus and Special Pay 
        Authorities..............................................   330
      Section 612--Reduction in Required Service Commitment to 
        Receive Accession Bonus for Registered Nurses............   331
      Section 613--Increase in Maximum Monthly Rate Authorized 
        for Hardship Duty Pay....................................   331
      Section 614--Termination of Assignment Incentive Pay for 
        Members Placed on Terminal Leave.........................   331
      Section 615--Consolidation of Reenlistment and Enlistment 
        Bonus Authorities for Regular and Reserve Components.....   331
      Section 616--Revision of Authority to Provide Foreign 
        Language Proficiency Pay.................................   331
      Section 617--Eligibility of Reserve Component Members for 
        Critical Skills Retention Bonus and Expansion of 
        Authority to Provide Bonus...............................   332
      Section 618--Eligibility of New Reserve Component Officers 
        for Accession or Affiliation Bonus for Officers in 
        Critical Skills..........................................   332
      Section 619--Eligibility of Reserve Component Members for 
        Incentive Bonus for Conversion to Military Occupational 
        Specialty to Ease Personnel Shortage.....................   332
      Section 620--Availability of Hazardous Duty Incentive Pay 
        for Military Firefighters................................   332
    Subtitle C--Travel and Transportation Allowance..............   332
      Section 631--Expansion of Travel and Transportation 
        Allowances to Assist Survivors of a Deceased Member to 
        Attend Burial Ceremony of the Member.....................   332
      Section 632--Transportation of Family Members Incident to 
        the Serious Illness or Injury of Members of the Uniformed 
        Services.................................................   332
      Section 633--Reimbursement of Members for Certain Lodging 
        Costs Incurred in Connection with Student Dependent 
        Travel...................................................   333
    Subtitle D--Survivors Benefits...............................   333
      Section 641--Computation of Benefits Under Survivor Benefit 
        Plan for Surviving Spouses Over Age 62...................   333
      Section 642--Open Enrollment Period for Survivor Benefit 
        Plan Commencing October 1, 2005..........................   333
      Section 643--Source of Funds for Survivor Benefit Plan 
        Annuities for Department of Defense Beneficiaries Over 
        Age 62...................................................   333
    Subtitle E--Commissary and Nonappropriated Fund 
      Instrumentality Benefits...................................   333
      Section 651--Consolidation and Reorganization of 
        Legislative Provisions Regarding Defense Commissary 
        System and Exchanges and other Morale, Welfare, and 
        Recreational Activities..................................   333
      Section 652--Consistent State Treatment of Department of 
        Defense Nonappropriated Fund Health Benefits Program.....   334
      Section 653--Cooperation and Assistance for Qualified 
        Scouting Organizations Serving Dependents of Members of 
        the Armed Forces and Civilian Employees Overseas.........   334
    Subtitle F--Other Matters....................................   335
      Section 661--Repeal of Requirement that Members Entitled to 
        Basic Allowance for Subsistence Pay Subsistence Charges 
        while Hospitalized.......................................   335
      Section 662--Clarification of Education Loans Qualifying 
        for Education Loan Repayment Program for Reserve 
        Component Health Professions Officers....................   335
      Section 663--Survey and Analysis of Effect of Extended and 
        Frequent Mobilization of Reservists for Active Duty 
        Service on Reservist Income..............................   335

TITLE VII--HEALTHCARE MATTERS....................................   335
  OVERVIEW.......................................................   335
  ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST......................................   336
      Collection of Perinatal Information........................   336
      Coordination of TRICARE and Medicare Benefits and Provider 
        Payments.................................................   336
      Department of Defense Chemical and Biological Test Review..   337
      Landstuhl Regional Medical Center Alteration...............   337
      Military-Civilian Education Programs Related to Sexual 
        Health Decision-Making...................................   338
      Nurse Triage and Health Information Line Services..........   338
      Reserve Component Requirement for Medical and Dental 
        Readiness Accountability.................................   339
      Resource Sharing Agreements................................   339
      State-of-the-Art Mobility Equipment........................   339
  LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS.........................................   339
    Subtitle A--Enhanced Health Care Benefits for Reserves.......   339
      Section 701--Demonstration Project for TRICARE Coverage for 
        Ready Reserve Members....................................   339
      Section 702--Comptroller General Report on the Cost and 
        Feasibility of Providing Private Health Insurance 
        Stipends for Members of the Ready Reserve................   340
      Section 703--Improvement of Medical Services for Activated 
        Members of the Ready Reserve and Their Families..........   340
      Section 704--Modification of Waiver of Certain Deductibles 
        Under TRICARE Program....................................   340
      Section 705--Authority for Payment by United States of 
        Additional Amounts Billed by Health Care Providers to 
        Activated Reserve Members................................   340
      Section 706--Extension of Transitional Health Care Benefits 
        After Separation from Active Duty........................   341
    Subtitle B--Other Benefits Improvements......................   341
      Section 711--Coverage of Certain Young Children Under 
        TRICARE Dental Program...................................   341
      Section 712--Comptroller General Report on Provision of 
        Health and Support Services for Exceptional Family Member 
        Program Enrollees........................................   341
      Section 713--Exceptional Eligibility for TRICARE Prime 
        Remote...................................................   342
      Section 714--Transition to Home Health Care Benefit Under 
        Sub-acute Care Program...................................   342
      Section 715--Requirement Relating to Prescription Drug 
        Benefits for Medicare-Eligible Enrollees Under Defense 
        Health Care Plans........................................   342
      Section 716--Professional Accreditation of Military 
        Dentists.................................................   342
      Section 717--Addition of Certain Unremarried Former Spouses 
        to Persons Eligible for Dental Insurance Plan of Retirees 
        of the Uniformed Services................................   342
      Section 718--Waiver of Collection of Payments Due from 
        Certain Persons Unaware of Loss of CHAMPUS Eligibility...   343
    Subtitle C--Planning, Programming, and Management............   343
      Section 721--Pilot Program for Transformation of Health 
        Care Delivery............................................   343
      Section 722--Study of Provision of Travel Reimbursement to 
        Hospitals for Certain Military Disability Retirees.......   343

TITLE VIII--ACQUISITION POLICY, ACQUISITION MANAGEMENT, AND 
    RELATED MATTERS..............................................   344
  LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS.........................................   344
    Subtitle A--Amendments to General Contracting Authorities, 
        Procedures, and Limitations..............................   344
      Section 801--Rapid Acquisition Authority to Respond to 
        Combat Emergencies.......................................   344
      Section 802--Defense Acquisition Workforce Changes.........   344
      Section 803--Limitation on Task and Delivery Order 
        Contracts................................................   344
      Section 804--Funding for Contract Cancellation Ceilings for 
        Certain Multiyear Procurement Contracts..................   344
      Section 805--Increased Threshold for Requiring Contractors 
        to Provide Specified Employee Information to Cooperative 
        Agreement Holders........................................   345
      Section 806--Extension of Authority for Use of Simplified 
        Acquisition Procedures...................................   345
      Section 807--Authority to Adjust Acquisition-Related Dollar 
        Thresholds for Inflation.................................   345
    Subtitle B--United States Defense Industrial Base Provisions.   345
      Section 811--Defense Reciprocity Trade.....................   345
      Section 812--Amendments to Domestic Source Requirements....   346
      Section 813--Three-Year Extension of Restriction on 
        Acquisition of Polyacrylonitrile (PAN) Carbon Fiber from 
        Foreign Sources..........................................   346
      Section 814--Grant Program for Defense Contractors to 
        Implement Strategies to Avoid Outsourcing of Jobs........   346
      Section 815--Preference for Domestic Freight Forwarding 
        Services.................................................   346
    Subtitle C--Other Acquisition Matters........................   346
      Section 821--Sustainment and Modernization Plans for 
        Existing Systems while Replacement Systems are Under 
        Development..............................................   346
      Section 822--Review and Demonstration Project Relating to 
        Contractor Employees.....................................   347
      Section 823--Defense Acquisition Workforce Limitation and 
        Reports..................................................   348
      Section 824--Provision of Information to Congress to 
        Enhance Transparency in Contracting......................   348

TITLE IX--DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE ORGANIZATION AND MANAGEMENT......   348
  ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST......................................   348
      National Defense University................................   348
  LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS.........................................   348
      Section 901--Change in Title of Secretary of the Navy to 
        Secretary of the Navy and Marine Corps...................   348
      Section 902--Transfer of Center for the Study of Chinese 
        Military Affairs from National Defense University to 
        United States-China Economic and Security Review 
        Commission...............................................   348
      Section 903--Transfer to the Secretary of the Army of 
        Responsibility for Assembled Chemical Weapons 
        Alternatives Program.....................................   349
      Section 904--Modification of Obligated Service Requirements 
        under National Security Education Program................   350
      Section 905--Change of Membership of Certain Councils......   350
      Section 906--Actions to Prevent the Abuse of Detainees.....   350
      Section 907--Responses to Congressional Inquiries..........   350

TITLE X--GENERAL PROVISIONS......................................   351
  ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST......................................   351
    Counter-Drug Activities......................................   351
      Overview...................................................   351
      Items of Special Interest..................................   351
        Intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance and tanker 
          support................................................   351
        Northern Command counter-narcotics support...............   351
        Southwest Border Fence...................................   352
        Tethered Aerostat Radar System...........................   352
    Other Activities.............................................   352
        Airlift Support for Homeland Defense Missions............   352
        Civil Reserve Air Fleet..................................   353
        Defense Transformation...................................   353
        Global War on Terrorism..................................   353
        Homeland Defense Forces..................................   354
        Wisconsin Project's International Export Control Center..   354
  LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS.........................................   355
    Subtitle A--Financial Matters................................   355
      Section 1001--Transfer Authority...........................   355
      Section 1002--Budget Justification Documents for Operation 
        and Maintenance..........................................   355
      Section 1003--Retention of Fees from Intellectual Property 
        Licenses.................................................   356
      Section 1004--Authority to Waive Claims of the United 
        States when Amounts Recoverable are Less than Costs of 
        Collection...............................................   356
      Section 1005--Repeal of Funding Restrictions Concerning 
        Development of Medical Countermeasures against Biological 
        Warfare Threats..........................................   356
      Section 1006--Report on Budgeting for Exchange Rates for 
        Foreign Currency Fluctuations............................   357
    Subtitle B--Naval Vessels and Shipyards......................   357
      Section 1011--Authority for Award of Contracts for Ship 
        Dismantling on Net-Cost Basis............................   357
      Section 1012--Independent Study to Assess Cost 
        Effectiveness of the Navy Ship Construction Program......   357
      Section 1013--Authority to Transfer Specified Former Naval 
        Vessels to Certain Foreign Countries.....................   357
      Section 1014--Limitation on Leasing of Foreign-Built 
        Vessels..................................................   357
    Subtitle C--Sunken Military Craft............................   358
      Section 1021-28--Protection of Sunken Military Craft.......   358
    Subtitle D--Counter-Drug Activities..........................   358
      Section 1031--Continuation of Authority to Use Dapartment 
        of Defense Funds for Unified Counter-Drug and Counter-
        Terrorism Campaign in Colombia...........................   358
      Section 1032--Limitation on Number of United States 
        Military Personnel in Colombia...........................   358
    Subtitle E--Reports..........................................   359
      Section 1041--Study of Continued Requirement for Two-Crew 
        Manning for Ballistic Missile Submarines.................   359
      Section 1042--Study of Effect on Defense Industrial Base of 
        Elimination of United States Domestic Firearms 
        Manufacturing Base.......................................   359
      Section 1043--Study of Extent and Quality of Training 
        Provided to Members of the Armed Services to Prepare for 
        Post-Conflict Operations.................................   359
    Subtitle F--Security Matters.................................   359
      Section 1051--Use of National Driver Register for Personnel 
        Security Investigations and Determinations...............   359
      Section 1052--Standards for Disqualification from 
        Eligibility for Department of Defense Security Clearances   359
    Subtitle G--Transportation Matters...........................   360
      Section 1061--Use of Military Aircraft to Transport Mail to 
        and from Overseas Locations..............................   360
      Section 1062--Reorganization and Clarification of Certain 
        Provisions Relating to Control and Supervision of 
        Transportation within the Department of Defense..........   360
      Section 1063--Determination of Whether Private Air Carriers 
        are Controlled by United States Citizens for Purposes of 
        Eligibility for Government Contract for Transportation of 
        Passengers or Supplies...................................   360
      Section 1064--Evaluation of Whether to Prohibit Certain 
        Offers for Transportation of Security-Sensitive Cargo....   360
    Subtitle H--Other Matters....................................   361
      Section 1071--Two-Year Extension of Authority of the 
        Secretary of Defense to Engage in Commercial Activities 
        as Security for Intelligence Collection Activities Abroad   361
      Section 1072--Assistance for Study of Feasibility of 
        Biennial International Air Trade Show in the United 
        States and for Initial Implementation....................   361
      Section 1073--Technical and Clerical Amendments............   361
      Section 1074--Commission on the Long-Term Implementation of 
        the New Strategic Posture of the United States...........   361
      Section 1075--Liability Protection for Certain Department 
        of Defense Volunteers Working in the Maritime Environment   361
      Section 1076--Transfer of Historic F3A-1 Brewster Corsair 
        Aircraft.................................................   361

TITLE XI--DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE CIVILIAN PERSONNEL...............   362
  OVERVIEW.......................................................   362
  LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS.........................................   362
      Section 1101--Payment of Federal Employee Health Benefit 
        Premiums for Mobilized Federal Employees.................   362
      Section 1102--Foreign Language Proficiency Pay.............   362
      Section 1103--Pay Parity for Civilian Intelligence 
        Personnel................................................   362
      Section 1104--Pay Parity for Senior Executives in 
        Nonappropriated Fund Instrumentalities...................   363
      Section 1105--Prohibition of Unauthorized Wearing or Use of 
        Civilian Medals or Decorations...........................   363

TITLE XII--MATTERS RELATING TO OTHER NATIONS.....................   363
  LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS.........................................   363
    Subtitle A--Matters Relating to Iraq, Afghanistan, and Global 
      War on Terrorism...........................................   363
      Section 1201--Documentation of Conditions in Iraq under 
        Former Dictatorial Government as Part of Transition to 
        Post-Dictatorial Government..............................   363
      Section 1202--Support of Military Operations to Combat 
        Terrorism................................................   363
      Section 1203--Commander's Emergency Response Program.......   364
      Section 1204--Status of Iraqi Security Forces..............   364
      Section 1205--Guidance and Report Required on Contractors 
        Supporting Deployed Forces in Iraq.......................   364
      Section 1206--Findings and Sense of Congress Concerning 
        Army Specialist Joseph Darby.............................   364
    Subtitle B--Other Matters....................................   364
      Section 1211--Assignment of Allied Naval Personnel to 
        Submarine Safety Programs................................   364
      Section 1212--Expansion of Entities of the People's 
        Republic of China Subject to Certain Presidential 
        Authorities when Operating in the United States..........   365
      Section 1213--Report by President on Global Peace 
        Operations Initiative....................................   365
      Section 1214--Procurement Sanctions against Foreign Persons 
        that Transfer Certain Defense Articles and Services to 
        the People's Republic of China...........................   366

TITLE XIII--COOPERATIVE THREAT REDUCTION WITH STATES OF THE 
  FORMER SOVIET UNION............................................   366
  OVERVIEW.......................................................   366
  ITEM OF SPECIAL INTEREST.......................................   368
      Visa Requirements..........................................   368
  LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS.........................................   368
      Section 1301--Specification of Cooperative Threat Reduction 
        Programs and Funds.......................................   368
      Section 1302--Funding Allocations..........................   368
      Section 1303--Temporary Authority to Waive Limitation on 
        Funding for Chemical Weapons Destruction Facility in 
        Russia...................................................   368

TITLE XIV--EXPORT CONTROLS AND COUNTERPROLIFERATION MATTERS......   368
  OVERVIEW.......................................................   368
  ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST......................................   369
      Defense Technology Security Administration.................   369
      Defense Threat Reduction Agency............................   369
      Nonproliferation Education.................................   370
  LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS.........................................   370
    Subtitle A--Export Controls..................................   370
      Section 1401--Definitions under Arms Export Control Act....   370
      Section 1402--Exemption from Licensing Requirements for 
        Export of Significant Military Equipment.................   371
      Section 1403--Cooperative Projects with Friendly Foreign 
        Countries................................................   371
      Section 1404--Licensing Requirement for Export of 
        Militarily Critical Technologies.........................   372
      Section 1405--Control of Exports of United States Weapons 
        Technology to the People's Republic of China.............   373
      Section 1406--Strengthening International Export Controls..   373
    Subtitle B--Counterproliferation Matters.....................   373
      Section 1411--Defense International Counterproliferation 
        Programs.................................................   373
      Section 1412--Defense Counterproliferation Fellowship 
        Program..................................................   374
    Subtitle C--Initiatives Relating to Countries of the Former 
      Soviet Union...............................................   374
      Section 1421--Silk Road Initiative.........................   374
      Section 1422--Teller-Kurchatov Nonproliferation Fellowships   374
      Section 1423--Collaboration to Reduce the Risks of a Launch 
        of Russian Nuclear Weapons...............................   374

TITLE XV--AUTHORIZATION FOR INCREASED COSTS DUE TO OPERATION 
  IRAQI FREEDOM AND OPERATION ENDURING FREEDOM...................   375
  OVERVIEW.......................................................   375
  SUMMARY TABLE OF AUTHORIZATION.................................   375
  ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST......................................   378
      Procurement................................................   378
      Operations and Maintenance.................................   378
      Military Personnel.........................................   379
  LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS.........................................   380
      Section 1501--Purpose......................................   380
    Subtitle A--Authorization of Appropriations..................   380
      Section 1511--Army Procurement.............................   380
      Section 1512--Navy and Marine Corps Procurement............   380
      Section 1513--Air Force Procurement........................   380
      Section 1514--Defense-Wide Activities Procurement..........   380
      Section 1515--Operation and Maintenance....................   380
      Section 1516--Defense Health Program.......................   380
      Section 1517--Military Personnel...........................   380
      Section 1518--Treatment as Additional Authorization........   381
      Section 1519--Transfer Authority...........................   381
      Section 1520--Designation of Emergency Authorization.......   381
    Subtitle B--Personnel Provisions.............................   381
      Section 1531--Three Year Increase in Active Army Strength 
        Levels...................................................   381
      Section 1532--Three Year Increase in Active Marine Corps 
        Strength Levels..........................................   381
      Section 1533--Extension of Increased Rates for Imminent 
        Danger Pay and Family Separation Allowance...............   382
    Subtitle C--Financial Management Matters.....................   382
      Section 1541--Revised Funding Methodology for Military 
        Retiree Health Care Benefits.............................   382
DIVISION B--MILITARY CONSTRUCTION AUTHORIZATIONS.................   382
  PURPOSE........................................................   382
  MILITARY CONSTRUCTION OVERVIEW.................................   382
TITLE XXI--ARMY..................................................   400
  SUMMARY........................................................   400
  ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST......................................   400
      Planning and Design........................................   400
  LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS.........................................   400
      Section 2101--Authorized Army Construction and Land 
        Acquisition Projects.....................................   400
      Section 2102--Family Housing...............................   400
      Section 2103--Improvements to Military Family Housing Units   400
      Section 2104--Authorization of Appropriations, Army........   400
      Section 2105--Modification of Authority to Carry Out 
        Certain Fiscal Year 2004 Projects........................   401
      Section 2106--Modification of Authority to Carry Out 
        Certain Fiscal Year 2003 Projects........................   401

TITLE XXII--NAVY.................................................   401
  SUMMARY........................................................   401
  ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST......................................   401
      Planning and Design........................................   401
  LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS.........................................   401
      Section 2201--Authorized Navy Construction and Land 
        Acquisition Projects.....................................   401
      Section 2202--Family Housing...............................   401
      Section 2203--Improvements to Military Family Housing Units   402
      Section 2204--Authorization of Appropriations, Navy........   402

TITLE XXIII--AIR FORCE...........................................   402
  SUMMARY........................................................   402
  ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST......................................   402
      Planning and Design........................................   402
  LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS.........................................   402
      Section 2301--Authorized Air Force Construction and Land 
        Acquisition Projects.....................................   402
      Section 2302--Family Housing...............................   402
      Section 2303--Improvements to Military Family Housing Units   403
      Section 2304--Authorization of Appropriations, Air Force...   403

TITLE XXIV--DEFENSE AGENCIES.....................................   403
  SUMMARY........................................................   403
  LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS.........................................   403
      Section 2401--Authorized Defense Agencies Construction and 
        Land Acquisition Projects................................   403
      Section 2402--Improvements to Family Housing Units.........   403
      Section 2403--Energy Conservation Projects.................   403
      Section 2404--Authorization of Appropriations, Defense 
        Agencies.................................................   403

TITLE XXV--NORTH ATLANTIC TREATY ORGANIZATION SECURITY INVESTMENT 
    PROGRAM......................................................   404
  SUMMARY........................................................   404
  LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS.........................................   404
      Section 2501--Authorized NATO Construction and Land 
        Acquisition Projects.....................................   404
      Section 2502--Authorization of Appropriations, NATO........   404

TITLE XXVI--GUARD AND RESERVE FORCES FACILITIES..................   404
  SUMMARY........................................................   404
  ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST......................................   404
      Planning and Design, Air National Guard....................   404
      Planning and Design, Air Reserve...........................   405
      Planning and Design, Army National Guard...................   405
      Planning and Design, Army Reserve..........................   405
      Unspecified Minor Construction, Army National Guard........   405
  LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS.........................................   405
      Section 2601--Authorized Guard and Reserve Construction and 
        Land Acquisition Projects................................   405

TITLE XXVII--EXPIRATION AND EXTENSION OF AUTHORIZATIONS..........   406
  LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS.........................................   406
      Section 2701--Expiration of Authorizations and Amounts 
        Required to be Specified by Law..........................   406
      Section 2702--Extension of Authorizations of Certain Fiscal 
        Year 2002 Projects.......................................   406
      Section 2703--Extension of Authorizations of Certain Fiscal 
        Year 2001 Projects.......................................   406
      Section 2704--Effective Date...............................   406

TITLE XXVIII--GENERAL PROVISIONS.................................   407
  ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST......................................   407
      Base Realignment and Closure...............................   407
      Department of Defense and Veterans Affairs Health Care 
        Facility Sharing.........................................   407
      Housing Requirements Analyses..............................   408
      Military Housing Privatization Program.....................   408
  LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS.........................................   409
    Subtitle A--Military Construction Program and Military Family 
        Housing Changes..........................................   409
      Section 2801--Increase in Certain Thresholds for Carrying 
        Out Unspecified Minor Military Construction Projects.....   409
      Section 2802--Assessment of Vulnerability of Military 
        Installations to Terrorist Attack and Annual Report on 
        Military Construction Requirements Related to 
        Antiterrorism and Force Protection.......................   409
      Section 2803--Changes in Threshold for Congressional 
        Notification Regarding Use of Operation and Maintenance 
        Funds for Facility Repair................................   409
      Section 2804--Reporting Requirements Regarding Military 
        Family Housing Requirements for General Officers and Flag 
        Officers.................................................   409
      Section 2805--Congressional Notification of Deviations from 
        Authorized Cost Variations for Military Construction 
        Projects and Military Family Housing Projects............   410
      Section 2806--Repeal of Limitation on Use of Alternative 
        Authority for Acquisition and Improvement of Military 
        Family Housing...........................................   410
      Section 2807--Temporary Authority to Accelerate Design 
        Efforts for Military Construction Projects Carried Out 
        Using Design-Build Selection Procedures..................   410
      Section 2808--Exchange or Sale of Reserve Component 
        Facilities to Acquire Replacement Facilities.............   411
      Section 2809--One-Year Extension of Temporary, Limited 
        Authority to Use Operation and Maintenance Funds for 
        Construction Projects Outside the United States..........   411
    Subtitle B--Real Property and Facilities Administration......   411
      Section 2811--Increase in Certain Thresholds for Reporting 
        Real Property Transactions...............................   411
      Section 2812--Reorganization of Existing Administrative 
        Provisions Relating to Real Property Transactions........   411
      Section 2813--Treatment of Money Rentals from Golf Course 
        at Rock Island Arsenal, Illinois.........................   411
      Section 2814--Number of Contracts Authorized Department-
        Wide Under Demonstration Program on Reduction in Long-
        Term Facility Maintenance Costs..........................   411
      Section 2815--Repeal of Commission on Review of Overseas 
        Military Facility Sturcture of the United States.........   412
      Section 2816--Designation of Airmen Leadership School at 
        Luke Air Force Base, Arizona, in Honor of John J. Rhodes, 
        a Former Minority Leader of the House of Representatives.   412
      Section 2817--Elimination of Reversionary Interests 
        Clouding United States Title to Property Used as Navy 
        Homeports................................................   412
      Section 2818--Report on Real Property Disposal at Marine 
        Corps Air Station, El Toro, California...................   412
    Subtitle C--Base Closure and Realignment.....................   412
      Section 2821--Two-Year Postponement of 2005 Base Closure 
        and Relignment Round and Submission of Reports Regarding 
        Future Infrastructure Requirements for the Armed Forces..   412
      Section 2822--Establishment of Specific Deadline for 
        Submission of Revisions to Force-Structure Plan and 
        Infrastructure Inventory for Next Base Closure Round.....   413
      Section 2823--Specification of Final Selection Criteria for 
        Next Base Closure Round..................................   414
      Section 2824--Requirement for Unanimous Vote of Defense 
        Base Closure and Realignment Commission to Add to or 
        Otherwise Expand Closure and Realignment Recommendations 
        made by Secretary of Defense.............................   414
      Section 2825--Adherence to Certain Authorities on 
        Preservation of Military Depot Capabilities During Any 
        subsequent Round of Base Closures and Realignments.......   414
    Subtitle D--Land Conveyances.................................   415
    Part I--Army Conveyances.....................................   415
      Section 2831--Transfer of Administrative Jurisdiction, 
        Defense Supply Center, Columbus, Ohio....................   415
      Section 2832--Land Conveyance, Fort Hood, Texas............   415
      Section 2833--Land Conveyance, Army National Guard 
        Facility, Seattle, Washington............................   415
    Part II--Navy Conveyances....................................
      Section 2841--Transfer of Jurisdiction, Nebraska Avenue 
        Naval Complex, District of Columbia......................   415
      Section 2842--Land Conveyance, Navy Property, Former Fort 
        Sheridan, Illinois.......................................   416
      Section 2843--Land Exchange, Naval Air Station, Patuxent 
        River, Maryland..........................................
    Part III--Air Force Conveyances..............................   416
      Section 2851--Land Exchange, Maxwell Air Force Base, 
        Alabama..................................................   416

DIVISION C--DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY NATIONAL SECURITY AUTHORIZATIONS 
    AND OTHER AUTHORIZATIONS.....................................   416

TITLE XXXI--DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY NATIONAL SECURITY PROGRAMS......   416
  OVERVIEW.......................................................   416
  ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST......................................   427
    National Nuclear Security Administration.....................   427
      Overview...................................................   427
      Adjustments to the Budget Request..........................   427
        Reductions...............................................   427
          Directed stockpile work................................   427
          Campaigns..............................................   427
          International nuclear materials protection and 
            cooperation..........................................   427
        Increases................................................   428
          Engineering campaign...................................   428
          Readiness in technical base and facilities.............   428
      Advanced Concepts and Robust Nuclear Earth Penetrator......   428
      Advanced Technology Research and Development...............   429
      Los Alamos Public Schools..................................   429
      Mixed Oxide Fuel Fabrication Facility......................   430
    Environmental and Other Defense Activities...................   430
      Overview...................................................   430
      Adjustments to the Budget Request..........................   430
        Reductions...............................................   430
          Waste incidental to reprocessing.......................   430
          Worker and community transition........................   431
          Office of future liabilities...........................   431
        Increases................................................   432
          2035 defense site accelerated completions..............   432
          Non-closure environmental activities...................   432
          Idaho facilities management-other defense activities...   432
      Technology Deployment and Development......................   433
      Energy Employees Occupational Illness Compensation Program.   433
  LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS.........................................   433
    Subtitle A--National Security Programs Authorizations........   433
      Section 3101--National Nuclear Security Administration.....   433
      Section 3102--Defense Environmental Management.............   434
      Section 3103--Other Defense Activities.....................   434
      Section 3104--Defense Nuclear Waste Disposal...............   434
    Subtitle B--Program Authorizations, Restrictions, and 
      Limitations................................................   434
      Section 3111--Extension of Authority for Appointment of 
        Certain Scientific, Engineering and Technical Personnel..   434
      Section 3112--Requirements for Baseline of Projects under 
        Facilities and Infrastructure Recapitalization Program...   434
    Subtitle C--Other Matters....................................   434
      Section 3131--Transfers and reprogrammings of National 
        Nuclear Security Administration Funds....................   434
      Section 3132--National Academy of Sciences study on 
        management by Department of Energy of high-level 
        radioactive waste........................................   435
      Section 3133--Contract to Review Waste Isolation Pilot 
        Plant, New Mexico........................................   435

TITLE XXXII--DEFENSE NUCLEAR FACILITIES SAFETY BOARD.............   436
  LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS.........................................   436
      Section 3201--Authorization................................   436

TITLE XXXIII--NATIONAL DEFENSE STOCKPILE.........................   436
  LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS.........................................   436
      Section 3301--Authorized Uses of National Defense Stockpile 
        Funds....................................................   436
      Section 3302--Revisions of Limitations on Required 
        Disposals of Certain Materials in National Defense 
        Stockpile................................................   436
      Section 3303--Authority to Dispose of Certain Materials in 
        National Defense Stockpile...............................   436

TITLE XXXIV--NAVAL PETROLEUM RESERVES............................   437
  LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS.........................................   437
      Section 3401--Authorization of Appropriations..............   437

TITLE XXXV--MARITIME ADMINISTRATION..............................   437
  LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS.........................................   437
      Section 3501--Authorization of Appropriations for Maritime 
        Administration for Fiscal Year 2005......................   437
      Section 3502--Extension of Authority to Provide War Risk 
        Insurance for Merchant Marine Vessels....................   437
Departmental Data................................................   437
  Department of Defense Authorization Request....................   438
Committee Position...............................................   438
Communications From Other Committees.............................   438
Fiscal Data......................................................   448
  Congressional Budget Office Estimate...........................   448
  Committee Cost Estimate........................................   448
Oversight Findings...............................................   449
General Performance Goals and Objectives.........................   449
Constitutional Authority Statement...............................   450
Statement of Federal Mandates....................................   450
Roll Call Votes..................................................   450
Changes in Existing Law Made by the Bill, as Reported............   459
Additional Views.................................................   462
  Additional views of Ike Skelton................................   462
  Additional views of Solomon P. Ortiz...........................   464
  Additional views of Steve Israel...............................   465
  Additional views of Kendrick B. Meek...........................   466
  Additional views of Mike D. Rogers.............................   469
  Additional views of Vic Snyder and Mac Thornberry..............   471
  Additional views of Jim Cooper and Tim Ryan of Ohio............   473



108th Congress                                                   Report
                        HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
 2d Session                                                     108-491
======================================================================




        NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2005

                                _______
                                

  May 14, 2004.--Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the 
              State of the Union and ordered to be printed

                                _______
                                

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

                              R E P O R T

                             together with

                            ADDITIONAL VIEWS

                        [To accompany H.R. 4200]

                   [Includes committee cost estimate]

    The Committee on Armed Services, to whom was referred the 
bill (H.R. 4200) to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 
2005 for military activities of the Department of Defense, to 
prescribe military personnel strengths for fiscal year 2005, 
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 amendment strikes 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. 4200. 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 2005 for procurement and for research, development, test 
and evaluation (RDT&E); (2) Authorize appropriations for fiscal 
year 2005 for operation and maintenance (O&M) and for working 
capital funds; (3) Authorize for fiscal year 2005: (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 2005 for military construction 
and family housing; (6) Authorize emergency appropriations for 
increased costs due to Operation Iraqi Freedom and Operation 
Enduring Freedom; (7) Authorize appropriations for fiscal year 
2005 for the Department of Energy national security programs; 
(8) Modify provisions related to the National Defense 
Stockpile; and (9) Authorize appropriations for fiscal year 
2005 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 $423.1 billion 
for the national defense budget function for fiscal year 2005. 
Of this amount, the President requested $402.6 billion for the 
Department of Defense, including $9.5 billion for military 
construction and family housing. The defense budget request for 
fiscal year 2004 also included $17.2 billion for Department of 
Energy national security programs and the Defense Nuclear 
Facilities Safety Board.
    The committee recommends an overall level of $422.1 billion 
in budget authority. This amount represents an increase of 
approximately $21.7 billion from the amount authorized for 
appropriation by the National Defense Authorization Act for 
Fiscal Year 2004 (Public Law 108-136).
    In addition, the committee recommends $25.0 billion in 
budget authority for the Department of Defense for fiscal year 
2005, in addition to amounts otherwise authorized by this Act, 
to provide funds for additional costs due to Operation Iraqi 
Freedom and Operation Enduring Freedom.

                    SUMMARY TABLE OF AUTHORIZATIONS

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


                    RATIONALE FOR THE COMMITTEE BILL

    H.R. 4200, the National Defense Authorization Act for 
Fiscal Year 2005, comes with our nation at war on multiple 
fronts. The ongoing Iraq mission, Operation Enduring Freedom in 
Afghanistan, and the broader Global War on Terrorism demand an 
appropriate level of resources and capabilities that Congress 
can and should provide. Additional security challenges 
elsewhere require planning and perseverance, including a 
continued commitment to the evolution of the U.S. armed forces. 
H.R. 4200 attempts to do all this given limited resources in 
the ``Year of the Soldier''.
    The largest mobilization in decades, Operation Iraqi 
Freedom will remain the focus of our armed forces for some 
time. The mission to rebuild and rehabilitate Iraq after 
decades of tyranny, though, is not static; the 2004 force 
rotation plan, completed earlier this year, represents the 
largest troop transfer undertaken by U.S. forces since World 
War II. In the Army alone, elements from eight of ten divisions 
were on the move during the first four months of 2004--a force 
of 250,000 soldiers, nearly half of them reservists.
    The challenges associated with the 2004 Operation Iraqi 
Freedom rotation of forces has confirmed pervasive concerns 
over end-strength shortfalls that strain armed forces personnel 
and undermine their ability to perform critical missions. 
Sustaining troop levels for Operation Iraqi Freedom and the 
broader Global War on Terrorism has in fact already exceeded 
the Army's immediate capabilities. As a result, the U.S. Marine 
Corps deployed 25,000 active and reserve component personnel to 
Iraq for two successive seven-month rotations, beginning in 
March 2004, while the Army was left extending the tours of more 
than 20,000 soldiers there. The Air Force and Navy, moreover, 
have deployed assets to Iraq to substitute for capabilities a 
stressed Army Total Force cannot provide.
    Even these forces may not relieve the Army's overall 
burden. Over the last year, the committee has examined a range 
of issues related to the armed forces' inability to meet 
military commitments and, perhaps, potential emergencies 
worldwide. The committee, for instance, found that the Army 
cannot meet its stated goal of resetting the force within 120 
days of returning from Iraq so that it is available for 
contingencies elsewhere. At the same time, it discovered that 
service force structure and manning decisions over the years 
have yielded insufficient numbers of high demand and low 
density assets, including special operations forces, 
intelligence and law enforcement units--elements critical to 
the Global War on Terrorism.
    Recent operations reinforced similar conclusions on the 
adequacy of the reserve component end-strength. Since the end 
of the 1991 Gulf War, reliance on the overall reserve component 
for peacetime support has increased twelve-fold. In fact, for 
the last seven years the reserve component has provided annual 
peacetime support equaling roughly 33,000 active duty 
personnel, in course adopting missions previously the exclusive 
domain of full-time forces. Wartime reliance on reserve 
component personnel has also increased. For example, average 
mobilization tours for reservists were substantially 
lengthened, from 156 days during Operations Desert Storm and 
Desert Shield to 319 for Operations Iraqi Freedom, Enduring 
Freedom and Noble Eagle, the continuing homeland security 
mission.
    These trends suggest the committee cannot expect reserve 
component relief anytime soon; the Department of Defense itself 
assumes there will be no substantial reduction in the length of 
the average mobilization tour. By the end of January 2003--
immediately prior to mobilizations in support of the war with 
Iraq and just fifteen months after the start of the Global War 
on Terrorism--more than 56,000 reserve component personnel 
remained on active duty worldwide. In comparison, at the peak 
of the Iraq mobilization, 225,000 reservists found themselves 
on active duty. Presently, the Department of Defense reports 
that sustaining troop levels in Iraq will require the 
mobilization of at least 100,000 to 150,000 reservists annually 
for the next several years. Reserve component personnel will 
ultimately comprise nearly 40 percent of all forces committed 
to Iraq and Kuwait during this rotation.
    The demand for additional manpower to sustain mission 
requirements and fulfill required capabilities is finally 
reflected in the actual active component strengths each service 
needed during the past two fiscal years--all services executed 
actual end-strength levels well above the minimum authorized 
amount. In general, these additional active component personnel 
were funded as part of emergency supplemental appropriations. 
Finding this approach to managing what is clearly an end-
strength shortfall self-defeating and ultimately unsustainable, 
the committee recommends the first significant increase in 
military end strength in decades.
    Further, H.R. 4200 directly addresses the numerous and 
growing force protection requirements that have emerged from 
the threats and realities found on the Iraqi battlefield. This 
legislation provides critical force protection resources, 
including additional body armor, countermeasures for improvised 
explosive devices, armored ``Humvees'' and armor add-on kits 
for ``thin-skinned'' vehicles. These tangible improvements in 
force protection accompany equally important combat capability 
enhancements. H.R. 4200 will provide the American warfighter 
with much needed supplies and ammunition to continue a ``hot'' 
war against global terrorism and the anti-democratic insurgents 
in Iraq.
    Today's adversaries are adaptable; they sabotage Iraq's 
developing infrastructure, ambush noncombatants and coalition 
forces alike and have found a powerfully simple capability to 
neutralize American conventional military might through the use 
of remote improvised explosive devices, or IEDs, to terrorize 
the country and inflict a steady number of casualties on 
coalition forces. U.S. servicemen and women must have every 
possible advantage to beat them soundly and safely. Believing 
that the armed forces cannot allow more unforeseen dangers--a 
new ``IED problem''--to surprise our troops and threaten their 
missions, H.R. 4200 makes available funds for advanced research 
and development to counter emerging threats to the American 
Soldier.
    While the American Soldier is at work in Iraq, Afghanistan, 
and terrorist locations worldwide, other potential threats to 
the United States loom. The committee believes that the 
standoffs on the Korean Peninsula and in the Taiwan Strait can 
be resolved peacefully if all parties act in good faith, but 
the U.S. must remain capable of responding to aggression 
alongside its regional partners whenever threats to peace and 
democracy surface. By supporting initiatives to strengthen our 
force posture and, thus, that of our allies and friends in the 
region, H.R. 4200 ensures that U.S. forces will not fight wars 
unnecessarily and from a disadvantaged starting point.
    Over the long term, the committee understands that the 
outcome of future engagements, including terrorist attacks, may 
be decided during today's battles against proliferation. H.R. 
4200 supports current programs designed to stop potential 
aggressors from obtaining advanced conventional weapons and 
weapons of mass destruction, including their long-range and 
stealth delivery systems. H.R. 4200 also takes additional steps 
to help the United States maintain its technological advantage 
by strengthening domestic and multilateral controls on arms as 
well as militarily-sensitive goods and technologies. Coupled 
with measures designed to strengthen the U.S. industrial base 
also contained in H.R. 4200, smarter export controls will help 
prevent a situation in which our troops and homeland are 
threatened with American-made or designed technology without 
sacrificing American economic productivity.
    In summary, this legislation is designed to strike a proper 
balance. H.R. 4200 provides such balance between the exigencies 
of ensuring full and total support for the needs of our men and 
women presently engaged in the difficult fight against global 
terrorism, while also advancing the necessary mix of policy and 
investments to ensure America's defense capabilities remain 
overwhelmingly superior to any known and future adversary, 
adaptable to the fast changing nature of the threat, and able 
to decisively defend our national interests now and in the 
future.

                                HEARINGS

    Committee consideration of the National Defense 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2005 results from hearings 
that began on February 4, 2004 and that were completed on April 
1, 2004.
    The full committee conducted seven sessions. In addition, a 
total of 29 sessions were conducted by 6 different 
subcommittees on various titles of the bill.

            DIVISION A--DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION


                          TITLE I--PROCUREMENT

                                OVERVIEW

    The budget request for fiscal year 2005 contained $76,034.3 
million for procurement. This represents a $1,830.8 million 
increase from the amount authorized for fiscal year 2004.
    The committee recommends authorization of $76,215.7 
million, an increase of $190.4 million from the fiscal year 
2005 request after the transfer of $1,372.0 million and $9.0 
million respectfully, for chemical agent and munitions 
destruction, Army, and the Defense Production Act, which have 
been transferred to other titles.
    The committee recommendations for the fiscal year 2005 
procurement program are identified in the table below. Major 
issues are discussed following the table.


                       Aircraft Procurement, Army


                                Overview

    The budget request for fiscal year 2005 contained $2,658.2 
million for Aircraft Procurement, Army. The committee 
recommends authorization of $2,805.9 million, an increase of 
$147.7 million, for fiscal year 2005.
    The committee recommendations for the fiscal year 2005 
Aircraft Procurement, Army program are identified in the table 
below. Major changes to the Army request are discussed 
following the table.


                       Items of Special Interest


Airborne communications

    The budget request contained $9.8 million to procure 
communication equipment for Army aircraft, but included no 
funds to upgrade the AN/ARS-6 personnel locator system for Army 
special operations forces (SOF) MH-60 and MH-47 helicopters.
    The committee is aware of the urgent need for modern 
survival radios for Army SOF aircraft to replace older, less 
capable equipment that these aircraft now carry. Army SOF 
helicopters routinely perform search and rescue operations with 
all components of the U.S. armed forces, as well as with the 
disparate elements of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization 
member militaries. Growing numbers of these military 
organizations are migrating to modern survival systems that are 
incompatible with the communications equipment currently 
deployed on Army SOF aircraft.
    The committee recommends $15.8 million for Army airborne 
communications, an increase of $6.0 million for procurement of 
the AN/ARS-6 version 12.

Blackhawk helicopter de-icing system upgrade

    The budget request included $6.1 million for UH-60 
modifications.
    The committee directs that $2.4 million be made available 
within the funds authorized for Army aircraft procurement for 
de-icing system upgrades for the Blackhawk helicopter.

Crashworthy crew seats

    The budget request contained $703.5 million for CH-47 Cargo 
Helicopter Mods, of which no funds were requested for the 
crashworthy crew chief seats.
    The crashes of CH-47s due to hostile fire and non-hostile 
fire incidents in Operation Iraqi Freedom demonstrate the need 
for crashworthy crew chief seats. The installation of 
crashworthy seats will increase crewmember mission efficiency 
and effectiveness while significantly reducing the risk of 
death or injury during a hard landing or controlled crash. 
Survivability equipment is an essential part of force 
protection, which is the committee's highest priority.
    The committee recommends $710.0 million, an increase of 
$6.5 million for the procurement of crashworthy crew chief 
seats for the CH-47 aircraft.

Modern signal processing unit

    The budget request contained $37.2 million for AH-64 Mods, 
of which no funds were requested for the modern signal 
processing unit (MSPU) initial integration and production for 
the AH-64.
    The MSPU is an embedded digital vibration diagnostic 
technology already developed by the Army for the AH-64A Apache 
and the AH-64D Longbow to monitor the tail rotor gearbox, the 
intermediate gearbox, and the auxiliary power unit clutch for 
incipient failures. The MSPU is a direct replacement for the 30 
year old analog signal processing unit which is known to 
experience high failure rates and shown to be unreliable in 
detecting incipient gearbox failures. The improved diagnostics 
of the MSPU will improve flight safety and reduce maintenance 
test costs.
    The committee recommends an increase of $7.6 million to 
begin initial integration of the modern signal processing unit 
into the AH-64A and AH-64D production line and to procure the 
MSPU for fielding as spares for both the active Army and 
National Guard Apache and Longbow aircraft.

                       Missile Procurement, Army


                                Overview

    The budget request for fiscal year 2005 contained $1,398.3 
million for Missile Procurement, Army. The committee recommends 
authorization of $1,414.3 million, an increase of $16.0 
million, for fiscal year 2005.
    The committee recommendations for the fiscal year 2005 
Missile Procurement, Army program are identified in the table 
below. Major changes to the Army request are discussed 
following the table.


               Weapons and Tracked Combat Vehicles, Army


                                Overview

    The budget request for fiscal year 2005 contained $1,639.7 
million for Weapons and Tracked Combat Vehicles, Army. The 
committee recommends authorization of $1,739.7 million, an 
increase of $100.0 million, for fiscal year 2005.
    The committee recommendations for the fiscal year 2005 
Weapons and Tracked Combat Vehicles, Army program are 
identified in the table below. Major changes to the Army 
request are discussed following the table.


                       Items of Special Interest


Air-droppable, lightweight armored direct fires system

    The committee notes that the operational need for a rapidly 
deployable, air droppable, lightweight armored direct fires 
system has been validated. Additionally, recent combat 
operations demonstrate the need for such a system. The 
committee is encouraged by the Department of the Army's 
decision to evaluate existing and developmental platforms in 
meeting this requirement.
    The committee directs the Secretary of the Army to keep the 
congressional defense committees informed on the progress of 
the evaluation effort and provide a report of the Army's 
findings at the conclusion of the evaluation program.

Armor and vehicle protection kits

    The budget request included $1,639.7 million for Weapons 
and Tracked Combat Vehicle procurement.
    The committee notes the importance of expedited delivery of 
armor and vehicle protection kits for the global war on 
terrorism.
    Accordingly, the committee directs that $1.0 million be 
made available within funds authorized for Army Weapons and 
Tracked Combat Vehicle procurement for the Rock Island Arsenal 
for a laser cutting machine, titanium welding cell, and wash 
rack to ensure the on-time delivery of armor kits and vehicle 
protection kits.

Bradley fighting vehicle integrated management

    The budget request contained $55.4 million for Bradley 
Fighting Vehicle Series Modifications, of which no funds were 
requested for sustainment and modernization.
    The committee is concerned that no funding exists for a 
sustainment and modernization program for the Bradley Fighting 
Vehicle. Considering the most optimistic assumptions for the 
fielding of the Future Combat Systems, the current force of the 
Abrams main battle tank and the Bradley Fighting Vehicle will 
constitute the majority of the total force for the next three 
decades.
    The Abrams Integrated Management Program is the Army's long 
term management program for the Abrams tank which provides a 
rebuild capability, a modernization program, and sustainment of 
both the government and private industrial bases. No such 
program exists for the Bradley Fighting Vehicle.
    The committee directs the Secretary of the Army to develop 
and implement a Bradley Fighting Vehicle Integrated Management 
program to maintain the Bradley fleet readiness through planned 
overhaul and modernization.
    The committee recommends an increase of $40.0 million for 
procurement of items to support the initiation of a Bradley 
Fighting Vehicle Integrated Management program.

M1A2 system enhancement package

    The budget request contained $292.2 million to procure 67 
M1A2 system enhancement package (SEP) tanks.
    The committee understands the budget request fulfills M1A2 
SEP procurement for the 3rd Armored Cavalry Regiment. 
Consistent with previous actions, the committee continues to 
recognize the advantages of upgrading the Army's armored 
brigade combat teams with M1A2 SEPs. The committee understands 
the M1A2 SEP brings advantages to the warfighter in combat and 
training and reduces logistical burdens. The committee commends 
the Army for accelerating modernization of the 3rd Armored 
Cavalry Regiment as part of this effort to digitize the heavy 
counterattack corps.
    Accordingly, the committee strongly recommends the Army 
continue the holistic M1 Abrams tank reset plan by modernizing 
with M1A2 SEP tanks the 3rd Infantry Division, the first 
armored unit to transform to the Chief of Staff's modularity 
construct.

M777 lightweight 155 millimeter howitzer

    The budget request contained $37.2 million to procure 18 
M777 Lightweight 155mm Howitzer (LW155) artillery systems. 
However, no funds were included for the Army National Guard.
    The M777 LW155 is a joint competitively procured program 
for the U.S. Marine Corps (USMC) and U.S. Army that replaces 
and improves upon the currently fielded 25-year old M198 towed 
howitzer artillery system by utilizing networked fires at 
almost 50 percent of the weight of the M198. The committee 
recognizes the LW155 would provide enhanced mobility and 
lethality to the USMC, the Army's XVIII Airborne Corps and 
Stryker Brigade Combat Teams and to the Army National Guard.
    The committee understands the Director of the Army National 
Guard has identified a $35.0 million fiscal year 2005 unfunded 
requirement for 18 LW155 systems. The committee recommends 
$72.2 million for the M777 LW155 artillery system, an increase 
of $35.0 million to procure an additional 18 systems and 
fulfill the Army National Guard's unfunded requirement.

                      Ammunition Procurement, Army


                                Overview

    The budget request for fiscal year 2005 contained $1,556.9 
million for Ammunition Procurement, Army. The committee 
recommends authorization of $1,729.4 million, an increase of 
$172.5 million, for fiscal year 2005.
    The committee recommendations for the fiscal year 2005 
Ammunition Procurement, Army program are identified in the 
table below. Major changes to the Army request are discussed 
following the table.


                       Items of Special Interest


Ammunition production base upgrades

    The budget request contained $147.9 million for ammunition 
production base support, of which $40.7 million is for the 
provision of industrial facilities. However, no funds were 
requested for flexible load, assemble, and pack (LAP) upgrades 
for modern munitions or small and medium caliber production 
line upgrades.
    The committee believes that the Department of Defense has 
not adequately funded or addressed the requirements for 
production line upgrades to the Nation's ammunition production 
industrial base. Further, the committee understands these 
upgrades are required, to not only update World War II-era 
production lines, but are also necessary to fulfill the 
increased production requirements of the growing shortfalls in 
war reserve and training ammunition, which have occurred from 
increased ammunition use in the global war on terrorism, 
Operation Enduring Freedom and Operation Iraqi Freedom. These 
increased requirements span from small to large caliber 
conventional ammunition, as well as conventional bombs and 
other explosive materials. The increased ammunition use rate, 
combined with the atrophy and underfunded ammunition production 
industrial has resulted in a limited production capacity in the 
United States, as well as an increased reliance on foreign 
sources for ammunition for U.S. soldiers, sailors, airmen, and 
marines. The committee is concerned and disturbed about these 
trends.
    Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $59.4 
million for army ammunition plant (AAP) modernization and 
transformation to support the munitions industrial base. The 
increases include:

                                                            In millions
(1) Lake City AAP modernization and transformation................$22.4
(2) Radford AAP modernization and transformation...................16.0
(3) Lone Star AAP LAP technology upgrades...........................6.0
(4) Kansas AAP LAP modern munitions enterprise.....................15.0

    The committee recognizes additional resources will be 
required to complete these production line upgrades and 
strongly urges the Secretary of Defense to provide the 
resources necessary in future fiscal year budget requests to 
complete these upgrades in order to ensure that the U.S. 
ammunition production base can and will support the 
transformational and future operational munitions requirements 
of the 21st century.

Conventional munitions demilitarization

    The budget request contained $95.4 million for conventional 
munitions demilitarization.
    The committee understands the remote weapon decasing and 
explosive removal kits project is an ongoing project in its 
second year and comprises two separate systems that are used 
for conventional munitions demilitarization. The committee 
understands rotary furnace RF9 upgrades are required for a 
furnace pollution abatement system and the committee notes the 
rotary furnace is used to thermally treat fuzes, primers, 
igniters, and munitions up to 20mm.
    The committee recommends $97.4 million for conventional 
munitions demilitarization, an increase of $1.5 million for 
remote weapon decasing and explosive removal kits and an 
increase of $500,000 for rotary furnace RF9 upgrades.

                        Other Procurement, Army


                                Overview

    The budget request for fiscal year 2005 contained $4,240.9 
million for Other Procurement, Army. The committee recommends 
authorization of $4,313.6 million, an increase of $72.7 
million, for fiscal year 2005.
    The committee recommendations for the fiscal year 2005 
Other Procurement, Army program are identified in the table 
below. Major changes to the Army request are discussed 
following the table.


                       Items of Special Interest


Common system open architecture

    The budget request contained $0.8 million to procure joint 
tactical area command systems (JTAC), but contained no funds 
for the integration of open architecture commercial off the 
shelf (COTS) technology to sustain currently fielded 
communications within JTACs.
    The committee recognizes there is a need to upgrade the 
tactical communication, navigation, and personnel location 
equipment for the Department of Defense and the Army. The 
committee understands this program will directly impact 
affordability and sustainability of currently fielded JTAC 
systems by integrating current commercial products and 
technology in an open architecture environment.
    The committee recommends $8.8 million for JTACs, an 
increase of $8.0 million to integrate open architecture COTS 
technology.

Digital soldier

    The budget request contained $2.9 million for human 
intelligence information management, but contained no funds for 
the digital soldier concept.
    The digital soldier project is a handheld extension for the 
Army's Information Dominance Center (IDC) at Fort Belvoir, 
Virginia and the Distributed Common Ground System (DCGS) for 
soldiers in the field. This highly ruggedized device supports 
remoted soldiers and teams in harsh combat environments. The 
concept leverages wireless and encrypted internet protocol 
(IP), voice over IP, text messaging, multi-data receive or 
transmit, GPS location, tracking, or fiber optic gyro for 
emission control conditions. The device provides eyewitness, 
actionable intelligence and situational reporting via networked 
inputs to and from IDC and DCGS with the ability to interface 
with other tactical radios to get information to those who 
critically need it.
    The committee notes that this project is part of the Army 
senior intelligence officer's ``every soldier a sensor'' model 
for the intelligence transformation focus area of Army 
transformation.
    Therefore the committee recommends $8.9 million, an 
increase of $6.0 million for the digital soldier concept.

Distributed common ground system

    The budget request contained a total of $734.5 million for 
the Department of Defense's (DOD) Distributed Common Ground 
System (DCGS) program. DCGS is a multi-service and agency 
program to enable existing intelligence processing, 
exploitation and dissemination systems to operate seamlessly 
across national and DOD architectures and standards.
    The committee supports the recent decision of the military 
service acquisition executives to integrate the DCGS backbone, 
version 10.2, into each service DCGS architecture. The 
committee commends the services in coming together to work the 
challenges of intelligence sharing and views this as an 
important step towards the goal of seamless information 
sharing.
    However, the committee is concerned that the present DCGS 
architecture within each of the military services is unique and 
may not be able to properly network and provide critical, 
timely information to the tactical users in the battlespace. 
The committee believes the services must have an overarching 
architecture that is well-defined so DCGS may operate across 
multiple domains to include ships at sea, Army and Marine Corps 
battalions on the move, and fixed sites for the Air Force.
    The committee also believes that the multiple systems that 
run the DCGS were devised by organizational tradition and not 
to modern standards. The committee is further concerned that 
while the services perform analogous operations on each DCGS 
system, they have not devised a coordinated strategy to merge 
requirements, functionalities, and applications to support a 
joint environment for users. The committee recommends that the 
Department coordinate service-centric requirements; use the 
best commercial practices to implement a systems architecture, 
maintain cost controls, leverage purchasing power, and 
streamline development for the program.
    In addition, the committee notes that the Defense 
intelligence community (IC) has an interest in the DOD's Global 
Information Grid. Since DCGS is required to operate in both the 
IC and DOD domains, the committee believes there must be a 
common approach for managing intelligence data over both 
enterprise networks. Therefore, the committee encourages the IC 
and the Department to work together to create and implement a 
systems architecture that will allow users from both 
communities to access information in a timely and accurate 
manner.
    Further, the committee is concerned that the DCGS is unable 
to receive data from either the E-8C Joint Surveillance 
Targeting and Radar System (J-STARS) or the RC-135 RIVET JOINT 
signals intelligence system and is unable to directly task the 
RQ-4 Global Hawk high-altitude endurance unmanned aerial 
vehicle for imagery. The committee is concerned that the DCGS 
will not be able to achieve its goals without this ability.
    Accordingly, the committee directs the Under Secretary of 
Defense for Intelligence to provide a report to the 
congressional defense committees and intelligence committees 
detailing the Department's DCGS integration plan to include 
tasking and imagery downlinks for the E-8C J-STARS, RC-135 
RIVET JOINT, and RQ-4 Global Hawk systems by March 1, 2005. 
Furthermore, the committee directs the Assistant Secretary of 
Defense for Networking Information and Integration to report to 
the congressional defense committees and intelligence 
committees by March 1, 2005, on the two communities' plans for 
future operation of a network- centric, DCGS across both the IC 
domain and the larger DOD information technology domain.
    The committee recommends the following for the DCGS 
military service programs: $8.2 million for the Army, a 
decrease of $1.4 million; $45.2 million for the Navy, a 
decrease of $8.0 million; and $291.7 million for the Air Force, 
a decrease of $28.5 million.

Logistics support vessel

    The budget request contained no funding for the logistics 
support vessel (LSV).
    The committee is aware that the LSV fleet is currently used 
in Iraq. It also notes that the Army has major concerns with 
the LSVs sea-keeping qualities. An improved bow has been 
developed to correct this problem.
    The committee recommends $3.5 million for LSV service life 
extension for LSVs 1-6.

Physical security systems

    The budget request included $68.0 million for physical 
security systems. The budget request included no funding for 
equipping new required truck and delivery inspection stations.
    The committee recommends $71.0 million, an increase of $3.0 
million for gamma ray inspection machines and associated items 
for equipping truck and inspection stations authorized in title 
XXI of this report.

Movement tracking system

    The budget request contained $84.0 million to procure 
palletized load systems including trucks and trailers, heavy 
equipment transporter systems, heavy expanded mobility tactical 
trucks and other related equipment of which $19.0 million was 
included to procure 1,067 movement tracking systems (MTS).
    The MTS is a satellite-based communications system 
providing combat support and combat service support units with 
secure real-time global positioning system vehicle location and 
tracking and two-way text messaging between stationary base 
locations and vehicles.
    The committee understands the MTS significantly enhances 
the Army's ability in current operations to strategically 
position tactical vehicles based on battlefield requirements, 
monitor and track re-supply items, and provides the ground 
commander with total asset visibility. The committee recognizes 
given the current asymmetric threat matrix there is no forward 
or rear front to direct combat situations and the need for an 
affordable, interoperable logistics tracking and communications 
system is essential for accurate situational awareness. The 
committee also notes the Chief of the Army Reserve and the 
Chief of the National Guard have identified fiscal year 2005 
high priority unfunded requirements for MTS.
    The committee recommends an increase of $15.0 million for 
the family of heavy tactical vehicles to accelerate the 
procurement of MTS.

Shortstop electronic protection system

    The budget request contained no funds for the procurement 
of the Shortstop Electronic Protection System (SEPS).
    SEPS is a countermeasure for proximity fuzed indirect fire 
munitions and other electronic attack measures. SEPS were 
modified in response to the emerging Improvised Explosive 
Device (IED) threats in Operation Enduring Freedom and 
Operation Iraqi Freedom (OIF).
    The committee understands the IED threat continues to pose 
the greatest risk to deployed military personnel serving in OIF 
and recognizes the need to continue to address this threat in 
an aggressive manner. The committee feels SEPS is critical to 
providing better force protection against the IED threat in 
OIF.
    Therefore, the committee recommends $18.6 million to 
procure additional SEPS.

Small Tugs

    The budget request contained no funds for theater support 
vessels.
    The committee understands that additional funds are 
required to complete the small tug under construction and for 
life extension upgrades to the existing Army tug fleet.
    The committee recommends $1.0 million to complete the tug 
under construction and for tug fleet life extension upgrades.

Tactical unmanned aerial vehicle

    The budget request contained $100.5 million for the 
tactical unmanned aerial vehicle (TUAV), but included no 
funding for the tactical common data link (TCDL).
    The committee is aware that three major improvements were 
identified during operational testing that should be 
incorporated into the Shadow 200 tactical unmanned aerial 
vehicle. These improvements are a larger wing to increase 
payload and endurance, electronics system changes to reduce 
target location error, and use of the TCDL.
    The committee supports rapid fielding of mature improved 
technology to our forces and recommends $116.5 million for 
TUAV, an increase of $16.0 million for Shadow 200 improvements.

                       Aircraft Procurement, Navy


                                Overview

    The budget request for fiscal year 2005 contained $8,767.9 
million for Aircraft Procurement, Navy. The committee 
recommends authorization of $8,912.7 million, an increase of 
$144.8 million, for fiscal year 2005.
    The committee recommendations for the fiscal year 2005 
Aircraft Procurement, Navy program are identified in the table 
below. Major changes to the Navy request are discussed 
following the table.


                       Items of Special Interest


AN/USC-42 miniaturized-demand assigned multiple access terminals

    The budget request contained $15.1 million for E-2 series 
modifications, but contained no funds for upgrading the AN/USC-
42 miniaturized-demand assigned multiple access (Mini-DAMA) 
terminals with improved communications security (COMSEC) and a 
graphical user interface (GUI).
    The committee notes that the AN/USC-42 provides significant 
communications improvement at less than one-tenth the size or 
weight of legacy communications equipment, and understands that 
the AN/USC-42 can be upgraded to accommodate improved COMSEC to 
alleviate demand on existing COMSEC systems. Additionally, the 
committee understands that an automated GUI upgrade would allow 
E-2C crews to program satellite communications channels more 
rapidly, and believes that both the COMSEC and GUI upgrade are 
necessary for future E-2C communications suites.
    Therefore, the committee recommends $22.7 million for E-2 
series modifications, an increase of $7.6 million for the 
procurement, installation, and testing of the COMSEC and GUI 
upgrades for the E-2C's AN/USC-42 mini-DAMA systems. The 
committee also expects that this increase would provide for the 
integration of this equipment into training facilities.

F/A-18E/F shared reconnaissance pod

    The budget request contained $2,907.5 million for 
procurement of 42 F/A-18E and F/A-18F aircraft, but included no 
funds to procure shared reconnaissance pods (SHARPs) or their 
associated logistics support elements.
    The SHARP is a digital reconnaissance pod capable of 
operating day or night, over a wide area, with the ability to 
use real-time data links to either land or sea-based 
distributed common ground systems for information exploitation. 
The SHARP is carried on the F/A-18F and replaces the tactical 
air reconnaissance pod system carried on the F-14 which is 
scheduled to retire in fiscal year 2006. The committee 
understands that current funding will only provide 21 pods, 
leaving the Department of the Navy short of its requirement for 
30 SHARPs, and notes that the Chief of Naval Operations has 
included the procurement of additional SHARPs among his 
unfunded priorities for fiscal year 2005.
    Consequently, the committee recommends $2,931.5 million for 
the F/A-18E/F, an increase of $24.0 million for three SHARPs 
and their associated support elements.

H-1 series modifications

    The budget request contained $3.5 million for H-1 series 
modifications, all of which were five AN/AAQ-22 night thermal 
imaging system (NTIS) product improvement program (PIP) 
upgrades.
    The AN/AAQ-22 NTIS provides the Marine Corps' UH-1N 
helicopter fleet with a capability to operate in both day and 
night conditions, as well as in a smoke, dust or haze 
environment. The PIP upgrade improves the AN/AAQ-22 NTIS by 
increasing resolution by greater than 20 percent, improving 
system stability and control, upgrading target detection and 
obstacle avoidance capability, and adding a laser designator to 
guide precision munitions. The committee understands that the 
UH-1Ns equipped with the AN/AAQ-22 NTIS PIP upgrade have 
performed superbly in Operation Enduring Freedom and Operation 
Iraqi Freedom in their mission to identify targets of 
opportunity and to provide rapid alerting of threats to Allied 
forces. Additionally, the committee notes that both the Chief 
of Naval Operations and the Commandant of the Marine Corps have 
included the AN/AAQ-22 NTIS PIP upgrade among their unfunded 
priorities for fiscal year 2005.
    Accordingly, the committee recommends $17.5 million for H-1 
series modifications, an increase of $14.0 million for 17 
additional AN/AAQ-22 NTIS PIP upgrades.

Joint primary air training system

    The budget request contained $2.5 million for procurement 
of Joint Primary Air Training System (JPATS) support equipment, 
but included no funds to procure T-6A aircraft or associated 
ground-based training systems.
    The JPATS, consisting of both the T-6A aircraft and a 
ground-based training system, will be used by the Navy and Air 
Force for primary pilot training. The T-6A will replace both 
the Navy's T-34 and Air Force's T-37B fleets, providing safer, 
more economical and more effective training for student pilots.
    The committee notes that the Department of the Navy does 
not plan to continue JPATS procurement until fiscal year 2007, 
and continues to believe that its procurement for the Navy 
would not only reduce procurement costs for both the Navy and 
the Air Force, but would also reduce operations and maintenance 
costs.
    Consequently, the committee recommends $37.5 million for 
JPATS, an increase of $35.0 million for six T-6A aircraft and 
associated ground-based training systems.

Metrology and calibration program

    The budget request contained $16.1 million for aircraft 
industrial facilities, of which $7.7 million was included for 
the Navy metrology and calibration (METCAL) program.
    The METCAL program provides the Navy with products and 
services to maintain accurate test equipment used for 
maintenance of weapons, aircraft, ships, submarines, and Marine 
Corps ground systems. The committee notes that without 
calibration equipment, test equipment drifts to inaccurate 
performance levels. This could induce errors in weapons systems 
or result in serviceable components being removed for 
unnecessary maintenance or unserviceable components remaining 
in a weapons or support system. The committee also notes that 
during the past 10 years, funding for the Navy's calibration 
test equipment has been substantially reduced, resulting in a 
corresponding decrease in the availability of calibrated test 
equipment.
    Therefore, the committee recommends $17.3 million for 
aircraft industrial facilities, an increase of $1.2 million for 
the METCAL program.

P-3 series modifications

    The budget request contained $135.0 million for P-3 series 
modifications, but included no funds for procurement of 
satellite communications (SATCOM) or a common 
informationprocessing system (CIPS) upgrades for aircraft that are not 
equipped with the anti-surface warfare improvement program (AIP).
    The AIP upgrade improves the P-3's communications, 
survivability, and over-the-horizon targeting capabilities 
through the installation of commercial-off-the-shelf 
components. The committee understands that AIP-equipped P-3s 
are the theater commander's platform of choice for overland 
intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance (ISR) missions, 
and that, as a result of extensive tasking, AIP-equipped P-3s 
are rapidly aging. The committee notes however, that of the 
Navy's 288-aircraft P-3 inventory, only 71 aircraft have been, 
or are planned to be, modified with the AIP upgrade. The 
committee understands that some of the remaining 217 non-AIP 
equipped aircraft could be upgraded with SATCOM and CIPS 
allowing those P-3 aircraft to assume lower priority ISR 
missions thereby conserving aircraft life on AIP equipped P-3 
aircraft.
    Consequently, the committee recommends $139.0 million, an 
increase of $4.0 million for procurement of SATCOM and CIPS 
upgrades for non-AIP equipped P-3 aircraft and expects that 
this amount will provide for procurement of two prototype 
systems including fleet evaluation.

T-45TS and T-48

    The budget request contained $52.4 million for one T-48 
aircraft and $253.6 million for eight T-45C aircraft and its 
associated training system. The T-48 would be a multi-seat 
replacement for the T-39 aircraft used for undergraduate 
military flight officer training. 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.
    Subsequent to submission of the budget request, the 
Assistant Secretary of the Navy for Research, Development and 
Acquisition informed the committee that procurement of the T-48 
is no longer required since the Department of the Navy now 
plans to conduct its undergraduate military flight officer 
training by using the T-45C, synthetic radar displays, and 
high-fidelity ground-based training systems.
    Accordingly, the committee recommends no funds for the T-
48, a decrease of $52.4 million. The committee also recommends 
$306.0 million for the T-45TS, a corresponding increase of 
$52.4 million and expects that this increase will procure at 
least two additional T-45C aircraft.

                       Weapons Procurement, Navy


                                Overview

    The budget request for fiscal year 2005 contained $2,101.5 
million for Weapons Procurement, Navy. The committee recommends 
authorization of $2,253.5 million, an increase of $151.9 
million, for fiscal year 2005.
    The committee recommendations for the fiscal year 2005 
Weapons Procurement, Navy program are identified in the table 
below. Major changes to the Navy request are discussed 
following the table.


                       Items of Special Interest


Close-in weapon system block 1B

    The budget request contained $86.1 million for 19 close-in 
weapon system (CIWS) modifications to upgrade the CIWS to the 
block 1B configuration.
    The CIWS is a weapon system with a high rate of fire that 
automatically acquires, tracks and destroys anti-ship missiles 
that have penetrated all other surface ship defenses. The CIWS 
block 1B configuration is a CIWS upgrade that incorporates a 
thermal imager and automatic acquisition video tracker to 
provide additional capability to engage small, high-speed 
maneuvering craft, and low, slow aircraft and helicopters. The 
committee understands that the CIWS, upgraded to the block 1B 
configuration, is the most effective surface-ship weapon system 
used to combat terrorist surface vessels and air threats. The 
committee further understands that 22 CIWSs are scheduled for 
overhaul in fiscal year 2005 without an upgrade to the CIWS 
block 1B configuration.
    Since the committee believes that completing the block 1B 
upgrade as part of an overhaul is the most cost-effective 
method to maximize CIWS block 1B capability for the surface 
ship fleet, it recommends $120.1 million for CIWS 
modifications, an increase of $34.0 million to upgrade 22 
additional CIWSs to the block 1B configuration.

Evolved sea sparrow missile

    The budget request contained $80.3 million for 71 evolved 
Sea Sparrow missiles (ESSMs).
    The ESSM is an upgraded version of the existing North 
Atlantic Treaty Organization Sea Sparrow missile which provides 
improved surface-ship air defense capabilities against low 
altitude, high-velocity and maneuvering aircraft and against 
anti-ship cruise missiles. The ESSM is designed for use in a 
``quad pack'' canister, or set of four missiles, in the MK 41 
vertical launching system.
    The committee notes that additional ESSMs were included 
among the Chief of Naval Operations' unfunded priorities for 
fiscal year 2005, and believes that increased procurement of 
ESSMs would significantly improve force protection capabilities 
in the surface fleet.
    Accordingly, the committee recommends $102.3 million for 
the ESSM, an increase of $22.0 million for 24 additional ESSMs 
and for 6 additional ``quad pack'' canisters.

Hellfire II missile

    The budget request for the Department of the Navy 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 as their 
primary precision-guided munition. The committee notes that 
current Hellfire II missile inventories are at 34 percent of 
requirements, and are projected to fall to 13 percent of the 
inventory requirement by fiscal year 2009 based on forecast 
expenditures and shelf-life expirations. As a result of this 
projection, the committee notes that both the Chief of Naval 
Operations and the Commandant of the Marine Corps have included 
procurement of Hellfire II missiles among their unfunded 
priorities for fiscal year 2005.
    Consequently, the committee recommends $42.0 million to 
procure 500 Hellfire II missiles.

Pioneer unmanned aerial vehicle

    The budget request contained $8.8 million to improve the 
Pioneer unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV).
    The committee is aware that the Navy no longer uses 
Pioneer, but has loaned Pioneer to the Marine Corps for use as 
a tactical UAV until the Marine Corps has developed and fielded 
its objective high speed vertical take-off and landing (VTOL) 
UAV. The committee notes that a Marine Corps VTOL UAV will, at 
best, not be operational until the end of this decade. The 
committee understands that the cost to improve the Pioneer is 
approximately the same as to produce a new Shadow tactical UAV 
(TUAV). Therefore, the committee believes that it is wiser to 
equip the Marine Corps with new Shadow systems incorporating a 
standard tactical common data link, target location error 
reduction features and other improvements. The committee notes 
that this would provide an interim TUAV to the Marine Corps 
that could, when appropriate, be transferred to the Army.
    Therefore, the committee recommends no funding for Pioneer, 
a reduction of $8.8 million. Elsewhere in this report funding 
is recommended to provide an upgraded Shadow 200 TUAV system to 
the Marine Corps.

Tomahawk missile

    The budget request contained $256.2 million for 293 
tactical tomahawk (TACTOM) missiles.
    The TACTOM missile is a long-range, precision-strike cruise 
missile launched from surface ships or submarines.
    The committee understands that the Department of the Navy's 
programmed budget for TACTOM missiles would result in an 
inventory that is significantly below the Navy's stated 
Tomahawk required inventory levels, and notes that planned 
production of 293 TACTOM missiles is below both the fiscal year 
2003 and fiscal year 2004 production rate of 350 missiles per 
year. Also, the committee notes that additional TACTOMs were 
included among the Chief of Naval Operations' unfunded 
priorities for fiscal year 2005 to restore inventory levels 
expended during Operation Iraqi Freedom.
    To sustain TACTOM production at a rate of 350 missiles per 
year for fiscal year 2005 and to improve the TACTOM inventory 
levels, the committee recommends $305.9 million for the 
Tomahawk missile, an increase of $49.7 million for an 
additional 57 TACTOM missiles.

              Ammunition Procurement, Navy & Marine Corps


                                Overview

    The budget request for fiscal year 2005 contained $858.6 
million for Ammunition Procurement, Navy & Marine Corps. The 
committee recommends authorization of $870.8 million, an 
increase $12.2 million, for fiscal year 2005.
    The committee recommendations for the fiscal year 2005 
Ammunition Procurement, Navy & Marine Corps program are 
identified in the table below. Major changes to the Navy & 
Marine Corps request are discussed following the table.


                   Shipbuilding and Conversion, Navy


                                Overview

    The budget request for fiscal year 2005 contained $9,962.0 
million for Shipbuilding and Conversion, Navy. The committee 
recommends authorization of $10,120.0 million, an increase of 
$158.0 million, for fiscal year 2005.
    The committee recommendations for the fiscal year 2005 
Shipbuilding and Conversion, Navy program are identified in the 
table below. Major changes to the Navy request are discussed 
following the table.


                       Items of Special Interest


Aft ramp range retriever craft

    The budget request contained $32.1 million for the 
procurement of service craft, but included no funding for aft 
ramp range retriever craft (ARC).
    The committee is informed that the Naval Undersea Warfare 
Center Division located in Keyport, Washington, currently has 
two, approximately 40-years-old, wooden ARCs that are at the 
end of their useful service life. The committee notes that the 
Navy has approved an Operational Requirements Document for 
replacement ARCs.
    The committee recommends $40.1 million for the procurement 
of service craft, an increase of $8.0 million to design and 
build two aluminum ARCs and provide appropriate spare parts.

Amphibious assault ship replacement program

    The budget request contained no funding for the amphibious 
assault ship replacement program (LHA (R)).
    The committee understands that the LHA (R) will be based on 
the LHD-1 Class hull combined with the latest propulsion and 
electric plant technology. The committee further notes that, 
while the LHA (R) design is not yet finalized, commonality with 
LHD-1 Class will be much greater than 50 percent. The Secretary 
of the Navy is directed to report to the congressional defense 
committees how the additional funding will be used prior to 
obligation of those funds, since no description has been 
provided with the budget request.
    Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $150.0 
million in ship construction Navy for advanced procurement of 
components common to LHD-9 and LHA (R).

                        Other Procurement, Navy


                                Overview

    The budget request for fiscal year 2005 contained $4,834.3 
million for Other Procurement, Navy. The committee recommends 
authorization of $4,876.7 million, an increase of $42.4 
million, for fiscal year 2005.
    The committee recommendations for the fiscal year 2005 
Other Procurement, Navy program are identified in the table 
below. Major changes to the Navy request are discussed 
following the table.


                       Items of Special Interest


Chemical biological defense for aviation and explosive ordnance 
        disposal

    The budget request included $25.1 million for explosive 
ordnance disposal equipment and $131.9 million for chemical and 
biological defense individual protection equipment.
    The committee notes that the Chief of Naval Operations has 
identified a critical requirement for chemical and biological 
individual protection equipment and explosive ordnance disposal 
equipment for which funding was not requested in fiscal year 
2005.
    The committee notes increasing Navy requirements for 
improvement of the mission readiness of explosive ordnance 
disposal (EOD) units for incidents involving improvised 
explosive devices and weapons of mass destruction. The 
committee notes that commercial-off-the-shelf (COTS) robotic 
and explosive detection systems are available that would 
significantly enhance the ability of EOD units to conduct 
remote reconnaissance and disruption operations against a range 
of military and commercial explosive devices.
    The committee also notes significant shortfalls in chemical 
and biological defense individual protection systems for Navy 
aircrews. The procurement of replacement aircrew chemical 
biological defense respirators is essential for Navy and Marine 
aircrews to be capable of operating in a chemical, biological, 
radiological, nuclear threat environment until the joint 
service aircrew mask is fielded in fiscal year 2009.
    The committee recommends an increase of $10.4 million for 
procurement of COTS robotic and explosive detection systems for 
EOD units. The committee also recommends an increase of $11.0 
million for procurement of aircrew chemical and biological 
defense respirators.

Complementary acoustic system improvements

    The budget request contained $225.0 million for the 
procurement of SSN acoustics, but contained no funding for 
complementary acoustic system improvements.
    The committee understands that it is necessary to 
coordinate complementary acoustic improvements in order that 
maximum overall system performance is realized. The committee 
also realizes that cost savings can be realized by such an 
approach.
    Therefore, the committee recommends $229.0 million for 
procurement of SSN acoustics, an increase of $4.0 million for 
complementary acoustic system improvements.

CVN replacement propeller program

    The budget request contained no funds for advanced aircraft 
carrier propellers.
    The committee is aware that the Navy has designed a new 
Generation III propeller for new and in service aircraft 
carriers. It further notes that it costs $2.0 million per ship 
set to refurbish old propellers which last for only a few 
years. The committee believes the Generation III propeller 
offers a more cost-effective alternative.
    The committee recommends $7.0 million to procure two ship 
sets of Generation III propellers for in-service aircraft 
carriers.

Envelop protective covers

    The budget request contained $245.5 million for the 
procurement of spares and repair parts, but contained no 
funding for envelop protective covers.
    The committee is aware that envelop protective covers 
significantly reduce corrosion on Navy surface combatant 
weapons systems. The committee notes that a 2003 General 
Accounting Office study estimated annual cost of corrosion 
control for military infrastructure at $20,000 million. The 
committee further notes that envelop covers, developed under 
Navy-sponsored research use modern technology to draw moisture 
from beneath the cover, keeping metal surfaces dry. The 
committee understands that Navy test results show that envelop 
covers reduce corrosion by 95 percent, compared to current 
covers.
    The committee recommends $249.9 million for the procurement 
of spares and repair parts, an increase of $4.4 million to 
procure covers for weapons systems on Navy surface combatants.

Integrated bridge system

    The budget request contained $57.5 million for the 
procurement of Aegis support equipment, but contained no 
funding for an integrated bridge system (IBS).
    The committee notes that an integrated bridge system has 
been developed that automates underway planning, reduces bridge 
manning, and reduces risk of collision and grounding. The 
committee also notes that significant cost savings per ship 
result from installation of IBS.
    The committee recommends $76.5 million for Aegis support 
equipment, an increase of $19.0 million for IBS.

Integrated condition assessment system

    The budget request contained $148.6 million for the 
procurement of items less than $5.0 million, but included no 
funding for an integrated condition assessment systems (ICAS).
    The committee is aware that ICAS links the key elements of 
the maintenance decision process, continually monitoring and 
recording critical machinery operating data. The committee 
notes that ICAS facilitates more timely and accurate 
maintenance with the potential to improve systems reliability 
while lowering operating costs.
    The committee recommends an increase of $11.8 million for 
ICAS.

Man overboard identification program

    The budget request contained $20.7 million in other 
procurement Navy, but included no funding for man overboard 
identification program (MOBI).
    The committee is aware that each year more than 50 service 
members fall overboard from U.S. Navy ships. The MOBI system 
provides an active means by which a Navy ship can immediately 
be alerted to a man-overboard incident and also be provided 
precision location of the individual in the water, thereby 
reducing death and injury from such incidents. The committee 
notes that the Navy has begun installing MOBI on all Navy 
ships.
    The committee recommends an increase of $12.4 million in 
other procurement Navy to expedite MOBI installation on all 
Navy ships.

Multi-climate protection clothing system

    The budget request contained $19.0 million for the 
procurement of aviation life support equipment, but contained 
no funding for a multi-climate protection clothing system.
    The committee is aware that the Chief of Naval Operations 
has given high priority to procurement of improved clothing for 
aircrews. The committee notes that a new multi-climate clothing 
system has been introduced that meets present requirements.
    The committee recommends $27.0 million aviation life 
support equipment, an increase of $8.0 million for the multi-
climate clothing protection system.

Programmable integrated communications terminal

    The budget request contained $14.1 million for shipboard 
tactical communications, but included no funding for a 
programmable integrated communications terminal (PICT).
    The committee is aware that many of the secure voice 
terminals aboard ship are out-dated and require expensive and 
time-consuming maintenance. The committee notes that a single 
commercial technology PICT can be used to replace several 
legacy terminals for interior and radio communications.
    The committee recommends $16.1 million, an increase of $2.0 
million for procurement and installation of PICTs aboard Marine 
Corps amphibious ships.

Serial number tracking system

    The budget request contained $11.5 million for the 
procurement of other supply support equipment, but contained no 
funding for a serial number tracking system (SNTS).
    The committee notes that the SNTS provides web-based, 
``cradle-to-grave'' total asset visibility of individual 
components throughout the supply, maintenance and 
transportation processes. This leads to increased readiness and 
reduced maintenance costs.
    The committee recommends $19.5 million for other supply 
support equipment, an increase of $8.0 million to continue 
implementation of SNTS in the areas of shipboard automated 
configuration management and calibrated equipment areas.

Weapons elevator automation

    The budget request contained $148.6 million for the 
procurement of items less than $5.0 million, but included no 
funding for weapons elevator automation.
    The committee is aware that weapons elevators on aircraft 
carriers are critical to the success of strike missions. The 
committee is also aware that a successful demonstration of an 
automated weapons elevator has been conducted and that it was 
also proven during recent combat deployments.
    The committee supports this improved capability and 
recommends an increase of $2.3 million for weapons elevator 
automation.

                       Procurement, Marine Corps


                                Overview

    The budget request for fiscal year 2005 contained $1,190.1 
million for Procurement, Marine Corps. The committee recommends 
authorization of $1,315.1 million, an increase of $125.0 
million, for fiscal year 2005.
    The committee recommendations for the fiscal year 2005 
Procurement, Marine Corps program are identified in the table 
below. Major changes to the Marine Corps request are discussed 
following the table.


                       Items of Special Interest


Assault breacher vehicle

    The budget request contained $4.6 million for the assault 
breacher vehicle (ABV).
    The ABV is a tracked, armored combat engineer vehicle 
designed to breach mine fields, complex obstacles and provide 
in-stride breaching capability to Marine Corps ground forces 
operating on the battlefield. The committee understands the ABV 
enters into low-rate initial production in fiscal year 2005 and 
recognizes the ABV would provide additional crew protection, 
vehicle survivability and improve the mobility of the Marine 
Air-Ground Task Force. The committee also notes the Commandant 
of the Marine Corps identified a $12.0 million fiscal year 2005 
unfunded requirement for the ABV.
    The committee recommends $16.6 million for the ABV, an 
increase of $12.0 million to accelerate ABV fielding by one 
year and fulfill the Commandant of the Marine Corps fiscal year 
2005 unfunded requirement.

Improved recovery vehicle

    The budget request contained no funds for procurement of 
the M88A2 Hercules Improved Recovery Vehicle (IRV).
    The committee understands the M88A2 IRV is a joint Marine 
Corps and Army product improvement program that reuses the 
fielded M88A1 recovery vehicle hull and installs a new upgraded 
engine and provides better suspension to increase towing, 
hoisting, and winching capability. The committee notes the 
M88A2 IRV also provides improved armored crew protection and is 
the prime recovery vehicle for the M1 Abrams tank and other 
heavy vehicles.
    The committee recommends $8.5 million to procure three 
M88A2 Hercules Improved Recovery Vehicles and fulfill the 
Commandant of the Marine Corps's fiscal year 2005 unfunded 
requirement.

Marines global command and control systems and integrated imagery and 
        intelligence analysis system

    The budget request included $9.6 million for modification 
kits for intelligence.
    The committee notes the Commandant of the Marine Corps's 
number one unfunded requirement for fiscal year 2005 is the 
acceleration of the Distributed Common Ground System (DCGS) 
integrated backbone (DIB). The DCGS DIB integration supports 
the capstone requirements document (CRD) and ongoing multi-
service collaboration efforts for the Marine Corps. Additional 
funding would provide the Marine Corps with needed licenses, 
software, and servers for intelligence analysis systems 
necessary to support the Marine Corps intelligence 
infrastructure.
    The committee recommends $14.1 million, an increase of $4.5 
million for Global Command and Control Systems, Integrated 
Imagery and Intelligence (GCCS-I3) for the Marine Corps.

Nitrile rubber collapsible storage units

    The budget request contained $5.2 million for tactical fuel 
systems, but included no funding for nitrile rubber collapsible 
storage tanks.
    The committee understands that the Marine Corps has 
identified an immediate need to procure nitrile rubber 
collapsible storage tanks for its Tactical Fuel System (TFS). 
The committee notes that TFS played a critical role in 
receiving, storage, transfer and dispensing fuel and bulk 
liquid in support of Marine Corps operations in Iraq.
    The committee recommends $8.5 million, an increase of $3.3 
million for nitrile rubber collapsible storage tanks.

                    Aircraft Procurement, Air Force


                                Overview

    The budget request for fiscal year 2005 contained $13,163.2 
million for Aircraft Procurement, Air Force. The committee 
recommends authorization of $13,649.2 million, an increase of 
$486.0 million, for fiscal year 2005.
    The committee recommendations for the fiscal year 2005 
Aircraft Procurement, Air Force program are identified in the 
table below. Major changes to the Air Force request are 
discussed following the table.


                       Items of Special Interest


Advanced targeting pod

    The budget request contained $309.7 million for other 
production charges, of which $52.3 million was for procurement 
of advanced targeting pods (ATP).
    The ATP will supplement and replace existing targeting pods 
while providing improved infra-red technology, improved laser 
capability, a laser spot tracker, and enhanced combat 
identification. The committee notes that the budget request 
would only provide forty-four percent of the fiscal year 2005 
inventory requirement for targeting pods, and understands that 
current budget plans would leave the Department of the Air 
Force 300 ATPs short of its inventory requirement. 
Additionally, the committee notes that the Air Force Chief of 
Staff has included accelerated ATP procurement as his second 
highest unfunded priority for fiscal year 2005.
    Therefore, the committee recommends $374.7 million for 
other production charges, an increase of $65.0 million to 
accelerate the procurement of ATPs.

B-1B modifications

    The budget request contained $8.8 million for B-1B 
procurement modifications, but included no funds for 
modifications or operations and maintenance required to 
regenerate 17 additional aircraft.
    The committee notes that the Air Force had planned to 
retire 32 of its 92-aircraft B-1B aircraft fleet by the end of 
fiscal year 2004. However, in its report on H.R. 1588 (H. Rept. 
108-106) the committee noted the B-1B's long-range capability 
to deliver conventional precision-guided munitions against 
strategic and tactical targets during the recent Operation 
Enduring Freedom and Operation Iraqi Freedom, and the B-1B's 
crucial contribution to the success of both operations. 
Moreover, the committee continues to believe that possible 
future conflicts could require an increased number of long-
range bomber aircraft to deliver precision-guided munitions 
since basing for shorter range aircraft may not be assured.
    To address the need for additional long-range bomber 
aircraft in fiscal year 2004, the committee recommended an 
increase of $20.3 million for B-1B modifications to begin the 
regeneration of 23 of the 32 aircraft planned for retirement, 
because, only 23 were available for regeneration at that time. 
The committee notes that $17.0 million was appropriated in 
fiscal year 2004 for this purpose. For fiscal year 2005, the 
committee understands that only 17, rather than 23, of the 32 
B-1Bs scheduled for retirement can now be reasonably 
regenerated to an operational condition, and that the 
Department of the Air Force plans to regenerate 7 of those 17 
aircraft. The Department, however, has not included the 
additional $7.5 million to operate and maintain these aircraft 
in its fiscal year 2005 budget request. To address this 
shortfall, the committee recommends a $7.5 million increase for 
this purpose elsewhere in this report.
    Since the committee continues to believe that all 17 of 
those aircraft should be regenerated, it recommends $104.6 
million for B-1B procurement modifications, an increase of 
$95.8 million for the necessary upgrades for 10 additional B-1B 
aircraft. Elsewhere in this report, the committee recommends an 
increase of $149.9 million to operate and maintain these 
aircraft for fiscal year 2005.
    In making this recommendation, the committee understands 
that an additional $732.5 million will need to be budgeted in 
various appropriations for fiscal years 2006 through 2011 to 
provide for these aircraft, and strongly encourages the 
Department to take this action.

C-5 modifications

    The budget request contained $99.6 million for C-5 
modifications, of which $89.7 million was included for 18 C-5 
avionics modernization program (AMP) kits.
    The C-5 AMP replaces unreliable and unsupportable engine 
flight instruments and flight system components. The committee 
understands that increased C-5 AMP funding is critical to 
sustain the operational utility and viability of the Air Force 
Reserve and Air National Guard C-5A fleet.
    Consequently, the committee recommends $120.6 million for 
C-5 modifications, an increase of $21.0 million for 6 C-5 
additional AMP kits.

C-17

    The C-17 is a strategic cargo aircraft, capable of rapid 
delivery to main operating bases or forward bases in the 
deployment area. The aircraft is also capable of performing 
tactical airlift and airdrop missions when required. The C-17 
is currently procured under a multiyear procurement contract 
that delivers 15 aircraft per year with the last deliveries 
under the existing contract scheduled for fiscal year 2008. The 
Department of the Air Force currently plans for an inventory of 
180 C-17 aircraft.
    The committee notes that the January 2001 Mobility 
Requirements Study 2005 (MRS-05) concluded that the airlift 
capacity to transport 54.5 million ton miles per day (MTM/D) is 
needed to execute the national military strategy with a 
moderate degree of risk, but that currently airlift capacity is 
approximately 44.7 MTM/D, a shortage of 9.8 MTM/D. In testimony 
before the committee's Projection Forces Subcommittee on March 
17, 2004, the Commander of the U.S. Transportation Command 
noted that a new Mobility Capabilities Study (MCS) is underway 
and stated that, ``we need to make sure that we meet at least 
the requirements of MRS-05 plus whatever MCS lays on the 
table.'' This would require an inventory of at least 222 C-17s, 
42 more than now planned to meet mobility requirements.
    Accordingly, the committee strongly urges the Department of 
the Air Force to budget for continued C-17 procurement through 
a multiyear program to procure at least 42 additional C-17 
aircraft.

C-17 maintenance training system

    The budget request contained $2,512.5 million to procure 14 
C-17 aircraft and associated support equipment, of which $45.0 
million was included for a C-17 maintenance training system 
(MTS) at Travis Air Force Base, California, but included no 
funds for an MTS at Hickam AFB, Hawaii.
    The C-17 MTS consists of three maintenance training devices 
designed to qualify personnel, and to sustain proficiency, in 
the maintenance of the C-17's engines, aircraft systems, and 
avionics. The committee understands that eight C-17 aircraft 
are planned for delivery to Hickam AFB in December 2005, and 
that without an MTS at this location, maintenancepersonnel 
would be required to travel to McChord AFB, Washington, for this 
training resulting in increased travel costs and maintenance manpower 
loss at Hickam AFB.
    Therefore, the committee recommends $2,547.5 million for 
the C-17, an increase of $35.0 million for an additional MTS.

C-130E engine upgrades

    The budget request contained $110.4 million for C-130 
modifications but included no funds to upgrade the C-130E's 
T56-A-7 engines to the T-56-A-15 configuration.
    Due to engine power limitations, the committee understands 
that C-130E aircraft are restricted to less demanding missions. 
The committee also understands that upgrading the C-130E's T56-
A-7 engines to the T-56-A-15 configuration would provide a 32 
percent increase in engine power, reduce time between engine 
overhaul by 15 percent, and provide the same engine 
configuration as the C-130E/H fleet.
    Consequently, the committee recommends $117.6 million for 
C-130 modifications, an increase of $7.2 million to upgrade 20 
C-130E T56-A-7 engines to the T-56-A-15 configuration.

F-15 modifications

    The budget request contained $181.6 million for F-15 
modifications, of which $3.0 million was included for ALQ-135 
band 1.5 countermeasures system support equipment, but included 
no funds for the procurement of ALQ-135 band 1.5 
countermeasures system modification kits.
    The ALQ-135 band 1.5 countermeasures system modification 
provides a self-protection jamming capability against modern 
surface-to-air enemy missiles and is integrated with the F-
15E's existing internal countermeasure set and its ALR-56C 
radar warning receiver to provide full threat coverage. The 
committee understands that over half of the F-15E fleet is now 
equipped with the ALQ-135 band 1.5 countermeasures system, and 
believes that all combat-coded F-15E aircraft should be so 
equipped until the F/A-22 and F-35 aircraft enter the Air Force 
inventory in significant numbers.
    Accordingly, the committee recommends $198.6 million for F-
15 modifications, an increase of $17.0 million for ALQ-135 band 
1.5 countermeasures system modification kits, and encourages 
the Department of the Air Force to complete ALQ-135 band 1.5 
production and installation on all combat-coded F-15E aircraft 
as soon as possible with a minimum production rate of two 
shipsets per month.

F-16 Air National Guard Force Structure

    The committee notes that the 177th Fighter Wing (FW) in 
Atlantic City, New Jersey, is designated as one of several 
full-time Combat Air Patrol (CAP) alert sites by the United 
States Northern Command. The 177th FW currently possesses a 
primary assigned aircraft (PAA) strength of only 15 Block 25 F-
16 aircraft, but the committee believes that an increase to 24 
PAA would enable the 177th FW to better meet its essential CAP 
mission protecting the citizens and property located on the 
East Coast of the United States. The committee strongly 
encourages the Air Force to adopt 24 PAA at the 177th FW as 
part of its force structure plan as soon as aircraft become 
available from elsewhere in active or air reserve component 
units, aircraft reassignments resulting from domestic or 
overseas base realignment and closure, or from future 
acquisition of F-16 aircraft.

F-16 modifications

    The budget request contained $336.3 million for F-16 
modifications, but included no funds for the AN/APX-113 
Advanced Identification Friend or Foe (AIFF) for F-16 block 25, 
30, and 32 aircraft, or for the Air National Guard's (ANG) 
Theater Airborne Reconnaissance System (TARS) pods.
    The AN/APX-113 AIFF provides F-16 block 25, 30, and 32 
aircraft with a capability to identify both U.S. and allied 
aircraft at well beyond visual ranges. The committee notes that 
the APX-113 AIFF is included among the ANG's significant 
equipment shortages in the ``National Guard and Reserve 
Equipment Report for Fiscal Year 2005,'' and believes that this 
system is critical for F-16 block 25, 30, and 32 aircraft that 
perform a homeland defense combat air patrol mission. 
Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $10.0 
million for the AN/APX-113 AIFF for the ANG's F-16 block 25, 
30, and 32 aircraft.
    The two ANG F-16 units equipped with TARS pods provide a 
responsive reconnaissance capability to support intelligence 
and targeting requirements of military users. The committee 
understands that upgraded TARS pods are available that meet 
Department of the Air Force operational requirements for day 
and night, through-the-weather reconnaissance and near real-
time data link of imagery to support time-critical targeting. 
The committee also understands that the Air Force component 
commander of the U.S. Central command has requested that this 
capability be deployed to the Iraq theater. Accordingly, the 
committee recommends an increase of $12.0 million to provide 
one of the two ANG F-16 TARS-equipped units with two TARS pods 
and associated spares and support equipment.
    In total, the committee recommends $358.3 million for F-16 
modifications, an increase of $22.0 million.

KC-767 aerial refueling tanker aircraft

    The budget request contained no funds for a KC-767 aerial 
refueling tanker aircraft. The Secretary of the Air Force has 
designated the KC-767 to be the replacement for the 43-year old 
KC-135 aerial refueling tanker aircraft.
    In its report on H.R. 1588 (H. Rpt. 108-106) for fiscal 
year 2004, the committee noted the advancing age of the KC-135 
fleet, which comprises most of the Air Force's aerial refueling 
capability, and expressed concern that a substantial portion of 
the Air Force's air refueling tanker fleet will reach 
simultaneous maturity, and will require substantial investment 
to operate, maintain, and eventually replace this fleet. To 
address this concern, the National Defense Authorization Act 
for Fiscal Year 2004 (Public Law 108-136) included a provision 
(section 135) that authorized the Secretary of the Air Force to 
lease not more that 20 tanker aircraft and to procure up to 80 
additional tanker aircraft through a ten-year multiyear 
procurement program.
    On December 1, 2003, the Deputy Secretary of Defense 
requested the Department of Defense (DOD) Inspector General 
(IG) determine if there is any compelling reason why the 
Secretary of the Air Force should not proceed with its tanker 
lease program. The committee notes the DOD IG concluded that 
there was no compelling reason why the Air Force could 
notexecute the proposal as planned, but that the DOD IG was critical of 
the Air Force's procurement strategy, acquisition procedures, and 
adherence to statutory requirements.
    Additionally, the committee notes that the Secretary of 
Defense has directed other reviews of the tanker lease program 
including a Defense Science Board evaluation of the tanker 
recapitalization program, a DOD General Counsel review and 
update of ethics policy and training for senior DOD officials, 
and a National Defense University study to analyze the 
decisionmaking process to develop lessons learned that would 
improve the acquisition and procurement processes. Other on-
going studies include an analysis of alternatives to meet the 
Air Force's aerial refueling requirements and a study of the 
long-term tanker aircraft maintenance and training requirements 
directed by sections 134 and 135 of the National Defense 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2004 (Public Law 108-136). As 
a result of these studies, analyses, and investigations, the 
committee further notes that the Secretary of Defense has 
directed the Secretary of the Air Force to suspend all further 
negotiations on the tanker lease program.
    While the committee supports the DOD and Congressionally-
directed studies and analysis regarding the Air Force's tanker 
aircraft, it remains concerned that as the KC-135 aircraft 
fleet ages, the Air Force confronts a risk that the entire KC-
135 fleet may be grounded pending the resolution of stress, 
material, or corrosion problems. The prospect of grounding the 
KC-135 fleet puts the Nation's long range strike and re-supply 
capabilities at risk when U.S. forces are globally deployed in 
support of the global war on terrorism. Accordingly, the 
committee believes that the Secretary of the Air Force should 
begin the KC-767 program in fiscal year 2005 in accordance with 
section 135 of the National Defense Authorization Act for 
Fiscal Year 2004 (Public Law 108-136) and section 116 and 117 
of this act. The committee further understands that projected 
annual procurement of KC-767 tanker aircraft would result in a 
procurement program likely to span over twenty-five years to 
replace the entire 544-aircraft KC-135 fleet, and further 
understands that the last of the retiring KC-135 aircraft may 
be approximately 70 years old when they are removed from the 
Air Force's tanker aircraft inventory.
    Consequently, the committee recommends an increase of $15.0 
million in procurement for the advance procurement of KC-767 
aerial refueling tankers, and an increase of $80.0 million in 
PE 64XXXF for KC-767 development. Elsewhere in this report, the 
committee recommends an increase of $3.5 million in operations 
and maintenance to sustain the KC-767 system program office and 
for KC-767 training.

Predator unmanned aerial vehicle

    The budget request contained $146.6 million for Predator 
unmanned aerial vehicles (UAV).
    The committee is aware that Predator B is the next 
generation of the proven Predator UAV. The committee strongly 
supports additional acquisition of propjet Predator B UAVs. The 
committee also realizes that Predator A has significant 
capability to support operations in Iraq.
    The committee recommends $322.6 million, an increase of 
$44.0 million for additional propjet Predator B UAVs and an 
increase of $132.0 million for four Predator A systems.

Senior scout permanent carrier

    The budget request contained $110.4 million for the C-130 
program, but contained no funding for the establishment of a 
dedicated C-130 unit for the SENIOR SCOUT mission.
    The SENIOR SCOUT mission package and assigned personnel are 
temporarily located at the Air National Guard's 169th 
intelligence squadron (169th IS) in Salt Lake City, Utah. The 
SENIOR SCOUT mission package is a self-contained, roll-on/roll-
off shelter that can be accommodated on any appropriately 
modified C-130 aircraft. The Joint Chiefs of Staff has 
mobilized this mission since October 2001 and considers this a 
high demand, low density asset capable of meeting current 
counternarcotics and global war on terrorism intelligence 
tasking.
    The Air National Guard (ANG) supports the SENIOR SCOUT 
mission lift requirements. The Idaho ANG at Gowen Field has 
indicated that it wishes to host the SENIOR SCOUT mission 
personnel and is presently coordinating with the National Guard 
Bureau (NGB) in establishing this permanent affiliation. The 
committee commends both the NGB and their units for their 
initiative and looks forward to the 169th IS-Idaho ANG 
affiliation to increase mission effectiveness and availability 
to both the counternarcotics and the global war of terrorism.
    Therefore, the committee recommends $112.4 million in C-130 
procurement, an increase of $2.0 million for the establishment 
of a dedicated ANG unit for the SENIOR SCOUT mission.

T-38 modifications

    The budget request contained $153.7 million for T-38 
modifications, but included no funds for the T-38 ejection 
system upgrade program (ESUP).
    The T-38 ESUP will replace the T-38's original ejection 
seats, add an inter-seat sequencing system, and improve escape 
path clearance. The committee understands that the T-38 ESUP 
will also result in improved accommodation for smaller and 
larger crewmembers not considered when the aircraft was 
originally fielded in the early 1960s, and notes that the Air 
Force Chief of Staff has included the T-38 ESUP among his 
unfunded priorities for fiscal year 2005.
    Therefore, the committee recommends $173.7 million for T-38 
modifications, an increase of $20.0 million for the T-38 ESUP.

                   Ammunition Procurement, Air Force


                                Overview

    The budget request for fiscal year 2005 contained $1,396.5 
million for Ammunition Procurement, Air Force. The committee 
recommends the budget request for fiscal year 2005.
    The committee recommendations for the fiscal year 2005 
Ammunition Procurement, Air Force program are identified in the 
table below. Major changes to the Air Force request are 
discussed following the table.


                     Missile Procurement, Air Force


                                Overview

    The budget request for fiscal year 2005 contained $4,718.3 
million for Missile Procurement, Air Force. The committee 
recommends authorization of $4,638.3 million, a decrease of 
$80.0 million, for fiscal year 2005.
    The committee recommendations for the fiscal year 2005 
Missile Procurement, Air Force program are identified in the 
table below. Major changes to the Air Force request are 
discussed following the table.


                       Items of Special Interest


Advanced extremely high frequency satellite

    The budget request contained $98.6 million for the advanced 
extremely high frequency (EHF) program, but contained no funds 
for long lead procurement associated with advanced EHF IV.
    Advanced EHF will replenish the existing EHF system and 
improve the capability to provide survivable, anti-jam, 
worldwide, secure communications for strategic and tactical 
warfighters. The current national space architecture plans for 
three advanced EHF satellites with follow-on capability 
provided by the Transformational Satellite (TSAT) 
Communications program. The committee is aware of the risk 
associated with the TSAT schedule and its ability to satisfy 
follow-on requirements which may require an additional advanced 
EHF satellite.
    The committee recommends $133.6 million, an increase of 
$35.0 million for long-lead procurement for a fourth advanced 
EHF satellite. This additional funding may not be obligated 
until 30 days after a formal Air Force decision to procure an 
additional advanced EHF satellite.

Evolved expendable launch vehicle

    The budget request included $611.0 million to acquire space 
launch services in the evolved expendable launch vehicle (EELV) 
program.
    EELV services are procured two years in advance of an 
operational requirement to provide the EELV contractors time to 
prepare for future launches. The fiscal year 2005, EELV budget 
request included launch services for a spaced-based infrared 
system satellite launch in fiscal year 2007. The committee 
notes that this launch will be delayed at least a year because 
of technical difficulties in satellite development and 
therefore funding for this launch is not required.
    Consequently, the committee recommends $511.0 million, a 
reduction of $100.0 million for the EELV program.

                      Other Procurement, Air Force


                                Overview

    The budget request for fiscal year 2005 contained $13,283.6 
million for Other Procurement, Air Force. The committee 
recommends authorization of $13,229.3 million, a decrease of 
$54.3 million, for fiscal year 2005.
    The committee recommendations for the fiscal year 2005 
Other Procurement, Air Force program are identified in the 
table below. Major changes to the Air Force request are 
discussed following the table.


                       Items of Special Interest


Combat training ranges

    The budget request contained $38.1 million for combat 
training ranges, of which $9.2 million was included for the 
joint threat emitter (JTE).
    The JTE is an advanced, mobile, rapidly reprogrammable 
electronic warfare threat simulator that generates all known 
ground-based electronic warfare threats. The committee 
understands that the Air Force's Air Combat Command fielding 
plan for the JTE includes additional JTEs in fiscal year 2006, 
and believes that this schedule should be accelerated.
    Accordingly, the committee recommends $43.1 million for 
combat training ranges, an increase of $5.0 million for the 
fielding of one additional JTE.

Advanced compression of tactical sensor information

    The budget request included $99.7 million for general 
information technology, but no funding for commercial-off-the-
shelf (COTS) technology that would improve intelligence 
analysis through the use of high-quality automatic target 
recognition from compressed video information.
    The committee is aware of COTS technology like Eagle Scout 
that would dramatically enhance the capability of advanced 
digital data and image compression technology that would 
automatically detect changes and objects within compressed 
digital video thereby improving target recognition and 
analysis.
    Therefore the committee recommends an increase of $7.0 
million for procurement and integration of COTS advanced 
compression, change detection, and target recognition software.

Fixed aircrew standardized seats

    The budget request contained $13.0 million for personal 
safety and rescue equipment items under $5.0 million, but 
included no funds for fixed aircrew standardized seats (FASS).
    FASS would provide crewmembers and passengers on C-130, C-
135, C-5, E-3, and E-8 aircraft protection against aircraft 
crash loads up to 16 times the force of gravity. In prior 
years, the committee has supported the development of the FASS, 
and understands that development will be completed in the early 
months of fiscal year 2005. The committee continues to believe 
that FASS procurement would not only increase safety, but would 
also reduce supply and maintenance costs through the 
commonality and interchangeability of their parts.
    Therefore, the committee recommends $17.8 million, an 
increase of $4.8 million for personal safety and rescue 
equipment items under $5.0 million for FASS.

General information technology

    The budget request contained $99.9 million for general 
information technologies, but included no funds for the science 
and engineering lab data integration (SELDI) program.
    The Air Force Material Command's science and engineering 
lab captures, analyzes and disseminates lab test data to the 
Air Force's engineering and system overhaul operations. The 
SELDI program facilitates this mission by providing a 
maintenance and logistics information management tool that 
allows more rapid lab data access affecting overhaul 
operations, provides accident investigators with immediate 
access to lab results of failed components, enables component 
failure trend analysis, and implements a new acoustic signature 
sensors to ensure the proper chemical composition of materials 
and equipment. The committee has recommended increases for the 
SELDI program in prior years, and continues to believe its 
implementation would improve operational aircraft readiness, 
increase flight safety and reduce support costs.
    Therefore, the committee recommends $107.9 million, an 
increase of $8.0 million for the SELDI program.

Point of maintenance and combat ammunition system initiative

    The budget request contained $16.2 million for mechanized 
material handling equipment, but included no funds for the 
point of maintenance and combat ammunition system initiative 
(POMX/CAS).
    The POMX/CAS is an automatic data collection program 
developed by the Air Force Materiel Command's Automatic 
Identification Technology Program Office, which streamlines 
mission critical data collection to reduce the burden on flight 
line personnel. The committee has supported the POMX/CAS in 
prior years.
    Since the committee continues to believe that the POMX/CAS 
would increase the timeliness and accuracy of maintenance data 
collection while reducing the administrative burden on 
maintenance technicians, it recommends $32.2 million for 
mechanized material handling equipment, an increase of $16.0 
million for the POMX/CAS.

                       Procurement, Defense-Wide


                                Overview

    The budget request for fiscal year 2005 contained $2,883.3 
million for Procurement, Defense-Wide. The committee recommends 
authorization of $2,950.7 million, an increase of $67.4 
million, for fiscal year 2005.
    The committee recommendations for the fiscal year 2005 
Procurement, Defense-Wide program are identified in the table 
below. Major changes to the Air Force request are discussed 
following the table.


                       Items of Special Interest


Chemical agents and munitions destruction

    The budget request contained $1,372.0 million for chemical 
agents and munitions destruction, including $1,138.8 million 
for operations and maintenance, $154.2 million for research, 
development, test and evaluation, and $79.0 million for 
procurement. The budget request also contained $81.9 million in 
military construction for the chemical agents and munitions 
destruction program.
    The committee notes that to date more than 8,600 tons of 
lethal chemical agents and munitions, over 27 percent of the 
total U.S. stockpile, has been safely destroyed in 4 
operational chemical demilitarization facilities. The committee 
notes, however, that the budget request represents a decrease 
of $166.2 million from the fiscal year 2004 budget request, 
despite the increased level of activity planned for the program 
in fiscal year 2005:
          (1) Destruction of chemical agents and munitions at 
        six sites: Tooele, Utah; Anniston, Alabama; Umatilla, 
        Oregon; Pine Bluff, Arkansas; Aberdeen, Maryland; and 
        Newport, Indiana;
          (2) Design, permitting, and construction activities 
        for Assembled Chemical Weapons Alternative pilot plants 
        at Pueblo, Colorado, and Blue Grass, Kentucky;
          (3) Sustainment of emergency preparedness activities 
        and capability improvements; and
          (4) Non-stockpile chemical material cleanup and 
        disposal efforts.
    The committee also notes that the fiscal year 2005 budget 
request reduced the fiscal year 2005 estimate for the chemical 
demilitarization program for completion, equipping, and 
systemization of the Pueblo Army Depot pilot plant from $151.7 
million to $4.9 million. The committee is informed that an 
analysis of alternatives for potential redesign of that plant 
is underway. The committee directs the Secretary of Defense to 
report to the congressional defense committees by July 1, 2004 
the results of the analysis of alternatives, the recommended 
course of action for proceeding with the construction of the 
Pueblo facility and destruction of the stockpile, and fiscal 
year 2005 funding requirements necessary to carry out that 
course of action.
    The committee further notes the ongoing review of proposals 
for disposal at a commercial hazardous waste water disposal 
facility of the hydrolysate that will result from the 
neutralization of the bulk VX agent at Newport. The committee 
believes that the United States must proceed as rapidly as 
possible in destroying the stockpile to ensure the overall 
maximum safety of our citizenry and meet our international 
treaty commitments. At the same time we must proceed 
objectively and deliberately in ensuring that the disposal of 
the hydrolysate in a commercial hazardous waste disposal 
facility would not compromise the public health and safety of 
the citizens or the environment near such a facility. The 
committee directs that the Army proceed expeditiously in 
providing for a prompt, objective and deliberate independent 
review of the process for destroying the VX nerve agent 
stockpile at Newport and not proceed with that process until 
such a review is completed, the findings are made available for 
public scrutiny, and all concerned understand precisely the 
risks involved.
    Section 1412(f) of the National Defense Authorization Act 
for Fiscal Year 1986 (Public Law 99-145) requires that funds 
for carrying out the destruction of the U.S. stockpile shall be 
set forth in the budget of the Department of Defense for any 
fiscal year as a separate account and shall not be included in 
the budget accounts for any military department. In committee 
hearings on the fiscal year 2005 budget request, Department of 
Defense witnesses testified that, while the Army was executive 
agent for the demilitarization program, the budget for the 
program is funded in a defense-wide account and any increases 
to program funding that might be required would come from the 
defense-wide account and not from the Department of the Army's 
budget. The committee agrees that this interpretation 
corresponds to the intent of Congress in establishing the 
program.
    Elsewhere in this report the committee recommends a 
provision that would transfer oversight of the Assembled 
Chemical Weapons Alternative program from the Under Secretary 
of Defense for Acquisition, Technology and Logistics to the 
Secretary of the Army. The committee believes that the 
establishment of a new management structure, which brings 
together all elements of the program under a single activity, 
as recommended by the General Accounting Office, would ensure 
more efficient management of the total program, and would also 
address the equities and concerns of those sites using 
assembled chemical weapons alternatives for destruction of 
stockpiles.
    The committee recommends $154.2 million for Chemical Agents 
and Munitions Destruction research, development, test and 
evaluation, $79.0 million for Chemical Agents and Munitions 
Destruction procurement, and $1,138.8 million for Chemical 
Agents and Munitions Destruction operations and maintenance. 
Elsewhere in this report the committee recommends $81.9 million 
for military construction for the chemical agents and munitions 
destruction program.

Chemical and biological defense procurement program

    The budget request contained $637.7 million for chemical 
and biological defense (CBD) procurement, including $104.9 
million for procurement of installation force protection 
equipment, $131.9 million for individual protection equipment, 
$11.3 million for decontamination equipment, $101.1 million for 
the joint biological defense program, $18.4 million for 
collective protection equipment, and $270.1 million for 
contamination avoidance equipment.
    The committee recommends the following increases for 
procurement of CBD individual protection and decontamination 
equipment:

                                                            In millions
M40 protective mask (rebuild)......................................$5.0
M45 protective mask (rebuild).......................................0.5
M40 protective mask.................................................2.0
M45 protective mask.................................................3.0
M12A1 decontamination apparatus (rework)............................3.0
M49 fixed installation filters......................................1.0
M100 sorbent decontamination kit....................................2.0
M291 skin protection kit............................................3.0
M295 equipment decontamination kit..................................2.0

    The committee also recommends an increase of $19.0 million 
for procurement of retrofit kits for improvement of the 
currently fielded chemical biological protective shelters and 
$20.0 million for procurement of M22 automatic chemical agent 
alarms for the Army National Guard.

Countering improvised explosive devices

    The committee finds that the well-being of the members of 
the Armed Forces deployed in defense of the Nation is of 
paramount importance. Therefore, the Department of Defense 
should do its utmost to see that deployed military personnel 
have the best force protection equipment the Nation can make 
available.
    Toward that end, the committee recommends that the 
Department of Defense and the military departments should, 
using all means at their disposal, increase the ability of 
currently unarmored vehicles that are deployed forward for 
operations in Operation Iraqi Freedom and Operation Enduring 
Freedom to resist improvised explosive devices, including 
nontraditional production sources and technologies, field-
installable kits, and reprogramming of funds. Further, the 
committee urges the Department of Defense to immediately 
release all funds that have been authorized and appropriated 
and that have not previously been released, to the military 
departments for the purposes of defeating improvised explosive 
devices and mitigating their effect on vehicles.
    In order to facilitate future such acquisitions, the 
committee directs the Secretary of Defense to submit a report 
to the congressional defense committees by March 1, 2005, 
discussing the lessons learned from the fiscal year 2004 effort 
to rapidly acquire force protection equipment and possible 
improvements in the acquisition system reflecting these 
lessons.

Guard and Reserve equipment

    The committee believes that the Chiefs of the Reserve and 
National Guard should exercise control of modernization funds 
provided for Reserve and National Guard programs and directs 
that the Chiefs of the Reserve and National Guard provide a 
separate submission for fiscal year 2006 of a detailed 
assessment of their modernization requirements and priorities 
to the congressional defense committees.

Indexing of class A mishaps

    The committee understands that the Department of Defense 
seeks to index certain contract thresholds to inflation, on the 
grounds that over time, unintended consequences result from not 
adjusting values to reflect actual economic conditions. The 
committee also notes that the value criterion for determining a 
Class A mishap has remained at $1.0 million for many years, 
while the value of parts for, and repair of, military systems 
have increased considerably.
    Therefore, the committee requests the Secretary of Defense 
to report to the congressional defense committees by February 
1, 2005, his recommendation as to whether the dollar values 
used to classify military mishaps should be indexed, and if so 
to recommend a generally accepted index to be used.

Joint threat work station, ground signals intelligence kits

    The budget request contained $16.9 million for the Special 
Operations Command (SOCOM) joint threat work station (JTWS), 
ground signals intelligence (SIGINT) kits (GSK).
    The committee notes that the JTWS is presently being 
integrated into the SOCOM mobile force platforms. The GSK is a 
variant of the JTWS that provides threat warning, force 
protection and SIGINT capabilities packaged for ground mobile 
special operation forces (SOF). Its utility in the global war 
on terrorism operations is significant. Additional funding 
would permit procurement of an additional 45 GSKs for use in 
the field by operational forces.
    The committee recommends $31.4 million, an increase of 
$14.5 million for SOF intelligence systems for the procurement 
of 45 GSKs.

Military specifications for radomes

    The committee notes that the military specification for 
radomes, also known as MIL-R-7705B, was written in 1975, and 
believes that this specification is outdated since it does not 
account for technological advancements that improve signal 
efficiency, reduce cost, and promote easier radome 
installation.
    The committee understands that, according to MIL-R-7705B, 
radomes are constructed according to four styles. One of these 
styles is a sandwich construction where the wall of the radome 
is constructed of three layers, two skins and a core material, 
and the dielectric constant of the skin materials is higher 
than the dielectric constant of the core material. The 
committee believes that greater efficiencies could be achieved 
through the use of interchangeable panels and overlapping 
flanges where the panels are joined so that signal loss could 
be diminished and installation time is reduced, resulting in 
lower cost.
    Therefore, the committee recommends that the Department of 
Defense consider updating its MIL-R-7705B military 
specification for radomes, by adding language to the sandwich 
construction section of this military specification to permit 
panels to be arranged in horizontal rows of identical 
interchangeable panels. The total panel arrangement would be 
such that the vertically joined edges would be staggered by 
locating them at the center of the panels in the rows 
immediately above and below the joint and that the joints of 
the panels would be overlapping sandwich flanges having 
appropriate dielectric constants and dimensions to produce 
minimum loss at the principal frequency of the system.

Special Operations Forces binocular goggle system

    The budget request contained $8.2 million for Special 
Operations Forces (SOF) small arms and weapons, but included no 
funding to procure the AN/PVS-15 binocular goggle system for 
SOF operators. The committee understands that this new 
binocular system will substantially improve the ability of SOF 
operators to conduct night operations by providing a wider 
field of view and better depth perception than the system 
currently in use. The committee notes that this item is on the 
unfunded priority list of the Commander, Special Operations 
Command.
    The committee recommends $20.2 million, an increase of 
$12.0 million for the procurement of AN/PVS-15 goggles for SOF 
small arms and weapons.

Special Operations Forces MH-47 infrared engine exhaust suppressor

    The budget request contained $447.3 million for Special 
Operations Forces (SOF) rotary wing upgrades and sustainment, 
but included only $2.9 million to procure the MH-47 infrared 
engine exhaust suppressor. The committee understands that these 
helicopter heat suppressors are a critical force protection 
requirement for the Army SOF MH-47 fleet now operating in a 
hostile environment, and believes that the entire fleet should 
be protected as soon as these suppressorscan be manufactured. 
The committee notes that this item is on the unfunded priority list of 
the Commander, Special Operations Command.
    The committee recommends $454.3 million, an increase of 
$7.0 million for SOF rotary wing upgrades and sustainment for 
procurement of additional MH-47 infrared engine exhaust 
suppressors.

Use of capability-based acquisition

    The committee endorses the Department's continuing move to 
capability-based planning and acquisition, a system that 
develops requirements based on the expected capabilities of 
potential adversaries rather than any specific employment 
scenario.
    Capability-based planning can be useful in allowing for 
unforeseen situations. Ideally, tailoring American forces to 
exceed other nations' known and projected capabilities should 
yield an advantage regardless of the situation in which they 
are employed.
    However, the committee notes a growing difficulty emerging 
from capability-based acquisition. Requiring all new hardware 
to exceed the posited capabilities of all possible enemies in 
all possible scenarios, while ignoring the likelihood of 
engagement against a particular adversary, leads ineluctably to 
more sophisticated and expensive systems. Given a defense 
budget top-line relatively fixed in real terms, that focus on 
possible future conflicts impinges on the Department's ability 
to meet requirements for current and known threats. The combat 
systems of the future fight for dollars against current 
logistics and operations and maintenance requirements, often to 
the detriment of both.
    Further, designing systems to meet the most stringent 
adversary capabilities does not always increase the capability 
to address lesser or unconventional threats. Traditional force 
structures included a ``high-low'' mix, offering an optimum 
combination of cost and capability. If all combat aircraft, for 
example, are tailored to operate in the most stressing 
environment that can be conceived, there can by definition be 
no ``low'' side.
    The Department asserts that the point of spiral acquisition 
is to be able to increase system capabilities as threats 
increase. But even the basic systems, prior to any spirals, are 
far more complex than will be needed in many post-Cold War 
conflicts.
    Before capabilities-based acquisition became the standard, 
the Office of Net Assessment provided input to the Defense 
Planning Guidance indicating which threats were likely to be 
most significant in the future; indeed, that was the reason Net 
Assessment was created in the first place. Force structures and 
acquisitions were designed to be relevant to what was likely to 
happen during the foreseeable future, recognizing that the 
likelihood of, for example, going to war against longtime 
allies was at best remote. The resulting forces can hardly be 
called technologically inadequate.
    As the military continues to operate at an unprecedented 
tempo around the globe against largely unsophisticated threats, 
the committee is concerned that use of capabilities-based 
acquisition, unleavened by common sense input as to the 
probability of a particular capability threat being used, will 
increase the pressure placed on the budgeting necessary to 
fight and win the wars in which we are currently engaged.

                         LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS


              Subtitle A--Authorization of Appropriations


           Sections 101-104--Authorization of Appropriations

    These sections would authorize the recommended fiscal year 
2005 funding levels for all procurement accounts.

                      Subtitle B--Program Matters


 Section 111--Multiyear Procurement Authority for the M777 Lightweight 
                         155mm Howitzer Program

    This section would permit the Secretary of the Navy and the 
Secretary of the Army to enter into a joint-service multiyear 
contract for procurement of the Lightweight 155mm Howitzer.

               Section 112--DDG-51 Modernization Program

    This section would direct the Secretary of the Navy to 
accelerate modernization of in-service guided missile 
destroyers (DDG-51) and expansion of the DDG-51 modernization 
program to include additional emphasis to reduce crew size to 
about 200.
    The budget request contained $3,445.0 million for 
procurement of three guided missile destroyers (DDG-51), but 
included no funding for in-service DDG-51 modernization.
    The committee notes that the Navy is scheduled to commence 
a DDG-51 modernization plan in fiscal year 2005 with new 
construction and subsequently extend modernization to in-
service destroyers. The committee is aware that the foundations 
for DDG-51 modernization are: increased warfighting capability, 
leverage of the DDG-51 shipbuilding program, reduction of total 
ship ownership costs, and use of open architecture. In addition 
to those factors, the committee believes that reduction in crew 
size from the present approximately 300 to an objective of 200 
personnel should also be part of the foundation of an even more 
aggressive modernization program.
    According to the Navy, a DDG-51 class ship costs $25.0 
million per year to operate, including $13.0 million for the 
crew. The Navy estimate is that its present modernization plan 
could reduce the crew cost per ship by $2.7 million per year. A 
larger reduction in crew size would clearly appear to result in 
significant savings over the estimated 18 years of remaining 
normal service life, especially noting that per capita 
personnel costs may be expected to increase during that period.
    The committee understands that the present DDG-51 
retirement schedule would retire some ships significantly 
before their expected life. The recent report to Congress, 
``DDG-51 Class Guided Missile Destroyers Modernization Plan'' 
indicates that modernization, beginning with the oldest DDGs 
first, ``will keep the DDG-51 portion of the Aegis equipped 
fleet an integral part of the Navy's Sea Power 21 Plan through 
year 2047.''
    The committee believes that acceleration of the in-service 
DDG-51 modernization would have the benefit of providing 
significant additional work to sustain the shipbuilding 
industrial base, which would allow deliberate maturation of the 
next generation destroyer's (DD (X))critical technologies prior 
to initiating production. The committee notes the recent testimony of 
the General Accounting Office and Congressional Research Service 
indicating that the majority of the DD (X) critical technologies are 
well below the acceptable level for initiating system design and 
development.
    The committee also notes that efforts are reportedly being 
made to accelerate the Coast Guard Deepwater Cutter program and 
that the Army is preparing to award a contract to construct 
several high speed vessels. Both programs, if coordinated with 
Navy ship construction, have potential to eliminate significant 
fluctuation in shipyard manning and to help to stabilize the 
industry.
    The committee understands that to increase shipyard work 
load, one solution would be to simply authorize one or several 
additional existing class new construction ships or to 
accelerate commencement of acquisition of some other class of 
ship. However, the committee believes it would be much wiser in 
the long run not to procure additional ships for which there is 
no established requirement. Likewise, to accelerate development 
of a class whose critical technologies are not mature has 
proven to significantly increase costs and cause delays that 
exacerbate industrial base problems.
    In fiscal year 2003, Congress approved and funded, above 
the President's request, a $300.0 million proposal that 
included a swap of DDG-51 and amphibious transport dock (LPD) 
shipbuilding workload between two shipyards handling the 
construction of these ships. At the time, the Navy indicated 
that such a workload ``swap'' was in the best interests of the 
government, providing workload stability and generally 
protecting a vital industrial base for the construction of 
surface combatants.
    This swap, implemented by Congress as a way of stabilizing 
the workload at these yards, has been undermined by the Navy's 
changing construction profile. Starting in 2004 and continuing 
into 2005, the Navy has reduced the number of DDG-51s and LPDs 
in its shipyard construction plan. Each time this happens, it 
creates instability within the surface combatant shipyards that 
see workload shares decrease in both the short- and long-term. 
In both 2004 and 2005, the Navy's ship construction plan 
changed from the proposal presented in 2003, negatively 
impacting the construction of surface combatants and thereby 
the same shipyards that Congress, with approval of the Navy, 
attempted to stabilize in 2003.
    The committee recommends $3,545.0 million for DDG-51s, an 
increase of $100.0 million to accelerate in-service DDG-51 
modernization.

Section 113--Repeal of Authority for Pilot Program for Flexible Funding 
                  of Cruiser Conversions and Overhauls

    This section would repeal Section 126 of the National 
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2004 (Public Law 108-
136).

    Section 114--Force Protection for Asymmetric Threat Environment

    This section would require that all manned ground systems, 
war-fighter survivability systems, and certain manned airborne 
systems be assessed for adequacy in survivability and 
suitability against asymmetrical threats. Force protection or 
survivability enhancements would be developed for these 
existing systems through the combination of in-service 
modifications and tactics, techniques, and procedures. Further, 
developmental military system designs must account for 
survivability and suitability against asymmetrical threats.
    The global war on terrorism has revealed a new 
sophisticated enemy. This foe is rapid to adapt, unbounded by 
civilized rules, and successfully using simple mechanisms to 
fight our advanced technology. Our military forces were 
developed to survive on the battlefield by detecting and 
destroying the enemy before he could see and engage our forces. 
Therefore, our existing manned ground and airborne systems were 
designed to survive in an environment that did not include the 
types of threats that now prevail in the global war on 
terrorism. Our military systems must now adapt to counter the 
close proximity, asymmetrical threat. Along with conventional 
threats, asymmetrical threats must be included as significant 
factors in the design and development of our war-fighter 
systems.
    The committee recommends that military departments adapt 
their current war gaming and simulation systems used to test 
advanced concepts to include asymmetrical threat capability.

  Section 115--Allocation of Equipment Authorized by This Title To Be 
         Made on Basis of Units Deployed or Preparing To Deploy

    This section would require the Secretary of Defense to 
provide that, in allocation to operational units of equipment 
acquired using funds authorized to be appropriated by the 
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2005, 
priority shall be given to units that are deployed to, or 
preparing to deploy to, Operation Iraqi Freedom or Operation 
Enduring Freedom, regardless of the status of those units as 
active, Guard, or reserve component units.

            Section 116--KC-767 Tanker Multiyear Procurement

    This section would clarify and reaffirm that the intent of 
Congress behind the multiyear aircraft tanker pilot program 
authority established by section 135 of the National Defense 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2004 (Public Law 108-136) is 
to accomplish a lease of no more than 20 aircraft and 
conventional purchase of no more than 80 aircraft. The 
provision would repeal the multiyear portion of section 135 of 
Public Law 108-136 and reestablish it as an authorization for 
the Secretary of the Air Force to enter into a multiyear 
contract for 80 KC-767 tanker aircraft under section 2306b of 
title 10, United States Code. The multi-year procurement 
authority provided in this section may not be executed under 
section 135 Public Law 108-136 or under section 8159 of the 
Department of Defense Appropriations Act, 2002 (Public Law 107-
117).

   Section 117--Other Matters Relating to KC-767 Tanker Acquisition 
                                Program

    This section would express the Sense of Congress that: (1) 
aerial refueling capability is a critical combat force 
multiplier, (2) the nation must expeditiously proceed with a 
program to replace the existing aging fleet of aerial refueling 
tankers, (3) in pursuing such a program, the Department of 
Defense should take full advantage of the United States' 
commercial aircraft production base, and (4) anyone currently 
or previously associated with this program that is found to 
have engaged in illegal activities should be prosecuted to the 
fullest extent of the law. The provision would also direct the 
Secretary of the Air Force to proceed with one or more new 
contracts to execute the program authorized by subsection (a) 
in section 135 of the National Defense Authorization Act for 
Fiscal Year 2004 (Public Law 108-136), section 8159 of the 
Department ofDefense Appropriations Act, 2002 (Public Law 107-
117), and section 116(a) of this Act. Finally, the provision would 
require the creation of an advisory panel of experts to review and 
assess the terms of the new contract and advise the Department of 
Defense and Congress on whether it provides the best value for the 
funds expended.
    The committee is deeply concerned that the ongoing multiple 
investigations into allegations of wrongdoing associated with 
this program, while necessary and proper, are needlessly 
delaying the pressing requirement to proceed with the 
acquisition of a replacement aircraft for our aging fleet of 
KC-135 tankers. The committee believes that a ``fresh start'' 
approach is warranted on the question of the contract proposed 
for the execution of the so-called 20-80 plan authorized by 
section 135 of Public Law 108-136. By negotiating a new 
contract and submitting the outcome of such negotiations to 
review by an independent panel of experts, the committee 
believes the Department can proceed with this important program 
without jeopardizing or undermining the various investigations 
presently under way at the direction of the Secretary of 
Defense. In turn, this approach would also help ensure that the 
Air Force can take full advantage of the existing availability 
of a ``warm'' domestic commercial aircraft production line 
ideal for the aerial tanker role. The committee is concerned 
that the increased costs associated with starting the 
production line, should production cease in the immediate 
future, would be significant and wholly unnecessary.
    The committee notes that there is no legal or other 
impediment presently precluding the Department from immediately 
pursuing this strategy and strongly urges the Secretary of 
Defense to pursue this approach in advance of the enactment of 
the fiscal year 2005 defense authorization bill.

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


                                OVERVIEW

    The budget request contained $67,772.3 million for 
research, development, test, & evaluation (RDT&E). The 
committee recommends $68,128.4 million, an increase of $356.1 
million to the budget request.


             Army Research, Development, Test, & Evaluation


                                Overview

    The budget request contained $9,266.3 million for Army 
research, development, test, and evaluation (RDT&E).
    The committee recommends $9,478.2 million, an increase of 
$211.9 million to the budget request.


                       Items of Special Interest


Advanced amputee treatment research and development

    The budget request contained $60.9 million in PE 62787A for 
applied research in medical technology.
    The committee notes that in Afghanistan and Iraq 
approximately 60 to 80 percent of all survivable combat 
injuries are to the extremities with 20 percent resulting in 
traumatic amputation. In order to provide the best care for 
these patients, the Surgeon General established the Walter Reed 
Amputee Care Center and the Army Amputee Patient Care Program 
at Walter Reed Army Medical Center (WRAMC). The program 
provides state-of-the-art treatment and is the center of a 
multi-site, coordinated complex of facilities involving 
regional military medical centers, the Department of Veterans 
Affairs, and other military and civilian treatment facilities. 
The goal of the program is to ensure that amputee patients 
receive the kind of care that will allow them to lead lives 
unconstrained by their amputation.
    Highlights of the program include innovative prosthetic 
technology; computer-assisted design and manufacturing of 
prosthetic devices; laboratory and training facilities, amputee 
education and peer visitation; clinical developments; and 
collaborative research in treatment, prosthetic design, and 
rehabilitation.
    The committee strongly endorses the Army's initiative in 
establishing the Amputee Patient Care Program. The committee 
notes that one element of the program is an infrastructure 
improvement plan for the center, which proposes construction of 
an advanced amputee training center at WRAMC at a cost of $10.9 
million and is addressed elsewhere in this report.
    The committee recommends an increase of $10.0 million in PE 
62787A for the Army program in clinical and applied 
collaborative research in amputee treatment, prosthetics, and 
rehabilitation.

Advanced battery technology initiative

    The budget request contained $41.2 million in PE 62705A for 
applied research in electronics and electronic devices.
    The committee continues to note continuing requirements for 
small, light-weight, efficient, and portable battery and non-
battery power sources for U.S. forces and of on-going applied 
research and development activities of the military departments 
that address these requirements. The committee is aware of a 
number of emerging battery and non-battery power technologies 
that have the potential for meeting the requirements of the 
military services, including but not limited to alkaline 
cylindrical cells, cylindrical zinc air batteries, high 
capacity nickel/zinc rechargeable cells, lithium oxyhalide and 
lithium ion thin-film technology, lithium copper oxide, lithium 
carbon monoflouride cells, and proton exchange membrane fuel 
cells. The committee recommends that these technologies be 
considered for potential funded research and development under 
the services' on-going programs on the basis of technical 
merit, cost effectiveness, and the potential of the particular 
technology to meet service needs.
    The committee requests the Secretary of Defense provide a 
report to the congressional defense committees on the next 
generation of lithium battery technologies for military 
applications. New lithium batteries for advanced portable 
electronic applications should be able to significantly 
increase energy and power, increase safety, lower cost, and/or 
weigh less. The Secretary should report on all phases of 
research, development and production for new systems and 
recommend actions necessary for commercial production in a one-
to-three year time frame.
    The committee recommends an increase of $20.0 million in PE 
62705A for the battery/portable power technology initiative.

Advanced carbon nano technology

    The budget request contained $131.2 million in PE 61102A 
for defense research sciences, but included no funding for 
advanced carbon nanotechnology.
    The committee is aware that advanced carbon nanotechnology 
has the potential to open the door to the creation of new 
sensors and other devices.
    The committee recommends $137.2 million in PE 61102A for 
defense research sciences, an increase of $6.0 million for a 
multi-institution, peer reviewed program for development of 
advanced carbon nanotechnology.

Advanced weapons technology

    The budget request contained $16.6 million in PE 62307A for 
Advanced Weapons Technology.
    The committee understands the need to carry out applied 
research in support of existing and future missile defense 
technologies. The committee is specifically aware of the need 
to conduct research on systemic issues common to Terminal High 
Altitude Area Defense, PAC-3/ Medium Extended Air Defense 
System, Ground-based Midcourse Defense and future systems in 
areas such as radar and radio frequency sensors, electronics 
and micro-fabrication, optical sensors and composite material 
and structures.
    The committee is also aware of the Army's need for 
additional funding for solid state technology laser research in 
support of directed energy weapons.
    The committee recommends $46.6 million in PE 62307A, an 
increase of $30.0 million. Of the $30.0 million increase, $20.0 
million shall be for missile defense applied technology 
research conducted by the Army Space and Missile Defense 
Command. The remaining $10.0 million of the increase shall be 
for solid state laser technology research conducted by the Army 
Space and Missile Defense Command.

Aerostat joint project office

    The budget request contained $81.5 million for the Aerostat 
Joint Project Office.
    The committee is aware of the importance of Micro Electro 
Mechanical (MEMS) antenna technology to the radar system for 
the Joint Land Attack Cruise Missile Defense Elevated Netted 
Sensor System (JLENS).
    The committee recommends $84.5 million, an increase of $3.0 
million for MEMS antenna technology in support of JLENS radar 
development.

Applied communications and information networking

    The budget request contained $41.8 million in PE 63008A for 
electronic warfare advanced technology, but included no funding 
for applied communications and information networking (ACIN).
    The committee realizes that the goal of ACIN is to 
revolutionize military doctrine and methods by enhancing high-
value military systems with rapidly advancing commercial 
information technologies and innovative applications of those 
technologies.
    The committee supports the application of state-of-the art 
commercial technology to improve military systems and 
recommends an increase of $10.0 million in PE 63008A for ACIN.

Center for rotorcraft innovation

    The budget request included $41.7 million in PE 62211A for 
Aviation and Applied Research and Technology. No request was 
included for a center for rotorcraft innovation.
    The committee is concerned that continued shortcomings in 
national policy planning for rotorcraft research and production 
is resulting in the inability of the United States to 
effectively produce competitive world-class rotorcraft 
products. This is evident by key decision-makers within 
federal, state, and local governments, as well as private 
sector users, selecting foreign products to meet their 
rotorcraft needs. National shortcomings in this regard are 
further evidenced by the closure of unique National Full Scale 
Aerodynamic Complex rotorcraft wind tunnel resources at the 
National Aeronautical and Space Administration (NASA) Ames 
Research Center at Moffett Field, California.
    The committee believes there exists a requirement to 
establish a center for rotorcraft innovation to coordinate 
technology strategies and areas of cooperative research efforts 
and increase public and private resources available for 
rotorcraft research. The committee understands that the first 
step toward creation of a center for rotorcraft innovation was 
recently taken when industry and academic leaders signed an 
agreement to work together with the federal government to 
coordinate rotorcraft research.
    The committee directs the Secretary of the Army to 
establish a center for rotorcraft innovation to facilitate the 
furtherance of the recently created partnership between the 
rotorcraft industry and academia to administer collaborative 
research projects. Members shall include major helicopter 
manufacturing companies, rotorcraft academic institutions, and 
technology firms; the Department of Defense; NASA; and the 
Federal Aviation Administration (FAA). The center shall take 
advantage of historical and present-day sites of helicopter 
technology development, rotorcraft academic institutions, and 
FAA technology facilities. Further, since NASA has concluded it 
is unable to continue to operate the National Full Scale 
Aerodynamic Complex, the committee recommends that the 
Secretary of the Army seek the transfer of the Complex to the 
Department of the Army.
    Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $15.0 
million in PE 62211A, $10.0 million to retain the availability 
of the wind tunnel facilities at Ames Research Center and $5.0 
million for the establishment of a center for rotorcraft 
innovation.

Center for tribology

    The budget request contained $69.6 million in PE 62601A for 
combat vehicle and automotive technology, but included no 
funding for a center for tribology.
    The committee notes that new coatings and other surface 
treatments commercially available today could extend the useful 
life of gears and other commercially available parts from 4 to 
10 times longer than current treatments. The committee is aware 
that this technology holds great promise for increasing the 
reliability for all types of military equipment, extending 
equipment life, and reducing fuel costs.
    The committee directs the Secretary of the Army to work 
with the friction, wear and abrasion test equipment 
manufacturing industry to develop a commercial capability to 
create and standardize new test apparatus and methods to 
analyze new coatings more quickly.

Centers of excellence

    The budget request contained $77.7 million in PE 61104A for 
university and industry research centers and included $2.5 
million for a collaborative academic research effort leveraging 
Army Training and Doctrine (TRADOC) Battle Labs in accordance 
with the Army Science and Technology Master Plan.
    The committee notes the Army initiative to harness 
university research expertise for Army-unique science and 
technology problems. The committee further notes the Army 
effort to partner university researchers at Historically Black 
Colleges and Universities/Minority Insitutions (HBCU/MI) with 
Army TRADOC Battle Labs in an effort to accelerate the 
transition of research to actual technology demonstration. The 
committee recognizes the potential benefits in the cognitive 
research areas of modeling and simulation, data fusion, 
protective materials, maneuver, health, and human systems 
integration. The committee encourages a continuation of this 
initiative.
    The committee recommends $80.7 million in PE 61104A, an 
increase of $3.0 million for the collaborative effort between 
HBCU/MI centers and TRADOC Battle Labs.

Combat vehicle electronics

    The budget request contained $16.0 million in PE 23735A for 
combat vehicle improvements, but included no funding to develop 
standardized next generation electronics architectures for 
current combat vehicle programs.
    The committee is aware that current combat vehicles face 
accelerated component obsolescence issues.
    The committee recommends $21.0 million in PE 23735A, an 
increase of $5.0 million to develop standardized next 
generation electronics architectures for current and future 
combat vehicle programs.

Defense language institute/foreign language center

    The budget request contained no funds for the Defense 
Language Institute Foreign Learning Center (DLI/FLC) for 
research and development.
    The committee notes the National Defense Authorization Act 
for Fiscal Year 2004 Public Law 108-136) recommended that the 
Secretary of the Army establish a research and development 
line, specifically focused on the latest technologies and 
instructional methods in language and language learning that 
are required by the DLI/FLC. The committee is surprised that a 
budget request was not included in the fiscal year 2005 budget 
request.
    The committee is aware of the increased demands within the 
Department of Defense for increased student throughput and 
expanded off-campus and distant learning sites. These current 
endeavors necessitate innovative approaches in the instruction 
of foreign languages and the educational processes to 
administer them.
    The committee applauds the progress of DLI/FLC's innovative 
practices in meeting this challenge and supports the efforts in 
seeking new methods in teaching foreign languages and language 
learning to meet the goals of the Department and the National 
Security Agency.
    Therefore the committee directs the Secretary of the Army 
to establish a new research and development program in fiscal 
year 2005 for the DLI/FLC, entitled, ``Defense Language 
Institute, Foreign Learning Center'' and recommends $5.0 
million for this purpose.

Digital array radar technology development

    The budget request contained $32.0 million in PE 63772A for 
advanced tactical computer science and sensor technology, but 
included no funds for digital array radar technology 
development.
    The committee is aware that evolving threats place new 
demands on sensors and notes that in particular the ground 
forces need reliable, transportable counter-fire radars to 
protect against mobile threats.
    The committee recommends an increase of $7.0 million in PE 
63772A to develop a transportable, ground-based, digital solid-
state multi-mission radar.

Electronic flight planning

    The budget request contained $2.4 million in PE 23752A for 
the aircraft engine component improvement program, but included 
no funding for electronic flight planning.
    The committee believes that electronic flight planning will 
improve force protection and operational performance knowledge 
of helicopter aircrews in the combat environment.
    The committee recommends $5.9 million in PE 23752A, an 
increase of $3.5 million for electronic flight planning.

Flexible display initiative

    The budget request contained $41.2 million in PE 62705A for 
electronics and electronic devices, but included no funding for 
the flexible display initiative.
    The committee is aware that new flexible display technology 
has the potential to provide the military with technology to 
fabricate high definition displays on rugged conformable, 
flexible substrates. The committee notes that the United States 
Display Consortium coordinates these efforts with over 80 
companies, using investments from both the public and private 
industry to accelerate the development of technologies and 
products needed by the Army, other military services, and 
various national security agencies.
    Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $13.5 
million in PE 62705A for the flexible display initiative.

Force XXI battle command brigade and below blue force tracking system

    The committee recognizes the Army's superb efforts to 
establish a truly network-centric (tactical) command, control, 
and communications (C3) capability through the fielding of the 
Force XXI Battle Command Brigade and Below (FBCB2) Blue Force 
Tracking system by employing a satellite communications 
network. The committee notes the accelerated fielding of this 
enhanced version of FBCB2 prior to commencement of Operation 
Enduring Freedom and Operation Iraqi Freedom proved to be an 
invaluable situational awareness tool for the warfighters and 
saved lives.
    The committee strongly recommends the Department of Defense 
leverage the Army's investment into a joint solution providing 
interoperability to all military services. Furthermore, the 
committee recommends the Army maintain the role of executive 
agent for this joint capability and directs the Secretary of 
the Army to provide a report to the congressional defense 
committees on its vision for a joint blue force situational 
awareness capability that builds upon the successes of previous 
operations.

Future combat systems

    The budget request included $3,198.1 million in PE 64645A 
and PE 64647A for the Future Combat Systems (FCS) program.
    The committee believes that the March 2004 General 
Accounting Office assessment is correct and is particularly 
concerned that the system network, the heart of this 
transformational concept, is by far the most technically 
challenging aspect of the FCS program. The committee believes 
that the demonstrations required by this section should begin 
early in system development and become increasingly more 
complex. In order to accomplish the direction of this section 
in regard to demonstrating the capabilities of the network, the 
committee recommends that the Secretary of the Army direct the 
U.S. Army Communications Electronics Command to test emerging 
network concepts in small scale field exercises at readily 
accessible range facilities.
    Further, the committee believes that to provide for 
necessary congressional oversight the Department of the Army's 
budget justification documents should provide separate 
justification of the major elements of the FCS program, as 
shown in the accompanying tables.
    The committee recommends $2,952.8 million in PE 64645A and 
PE 64647A for FCS, a reduction of $245.3 million as detailed in 
section 211 of this report.

Geospatial information decision support for single integrated air 
        picture

    The budget request contained $91.7 million in PE 63327A for 
air and missile defense systems engineering, but included no 
funding for geospatial information decision support for the 
single integrated air picture (GIDS-SIAP).
    The committee notes that there is a need for commanders to 
have a clear, unambiguous geospatial foundation in order to 
support a common operational picture. The committee is aware 
that GIDS-SIAP will integrate disparate geospatial information 
systems to provide ground and air picture recommendations for 
the commanders.
    The committee recommends an increase of $7.0 million in PE 
63327A for GIDS-SIAP.

Human systems integration

    The budget request included $16.9 million in PE 62716A for 
human factors engineering, $61.1 million in PE 63236N for 
warfighter sustainment advanced technology, and $71.5 million 
in PE 62202F for human effectiveness applied research.
    The committee recognizes the need to consider human systems 
integration issues early in the development cycle. Too often, 
man-machine interface issues are not addressed until late in 
the development cycle after the configuration of a particular 
weapon or system has been set.What results is a degraded combat 
system that is not able to achieve its maximum performance and, at 
worst, becomes a liability on the battlefield.
    The committee notes that all the military departments 
include some form of human systems integration in their 
development and acquisition process, but believes that 
institutionalization and standardization of human systems 
integration methodologies and modeling tools across the 
Department of Defense is desirable. To this end, the committee 
recommends that the Secretary of Defense conduct a 
comprehensive Department-wide review of the implementation of 
human systems integration in defense acquisition programs. 
Further, the committee recommends additional resources for 
human factors engineering initiatives in each of the military 
departments.
    The committee recommends an increase of $5.5 million in PE 
62716A for development of manpower and personnel integration 
(MANPRINT) tools for modeling and predicting soldier and system 
performance; increases of $3.0 million in PE 63236N and $2.0 
million in PE 62233N to develop cognitive and physiological 
research data under the Navy's system engineering, acquisition 
and personnel integration (SEAPRINT) program; and an increase 
of $3.0 million in PE 62202F for the development of new 
training algorithms for human performance prediction under the 
Air Force's improved performance research integration tool 
(IMPRINT) program. The committee directs the Secretary of 
Defense to conduct a comprehensive review of human systems 
integration programs within the Department and to report the 
results of that review to the congressional defense committees 
by December 31, 2004.

Hydrogen proton exchange membrane

    The budget request contained $69.6 million in PE 62601A for 
combat vehicle and automotive technology, but included no 
funding for the hydrogen proton exchange membrane (PEM) ambient 
pressure fuel cell medium/heavy duty vehicle demonstration 
program.
    The committee is aware that the hydrogen PEM fuel cell is 
to demonstrate zero emission, ambient pressure, highly 
efficient hydrogen fuel cell powered vehicles in various 
operating situations and conditions. The committee notes that 
this development supports the government objective of tripling 
fuel economy while reducing harmful emissions.
    The committee recommends an increase of $10.0 million in PE 
62601A for the hydrogen proton exchange membrane (PEM) ambient 
pressure fuel cell medium/heavy duty vehicle demonstration 
program.

Information dominance center

    The budget request contained no funds for operations and 
maintenance or research and development for the Army's 
information dominance center (IDC) at Fort Belvoir, Virginia.
    The IDC provides multi-disciplinary Information Operations 
(IO) support to the Army's commands. Through tailored 
analytical products generated to meet immediate operational 
needs, the IDC also monitors potential trouble spots worldwide, 
preparing to support contingency operations with IO-related 
products. The committee believes the IDC's use of high-capacity 
communications links to access selected information from a 
number of databases maintained by a number of other 
organizations is truly transformational.
    The committee acknowledges that the IDC is one of the Army 
Chief of Staff's unfunded priorities intelligence objectives. 
The committee supports the transformation efforts of the IDC 
and the future plan to incorporate functions of the IDC into 
the Army's Distributed Common Ground Systems (DCGS).
    Therefore, the committee recommends $6.0 million in 
operations and maintenance, Army for IDC, an increase of $6.0 
million, and $4.0 million in PE 33028A, an increase of $4.0 
million for research and technology development at the IDC.

Institute for creative technologies

    The budget request contained $15.0 million in PE 62308A for 
advanced concepts and simulation, including $1.6 million for 
the institute for creative technologies (ICT).
    The committee notes that the technologies developed at the 
ICT are being applied to significantly improve fidelity of 
computer-based training, which is essential to the Army.
    The committee supports development of improved training 
devices and recommends $22.0 million in PE 62308A, an increase 
of $7.0 million for the ICT.

Integrated communications navigation identification avionics program

    The committee is aware that during the execution of the now 
canceled Comanche program, significant progress had been made 
in development of the Integrated Communications Navigation 
Identification Avionics (ICNIA) system. The Joint Tactical 
Radio System (JTRS) has been selected as the joint standard 
radio system for all services and has also made significant 
technical progress and is scheduled to begin testing in the 
first quarter of fiscal year 2005. After the cancellation of 
the Comanche program the Army convened an independent 
assessment panel to compare the relative performance of the 
Joint Tactical Radio System (JTRS) and ICNIA. The committee is 
aware that a second evaluation has been requested as a result 
of the independent assessment team's review.
    The committee directs the Secretary of the Army to submit 
the results of the independent assessment panel and subsequent 
evaluations to the congressional defense committees. The 
committee further directs the Secretary, prior to a final 
decision or selection of JTRS or ICNIA as the standard for Army 
aviation or the obligation of fiscal year 2005 authorized 
amounts for JTRS, to brief the congressional defense committees 
on the criteria of selection and the performance comparison of 
these two avionics systems.

Joint and combined communications test tool product suite

    The budget request contained $53.5 million in PE 63305A for 
Army missile defense systems integration, but included no 
funding for the joint and combined communications test tool 
product suite.
    The committee notes that the joint and combined 
communications test tool product suite will provide a test tool 
suite that will test interoperability issues within joint and 
combined forces.
    The committee recommends $63.5 million in PE 63305A, an 
increase of $10.0 million for the joint and combined 
communications test tool product suite.

JP-8 soldier fuel cell

    The budget request contained $41.2 million in PE 62705A for 
electronics and electronic devices, but included no funding for 
JP-8 soldier fuel cell.
    The committee is aware that light, compact, high-capacity 
power sources are essential to success on the modern 
battlefield to power a variety of devices. The committee notes 
that an effort is on-going to modify a commercial fuel cell to 
run on standard, readily available JP-8 fuel.
    The committee recommends an increase of $2.0 million in PE 
62705A for development of the JP-8 soldier fuel cell.

LEAN munitions

    The budget request contained $67.2 million in PE 78045A for 
end item industrial preparedness activities, but included no 
funds for the second phase of the LEAN Munitions program.
    The committee notes that the Army Armaments Research, 
Development and Engineering Command (ARDEC) is responsible for 
90 percent of the munitions produced and utilized by the U.S. 
Army. The committee further notes that the Army's increased 
operational tempo and transformation plans support the need to 
reduce the time and cost for development and production of 
munitions used by our armed forces. The committee believes that 
the use of a standards-based, model-driven design and 
manufacturing life cycle support environment would enable the 
more timely and affordable production and sustainment of 
current and future munitions systems.
    The committee recommends $70.2 million in PE 70845A, an 
increase of $3.0 million to continue the LEAN Munitions 
program.

Light unmanned aerial vehicle weaponization

    The budget request contained $203.1 million in PE 63005A 
for combat vehicle and automotive technology, but included no 
funds for light unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) weaponization.
    The committee notes that historically, light UAVs have been 
unable to carry weapons. The committee is aware that a unique, 
patented, electronically-fired, stacked-round technology has 
been developed that lends itself to the stringent restrictions 
of lightweight UAV weaponization.
    The committee recommends an increase of $4.0 million in PE 
63005A for integration of the unique electronically-fired, 
stacked-round capability with a light UAV such as the Defense 
Advanced Research Agency DP-5 UAV.

Light utility vehicle

    The budget request contained $69.6 million in PE 62601A for 
combat vehicle and automotive technology, but included no 
funding for the light utility vehicle.
    The committee believes that the Army requires a low-cost, 
light utility vehicle (LUV) that would provide soldiers with 
enhanced mobility, lethality and survivability compared to the 
current high mobility multipurpose wheeled vehicle and 
understands that the design and development of a LUV 
demonstrator could be accelerated due to previous research in 
LUV technology by the National Automotive Center.
    Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $5.0 
million in PE 62601A to design, develop, and deliver an 
operational prototype LUV.

Lightweight structures initiative

    The budget request contained $203.1 million in PE 63005A 
for combat vehicle and automotive technology, but included no 
funding for the Army lightweight structures initiative (ALSI).
    The committee is aware that the objective of the ALSI 
program is to develop, design, demonstrate, validate and 
implement a methodology for producing lightweight vehicle 
structure components and assemblies for the Army Future Combat 
Systems. The committee notes that the methodology utilized has 
been proven to substantially reduce costs and weights of 
structures in the automotive and aerospace applications.
    The committee recommends an increase of $9.0 million in PE 
63005A for the ALSI.

Low cost course correction

    The budget request contained $28.2 million in PE 64601A for 
infantry support weapons, of which no funds were requested for 
Low Cost Course Correction.
    The committee has been encouraged by the demonstration of 
Low Cost Course Correction (LCCC) technology.
    The committee recommends an increase of $2.5 million in PE 
64601A to accelerate the development of LCCC for projectiles in 
the 20mm to 100mm range.

M5 high performance fiber for personnel armor systems

    The budget request contained $21.1 million in PE 62786A for 
warfighter technology, but included no funding for M5 high 
performance fiber.
    The committee notes that M5 fiber, based on independent 
evaluation, offers the possibility of a new generation of 
lighter and more effective body and vehicle armor as well as 
similar improvement in heat resistant clothing.
    The committee recognizes the urgency to provide improved 
personnel protection and recommends $31.1 million in PE 62786A, 
an increase of $10.0 million to hasten development and 
evaluation of M5 fiber and M5 based armor.

Medical technology applied research initiative

    The budget request contained $60.9 million in PE 62787A for 
medical technology applied research.
    The committee notes that the primary goal of medical 
research and development in the Department of Defense is to 
sustain medical technology to effectively protect and improve 
the survivability of U.S. armed forces in a variety of settings 
including, but not limited to: conventional battlefields, areas 
of low-intensity conflict, and military operations other than 
war. Operations of U.S. forces in the global war on terrorism 
have placed a premium on the need for a range of medical 
technologies in the areas of infectious diseases, combat 
casualty care, military operational medicine, and health 
hazards for materials, that are the core applied technology for 
the Army's military technology applied research program.
    The committee recommends the establishment of a medical 
technology applied research initiative that would provide the 
opportunity for emerging medical technologies and concepts to 
compete for funding on the basis of peer-reviewed technical 
merit. The committee recommendsthat the medical projects and 
technologies to be considered for funding under the initiative, 
include, but are not limited to the following:
          (1) Bio-activity of nanomaterials;
          (2) Bio-defense gene knockout technology;
          (3) Dermal phase meter;
          (4) Elgen gene delivery technology;
          (5) Fibrin bandage from non-mammalian sources;
          (6) Nano-fabricated Bio-artificial kidney; and
          (7) Rapid Bio-pathogen detection technology.
    The committee recommends an increase of $25.0 million in PE 
62787A for the medical technology applied research initiative.
            Clinical research programs
    The committee understands that the primary federal agency 
responsible for conducting research into diseases affecting a 
broad demographic portion of the population is the Department 
of Health and Human Services. Nonetheless, the Department of 
Defense (DOD), and in particular the Department of the Army, 
has at the direction of Congress conducted and managed research 
for a number of diseases that particularly affect military 
members, their family members, and military retirees. In fact, 
the Army provides special scrutiny to these programs, since 
they are congressional directed and necessarily involve 
clinical trials conducted over several years.
    While the committee applauds the Department's efforts to 
manage these programs, the committee is concerned that there 
may be missed opportunities to conduct research into other 
vital areas. For example, service members, family members, and 
military retirees are certainly affected by such serious and 
increasingly prevalent diseases as lung cancer and diabetes, 
yet no formal program exists for either.
    The committee believes that a comprehensive review of these 
research programs is necessary so that research can be directed 
into areas that may have been neglected. Accordingly, the 
committee directs the Secretary of Defense to review ongoing 
clinical research efforts within the military departments and 
report to the congressional defense committees by February 1, 
2005, whether any research programs should be added to the 
DOD's efforts. The committee believes that lung cancer and 
diabetes are excellent candidates for military sponsored 
research and urges the Secretary to give every consideration to 
establishing formal programs to fight these diseases, as they 
relate to military service.

Medium tactical truck development

    The budget request contained $2.9 million in PE 64604A for 
the continued development of medium tactical truck technologies 
and enhancements.
    The family of medium tactical vehicles (FMTV) A2 will be 
the next generation of FMTVs. The committee understands 
additional funds are required to ensure synchronization with 
the fielding of the Army's Future Combat Systems (FCS) 
Increment I Unit of Action. The committee also notes these 
additional funds will enable the spiraling of FCS-like 
technologies into the tactical truck fleet, ensuring 
interoperability and maximizing future force capability.
    The committee recommends $12.6 million in PE 64604A, an 
increase of $9.7 million, to further the development of medium 
tactical truck technologies.

Miniature sensor development for small and tactical unmanned aerial 
        vehicles

    The budget request contained $22.6 million in PE 62709A for 
night vision technology, but included no funding for 
miniaturized hyperspectral and coherent imaging sensors for 
small and tactical unmanned aerial vehicles (UAV).
    The committee notes the urgent need for better sensors for 
small and tactical UAVs and recommends $27.6 million in PE 
62709A, an increase of $5.0 million for miniaturized 
hyperspectral and coherent imaging sensors for small and 
tactical UAVs.

Modeling and analysis of the response of structures

    The budget request contained $47.2 million in PE 62784A for 
military engineering technology, but included no funding for 
modeling and analysis of the response of structures (MARS).
    The committee notes that MARS computer simulations will 
provide accurate vulnerability assessments that can be used to 
improve warfighter protection, enhance survivability, and 
facilitate rapid repair of structures.
    The committee recommends $52.2 million in PE 62784A, an 
increase of $5.0 million for MARS.

Night vision fusion

    The budget request contained $50.1 million in PE 63710A for 
night vision advanced technology, but included no funds to 
accelerate development of night vision fusion technology.
    The committee recognizes that night vision capability has 
provided our armed forces a significant advantage over their 
adversaries. The committee notes that while older technology 
has become available to others, state-of-the-art in night 
vision, pixel level digital fusion of light intensification and 
infrared images offers a very significant advantage over 
previous night vision devices. The committee understands that 
this technology will provide vital survivability and 
operational enhancements.
    The committee recommends an increase of $9.5 million in PE 
63710A to accelerate development and fielding of pixel level, 
digital fusion of light intensification and infrared image 
technology.

Patient monitor with defibrillator

    The budget request contained $38.4 million in PE 63002A for 
medical advanced technology development.
    The committee recommends an increase of $5.0 million in PE 
63002A for development of advanced technology for a compact, 
lightweight, full-featured patient monitor with defibrillator.

Portable and mobile emergency broadband system

    The budget request contained $41.8 million in PE 63008A for 
electronic warfare advanced technology, but included no funding 
for the portable and mobile emergency broadband system.
    The committee notes that the portable and mobile emergency 
broadband system, based on emerging commercial technology, will 
allow rapid establishment of emergency communications networks.
    The committee recommends an increase of $4.0 million in PE 
63008A to complete critical development of the portable and 
mobile emergency broadband system.

Shadow tactical unmanned aerial vehicle

    The budget request contained $27.1 million in PE 35204A for 
tactical unmanned aerial vehicles (TUAV).
    The committee is aware that the three major improvements to 
the Shadow 200 TUAV based on operational evaluation were 
incorporation of the tactical common data link (TCDL), changes 
to reduce target location error, and a larger wing to increase 
both payload and endurance. The committee understands that the 
only remaining engineering necessary to include all three 
improvements in future Shadow 200 production is software 
modifications associated with TCDL.
    The committee fully supports expediting completion of these 
improvements in order to field the most capable Shadow 200 to 
ground forces. Therefore the committee recommends $30.6 million 
in PE 35204A, an increase of $3.5 million to complete required 
Shadow non-recurring engineering for these improvements.

Smart responsive nanocomposites

    The budget request contained $75.1 million in PE 61103A for 
University Research Initiatives, but included no funding for 
smart responsive nanocomposites (SRN).
    The committee is aware that there is a multitude of design 
possibilities for nanostructured, nature-simulating materials 
capable of responding to outside stimuli.
    The committee recommends $79.1 million in PE 61103A, an 
increase of $4.0 million to develop a smart responsive 
nanostructured material, which combines detection of toxins and 
alarm-release with self-cleaning and self-repairing material.

Space and missile defense architecture analysis program

    The budget request contained $91.7 million in PE 63327A for 
Army air and missile defense systems engineering, but included 
no funding for the Army Space and Missile Defense (ASMD) 
architecture analysis program.
    The committee places a priority on the development of a 
transformational capability. The committee recognizes the 
contributions of the ASMD architecture analysis program in 
providing the essential analytical, modeling, and simulation 
tools to support advanced concepts and architectures of future 
forces.
    The committee recommends an increase of $7.0 million in PE 
63327A for the ASMD architecture analysis program.

Strategic materials strategic manufacturing initiative

    The budget request contained $44.7 million in PE 62624A for 
weapons and munitions technology, but included no funding for 
the strategic materials strategic manufacturing initiative 
(SM2i).
    The committee notes that titanium is important for weight 
reduction of weapons systems. The committee is aware that SM2i 
will link the Army's efforts to establish a reliable low-cost 
domestic source of titanium with advanced domestic 
manufacturing capabilities.
    The committee supports an increase of $6.0 million in PE 
62624A for SM2i.

Titanium alloy powder

    The budget request contained $15.4 million in PE 62105A for 
materials technology, but included no funding for titanium, 
titanium-alloy powder production.
    The committee recommends an increase of $5.0 million in PE 
62105A to enhance the domestic capacity to produce inexpensive, 
high-quality titanium powder for military use.

Titanium extraction, mining, and process engineering research

    The budget request contained $44.7 million in PE 62624A for 
weapons and munitions technology, but included no funding for 
Titanium extraction, mining, and process engineering research 
(TEMPER).
    The committee is aware that the TEMPER initiative is 
intended to enhance U.S. industrial capability for the 
efficient production of inexpensive titanium for military 
systems. The committee notes that titanium offers weight and 
performance advantages and that the process must be developed 
to produce titanium at a reasonable cost in order to realize 
those advantages in future military systems.
    The committee recommends an increase of $12.0 million in PE 
62624A for TEMPER.

Unmanned systems initiative

    The budget request contained $52.0 million in PE 62303A for 
missile technology, but included no funding for the unmanned 
systems initiative.
    The committee recognizes the unmanned systems initiative 
will support battlefield control of multiple unmanned assets.
    The committee recommends $62.0 million in PE 62303A, an 
increase of $10.0 million for the unmanned systems initiative.

            Navy Research, Development, Test, and Evaluation


                                Overview

    The budget request contained $16,346.4 million for Navy 
research, development, test, and evaluation (RDT&E).
    The committee recommends $16,047.8 million, a decrease of 
$298.6 million to the budget request.


                       Items of Special Interest


Advanced composite structures program

    The budget request contained $81.2 million in PE 63561N, 
for advanced submarine systems development.
    The committee notes that the success of the Navy's Phase I 
Large Scale Vessel (LSV) advanced composite sail program 
suggests that the use of composite materials can impart 
improved performance, significant increases in load carrying 
capacity and stealth characteristics to submarine sails and to 
surface combatant superstructures and hulls. Therefore, the 
committee recommends that the Secretary of the Navy expand the 
program to include the fabrication and test of full-scale 
composite structures.
    The committee recommends an increase of $7.0 million in PE 
63561N to continue the program for development and evaluation 
of advanced composite structures for submarine and surface 
combatant applications.

Advanced gun system for DD(X) multi-mission destroyer

    The budget request contained $1,431.6 million in PE 64300N 
for DD(X) total ship systems engineering development and 
demonstration, including $46.5 million for the advanced gun 
system (AGS), $20.3 million of which is for continued 
development and testing of the engineering development model of 
the long-range land attack projectile.
    The committee notes that the acquisition strategy for the 
DD(X) multi-mission destroyer includes the development and 
testing of engineering development models of the major 
component systems of the DD(X), including AGS, to ensure that 
these systems are ready for fielding with the first ship of the 
DD(X) class. The AGS system consists of a major caliber gun, 
automated ammunition handling systems, and the long-range land 
attack projectile family of munitions.
    The committee recommends an increase of $10.0 million in PE 
64300N to continue development, integration, and testing of the 
long-range, land-attack projectile family of munitions with the 
AGS.

Advanced laser diode arrays

    The budget request contained $80.8 million in PE 63582N for 
combat systems integration advanced development and 
prototyping. The budget included no funds for continued 
development of advanced laser diode arrays.
    The committee notes that the Navy is developing 
electrically driven high energy lasers for potential use in 
ship self defense against a variety of surface and air threats. 
High reliability and high power continuous wave diode arrays, 
efficient laser optical configurations, and advanced solid-
state laser gain materials will be among the key technologies 
needed to reach the power levels required in a solid-state 
laser weapon system.
    The committee recommends an increase of $6.0 million in PE 
63582N to continue the development of advanced laser diode 
arrays.

Advanced mine detection program

    The budget request contained $58.2 million in PE 63640M for 
the Marine Corps advanced technology demonstration, but 
included no funding for the advanced mine detection program.
    The committee is aware that the Marine Corps urgently needs 
a backpack advanced mine detection capability with minimal 
false alarm rates. The committee notes that the Office of Naval 
Research has been working to develop an advanced mine detection 
system based on quadrupole resonance technology that has the 
potential to meet Marine Corps requirements.
    The committee recommends an increase of $3.0 million in PE 
63640M to complete development of a quadrupole resonance 
technology advanced backpack mine detection system.

Advanced processor build integration

    The budget request contained $75.3 million in PE 64503N for 
system development and demonstration for SSN-688 and Trident 
submarine modernization.
    The committee has strongly supported the use of the 
acoustic rapid commercial-off-the-shelf technology insertion 
(ARCI) program and use of advanced processor software builds 
(APB) to upgrade sonar systems on submarines, surface 
combatants, and other platforms. Use of the ARCI/APB process 
has enabled the United States Navy to regain the advantage in 
sonar systems that it lost in the 1980s.
    The committee notes that the fiscal year 2005 budget 
request includes sufficient funds for APB integration to 
provide the fiscal year 2004 advanced processor build (APB-04) 
software update for 668I and SSGN submarine sonar systems. 
However, additional funding is needed to integrate APB-04 into 
the 688, SEAWOLF, and SSBN class ARCI systems and ensure that 
thirteen ships, for which the update is not presently funded, 
receive the updates before their planned deployments in fiscal 
year 2006.
    The committee recommends an increase of $20.0 million in PE 
64503N for the Navy's unfunded requirement for integration of 
APB-04 update into the 688, SEAWOLF, and SSBN class ARCI 
systems.

Aegis open architecture

    The budget request contained $146.5 million in PE 64307N 
for Aegis combat system engineering systems development and 
demonstration.
    The Aegis combat system engineering program includes the 
development of upgrades for cruiser and destroyer Aegis combat 
systems and the integration of new equipment and systems to 
keep pace with the threat and capture advances in technology. 
The committee notes that experiences aboard Aegis-equipped 
ships and shore sites have shown that the use of currently 
available commercial-off-the-shelf equipment requires periodic 
refreshment and additional development effort as new 
technologies become available and computer operating systems, 
device drivers, and interfaces are updated. To overcome these 
problems, the Navy is developing an open architecture computing 
environment for Aegis-equipped cruisers and destroyers as a 
part of the Navy's overall open architecture program. The goal 
of the program is to evolve combat systems into a ``system of 
systems'' that resides on a common computing environment which 
will be less complex, more easily upgraded, and have lower 
total ownership costs.
    The committee recommends $168.3 million in PE 64307N, an 
increase of $21.8 million to accelerate the development and 
introduction of an open architecture computing environment for 
the Aegis combat system.

Affordable towed array construction

    The budget request contained $75.6 million in PE 64503N for 
submarine system equipment development, including $5.2 million 
to continue the development of affordable towed array 
technology initiatives for the development of fiber optic thin 
line towed arrays technology initiatives. The affordable towed 
array construction (ATAC) program employs fiber optic thinline 
arrays to provide reliability improvements by reducing system 
complexity, eliminating wet end electronics, enhancing littoral 
capability and incorporating robust array construction methods.
    The committee believes that accelerating the development 
and fielding of fiber optic towed array technology using 
improved construction methods and processes would provide 
increased performance, reliability and operational capabilities 
at reduced costs.
    Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $6.0 
million in PE 64503N to accelerate the development and 
introduction into the fleet of fiber optic thinline arrays.

Affordable weapon system

    The budget request contained $82.0 million in PE 63795N for 
land attack technology advanced component development and 
prototypes, and included $28.9 million for development and 
demonstration of the affordable weapon system (AWS).
    The AWS program began as an Office of Naval Research (ONR) 
advanced technology initiative to demonstrate the ability to 
design, develop, and build a capable and affordable precision 
guided weapon system at a cost that would be an order of 
magnitude cheaper than comparable weapons systems and in 
production would achieve a stable unit production cost very 
early in the production cycle.
    The committee notes that the ONR program has been 
successful in all respects. In less than four years, the AWS 
program demonstrated the use of commercial-off-the-shelf (COTS) 
components to construct a 400-600 mile range, subsonic (180-220 
knot), loitering, 200 pound payload, precision strike missile 
with global positioning inertial navigation system guidance; a 
control unit; and a data link. The missile has both line-of-
sight and satellite data links for interaction with ground 
stations and forward observers and is reprogrammable in flight. 
In operational use the missile would be launched from CONEX-
type containers that hold between six and twenty missiles and 
could be carried on land, sea, or air platforms. The initiative 
has demonstrated that the COTS approach can reduce costs by an 
order of magnitude from traditional cruise missiles. The 
current missile cost in large scale production, exclusive of 
warhead, is estimated to be approximately $60,000.
    Based on the results of the AWS advanced technology 
demonstration, the Department of Defense and the Navy decided 
to transition the AWS from the technology base to an 
accelerated advanced component development and prototype 
program that demonstrates the ability to produce the missile at 
the projected cost; provides up to 100 missiles and launch and 
fire control equipment for developmental and operational 
testing; and supports user evaluation of the AWS for potential 
use by the fleet. Congress provided $28.0 million to support 
the program in fiscal year 2004. The committee notes that 
shortfalls in science and technology funding for the AWS 
transition and delays in award of the development and 
production contract have delayed the program and completion of 
operational test and evaluation until the spring of 2005 and 
resulted in increased costs to complete the initial missile 
production buy.
    The committee recommends an increase of $23.0 million in PE 
63795N to complete a 100-missile build of the AWS and support 
developmental and operational testing and fleet evaluation of 
the system.

Airborne mine neutralization system

    The budget request contained $50.5 million in PE 64373N for 
airborne mine countermeasures system development and 
demonstration, including $15.6 million for continued 
development of the Airborne Mine Neutralization System (AMNS)
    The AMNS is an expendable, remotely operated mine 
neutralization device that is deployed in shallow and deep 
water from the MH-53E and MH-60S mine countermeasures 
helicopters to explode unburied bottom and anchored sea mines, 
which are impractical or unsafe to counter using existing 
minesweeping techniques.
    In an audit of the AMNS program completed in February 2004, 
the Department of Defense Inspector General (DOD IG) concluded 
that the program is well-managed overall. However, the DOD IG 
cited the decision to transition the MH-53E to a Rapid 
Deployment Capability as premature and recommended that the 
ASN(RDA) rescind approval and require full operational test and 
evaluation of the system to assure that it is operationally 
effective and capable of supporting real-world contingency 
operations. The DOD IG also found that the Navy did not perform 
an adequate analysis of alternatives to evaluate the cost- and 
operational- effectiveness of alternative courses of action and 
that the Program Executive Officer (Littoral and Mine Warfare) 
should not proceed further with the development and acquisition 
of the AMNS unless a comprehensive, independent analysis of 
alternatives justifies proceeding.
    The committee recognizes that operational necessity may 
require the rapid deployment of interim or developmental 
capabilities in times of emergency, but also recognizes and 
supports the requirement that such systems be operationally 
capable and effective. The committee directs the Secretary of 
the Navy to report to the congressional defense committees by 
September 30, 2004, the actions that will be taken by the 
Department of the Navy to respond to the DOD IG's findings.

Airborne reconnaissance systems

    The budget request contained $10.2 million in PE 35206N for 
airborne reconnaissance systems, but included no funding for 
passive collision avoidance and reconnaissance (PCAR).
    The committee is aware that unmanned aerial vehicles (UAV) 
must fly in regions that make them a potential hazard to 
commercial and other manned aircraft. The committee notes that 
PCAR will sense an impending collision and allow the UAV to 
safely avoid approaching aircraft.
    Therefore, to improve safety of UAV operations, the 
committee recommends $13.2 million in PE 35206N, an increase of 
$3.0 million for PCAR.

AN/BLQ-10 test and support

    The budget request contained $75.3 million in PE 64503N for 
system development and demonstration for SSN-688 and Trident 
submarine modernization, including $1.4 million for submarine 
support equipment.
    The submarine support equipment program develops and 
evaluates improvements in submarine electronic warfare support 
measures, including implementation of state-of-the-art 
technologies for periscope, mast, and engineering improvements 
in the AN/BLQ-10 tactical electronic support system.
    The committee notes proposals for adaptation and evaluation 
of a commercial-off-the-shelf tester for electronic circuit 
card assemblies that could be used aboard submarines.
    The committee recommends an increase of $3.0 million in PE 
64503N for adaptation and evaluation of a commercial-off-the-
shelf tester for electronic circuit card assemblies for the AN/
BLQ-10 tactical electronic support system.

Anti-torpedo torpedo

    The budget request contained $46.9 million in PE 63506N for 
surface ship torpedo defense advanced component development and 
prototyping.
    The surface ship torpedo defense program develops the 
Tripwire AN/WSQ-11 torpedo defense system, which includes the 
Tripwire towed sensor and processor to detect a threat torpedo 
and provide launch orders for the associated anti-torpedo 
torpedo countermeasure. The committee notes that the anti-
torpedo torpedo as the ``offensive'' response to the Tripwire 
launch detection is a critical part of the surface ship torpedo 
defense.
    The committee recommends an increase of $7.0 million in PE 
63506N to accelerate development of the anti-torpedo torpedo as 
a part of the surface ship torpedo defense system.

Automatic radar periscope detection and discrimination

    The budget request contained $13.4 million in PE 64261N for 
acoustic search sensors system development and demonstration, 
including $2.9 million to continue development of the automatic 
radar periscope detection and discrimination (ARPDD) project.
    The ARPDD project provides fully automated periscope 
detection, classification and tracking capability to reliably 
detect periscopes and masts of submerged submarines and to 
discriminate periscopes from other targets. The committee notes 
that the Navy regards this capability as essential for 
effective detection of submarines in congested littoral waters. 
The current program of record provides for a four-year 
development cycle, followed by developmental and operational 
testing and a low rate initial production decision in fiscal 
year 2011. The budget request would be used for project 
planning and acquisition program documentation in preparation 
for awarding a contract for development of an airborne ARPDD 
capability. The committee notes that acceleration of the 
program is a priority for the Navy.
    Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $15.0 
million in PE 64261N to accelerate ARPDD system development and 
demonstration and rapid introduction of the capability into the 
fleet.

Aviation ship integration center

    The budget request contained $157.5 million in PE 63512N 
for carrier systems advanced technology development and 
prototyping. No funds were included for the Aviation Ship 
Integration Center.
    The Aviation Ship Integration Center supports the 
development and conceptualization of fully integrated advanced 
technology designs for future aircraft carriers. The center 
identifies, tests, and integrates transformational design 
changes and products for aviation capable ships and component 
systems, and permits the identification and resolution of 
potential problems early in the development cycle, thereby 
reducing overall engineering costs and facilitating the 
introduction of transformational initiatives in the CVN-21 
carrier.
    The committee notes that additional funding is required to 
expand and complete several key initiatives by the shipbuilder 
and appropriate government sponsors.
    Congress appropriated $9.8 million for the Aviation Ship 
Integration Center in fiscal year 2004. The Chief of Naval 
Operations has indicated the center is a critical unfunded 
requirement for fiscal year 2005.
    The committee recommends an increase of $10.0 million in PE 
63512N for the Aviation Ship Integration Center.

Aviation shipboard information technology initiative

    The budget request contained $28.6 million in PE 64512N for 
system development and demonstration for shipboard aviation 
systems, but included no funds for continuation of the 
integrated aviation shipboard information technology 
initiative.
    The aviation shipboard information technology initiative 
seeks to use state-of-the-art information technology and 
decision support systems to automate the current manually 
intensive process for collecting and distributing the 
information required to manage aviation operations on board 
aircraft carriers more efficiently and effectively. The 
committee notes continued progress in the initiative, now 
renamed the Aviation Data Management and Control Systems 
(ADMACS). The development of a common operating picture for 
carrier aviation operations and the ability through process 
automation and integration of key operational systems to 
provide an accurate status of weapons, aircraft, personnel, 
launch, and recovery systems throughout the ship should result 
in significant workload reductions, reduced mission planning 
and execution time, and an increased sortie generation rate. In 
addition to the operational impact of ADMACS, the committee 
notes estimates of operations and support cost savings of $2.0 
million per year per ship and workload savings of 45 man-years 
per year per ship. Congress has provided a total of $7.8 
million for the program since fiscal year 2002.
    The committee recommends an increase of $4.0 million in PE 
64512N to continue the development of ADMACS. The committee 
expects the Navy to include funding for any further development 
of ADMACS in the Navy's core aviation program beginning with 
the fiscal year 2006 budget request.

Biomedical research imaging

    The budget request contained $16.7 million in PE 63729N for 
warfighter protection advanced technology development.
    The committee continues to note the progress being made in 
the use of advanced imaging technology in biomedical research. 
The program develops new tools and diagnostic procedures that 
improve the efficiency and accuracy of biomedical research in 
bone marrow transplantation and breast and prostate cancer, and 
the potential for new collaboration between previous 
unconnected medical specialties. The committee believes that 
these findings have important implications for advances in 
real-time medical diagnosis and treatment and for the 
application of advanced data fusion technologies in other 
areas.
    The committee recommends an increase of $5.0 million in PE 
63729N to continue research in the applications of advanced 
imaging technology to biomedical research.

Center for critical infrastructure protection

    The budget request contained $96.3 million for force 
protection applied research, but included no funding for the 
Center for Critical Infrastructure Protection (CCIP).
    The committee believes that the Department of Defense 
should place a greater emphasis on its acknowledged mission of 
protecting critical defense infrastructure, such as ports, 
railroads, and pipelines. Sustained force protection of fixed 
defense-critical national assets requires additional research 
on sustained and integrated surveillance and sensing 
capabilities. The CCIP is an innovative program that will 
explore such technologies on a continuing basis, helping to 
develop the most comprehensive security systems for the 
nation's critical defense infrastructure.
    The committee recommends an increase of $5.0 million in PE 
62123N for this important research.

Claymore marine

    The budget request contained $4.5 million in PE 63254N for 
anti-submarine warfare (ASW) systems development.
    The committee notes that the Navy established the Claymore 
Marine program to investigate and demonstrate a new littoral 
antisubmarine warfare (ASW) system that integrates the 
previously developed ATD-111 airborne ASW and mine hunting 
system with new signal processing algorithms to achieve a 
significant increase in performance.
    The committee recommends an increase of $7.0 million in PE 
63254N for the Claymore Marine program.

Common submarine radio room

    The budget request contained $18.7 million in PE 33140N for 
information systems security program operational systems 
development.
    The committee notes that the radio room on many of today's 
ships uses outdated, and in some cases, obsolete technologies. 
As a result, the systems that support ship communications in 
the radio room are labor intensive, require heavy and costly 
maintenance, suffer from operator overload and require large 
numbers of highly skilled operators. The Navy developed the 
Common Submarine Radio Room (CSRR) in the Virginia Class 
submarine program and now plans to standardize radio rooms 
across all submarine classes using the CSRR model. CSRR will 
reduce the cost, training, and maintenance of submarine radio 
rooms and, through increased use of automation, will permit the 
reduction of personnel required to stand watch in the radio 
room. In the future the CSRR concept may be extended to the 
surface fleet.
    The committee recommends $36.4 million in PE 33140N, an 
increase of $17.7 million for the Navy's unfunded requirement 
for the CSRR.

Composite ceramic unmanned underwater vehicle

    The budget request contained $63.7 million in PE 62236N for 
warfighter sustainment advanced technology development, but 
included no funding for development of a composite ceramic 
unmanned underwater vehicle.
    The committee notes that the high cost of development and 
manufacture of advanced underwater vehicles (UUV) and that the 
long design and development lifecycle have significantly 
limited introduction of innovative UUV capabilities. The 
committee is aware that the composite ceramic unmanned 
underwater vehicle program plans to use advanced ceramic 
material research for the rapid development of high-
performance, low cost, modular UUVs. The committee supports the 
development of high-performance UUVs, using advanced composite 
technology, ceramic component technology and water-soluble 
tooling, and integration of next- generation sensors, guidance 
and control, propulsion and payloads. The committee expects 
that this technology could replace steel construction with 
light-weight, high strength, corrosion resistant ceramics and 
polymers.
    The committee recommends an increase of $8.0 million in PE 
62236N for composite ceramic unmanned underwater vehicle 
applied research.

Consolidated undersea situational awareness

    The budget request contained $79.5 million in PE 63235N for 
common picture advanced technology development, but included no 
funds to continue development of the consolidated undersea 
situational awareness system (CUSAS).
    The committee notes that CUSAS is a decision-support system 
that would provide knowledge superiority to undersea warfare 
(USW) forces through the use of advanced, interactive, decision 
support software. Developed initially under the Defense 
Advanced Research Projects Agency, CUSAS would offer 
significant improvements in situational awareness for fleet 
operators through the use of high fidelity, two- and three-
dimensional presentations, augmented with real-time, 
intelligent agent-based, tactical recommendations.
    The committee notes the progress in the development of 
CUSAS. The system has demonstrated the capability to interface 
with, process, and display all sources of sensor and 
intelligence data onboard a U.S. submarine. The core technology 
has been installed and successfully demonstrated in an 
operational tactical submarine trainer and a follow-on at-sea 
demonstration is scheduled later in 2004. The committee 
believes that successful development of the CUSAS decision 
support system would provide a capability that would 
significantly assist submarine commanders to make rapid and 
informed decisions in critical combat operations.
    The committee recommends an increase of $4.0 million in PE 
63235N to continue development of CUSAS.

DD(X) multi-mission destroyer

    The fiscal year 2005 budget request included $1,450.6 
million for the DD(X) multi-mission destroyer, including 
$1,431.5 million in PE 64300N and $19.0 million in PE 63513N, 
to continue detailed design and, using RDT&E funding, to begin 
construction of the first ship of the DD(X) class. Of the 
amount requested, $221.1 million is for construction.
    DD(X) is a multi-mission surface combatant tailored for 
land attack in support of the ground campaign and maritime 
dominance. In addition, the DD(X) program will provide a 
baseline for development of technology and engineering to 
support a range of future surface ships such as the CG(X) 
future cruiser and the Littoral Combat Ship. A Milestone B 
acquisition decision is scheduled for mid-fiscal year 2005. 
Delivery of the first ship of the class to the fleet is 
currently planned for fiscal year 2011. The Navy wants to 
procure a total of 24 DD(X)s at a unit procurement cost of 
$1,200 million to $1,400 million.
    The committee has strongly supported the DD(X) program 
since its inception. DD(X) will be the advanced technology 
platform for transformational technologies including an 
integrated power system and electric drive; an advanced gun 
system; a new multi-function radar/volume search radar suite; 
optimal manning through advanced system automation; stealth 
through reduced acoustic, magnetic, infrared, and radar cross-
section signatures; and enhanced survivability through 
automated damage control and fire protection systems. The 
committee report on H.R. 1588 (H. Rept. 108-106) noted that the 
ship's operational requirements and key performance parameters, 
which affect the mission capabilities, design, and size of the 
ship, were under review. Subsequently, the Navy decided to 
reduce the size of the DD(X) from a full load displace of 
approximately 18,000 tons to 14,000 tons.
    In its report, ``Defense Acquisitions--Assessments of Major 
Weapons Programs,'' dated March 2004, the General Accounting 
Office (GAO) assessed the DD(X) as entering system development 
with none of its 12 critical technologies fully mature (and 
thereby subject to a higher risk of completing development at 
the planned cost and schedule). The program manager is pursuing 
risk mitigation by constructing and testing engineering 
development models for the critical technologies; however, the 
acquisition strategy calls for engineering development model 
construction and testing to be done concurrently with system 
design. The decision to reduce the weight of the ship prompted 
redesign of the advanced gun system and hull form engineering 
development models. Because of schedule slippage, only two 
engineering development models (the hull form and the 
integrated power system) would be mature by the award of the 
lead ship construction contract, currently planned for 
September 2005. Current testing schedules call for the 
integrated power system, dual band radar suite, total ship 
computing environment, and peripheral vertical launching system 
to continue development beyond the lead ship production 
decision. In the GAO's view, should any of these innovative 
technologies encounter challenges that cannot be accommodated 
within the current design margins, redesign of other 
technologies and of the integrated ship system may be needed. 
Redesign would likely result in additional costs and schedule 
delays and affect the planned installation schedule. In 
addition, because the DD(X) acquisition strategy focuses on 
developing and maturing technologies that could be leveraged 
across multiple ship classes, delay in the maturation of 
critical technologies would increase the risk for other 
development programs.
    The committee notes that the engineering development models 
of the integrated power system and the advanced gun system are 
scheduled to complete land-based testing by the end of fiscal 
year 2005 and the multi-function radar will have completed two-
thirds of its land-based and at-sea testing by that date. The 
committee believes that it would be prudent to delay the award 
of the contract for construction of the first ship of the class 
from fiscal year 2005 to fiscal year 2006 in order to 
accommodate any results from the testing of these critical 
systems in the design of the ship prior to beginning 
construction. The committee recommends that the DD(X) program 
be restructured to reduce concurrency and develop technology 
``off-ramps'' for technologies that do not mature.
    Accordingly, the committee recommends a decrease of $221.1 
million in PE 64300N and deferring the initiation of 
construction of the lead ship from fiscal year 2005 to fiscal 
year 2006.

Deployable joint command and control

    The budget request contained $42.4 million in PE 63237N for 
research and development of the Deployable Joint Command and 
Control System (DJC2) and $32.5 million for procurement of two 
DJC2 cores (120 seats total) for the European Command.
    The committee supports the concept of establishing a 
standing joint force headquarters within each of the regional 
combatant commands (RCCs) and of providing standardized joint 
command and control capabilities for the commands. However, the 
committee questions the acquisition strategy to procure, equip, 
and provide technology updates for this program. The committee 
is concerned that the schedule to procure and equip the first 
set of two cores per RCCs is too aggressive and may not 
accomplish its schedule due to lack of technology integration 
for the information systems and applications that are required 
for this program.
    While the committee understands that each combatant 
commander would like four core systems, for a potential of up 
to 240 seats per RCC, the committee notes the Department has 
not devised a capital planning strategy to pay for the second 
set of two cores per RCC. Furthermore, there is no 
justification to show how the Department plans to pay for 
updating hardware and software systems to prevent them from 
becoming obsolete by fiscal year 2008.
    Accordingly, the committee directs the Secretary of the 
Navy, in coordination with the commander, Joint Forces Command, 
to provide a report to the congressional defense committees by 
March 31, 2005, detailing a systems architecture, performance 
metrics, management plan for the development of DJC2, and a 
capital planning investment strategy as to how the Department 
plans to fund the second set of two cores per combatant 
command.

Digital modular radio

    The budget request contained $78.6 million in PE 64280N for 
system development and demonstration for the Joint Tactical 
Radio System-Navy (JTRS-Navy). No funds were requested to 
continue system development and demonstration for the digital 
modular radio (DMR).
    DMR is a digital, modular, software programmable, multi-
channel, multi-function and multi-band (2 megahertz--2 
gigahertz) radio system that would provide improved fleet radio 
communications in the high, very-high, and ultra-high frequency 
radio bands. DMR would replace and be interoperable and 
backwards compatible with currently deployed Navy radio 
systems.
    The committee notes that the Department of Defense has 
mandated that all future tactical radio procurements must be 
compliant with the Joint Tactical Radio System (JTRS). The 
committee also notes that the contract for a commercial-off-
the-shelf, non-development initiative DMR was awarded before 
the JTRS architecture and acquisition strategy was established.
    The committee recommends an increase of $15.0 million in PE 
64280N to continue development of the DMR and bring the DMR 
operating environment software to full compliance with the JTRS 
common architecture (version 2.2).

DP-2 thrust vectoring system

    The budget request contained $92.4 million in PE 63114N for 
power projection advanced technology development, but included 
no funding for continuation of the DP-2 thrust vectoring system 
demonstration.
    DP-2 is a proof-of-concept program to demonstrate the use 
of jet-powered, thrust vector control in a light weight 
composite airframe to achieve vertical takeoff and short 
takeoff and landing in a one-half scale flight test vehicle. 
The committee notes the progress to date in the program and 
believes that the potential for a successful proof-of-concept 
demonstration justifies continuation of the program.
    The committee recommends an increase of $10.0 million in PE 
63114N to continue development and demonstration of the DP-2 
thrust vector system concept, leading to potential flight test 
of the one-half scale airframe.

Electromagnetic gun program

    The budget request contained $82.1 million in PE 63123N for 
force protection advanced technology development.
    In section 211 of the National Defense Authorization Act 
for Fiscal Year 2004 (Public Law 108-136), Congress directs the 
Secretary of Defense to establish and carry out a collaborative 
program among the Director of Defense Research and Engineering, 
Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency, the Army, the Navy, 
and other appropriate Department of Defense activities, for 
evaluation and demonstration of advanced technologies and 
concepts for advanced gun systems that use electromagnetic 
propulsion for direct and indirect fire applications. The 
committee believes that the development of electromagnetic gun 
technology would have potentially high payoff for U.S. armed 
forces in both direct and indirect fire weapons systems, and 
that the major investment made by the Department of Defense 
(principally by the Army) in this technology over the last 20 
years is beginning to provide significant returns. In the 
fiscal year 2005 budget request, the committee notes 
significant shortfalls in Department of the Navy funding for 
the program.
    Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $9.5 
million in PE 63123N for electromagnetic gun technology 
advanced development.

Embedded national tactical receiver integration with advanced anti-
        radiation guided missile

    The budget request included $163.4 million in PE 25601N for 
operational systems development for high-speed anti-radiation 
missile (HARM) improvement, including $53.5 million for the 
advanced anti-radiation guided missile (AARGM).
    The embedded national tactical receiver (ENTR) is a circuit 
card capable of receiving global surveillance information. 
Integrating the ENTR in the AARGM would facilitate the 
engagement of time sensitive and critical targets by adding the 
ability for the missile to receive threat data from national 
assets, thereby enlarging the target set and increasing aircrew 
situational awareness. The capability of such a system to 
receive near real time intelligence data will enhance the 
suppression of enemy air defense by increasing the ability to 
engage the most current surface-to-air missile threats in 
denied access area.
    The committee recommends $165.4 million in PE 25601N, an 
increase of $2.0 million to integrate the ENTR in the AARGM.

Emerging/critical interconnection technology

    The budget request contained $61.1 million in PE 63236N for 
warfighter sustainment advanced technology development but no 
funds were requested for continuation of the electronic 
interconnection research and development program.
    The committee notes that printed circuit boards are 
fundamental components of military navigation, guidance and 
control, electronic warfare, missile, and surveillance and 
communications equipment. The committee notes that printed 
circuit boards for military systems have unique design 
requirements for high performance, high reliability, and the 
ability to operate under extreme environmental conditions that 
require the use of high density, highly rugged, and highly 
reliable interconnection technology. The committee also notes 
that the commercial printed circuit board industry focuses on 
the design and high-volume production of low-cost boards and 
the United States has lost much of its printed circuit board 
manufacturing capability to overseas sources. The committee 
recognizes the need to enhance the U.S. capability for 
development and production of high density, highly reliable 
printed circuit boards for use in U.S. military systems. 
Congress appropriated $3.5 million in fiscal year 2004 for this 
program.
    The committee recommends an increase of $4.0 million in PE 
63236N to continue the program for development of emerging and 
critical printed circuit interconnection technology. The 
committee expects that the electronic interconnection research 
and development program will be included in the Navy's core 
research and development program in the fiscal year 2006 budget 
request.

Enterprise resource planning

    The budget request contained $109.5 million in PE 65013N 
for information technology (IT) development, including the 
Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) program.
    The Navy ERP program is intended to provide a standard set 
of tools to Navy organizations to facilitate business process 
reengineering and provide interoperable data for acquisition, 
financial, and logistics operations. The committee understands 
that this new program would converge the four existing ERP 
pilot programs in various Navy commands into one larger ERP.
    The committee believes the Navy should select the most 
comprehensive ERP pilot for the entire Navy's use and terminate 
the other three pilots. Accordingly, the committee recommends 
$26.5 million in PE 65013N for IT programs, a decrease of $83.0 
million for the ERP program.

Enterprise targeting and strike system

    The budget request contained $3.6 million in PE 35208N for 
the development of the Navy's enterprise targeting and strike 
system (eTSS). This program will employ web-enabled enterprise 
technologies across existing operational capabilities. By using 
commercial e-business technologies, eTSS transforms the Navy's 
targeting, strike and mission-planning systems by integrating 
combat platforms and their support components into a single 
hardware dispersed web-enabled enterprise. The committee 
supports this non-proprietary, open standards solution that is 
consistent with the Department of the Navy's other important 
information technology programs. The committee also supports 
the program's goal of supporting globally distributed, joint, 
collaborative, time critical, strike operations within the 
Global Information Grid (GIG) architecture.
    Accordingly, the committee recommends $9.6 million in PE 
35208N, an increase of $6.0 million, for the acceleration and 
deployment of eTSS.

Evolved sea sparrow missile capability for large decks

    The budget request contained $48.2 million in PE 64755N for 
ship self defense (detect and control) system development and 
demonstration.
    The committee notes the requirement for large deck 
amphibious ships and aircraft carriers to be capable of 
countering the anti-ship cruise missile (ASCM) threat.
    The committee notes that the Navy has identified the 
Evolved Sea Sparrow Missile (ESSM) capability for large deck 
amphibious ships as a critical unfunded requirement in the 
fiscal year 2005 budget request. Additional funds are required 
to develop the complete SSDS Mk 2 software configuration 
modification for LHD 1 class ships; initiate integration of the 
ESSM into the SSDS Mk 2 computer program; and procure the 
Reconfigured NATO Sea Sparrow Missile System (RNSSMS), a Mk 29 
missile launching system, an AN/SPQ-9B radar system, and a 
cooperative engagement capability (CEC) system for the LHD 1.
    The committee recommends the following to address the 
Navy's unfunded requirement for providing the ESSM capability 
on large deck amphibious ships:
          (1) An increase of $15.3 million in PE 64755N for 
        SSDS Mk 2 system development and demonstration;
          (2) An increase of $8.7 million for one Reconfigured 
        NATO Sea Sparrow Missile System (RNSSMS);
          (3) An increase of $6.0 million for one AN/SPQ-9B 
        radar system; and
          (4) An increase of $4.2 million for one cooperative 
        engagement capability system.

Formable aligned carbon thermosets

    The budget request contained $63.7 million in PE 62236N for 
warfighter sustainment applied research, but included no funds 
for formable aligned carbon thermosets (FACTS).
    The committee continues to support the development and 
demonstration of FACTS, which employ stretch broken fibers to 
give the composite material plasticity akin to metals. FACTS 
also significantly eases the formation of composite parts for 
use in aircraft and other construction where weight savings and 
reduced operation and maintenance costs are desired. The use of 
FACTS is expected to increase significantly the percentage of 
airframes that can be fabricated from composites, reduce the 
cost of the composite structure, permit the use of more 
efficient designs, and significantly lower the weight of the 
airframes.
    The committee recommends an increase of $2.0 million in PE 
62236N to continue the program for development and 
demonstration of FACTS product technology.

Gallium nitride radio-frequency power technology

    The budget request contained $49.2 million in PE 62271N for 
radio frequency systems applied research.
    Gallium nitride (GaN) radio frequency power 
microelectronics is a wide band gap power semiconductor 
technology that has several key advantages over radio frequency 
component technologies now in use, including higher power 
density, better heat dissipation, and increased bandwidth. This 
new technology could lead to dramatic improvements in system 
performance, such as significant increases in the range of 
radar systems and enabling such systems to more effectively 
identify threat signatures in the presence of terrain 
background clutter. Congress authorized $3.0 million for GaN 
microelectronics and materials development in fiscal year 2004.
    The committee recommends an increase of $3.0 million in PE 
62271N to continue the program for applied research in GaN wide 
band gap semiconductor materials and power microelectronics.

Hemoglobin-based oxygen carrier

    The budget request contained $6.9 million in PE 64771N for 
medical system development and demonstration. No funds were 
specifically requested to continue the development of 
hemoglobin-based oxygen carrier technology.
    The committee notes that there is currently no effective 
method of providing front-line resuscitative treatment (i.e. 
immediate oxygen-carrying support) for acute blood loss to 
wounded soldiers on the battlefield and civilian trauma victims 
in an out-of-hospital setting. The single major cause of death 
in potentially salvageable battlefield casualties is hemorrhage 
and blood loss, and early intervention to treat hemorrhage 
provides the greatest opportunity for reducing mortality and 
morbidity. Although blood transfusion is not practical in far 
forward or out-of-hospital settings, hemoglobin-based oxygen 
carriers have the characteristics of stability at room 
temperature that overcome many of the medical and logistical 
problems associated with red blood cell transfusion.
    In fiscal year 2002 Congress initiated a program for 
evaluation of hemoglobin-based oxygen carriers for the 
treatment of trauma casualties. Based on the progress in the 
program the U.S. Naval Medical Research Center is directing a 
clinical development and trials program to evaluate the safety 
and efficacy of a particular hemoglobin-based oxygen carrier. 
The program is designed to serve as the basis for U.S. Food and 
Drug Administration approval and subsequent licensing of the 
product for military and civilian trauma applications.
    The committee recommends an increase of $13.0 million in PE 
64771N to continue the program for development and clinical 
trials of hemoglobin-based oxygen carriers for treatment of 
trauma casualties.

High temperature superconducting AC synchronous ship propulsion motor

    The budget request contained $82.1 million in PE 63123N for 
force protection advanced technology development, including 
$16.0 million to continue development of a 36.5 megawatt class, 
high temperature superconducting alternating current (AC) 
synchronous motor.
    The committee notes that development of component 
technologies for the all electric warship is one of the major 
goals of the Navy's science and technology program. In fiscal 
year 2003, the Navy awarded a contract for development and 
demonstration of high temperature, superconducting AC 
synchronous motor technology in a 36.5 megawatt propulsion 
motor and drive system that would be designed to be compatible 
with Navy electric warship concepts and performance 
requirements, and would be available to begin Navy evaluation 
in fiscal year 2006. The committee is informed that the Navy's 
budget request is not sufficient to maintain the program 
schedule.
    The committee recommends an increase of $8.0 million in PE 
63123N to maintain the schedule for development of the AC 
synchronous high temperature superconducting motor.

Hybrid POSS composites development

    The budget request contained $96.3 million in PE 62123N for 
force protection applied research.
    The committee notes that the use of composite materials in 
naval aircraft continues to increase and the use of composites 
for ship and submarine applications is becoming more 
acceptable. Organic polymers are the main component of the 
composite resin technology that iscurrently in use; however, 
the limited capability of composites to survive the effects of a 
shipboard fire is the main obstacle to more extensive use and there are 
no resin systems which entirely meet military standards. The committee 
notes that hybrid (organic-inorganic) POSS polymers have been 
demonstrated that meet the fire retardance standard of Military 
Specification 2031, but have not yet been qualified for use on board 
ships. The committee is aware that in fiscal year 2004, the Navy has 
committed to conduct a 1/4-scale demonstration of the fire retardancy 
of hybrid POSS composite resins. The committee believes that it is 
important that the POSS resin technology be fully demonstrated in 
fiscal year 2005 in order to insure that the resin is qualified as a 
candidate for use in the DD(X) multi-mission destroyer and the Littoral 
Combat Ship.
    The committee recommends an increase of $2.0 million in PE 
62123N to continue applied research in the design, fabrication, 
testing, and qualification of POSS composites for shipboard use 
by the Navy.

Integrated personnel protection system

    The budget request contained $98.8 million in PE 62114N for 
power protection applied research.
    The committee notes Navy requirements for improving the 
protection of Navy ships and personnel from natural or combat 
hazards ashore and afloat. Although many advances have been 
made in personnel protection equipment for Navy personnel, many 
situations exist in which current personnel protective 
equipment is inadequate. The committee is aware of advances in 
technologies for protection of Navy personnel from fire, 
chemical, and biological hazards that, when combined with an 
integrated individual display system and interconnected through 
an ultra-wideband personnel communications network, would 
provide enhanced situational awareness and communications 
capabilities for the monitoring of personnel situations and 
coordination of crew response in critical situations.
    The committee recommends an increase of $3.0 million in PE 
62114N for applied research in integrated personnel protection 
systems.

Integrated radar optical surveillance and sighting system

    The budget request contained $48.2 million in PE 64755N for 
ship self defense (detect and control) system development and 
demonstration.
    The committee notes that, in view of the current world 
situation and the worldwide deployment of United States naval 
forces, protection of high value surface assets has become 
highly important.
    The integrated radar optical surveillance and sighting 
system (IROS3) integrates commercial-off-the-shelf systems in a 
non-proprietary, network architecture to provide a digital 
radar picture, electro-optical sensor, non-lethal deterrent, 
and remote engagement by small arms and minor caliber guns. In 
addition to providing a capability to detect and classify 
asymmetric surface threats, maintain 360-degree situational 
awareness around the ship, and effectively engage small close-
in threats, IROS3 would also enhance the capability for surface 
warfare, navigation, maritime intercept operations and related 
naval missions. Congress provided $4.2 million in fiscal year 
2004 to continue development of the IROS3.
    The committee recommends an increase of $3.5 million in PE 
64755N for demonstration and evaluation of the IROS3 system.

Intermediate modulus carbon fiber qualification

    The budget request contained $61.1 million in PE 63236N for 
warfighter sustainment advanced technology development. No 
funds were requested to continue the qualification of 
commercially available intermediate modulus carbon fibers.
    The committee supports efforts to transition new materials 
and processes for use in present and future aircraft and 
missile systems. The committee is encouraged by the Navy's 
efforts to establish a second production source for 
intermediate modulus carbon fiber to ensure more competitive 
practices. In fiscal year 1997, the Navy initiated an effort to 
develop a protocol for the qualification of new materials, 
second source materials, and new processes for use on naval 
aircraft and missile systems. The Navy has developed a 
certification protocol for the qualification of commercially 
available intermediate modulus carbon fibers, which are used to 
strengthen aircraft and missile bodies. To date $5.5 million 
has been provided for this qualification program.
    The committee recommends an increase of $4.0 million in PE 
63236N to complete the qualification program for commercially 
available intermediate modulus carbon fibers.

Interrogator for high-speed retro-reflective communications

    The budget request contained $98.8 million in PE 62114N for 
power project applied research, but included no funding for a 
high-speed retro-reflectometer communications data link.
    The committee notes that the Naval Research Laboratory 
(NRL) has been conducting extensive research into the use of 
modulated retro-reflectors, which would eliminate the need for 
an unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) to carry a laser for downlink 
communications. NRL's progress to date is promising and 
includes the development of a prototype interrogator with fine 
steering optics and software, laser tracking algorithms, 
hardware and software, electronics, and return signal 
collection and demodulation to effectively test a ship-to-shore 
communications scenario. A second prototype will be 
demonstrated in an air-to-ground scenario.
    The committee notes that additional funding in fiscal year 
2005 would permit NRL to develop and demonstrate a miniaturized 
prototype high-speed data link with an interrogator designed 
for easy transport, setting the stage for demonstrations of 
further system applications.
    The committee recommends an increase of $3.0 million in PE 
62114N to continue development of a laser interrogator for 
high-speed retro-reflectometer communications data link.

Joint integrated systems technology

    The budget request contained $573.1 million in PE 33109N 
for Satellite Communications (SATCOM) operational system 
development.
    The Joint Integrated Satellite Communications (JIST) is a 
web-based satellite communications planning and management 
technology that utilizes the Department of Defense's existing 
internet protocol router to expand the flexibility and 
efficiency of military satellite communications across a broad 
spectrum of radio frequencies. The committee continues to 
believe that developmental systems like JIST, based on common 
standards, are key to increased satellite communications 
efficiency and maximizing the utilization of available spectrum 
resources across legacy and follow-on satellite communications 
systems.
    The committee recommends $581.1 million in PE 33109N, an 
increase of $8.0 million to continue the JIST program for 
development of a uniform web-based architecture for SATCOM 
mission planning and resource allocation.

Joint Strike Fighter

    The budget request included $2,264.5 million in the 
Department of the Navy and $2,307.4 million in the Department 
of the Air Force for the Joint Strike Fighter (JSF) program.
    In order to maintain competition for the engine for the 
JSF, Congress has mandated the funding of an alternate engine 
program and the JSF Joint Program Office (JPO) is working with 
the contractor propulsion teams to provide for completely 
interchangeable engines.
    The committee believes that the earliest possible engine 
production lot competition is beneficial to the JSF program. 
The committee directs the JSF JPO plan to compete, at the 
earliest possible date, engine common hardware as well as the 
turbomachinery, while maintaining PW F135 and GE F136 engine 
interchangeability.

Laser radar data exploitation

    The budget request contained $92.4 million in PE 63114N for 
power projection advanced technology development.
    The committee notes that laser radar (LADAR) seekers 
provide high-quality, high-resolution, three-dimensional 
imagery of the target area that is used by the seeker for 
autonomous target recognition (ATR) and location. The committee 
also notes the development of LADAR imagery viewing software 
for engineering analysis of the ATR algorithms and believes 
that such technology can be exploited for intelligence, 
surveillance, and reconnaissance purposes. The imagery, if 
down-linked or otherwise made available to the user, could be 
used to support three-dimensional target area visualization, 
aim point analysis, mission planning, and attack plan 
rehearsal.
    The committee recommends an increase of $3.0 million in PE 
63114N for the continued development of software tools for 
laser radar imagery analysis and the development of concepts of 
operations and procedures for exploiting LADAR imagery for 
mission planning, mapping, and three-dimensional target area 
visualization.

Littoral combat ship

    The budget request contains $352.1 million in PE 63581N for 
the Littoral Combat Ship (LCS), including $244.4 million for 
LCS development and $107.7 million for construction, using 
RDT&E funds for the first ship of the LCS class.
    The LCS is a planned new Navy surface combatant for 
fighting in heavily contested littoral waters that would be the 
smallest member of the DD(X) family of next-generation surface 
combatants and has been identified in budget reviews as a key 
component of Navy transformation. A fast, agile, and stealthy 
surface combatant, LCS missions include mine countermeasures, 
littoral anti-submarine warfare, and countering fast attack 
craft (i.e. ``swarm boats'') in heavily contested littoral 
waters. Secondary missions include intelligence, surveillance, 
and reconnaissance; homeland defense/maritime intercept; 
special operations forces support; and logistics support for 
movement of personnel and supplies.
    LCS would be the first Navy ship to separate capability 
from hull form. Modular mission payloads and open-system 
architecture are intended to be used to configure the LCS for 
particular missions. LCS would be much smaller and faster than 
the Navy's current major surface combatants (2,000-3,000 ton 
displacement and a maximum speed of 40 to 50 knots) and would 
have a reduced crew size of 15 to 50 core members. Three 
contractor teams are competing for the LCS prime contract and 
two will be selected later this year for the next phase of the 
competition. The Navy wants to procure 56 LCSs at an estimated 
unit cost of $150.0 to $220.0 million for the ship alone and 
$250.0 million, including a representative mission payload 
package. The total acquisition cost for the program could 
exceed $14,000 million. Congress provided $166.0 million for 
LCS in fiscal year 2004. The Chief of Naval Operations has 
identified an unfunded requirement of $74.7 million for LCS 
mission module development in fiscal year 2005.
    Prior to announcing the LCS program, the Navy did not 
conduct a formal analysis of alternatives to demonstrate that a 
ship like the LCS would be more cost-effective for performing 
the stated missions than potential alternative approaches. In 
the statement of managers accompanying the conference report on 
H.R. 4546 (H. Rept. 107-772), the conferees raised a number of 
issues with respect to the development of LCS. The Secretary of 
the Navy's report on those issues was a brief, summary document 
that provided little detail with regard to the analysis 
performed by the Navy in developing the requirement and the 
concept for LCS. The Navy's March 2004 report on LCS 
requirements, concepts of operations, acquisition strategy, and 
systems that would be replaced by LCS was also a relatively 
brief summary document that provided little new information 
about the LCS program. Congress has directed the General 
Accounting Office to report by March 1, 2005, on the LCS 
program's analytical justification, concept of operations, 
technical maturity, and potential costs.
    The committee continues to have concerns about the lack of 
a rigorous analysis of alternative concepts for performance of 
the LCS mission, the justification for the force structure 
sought by the Navy, and whether the program's acquisition 
strategy is necessary to meet an urgent operational need. In 
view of continued unfunded requirements for mission module 
development and experimentation and what the committee believes 
is the need for more thorough evaluation program, the committee 
is concerned about the Navy's ability to resolve these issues 
before committing to the design for the LCS and beginning 
construction of the first ship. Finally, the committee is 
concerned about whether the program schedule provides 
sufficient time and capabilities for experimentation and 
evaluation of the operational concepts for LCS before 
committing to major serial production of the ship.
    Consequently, the committee recommends $244.4 million in PE 
63581N for the LCS, a decrease of $107.7 million for LCS 
construction. The committee also recommends that the 
construction of the first Flight 0 LCS be delayed until fiscal 
year 2006.

Littoral support craft-experimental

    The budget request contained $82.1 million in PE 63123N for 
force protection advanced technology development, including 
$10.2 million to continue development and demonstration of the 
Littoral Surface Craft-Experimental (LSC-X).
    The LSC-X or ``X-Craft'' is a science and technology 
platform designed for experimentation with lifting bodies, drag 
reduction and mission modularity. A high-speed, all-aluminum 
catamaran, the LSC-X displaces 1,400 tons at full load. 
Performance requirements are speeds of 50 knots at a combat 
load of about 1,200 tons and 40 knots in sea state four, and 
arange of 4,000 nautical miles without replenishment. The LSC-X will be 
capable of landing two helicopters up to the size of the SH-60R, 
transporting and operating autonomous vehicles, and carrying several 
reconfigurable mission modules in standard twenty-foot-equivalent unit 
boxes. The operating crew will be minimal and the vessel will be built 
to commercial American Bureau of Shipping standards. As expressed in 
the committee report on H.R. 4546 (H. Rept. 107-436), the committee 
continues to believe that an experimental vessel such as the LSC-X 
would be an effective experimental test bed for many of the 
technologies that might be chosen for use on the Littoral Combat Ship 
(LCS). The committee encourages the Secretary of the Navy to carry out 
such an experimentation program as a part of the process for developing 
the operational and design requirements for the LCS.
    The committee recommends an increase of $25.8 million in PE 
63123N to complete construction of the LSC-X, high-speed 
performance testing at-sea, and mission module demonstrations.

Low acoustic signature motor/propulsor

    The budget request contained $64.1 million in PE 62747N for 
undersea warfare advanced technology development.
    The committee notes that the low acoustic signature motor 
propulsor for electrically powered undersea vehicles (LAMPREY) 
will demonstrate an integrated motor-propulsor and power 
converter with extremely low acoustic signature for undersea 
vehicles. When integrated with an already developed, high power 
lithium-propulsion system, the LAMPREY program will represent a 
new propulsion system for an upgraded MK-48 Advanced Capability 
torpedo. The LAMPREY test vehicle will also represent a 1/20th-
scale submarine and will provide valuable data for a larger 
scale version of the propulsion system that could ultimately be 
used in Virginia class submarines. Congress provided $2.1 
million in fiscal year 2003 and $1.8 million in fiscal year 
2004 for the LAMPREY program.
    The committee recommends an increase of $1.0 million in PE 
62747N to complete on-range testing of the LAMPREY test vehicle 
to verify acoustic performance of the propulsion system and 
maximum speed, range, and maneuvering characteristics.

Low-cost terminal imaging seeker

    The budget request contained $92.4 million in PE 63114N for 
power projection advanced technology development.
    The committee notes that the Naval Air Warfare Center, 
Weapons Division, China Lake is demonstrating a low-cost 
precision guidance upgrade kit for a low-cost terminal imaging 
seeker (LCTIS) that is an out-growth of the low-cost guided 
imaging rocket (LOGIR) project. The committee believes that the 
technology which would be demonstrated in the LCTIS could have 
application to the advanced precision kill weapon system, the 
joint common missile, and the small diameter bomb and would be 
a risk reduction alternative for all three of these programs. 
The committee notes that the plan for use of additional fiscal 
year 2005 funding for the LCTIS project would include 
development and test of seeker guidance and control 
alternatives and seeker signal processing algorithms.
    The committee recommends an increase of $5.0 million in PE 
63114N for LCTIS advanced technology development and 
demonstration.

Low-power mega-performance unmanned aerial vehicle processing engines

    The budget request contained $92.4 million in PE 63114N for 
power projection advanced technology, but included no funding 
for low-power mega-performance unmanned aerial vehicle 
processing engines.
    The committee continues to support the development of 
improved signal processing capability for unmanned aerial 
vehicles for precision targeting and other missions. The 
committee notes that the massively parallel processing 
technology being developed under the low-power mega-performance 
unmanned aerial vehicle processing engines program should 
provide significantly enhanced on-board sensor processing 
capabilities that will address the difficult computational 
challenge of on-board sensor processing capabilities for 
unmanned aerial vehicles and will greatly enhance sensor 
performance and surveillance capabilities. Congress 
appropriated $1.5 million for the program in fiscal year 2004.
    The committee recommends an increase of $7.0 million in PE 
63114N to accelerate advanced technology development of low-
power mega-performance unmanned aerial vehicle processing 
engines.

Marine mammal research program

    The budget request contained $63.7 million in PE 62236N for 
warfighter sustainment applied research, but included no funds 
for continuation of the marine mammal research program.
    The committee notes continuing public concern about the 
effect of sound on the behavior and well-being of marine 
mammals and continues to support research in these areas. The 
marine mammal research program investigates the effects of 
noise on dolphin hearing and dolphin biosonar capabilities, 
conducts joint visual and acoustic surveys of the behavior of 
humpback whales, and supports research in bioacoustical 
oceanography.
    The committee recommends an increase of $2.2 million in PE 
62236N to continue the program for research in marine mammal 
behavior, the effects of sound on marine mammals, and 
bioacoustical oceanography.

Nanoscience and nanomaterials

    The budget request contained $375.8 million in PE 61153N 
for defense research sciences, including $65.8 million for 
basic research in advanced naval materials sciences.
    The committee notes continuing progress in research in 
nanoscience and nanomaterials. The committee is also aware that 
the application of these new concepts and technologies in 
improved materials, novel structures, and integrated 
multifunctional composite materials and structures that address 
high priority Navy science and technology needs and future Navy 
capabilities.
    The committee recommends an increase of $3.0 million in PE 
61153N for basic research in nanoscience and nanomaterials.

One megawatt molten carbonate fuel cell demonstrator

    The budget request contained $1.5 million in PE 63724N for 
advanced component development and prototyping for the Navy 
energy program. No funds were requested for the development and 
demonstration of a one megawatt molten carbonate fuel cell.
    The committee notes that reliable, grid-independent and 
environmentally ``clean'' power plants would provide many 
advantages for Department of Defense use. The ability of such 
power plants to generate electricity independent from the local 
electrical utilities would enhance base security by satisfying 
the critical military need of providing uninterruptible 
electrical service.
    The committee recommends $7.5 million in PE 63724N, an 
increase of $6.0 million for the development and demonstration 
of a one megawatt molten carbonate fuel cell.

Open architecture warfare systems

    The budget request contained $48.2 million in PE 64755N for 
ship self defense (detect and control) system development and 
demonstration.
    The committee notes that open architecture warfare systems 
support the Navy's top priority of modernizing warfighting 
capabilities to meet the concepts described in Sea Power 21 and 
that open architecture is the technology enabler that supports 
the Navy's FORCEnet and joint interoperability. Established in 
a commercially based computing environment, open architecture 
provides the common internet protocol technology base that will 
be critical to the seamless interchange of information among 
elements of the Navy's battle management command and control 
systems and the operational and planning capabilities required 
to make network-centric warfare effective.
    The Navy has identified a requirement for $21.8 million in 
fiscal year 2005 to fully fund the implementation of open 
architecture and establish a single functional information 
architecture for Navy surface forces. The committee notes that 
providing these funds in fiscal year 2005 would complete the 
engineering effort to modernize and report the software for 
Ship Self Defense System Mark 2 (SSDS MK 2) combat system 
applications and comply with the required technical and 
functional system design standards that are the necessary 
precursors for implementing the single integrated operational 
picture.
    The committee recommends an increase of $21.8 million in PE 
64755N for the Navy's unfunded requirement for open 
architecture systems development.

Open architecture wireless sensors

    The budget request contained $9.3 million in PE 65013N for 
information technology system development and demonstration.
    The committee notes that the applications of wireless 
networking have achieved significant cost reductions and 
benefits to the U.S. Navy in ship building through the use of 
wearable computers, personal data assistants, and wireless 
communications devices that enable supervisors, engineers, 
technicians, and construction workers to coordinate their 
activities more efficiently. The committee believes that the 
future insertion of wireless network applications through the 
shipboard environment and the converging of multiple networks 
into a single ship-wide network could facilitate significant 
improvements in ship operations, damage control, maintenance, 
and other activities.
    The committee recommends an increase of $3.0 million in PE 
65013N for development and demonstration of open architecture 
wireless sensors and their applications to improvements in ship 
operations, maintenance and monitoring of ship systems, damage 
control, and other activities.

Organ transplant technology

    The budget request contained $16.7 million in PE 63729N for 
warfighter protection advanced technology development. No funds 
were requested for continuation of the organ transfer 
technology program.
    The committee continues to note progress in the development 
of immune therapies by investigators at the Naval Medical 
Research Center that have been shown to prevent the rejection 
of tissue and organ transplants without the need for continuous 
use of immuno-suppressive drugs. In fiscal year 2001, the Chief 
of Naval Research initiated a program to capitalize on these 
newly developed methods of treatment. The committee notes the 
continuing progress in the clinical trials program. The 
committee believes that the ability to transplant massive 
tissue segments without rejection could revolutionize the 
treatment of combat casualties who suffer significant tissue 
loss or organ damage from blast, missile fragments, or burns.
    The committee recommends an increase of $4.0 million in PE 
63729N to continue the organ transfer technology clinical 
trials program.

Project M

    The budget request contained $82.1 million in PE 63123N for 
force protection advanced technology development. No funds were 
included for continuation of Project M.
    The committee notes the progress in the Office of Naval 
Research (ONR) program to evaluate the ability of Project M 
technology to mitigate the high shock and vibration experienced 
by the Navy SEALS Mark V patrol craft crew and passengers in 
high-speed special operations. The committee is aware that at-
sea tests of the technology are scheduled for the summer of 
2004.
    The committee also notes the application of Project M 
technology to reduce the magnetic signature of electric 
propulsion motors. As the Navy places increased emphasis on the 
introduction of the ``electric'' ship and the use of electric 
motors for ship propulsion, reduction of the magnetic signature 
of the ship as a defense against magnetic-influence mines, 
particularly in littoral operations, will become increasingly 
important. The committee strongly recommends that the Navy 
consider the exploitation of the Project M technology for 
magnetic signature reduction in new construction ships such as 
the DD(X) destroyer and the Littoral Combat Ship.
    The committee report on H.R. 1588 (H. Rept. 108-106) 
directed the Secretary of the Navy and the Commander, Special 
Operations Command, to report to the congressional defense 
committees on plans for transition of Project M shock reduction 
technology to potential operational use, and the Secretary to 
report Department of the Navy plans for further development, 
evaluation, and exploitation of Project M technology for 
magnetic signature reduction. The committee expects the results 
of the shock-mitigation at-sea trials to be included in the 
report.
    The committee recommends an increase of $4.0 million in PE 
63123N to continue the development and demonstration of Project 
M technology.

Rapid deployment fortification wall

    The budget request contained $58.2 million in PE 63640M for 
Marine Corps advanced technology demonstration. No funds were 
requested to continue the development and evaluation of the 
rapid deployment fortification wall.
    In the fiscal year 2004 budget the committee initiated a 
program for development and evaluation of a rapid deployment 
fortification wall (RDFW) which would provide a significantly 
faster means for force protection than the use of sand bags. 
The RDFW has been selected for force protection evaluation at 
Lackland Air Force Base, Texas. The committee is informed that 
additional funding for the evaluation would permit its 
evaluation as a vehicular barrier and a more comprehensive 
evaluation of the speed of installation, labor savings, 
construction, and structural integrity, and innovative uses of 
the RDFW.
    The committee recommends an increase of $1.5 million in PE 
63640M to continue evaluation of the RDFW.

Real-time precision targeting radar

    The budget request contained $44.0 million in PE 63271N for 
radio frequency systems advanced technology development. No 
funds were requested for the AN/APY-6 radar.
    The committee notes the Navy's operational requirement for 
reducing the targeting cycle for engaging time-critical mobile 
targets and enhancing the ability to detect, locate and strike 
these targets in all weather conditions. The committee also 
notes as a part of the future naval capabilities program that 
the Office of Naval Research is developing the AN/APY-6 multi-
mode, high-resolution surveillance radar as a real-time 
precision targeting radar for all-weather surveillance, 
detection and location of such targets. The objective of the 
program is to provide the warfighter with a lightweight, low-
cost, high-resolution radar, with synthetic aperture radar and 
ground moving target indicator capability for use in both 
manned and unmanned platforms for reconnaissance, surveillance, 
and targeting.
    The committee recommends an increase of $10.0 million in PE 
63271N for continuation of the development and demonstration of 
the AN/APY-6 real-time precision targeting radar.

Reduced risk ordnance

    The budget request contained $10.8 million in PE 63216N for 
aviation survivability advanced component development and 
prototyping, including $1.2 million for aircrew and ordnance 
safety.
    The committee notes that current submunitions in naval 
weapon systems use fuzes that have reliabilities in the range 
of 90 to 94 percent. As a result, a significant number of 
deployed submunitions fail to detonate and become unexploded 
ordnance that pose a safety hazard to warfighters who might 
encounter the unexploded submunitions on the battlefield, to 
technicians who must clear the battlefield, and to civilians 
who might come upon them accidentally.
    The committee notes that in the past, highly reliable fuzes 
have been too expensive for use in submunitions. However, new 
technologies are being developed for all-electronic fuzes that 
would have a much higher reliability (approximately 99 percent) 
and could be produced at a cost that would make such fuzes 
affordable for use in submunitions.
    The committee recommends $13.8 million in PE 63216N, an 
increase of $3.0 million for development and demonstration of 
highly reliable, all-electronic fuzes for use in submunitions.

Remote ocean surveillance system

    The budget request contained $44.0 million in PE 63271N for 
radio frequency systems advanced technology development.
    The committee notes continued progress in the development 
of high contrast, high resolution multi-spectral sensors and 
image processing technology that indicates potential 
capabilities for detection of objects in the ocean in real 
time, at various depths, and with relatively high search rates. 
Realization and employment of these technologies in littoral 
areas, estuaries, and ports would provide the capability for a 
remote ocean surveillance system to provide real-time 
capabilities for mine detection and avoidance, force 
protection, and identification and dissemination of information 
on the surface and sub-surface threat to ports and harbors.
    The committee recommends an increase of $3.0 million in PE 
63271N to continue the proof-of-concept development and 
demonstration of multi-spectral sensor and image processing 
technology for a remote ocean surveillance system.

Ship system component development

    The budget request contained $19.0 million in PE 63513N for 
ship system component advanced technology development and 
prototyping.
    The committee notes that with the integration of advanced 
power systems into future combat ships there is a need to 
address the manufacturing methods and process technology that 
will improve the manufacturability and affordability of 
advanced solid state power electronics systems early in the 
development cycle. This effort should begin with the 
manufacturing methods and processes for high density advanced 
motors, solid-state switches, distribution systems, and other 
power electronics systems that will be used in the DD(X) multi-
mission destroyer.
    The committee recommends an increase of $2.0 million in PE 
63513N for development and demonstration of improvements in 
manufacturing methods and process technology for high power 
switches and conversion equipment that will be used in the 
DD(X) program.

Spectral beam combining fiber lasers

    The budget request contained $44.0 million in PE 63271N for 
radio frequency systems advanced technology development.
    The committee notes that high power lasers based on fiber 
laser technology might be capable of providing U.S. armed 
forces the same operational advantages as solid-state lasers, 
but could offer potential breakthroughs in reduced size, 
weight, complexity, and cooling requirements. The committee is 
informed that recently demonstrated technology for spectral 
beam combining fiber lasers, in which the outputs of a number 
of low power fiber optic lasers are combined into a single, 
high quality laser beam, could permit the construction of high 
power lasers from an array of lower power fiber laser elements 
at a significantly lower cost than conventional high power 
lasers.
    The committee recommends an increase of $1.5 million in PE 
63271N for advanced development and evaluation of the 
technology for spectral beam combining fiber lasers.

Submarine payloads and sensors program

    The budget request contained $81.2 million in PE 63561N, 
for advanced submarine systems development.
    The committee notes that the Defense Advanced Research 
Project Agency/Navy submarine payloads and sensors program 
resulted in the development of a number of innovative, but 
realistic payload, sensor, and platform concepts that would 
enable a revolutionary expansion of capabilities and allow the 
submarine (Virginia Class and SSGN) to play a more decisive 
role in joint force operations, especially in the ability to 
exert greater influence over events on shore.
    The committee recommends and increase of $10.0 million in 
PE 63561N to continue the program for continued development and 
demonstration of advanced submarine payloads and sensor 
capabilities.

Superconducting direct current homopolar motor

    The budget request contained $82.1 million in PE 63123N for 
force protection advanced technology development, including 
$42.7 million for advanced development of surface ship and 
submarine hull, mechanical, and electrical systems, of which 
$5.0 million would continue the development and demonstration 
of an advanced main propulsion 36.5 megawatt prototype 
superconducting direct current (DC) homopolar motor.
    The development of component technologies for the all-
electric warship is one of the major goals of the Navy's 
science and technology program. The committee also notes that 
low temperature superconducting DC homopolar motor technology 
has the potential technical advantages of being smaller, 
lighter, and quieter than alternating current (AC) electric 
motors, and, if realized, would make the superconducting DC 
homopolar motor a potentially more suitable alternative for use 
in submarines or in other ship applications where these 
attributes are desired.
    The committee recommends an increase of $9.2 million in PE 
63123N to continue the program for development of a 26.5 
megawatt prototype superconducting DC homopolar motor for ship 
main propulsion.

Tactical E-field buoy development

    The budget request contained $4.5 million in PE 63254N for 
advanced component development and prototypes for anti-
submarine warfare systems, including the continued development 
and evaluation of nonlinear dynamics and stochastic resonance 
(NDSR) for acoustic, magnetic, and other anti-submarine warfare 
sensor and signal processing applications.
    The committee notes the continuing progress in the 
application of nonlinear dynamics science and technology to 
non-acoustic shallow water anti-submarine warfare and the 
potential for greatly improving anti-submarine warfare systems 
performance as a result of significantly increased 
electromagnetic detection ranges, enhanced sonar target 
discrimination, and improved signal processing. One result of 
this program has been the establishment of the effectiveness of 
E-field sensors using state-of-the-art sensor technology 
coupled with nonlinear signal processing. The committee 
believes that an air-launched tactical E-field buoy patterned 
after the Air Deployed Active Receiver sonobuoy has great 
potential for real-time target detection and classification.
    The committee recommends an increase of $4.0 million in PE 
63254N to continue the program for accelerated component and 
prototype design, development, and laboratory and at-sea 
testing of a tactical E-field buoy for littoral anti-submarine 
warfare.

Task force anti-submarine warfare

    The budget request contained $17.6 million in PE 63553N for 
surface anti-submarine warfare (ASW).
    Task Force Antisubmarine Warfare (ASW) was established in 
2003 at the direction of the Chief of Naval Operations to 
examine fleet shortcomings in anti-submarine warfare 
operational capabilities and recommend improvements in 
technology, operational concepts, and training techniques. The 
program focuses on fundamentally changing the way ASW is 
conducted, to render enemy submarines impotent against United 
States and coalition forces. According to the Navy, changing 
the calculus of antisubmarine warfare will require developing 
off-board and distributed systems, minimizing force-on-force 
engagements, reducing the time required to conduct an ASW 
engagement, and supporting rapid maneuver of ASW forces.
    The committee notes that the Navy plans a multi-level 
trials program for development of active-passive distributed 
sensor systems and promising technologies proposed by industry. 
Two at-sea experiments are planned that would employ active-
passive distributed sensor systems to test hardware concepts, 
evaluate candidate software algorithms, and collect the data 
required for further software development. The plan also 
includes advanced development of a minimum of two promising 
industry-proposed technologies. The program has been 
established as one of the Chief of Naval Operations highest 
priority unfunded requirements.
    The committee recommends an increase of $16.6 million in PE 
63553N for Task Force ASW multi-level trials for technical and 
operational evaluation of developmental ASW systems and 
concepts of operation.

Theater undersea warfare initiative

    The budget request contained $60.1 million in PE 62235N for 
common picture applied research. No funds were requested to 
continue the theater undersea warfare initiative.
    The committee notes that Congress has added a total of 
$14.5 million in fiscal years 2003 and 2004 for the Theater 
Undersea Warfare Initiative, which seeks to enhance the Navy's 
network centric capability for maritime patrol aircraft (MPA) 
and provide a near real-time, collaborative communication, 
command, and control capability for MPA operations. The program 
utilizes the High Performance Computing Center in Maui, Hawaii, 
to support network- centric undersea warfare (USW) and as a 
repository for tactical environmental data services; the 
oceanographic and atmospheric master library, and sensor and 
platform data bases. The committee notes that over the long 
term the Office of Naval Research intends to use the program to 
provide enhanced USW capabilities to the fleet and to transfer 
the technology developed in the program to USW support 
activities.
    The committee recommends an increase of $6.0 million in PE 
62235N to continue the theater undersea warfare initiative.

Ultrasonic detection equipment

    The budget request contained $19.0 million in PE 63513N for 
shipboard system component advanced technology development and 
prototyping.
    The committee notes the recently completed shipboard 
demonstration of a commercial-off-the-shelf (COTS) ultrasonic 
tester aboard the USS Gunston Hall that evaluated the 
effectiveness and the practicality of inexpensive ultrasonic 
testers to assess the material conditionof specific shipboard 
components and equipment. Areas examined during the demonstration 
included watertight door integrity, fluid systems leakage, valve leak-
by identification, compartment integrity inspections, gear-train and 
bearing inspections, faulty electrical component identification, and 
rotating machinery integrity. The results of the demonstration 
indicated that the use of relatively inexpensive, COTS ultrasonic 
testers as a diagnostic tool to assist sailors in conducting periodic 
maintenance is practical and cost-effective, and supports the 
implementation of condition-based maintenance in the surface fleet. 
Based on the results of the test, the committee recommends the adoption 
of such testers for use in the fleet.
    The committee recommends an increase of $2.5 million in PE 
63513N for fielding and evaluation of COTS ultrasonic testers 
for use by the fleet.

VH-XX executive helicopter development

    The budget request contained $777.4 million for the VH-XX 
executive development program, a program that is developing a 
replacement for the VH-3D helicopter.
    The committee notes that the Department of the Navy has 
delayed the decision to enter the system design and development 
(SDD) phase of the VH-XX program from fiscal year 2004 to 
fiscal year 2005, and understands that the VH-XX program SDD 
phase would select one helicopter manufacturer to develop and 
produce the VH-XX helicopter. The committee further understands 
that this decision resulted principally from the awareness of 
the complexities in equipping helicopter commercial variants 
with the communication systems required to perform the VH-XX 
mission. While the committee commends the Department for taking 
the additional time necessary to further refine requirements 
and to conduct design and integration planning, it notes that 
the budget planned for both fiscal year 2004 and fiscal year 
2005 assumed that the VH-XX SDD program would begin in the 
third quarter of fiscal year 2004. Since the committee believes 
that the VH-XX SDD program will not begin until at least the 
second quarter of fiscal year 2005, it also believes that $26.0 
million in fiscal year 2004 appropriations can be applied to 
fiscal year 2005 requirements and that $194.0 requested for 
fiscal year 2005 exceeds requirements.
    Consequently, the committee recommends $557.4 million for 
the VH-XX executive helicopter development program, a decrease 
of $220.0 million.

Virginia class multi-mission modules

    The budget request contained $143.2 million in PE 64558N 
for Virginia class submarine design development system 
development and demonstration.
    The committee notes the experience gained in the 
development, design, and implementation of multi-mission 
capabilities in the USS Jimmy Carter (SSN-23). The committee 
believes that the modular design of the Virginia class 
submarine continues to lend itself to the evaluation of multi-
mission module concepts for that submarine that could be 
considered for insertion in selected hull numbers of the class 
to increase payload capacity, capability for technology 
insertion, and adaptability to new missions.
    The committee recommends an increase of $10.0 million in PE 
64558N to continue the program for evaluation of modular 
payload concepts and multi-mission modules for Virginia class 
submarine variants that would increase payload capacity and 
mission capability.

Virtual at-sea training initiative

    The budget request contained $61.1 million in PE 63236N for 
warfighter sustainment advanced technology development.
    In view of recent reductions in the number of available 
naval live-fire training ranges, the committee recognizes the 
benefit of the Department of the Navy's program to develop a 
technological solution to maintain fleet readiness in the area 
of live fire targeting and ordnance delivery. The Office of 
Naval Research's Virtual-at-Sea-Training (VAST) initiative is 
an encouraging technology solution for solving the problem of 
maintaining readiness despite the reduction in live fire 
training ranges. The committee, therefore, supports the Navy's 
continued development of VAST by the Office of Naval Research 
for transition into a Department of Defense acquisition 
program.
    The committee recommends an increase of $4.0 million in PE 
63236N for continued development of the VAST initiative.

Wide band gap semiconductor power electronics

    The budget request contained $46.3 million in PE 62712E and 
$3.5 million in PE 62271N for applied research in wide band gap 
semiconductor electronics and wide band gap semiconductor 
electronic devices. Section 212 of the National Defense 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2002 (Public Law 107-107) 
requires the Secretary of Defense to carry out a cooperative 
program to develop and demonstrate advanced technologies and 
concepts for future Navy radar systems and other applications 
with particular emphasis on development of high frequency and 
high power wide band gap semiconductor materials and devices.
    The committee notes the progress in the development of 
silicon carbide and other wide band gap materials in the 
Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency program and in the 
Navy program and the potential for transition of the materials 
technology to applications in advanced power and high frequency 
semiconductor devices.
    The committee recommends an increase of $4.0 million in PE 
62271N for wide band gap semiconductor power electronics 
applied research.

         Air Force Research, Development, Test, and Evaluation


                                Overview

    The budget request contained $21,114.7 million for Air 
Force research, development, test, and evaluation (RDT&E).
    The committee recommends $21,528.0 million, an increase of 
$413.3 million to the budget request.


                       Items of Special Interest


Advanced vehicle and propulsion center and engineering research lab 
        equipment upgrade

    The budget request contained $92.7 million in PE 62203F for 
aerospace propulsion, but contained no funds for the advanced 
vehicle and propulsion center and engineering research lab 
oratory equipment upgrade.
    The committee recognizes the value added to Air Force Space 
Command projects through the Air Force Research Laboratory's 
effort to merge modeling and simulation capabilities with 
advanced technologies involving the advanced vehicle and 
propulsion center. Additionally, the committee notes the need 
to upgrade propulsion laboratory equipment to support the 
exploration of emerging technologies.
    The committee recommends increases of $8.5 million in PE 
62203F for the advanced vehicle and propulsion center and $1.0 
million for the engineering research lab equipment upgrade.

Advanced wideband signals intelligence geo-processor

    The budget request contained $13.3 million in PE 35207F, 
but contained no funding for the advanced wideband processor 
and high frequency geo-processor (AWP/HGP).
    The committee notes that our asymmetrical adversaries are 
more commonly using widely available high-technology 
communications for command and control networks. Airborne 
collectors are experiencing an increasing challenge in 
collecting these types of low probability of intercept (LPI)/ 
low probability or detection (LPD) signals in a dense co-
channel environment with rapid geolocation capability. The Air 
Force Research Laboratory (AFRL) has developed a promising 
technology that enables signals intelligence collection suites 
to collect against these signals and provide real-time geo-
coordinates of these signals. Flight testing is being conducted 
and follow-on field testing needs to be accomplished with 
subsequent integration of this capability into an operational 
intelligence collector such as the RC-135.
    Therefore the committee recommends an increase of $4.0 
million in PE 35207F for the AWP/HGP project for the RC-135 
aircraft.

B-2 development

    The budget request contained $245.0 million in PE 64240F 
for B-2 system development, but included no funds to develop 
the extremely high frequency (EHF) satellite communications 
(SATCOM) system, or for a global strike capabilities initiative 
(GSCI). The B-2 is the Department of Defense's most advanced 
long-range strike aircraft, capable of global force projection 
in a highly defended target environment.
    The EHF SATCOM system is being developed to provide high 
bandwidth communications for both nuclear and conventional B-2 
missions. The committee notes that the Congress appropriated 
$12.6 million in fiscal year 2004 for this system, understands 
that $24.0 million is required in fiscal year 2005 to complete 
EHF SATCOM development. Therefore, the committee recommends an 
increase of $24.0 million for the EHF SATCOM system.
    The GSCI would incrementally upgrade B-2 aircraft with 
capabilities that address warfighting gaps identified by the 
Air Force and Joint Force Commanders. For fiscal year 2005, the 
committee understands that the most urgent capabilities 
required through the GSCI would include: defensive management 
system processor upgrades; integrated avionics block 
development to address deficiencies in the standby flight 
instruments; Link 16 information exchange between B-2 and other 
aircraft, and flight management control processor software; and 
global air traffic management system upgrades. Additionally, 
the committee understands that the GSCI for fiscal year 2005 
would begin development of small diameter bomb (SDB) 
integration on the B-2, and expects that this effort would 
eventually provide the B-2 with a capability to deliver 160 to 
240 SDBs. Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of 
$74.0 million for the GSCI, and expects that $13.0 million 
would upgrade the defensive management system, $51.0 million 
would develop an integrated avionics block upgrade, and $10.0 
million would provide for SDB design concepts and program 
planning necessary to implement an SDB development and 
integration program.
    In total, the committee recommends $343.0 million for B-2 
system development, an increase of $98.0 million.

Blue MAJIC

    The budget request contained $35.4 million in PE 64855F for 
operationally responsive launch, but included no funding for 
Blue MAJIC.
    The committee understands the importance of blue force 
tracking in the effort to reduce fratricide and increase force 
protection. The committee recognizes Blue MAJIC would provide 
the field commander a significant tool to improve blue force 
tracking. The committee also realizes that Blue MAJIC will 
pursue a strategy that furthers the employment of responsive 
launch and integrates current technology into operations.
    The committee recommends an increase of $4.0 million in PE 
64855F for Blue MAJIC.

Cobra Ball

    The budget request contained $13.3 million in PE 35207F for 
the manned reconnaissance system, but contained no funds for 
Cobra Ball.
    The committee notes Cobra Ball's ability to exploit unused 
spectral data content and its increased sensitivity and 
accuracy in the medium wave infrared spectrum and believes it 
necessary to accelerate this effort.
    The committee recommends an increase of $7.5 million in PE 
35207F for Cobra Ball.

Combat optical receiver for smart and loitering standoff weapons

    The budget request included $78.8 million in PE 62204F for 
aerospace sensors.
    The committee directs that $2.0 million be made available 
within funds authorized for PE 62204F for the combat optical 
receiver for smart and loitering standoff weapons.

Collaborative information technologies

    The budget request included $5.3 million in PE 62702F, 
project 4917, for collaborative information technologies to 
develop emerging technologies for the next generation of 
distributed, collaborative command and control systems.
    The committee recommends an additional $4.5 million in PE 
62702F, project 4917, to develop an initial operational 
capability for application of collaborative information 
technologiesto joint and Air Force capability planning, 
technology assessment, and enterprise management activities.

Common aero vehicle

    The budget request contained $21.6 million in PE 64856F for 
the Common Aero Vehicle (CAV).
    The committee is aware that additional funding is required 
to complete CAV analysis; ensure validation of system 
components and operational capabilities; fund launch vehicle 
procurement; and provides flight test planning and range safety 
support.
    The committee recommends $33.6 million in PE 64856F, an 
increase of $12.0 million for CAV.

Defensive electro-optical tracker countermeasures technologies

    The budget request included $12.4 million in PE 63270F to 
develop and demonstrate advanced warning and countermeasures 
technologies to negate electro-optical, infrared, and laser 
threats to aerospace platforms.
    The committee recommends an additional $6.0 million in PE 
63270F to increase the technology readiness levels to 
accelerate transition of this capability to system development 
and demonstration.

Distributed mission interoperability toolkit

    The budget request contained $300,000 in PE 64740F for 
integrated command and control applications, which includes the 
Distributed Mission Interoperability Toolkit (DMIT) program.
    The committee notes that the DMIT is a suite of tools that 
enable an enterprise architecture for on-demand, trusted, 
interoperability among mission-oriented command, control, 
communications, computers, and intelligence (C4I) systems based 
on lessons learned from Operation Iraqi Freedom.
    The committee notes that this program leverages best 
practices from the commercial sector to positively impact the 
Department of Defense's C4I programs through the use of open 
architectures, existing and emerging web standards, and state-
of-the-art technologies. The committee believes DMIT will 
enable rapid and adaptive integration between legacy and new 
information systems.
    Accordingly, the committee recommends $6.3 million in PE 
64740F, an increase of $6.0 million.

Enterprise availability and cost optimization system

    The budget request contained $15.7 million in PE 65011F for 
development of products and services to improve the performance 
of aging aircraft systems but included no funds for the 
enterprise availability and cost optimization system (EACOS).
    The committee understands that the program offices 
supporting aging aircraft systems are each generating their own 
criteria and processes for identifying enhancements and 
measuring success. The committee further understands that, as a 
result of this situation, common problems are being addressed 
and resolved multiple times in dissimilar manners, and believes 
that the EACOS, can standardize this process and result in the 
identification of common solutions.
    Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $2.0 
million in PE 65011F.

F-15C/D active electronically scanned array radar

    The budget request contained $115.2 million in PE 27134F 
for F-15 development programs, but included no funds for the F-
15C/D active electronically scanned array (AESA) radar.
    The F-15C/D AESA radar, also known as the APG-63(V) 3 
radar, would replace the current APG-63(V) 1 radar, and provide 
a five hundred percent improvement in reliability while 
reducing the APG-63(V)1's mobility requirements by eight 
hundred percent. The committee understands that the F-15C/D 
AESA radar would also provide significant operational 
improvements and notes that the Air Force Chief of Staff has 
included the F-15C/D AESA as his highest unfunded priority for 
fiscal year 2005.
    Consequently, the committee recommends $132.4 million in PE 
27134F, an increase of $17.2 million for F-15C/D AESA radar.

Global Hawk United States Southern Command demonstration

    The budget request contained $336.2 million in PE 35220F 
for the Air Force Global Hawk high altitude endurance, unmanned 
aerial vehicle (HAE/UAV) program.
    The committee notes that section 221 of the National 
Defense Authorization Act of 2001 (Public Law 106-398) directed 
the Secretary of Defense to require and coordinate a concept 
demonstration of the Global Hawk HAE/UAV. The purpose of the 
demonstration was to demonstrate the capability of the Global 
Hawk to operate in an airborne surveillance mode, using 
available, non-developmental technology in a counter-drug 
surveillance scenario designed to replicate actual conditions 
typically encountered in the performance of the counter-drug 
surveillance mission of the U.S. Southern Command.
    The committee believes the Department has not met the 
requirements of this congressionally directed action.
    The committee has received the Air Force January 28, 2004, 
memorandum that states the directive will be met by utilizing 
the HAE/UAVs existing ground target moving indicator (GMTI) 
with surface search modes. The committee notes that the 
specific intent of section 221, is to provide an airborne air 
surveillance alternative for U.S. Southern Command through a 
concept demonstration performed under actual conditions of 
counter-drug airborne surveillance missions. Additionally, the 
committee notes that the authorized funds were to also pursue 
the initiation of concurrent development of an improved 
surveillance radar, such as an airborne moving target indicator 
(AMTI) capability, for this purpose.
    The committee has determined that the Air Force's present 
plan does not meet the mandated objective contained in section 
221. The committee suspects the Air Force used the $18.0 
million set aside in 2001 for the counter-drug demonstration to 
meet other requirements of the Global Hawk development program. 
The committee concludes that $18.0 million of Global Hawk 
requirements, as presented in the 2005 budget request, have 
been met through the use of the funds set aside for the 
counter-drug demonstration, and therefore has reduced funds for 
Global Hawk requirements accordingly.
    The committee directs, once again, the Secretary of Defense 
to conduct a long endurance air-to-air radar surveillance 
mission concept demonstration of the Global Hawk HAE/UAV that 
meets the congressional intent of section 221 of Public Law 
106-945.
    The committee recommends $318.2 million in PE 35220F, a 
reduction of $18.0 million based on the failure of the 
Department to conduct a demonstration of the Global Hawk UAV 
for the Southern Command's airborne surveillance concept 
demonstration for the drug-interdiction mission.

Global positioning system

    The budget request contained $148.3 million in PE 35165F 
for the global positioning system, including $40.6 million for 
the global positioning system block III (GPS III).
    Lessons learned from recent operations have confirmed the 
value of precision guided munitions in warfare. The committee 
understands this success relies greatly on the support provided 
by GPS. Development of GPS III would enhance accuracy, 
availability and anti-jam capability, while reducing system 
life-cycle costs. The committee strongly supports this 
development effort, but is concerned that the first launch, 
scheduled for fiscal year 2012, is unnecessarily delayed. The 
committee recommends acceleration of block III satellites 
consistent with program priorities.
    The committee recommends the budget request.

High accuracy network determination system

    The budget request contained $6.3 million in PE 63444F for 
the Maui space surveillance system, but included no money for 
the High Accuracy Network Determination System (HANDS).
    The committee recognizes that HANDS would reduce the 
potential for collisions of space assets by reducing errors in 
the current space-object maintenance catalog.
    The committee recommends $16.3 million in PE 63444F, an 
increase of $10.0 million for HANDS.

Identification of time critical targets

    The budget request included $28.5 million in PE 63789F for 
Command, Control, Communications and Intelligence (C3I), 
including $5.4 million to develop and demonstrate advanced data 
and information fusion capabilities for identification of time 
critical targets (targets under trees).
    The committee supports the need for enhanced fusion of 
intelligence data. Increased funding in fiscal year 2005 would 
permit the demonstration of fusion technologies for continuous 
tracking of time critical targets and track continuity to 
provide more accurate common operational pictures through the 
use of the Distributed Common Ground System.
    Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $5.0 
million in PE 63789F for data fusion technologies enabling 
identification of time critical targets.

Integrated cooling and power system magnetic bearing technology

    The budget request included $92.7 million in PE 62203F for 
Aerospace Propulsion Systems, including $2.2 million to 
continue development of advanced bearing concepts for turbine 
engine applications.
    Advanced avionics, electronic warfare systems, and radars 
in new and upgraded tactical aircraft and unmanned aerial 
vehicles provide significantly increased capability, but demand 
advanced solutions to meet power and cooling requirements. One 
enabling technology to meet these requirements is a magnetic 
bearing turbo-generator.
    Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $4.0 
million in PE 62203F for integrated cooling and power system 
magnetic bearing technology.

Integrated control for autonomous space systems

    The budget request contained $88.9 million in PE 62601F for 
space technology, but contained no funds for integrated control 
for autonomous space systems (ICASS).
    The committee notes that ICASS is intended to provide 
advanced satellite control and measurement technologies. The 
committee realizes ICASS has the potential to greatly expand 
the Department of Defense capability to deploy and control 
super-compact structures.
    The committee recommends an increase of $4.0 million in PE 
62601F for the development of ICASS.

Intelligent free space optical satellite communication node

    The budget request contained $60.1 million in PE 63401F for 
advanced spacecraft technology, but contained no funds for the 
intelligent free space optical satellite communication node.
    The committee is concerned about the development risk of 
the transformational communications architecture and notes that 
any laser-based satellite communication system will also 
require a radio-frequency (RF) capability. The committee 
believes additional risk-mitigation development is warranted 
for RF and laser-capable routers and low-cost adaptive 
switching.
    The committee recommends an increase of $3.0 million in PE 
63401F to develop an intelligent free space optical 
communications node.

Joint surveillance target attack radar system blue force tracking and 
        combat identification

    The procurement budget request contained $45.3 million for 
various E-8C joint surveillance target attack radar system 
(JSTARS) modifications, but included no funds for the blue 
force tracking and combat identification (CID) upgrade. 
Additionally, the research, development, test and evaluation 
(RDT&E) budget request contained $89.2 for JSTARS development, 
but also included no funds to develop the JSTARS blue force 
CID.
    The committee understands that, as a result of Operation 
Iraqi Freedom, the Department of the Air Force has identified 
critical needs to prosecute mobile targets; provide a common 
operating picture of friendly and enemy forces to warfighting 
decision makers; and accurately distinguish between friendly 
and enemy forces. The committee also understands that the 
JSTARS blue force tracking and CID upgrades would network 
friendly forces in real time with the JSTARS E-8C aircraft in 
all weather conditions to address these critical needs.
    Consequently, the committee recommends $55.3 million for E-
8C procurement modifications, an increase of $10.0 million for 
the JSTARS blue force tracking and CID upgrade; and $100.2 
million in PE 27581F, an increase of $11.0 million to develop 
the JSTARS blue force combat tracking and CID components.

KC-10 global air traffic management development

    The budget request contained $18.5 million in PE 41219F for 
the KC-10 global air traffic management (GATM) development 
program.
    The KC-10 GATM program is an engineering and manufacturing 
development (EMD) program that would improve the navigation and 
communication systems used on KC-10 aircraft. Subsequent to 
submission of the budget request, the Department of the Air 
Force canceled the GATM development program due to cost 
increases. As a result of this decision, the Department 
informed the committee that it would prefer to transfer these 
funds into the procurement appropriation to acquire, among 
other systems, two flight training devices for $7.8 million and 
a high-frequency data link for $1.2 million. While the 
committee supports the procurement of flight training devices 
and communication systems, it believes that existing flight 
training devices are adequate to meet requirements and that the 
high-frequency data link can be deferred until fiscal year 
2006.
    Consequently, the committee recommends $9.4 million in PE 
41219F, a decrease of $9.1 million, for the KC-10 GATM 
development program.

Lightweight modular support jammer

    The budget request included $28.3 million in PE 63270F for 
electronic combat technology, including $12.4 million for 
electro-optical, infrared warning and countermeasures 
technology.
    Countering the threat posed by infrared missiles remains a 
high priority for the military services. The lightweight 
modular support jammer (LMSJ) provides a scalable, open 
architecture, digital receiver and jammer capability for 
multiple electronic warfare programs and platforms. Additional 
funding would permit the integration of LMSJ with the Advanced 
Threat Alert and Response receiver and accelerated testing of 
the end-to-end system concept.
    The committee recommends an increase of $6.0 million in PE 
63270F for LMSJ.

Metals affordability

    The budget request included $34.3 million in PE 63112F for 
advanced materials for weapon systems.
    The committee supports the continued government-industry 
collaboration provided through the Metals Affordability 
Initiative, providing significant improvements in the 
manufacturing of specialty metals for aerospace applications 
for the private and government sectors of the aerospace 
industry.
    The committee recommends an additional $14.0 million in PE 
63112F for the Metals Affordability Initiative.

Next generation bomber program

    The budget request contained no funds in PE 64015F for the 
next generation bomber program.
    In the committee report on H.R. 1588 (H. Rept. 108-106) for 
fiscal year 2004, the committee noted both the increasing age 
of the Department of the Air Force's B-52 bomber fleet and 
existing plans to begin a next generation bomber program 
between the years of 2012 to 2015. The committee concluded that 
Air Force deferral of a next generation bomber program to 2012 
to 2015 would be too late to assure a sufficient bomber force 
structure to meet future requirements for long-range strike in 
light of the prospect that future basing for shorter range 
aircraft may not be assured. Consequently, the committee 
recommended an increase of $100.0 million for this purpose and 
notes that $45.0 million was appropriated. However, the 
committee is dismayed that budget justification documents 
accompanying the fiscal year 2005 budget request reveal that 
these funds would be used to develop, mature and study 
integration of next generation style technologies with the 
existing bomber fleet, rather than beginning a next generation 
bomber program that would develop, and eventually procure, new 
bomber aircraft to meet future long range strike requirements.
    For fiscal year 2005, the committee notes that, despite its 
expectation that the Department of the Air Force would begin a 
program to develop and procure a next generation bomber 
beginning in fiscal year 2004, the Department does not include 
any funds for this purpose until fiscal year 2008, with 
additional funding planned for fiscal year 2009. While the 
committee recognizes that the Department of the Air Force has 
accelerated its next generation bomber plan from the 2012 to 
2015 timeframe to fiscal year 2008, the committee remains 
steadfast in its prior year view that development of a next 
generation bomber aircraft needs to be initiated, since most of 
the Air Force's bomber fleet consists of 94 B-52 aircraft which 
are now approximately 42 years old.
    Accordingly, the committee recommends $100.0 million in PE 
64015F for the next generation bomber program, and strongly 
urges the Department of the Air Force to budget for a next 
generation bomber program each year in its Future Years Defense 
Program.

Operationally responsive launch

    The budget request contained $35.4 million in PE 64855F for 
operationally responsive launch.
    The committee strongly supports an operationally responsive 
launch capability and its objective of developing an 
affordable, reliable, time responsive launch system, including 
Scorpius. The committee believes integration of operationally 
responsive launches would greatly increase the speed of 
delivering critical space capabilities to the warfighter.
    The committee recommends an increase of $6.0 million in PE 
64855F for development of an operationally responsive launch 
capability, including Scorpius.

Satellite simulation toolkit

    The budget request contained $60.1 million in PE 63401F for 
advanced spacecraft technology, but contained no funds for 
integrated control for a satellite simulation toolkit (SST).
    SST provides value to the acquisition and development of 
space systems via coherent systems engineering and virtual 
prototyping. The committee is aware of the need to complete 
development and integration of new and legacy models for the 
full implementation of SST based effects.
    The committee recommends an increase of $5.0 million in PE 
63401F for SST.

Satellite tool kit technical integration concept of operations for 
        tactical satellite

    The budget request contained $88.9 million in PE 62601F for 
space technology, but contained no funds for satellite tool kit 
technical integration.
    The committee notes that satellite tool kit technical 
integration would provide tactical data to the warfighter 
indicating when a satellite overflight will occur to allow 
single pass tasking and downlink of time-sensitive surveillance 
information. This program would benefit in-theater warfighters 
by enabling immediate access to tactical intelligence, 
surveillance and reconnaissance assets to enable the collection 
and delivery of timely surveillance information to enable 
battlefield superiority. Additionally, these assets provide 
surge capability to augment existing national assets or help 
reconstitute space capabilities lost due to enemy action.
    The committee recommends an increase of $4.0 million in PE 
62601F for satellite tool kit technical integration.

Space-based infrared system

    The budget request included $508.4 million in PE 64441F for 
development of the space-based infrared system (SBIRS).
    When finally deployed, SBIRS will provide improved early-
warning capabilities and technical intelligence. The committee 
notes that the SBIRS program has had persistent cost, schedule 
and technical problems over the last three years of its 
development. Unexpected technical difficulties on the first 
SBIRS payload resulted in cost overruns and schedule delays. 
These problems and further technical difficulties have in turn 
resulted in a delay of at least one year for the first launch 
of a SBIRS satellite into geostationary orbit.
    The committee notes that the Commander of United States 
Strategic Command testified to the Strategic Forces 
Subcommittee in February, 2004 that continuation of the SBIRS 
program is absolutely essential to his command. The committee 
remains supportive of the SBIRS program because of the critical 
nature of its mission. The committee notes the recent technical 
issues with the geosynchronous sensors and concurs with the 
recovery plan as presented by the Undersecretary of the Air 
Force.
    The committee recommends an increase of $35.0 million in PE 
64441F to address the SBIRS budget shortfall, overcome 
development difficulties and minimize the schedule delay.

Space-based radar

    The budget request contained $327.7 million in PE 63858F 
for space-based radar (SBR).
    The committee recognizes the benefits SBR will provide 
through a persistent, near real-time, high resolution 
surveillance capability deep into enemy territory and denied 
areas, benefiting both military and intelligence communities. 
The committee believes the country cannot afford separate SBR 
systems to address the needs of these two communities and, as 
such, it is imperative to develop this system with full support 
and involvement of the Department of Defense and the 
Intelligence Community (IC). The committee strongly urges the 
Department and the IC to work in a joint manner toward the 
development of a SBR capability.
    The committee notes unfavorable schedule and cost 
performance of several space system acquisition programs. As a 
result of this trend, the committee recommends a legislative 
provision (sec. 216) affecting the progression to Milestone B 
for SBR.
    The committee recommends the budget request.

Space cadre

    The committee is committed to the development of highly 
skilled and knowledgeable professionals to address the 
acquisition, policy, and technology aspects of space necessary 
to ensure United States preeminence in tomorrow's space 
environment. The committee is aware of the ongoing effort by 
the Department of Defense to institute the space human capital 
resources strategy as described in the February 2004 report to 
the congressional defense committees titled, ``Space Human 
Capital Resources Strategy.''
    The committee notes that this three-phased strategy will 
initiate the development of a professional space cadre. The 
committee supports this effort and encourages the Secretary of 
Defense to continue this effort. The committee recommends that 
the Department include in its strategy a thorough review of 
education, training, and the development of a robust, joint 
space curriculum.

Space situational awareness initiative

    The budget request contained $161.8 million in PE 35910F 
for Spacetrack, but included no funds for the space situational 
awareness initiative.
    The committee notes the importance of this upgrade for the 
future of the counter space mission. Moreover, the committee 
understands the effort will require nearly eight years to 
achieve a full operational capability and believes it is 
prudent to initiate this effort immediately.
    The committee recommends $170.8 million in PE 35910F, an 
increase of $9.0 million for the space situational awareness 
initiative.

Streaker small launch vehicle

    The budget request contained $60.1 million in PE 63401F for 
advanced spacecraft technology, but included no funds for the 
Streaker small launch vehicle (SLV).
    The committee is aware that the Department of Defense 
desires to develop this capability to affordably launch small 
satellites to low earth orbits for a variety of purposes. The 
committee notes that the Streaker SLV has the potential to 
provide affordable responsive launch for small satellites.
    The committee recommends an increase of $6.0 million in PE 
63401F for the Streaker SLV.

Transformational satellite communications

    The budget request contained $774.8 million in PE 63845F 
for the transformational communications satellite (TSAT) 
system.
    The General Accounting Office expressed concerns in report 
GAO-04-71R about the immaturity of the TSAT technology and the 
significant engineering challenges facing a laser-based 
satellite communications system. The committee remains 
concerned that the TSATsystem is still being driven by an 
aggressive schedule that does not adequately take into account the 
immaturity of several key enabling technologies and challenging 
integration issues.
    While the committee supports the goal of TSAT and 
recognizes the modest steps the Air Force has taken to address 
the concerns raised in the committee report on H.R. 1588 (H. 
Rept. 108-106) last year, the committee believes a slower, more 
realistic schedule for this program is warranted.
    The committee recommends $674.8 million in PE 63845F, a 
decrease of $100.0 million for the TSAT program.

Ultra short pulse laser technology

    The budget request contained $36.5 million in PE 62605F for 
directed energy technology, but included no funding for ultra 
short pulse laser technology.
    The committee is aware that ultra short pulse laser 
technology has the potential to be a breakthrough in size, 
weight and effectiveness for many applications.
    The committee recommends $46.5 million in PE 62605F, an 
increase of $10.0 million for ultra short pulse laser.

Upper stage engine technology

    The budget request contained $51.1 million in PE 63500F for 
multi-disciplinary space technology, but contained no funds for 
upper stage engine technology.
    Upper stage engine technology supports the Air Force's goal 
to improve liquid oxygen/hydrogen simulation and forecasting 
tools. The committee recognizes this goal will reduce the risk 
associated with new technology transition into upper stage 
engines for reusable and expendable launch vehicles.
    The committee recommends $58.1 million in PE 63500F, an 
increase of $7.0 million for upper stage engine technology.

Wideband gapfiller system

    The budget request included $73.5 million in PE 63854F and 
$40.3 million in Missile Procurement, Air Force, for the 
wideband gapfiller satellite (WGS) communications system.
    WGS will provide a significant increase in communications 
bandwidth for warfighters. The committee notes the Air Force's 
plan to acquire and launch three satellites over the course of 
fiscal years 2005 and 2007. The committee also notes plans 
during fiscal year 2005 to negotiate a contract to acquire two 
additional satellites that would be launched starting in fiscal 
year 2009. This plan could leave a three-year production gap 
between the third and fourth satellites, a gap that could 
increase program risk and cost resulting from parts 
obsolescence, personnel fluctuations, and the potential need to 
re-qualify subcontractors. The committee also notes that the 
Department of Defense supplements its satellite communications 
network by leasing commercial satellite communications capacity 
at a cost of about $300.0 million per year. The committee 
believes that deferring additional military satellite 
communications acquisition may not be cost effective.
    The committee believes that the Air Force decision to 
proceed with WGS acquisition is correct, but the acquisition 
strategy that results in this production gap is not well 
considered.
    The committee recommends $88.5 million in PE 63854F, an 
increase of $15.0 million for additional WGS spare parts.

Worldwide infrastructure security environment

    The budget request contained $79.6 million in PE 33140F for 
information security systems programs, but included no funding 
for the worldwide infrastructure security environment (WISE).
    The committee supports this initiative to provide 
protection and response to attacks that exploit our reliance on 
computers. This program will manage the complex interactions 
between physical access, network access, authentication, 
monitoring, and environmental controls to provide defense 
against sophisticated hackers. This program also addresses the 
cyber threat of the year 2010 and beyond with a unique approach 
to protect information on the Global Information Grid through 
transaction authentication.
    Accordingly, the committee recommends $87.6 million in PE 
33140F, an increase of $8.0 million for WISE.

        Defense-Wide Research, Development, Test, and Evaluation


                                Overview

    The budget request contained $20,739.8 million for Defense-
wide research, development, test, and evaluation (RDT&E).
    The committee recommends $20,769.3 million, an increase of 
$29.4 million to the budget request.


                       Items of Special Interest


Accelerating transition and fielding of advanced technologies for 
        emerging critical operational needs

    The pace at which new technology moves from the laboratory 
to a fielded system has been an area of continuing concern to 
the Department of Defense and to Congress. Scaling technology 
up in size and integrating it with other technologies can 
present problems, not identified in the laboratory, that delay 
a program and/or greatly increase program costs. More emphasis 
and an increased share of the science and technology program 
have been directed toward the use of technology demonstrations 
and joint experiments to solve these problems before beginning 
an acquisition program and speeding the transition of new 
technology to operational capabilities the user faster and at 
less cost.
    The transition of technology from discovery and 
demonstration to development and fielding is also difficult 
because the Department's planning and budgeting process 
frequently creates a funding gap. Revolutionary technologies 
that ``change minds'' and ways of doing things often occur 
faster than the present defense budget and the appropriations 
process can respond. Additionally, it is difficult to 
reallocate fiscal funding for a revolutionary technology within 
current year funding. The institutional process within the 
Department lacks the flexibility at all levels: service 
laboratory; research; development and engineering center; 
systems command; military departments, and the defense 
secretariat--to capitalize on new discoveries in academia or 
institute, service or national laboratory, large industry or 
small business, and to rapidly develop, demonstrate, and 
transition the new technology to the military user. There are a 
number of initiatives underway to address this problem: the 
Advanced Concept Technology Demonstration program, the Army's 
Rapid Fielding Initiative, the congressionally sponsored 
Technology Transition Initiative and the Defense Challenge 
program. Section 806 of the Bob Stump National Defense 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2003 (Public Law 107-314) 
requires the Secretary of Defense to prescribe rapid 
acquisition and deployment procedures. Section 1443 of the 
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2004 (Public 
Law 108-136) provides special emergency procurement authority 
for use in support of contingency operations or in response to 
a nuclear, biological, chemical, or radiological attack. During 
the committee hearing on the Defense science and technology 
budget request for fiscal year 2005, the Director, Defense and 
Engineering testified about the establishment of the quick 
reaction special projects program, which he characterized as a 
flexible continuum of technology transition projects that moves 
products from the Department to the warfighter quickly.
    Many of these initiatives are at an early stage and changes 
to acquisition and budgeting systems to provide the Department 
with greater flexibility to take advantage of rapidly 
developing technology are slow to be institutionalized. The 
committee is encouraged by many of the improvements in the 
rapid fielding of technology to support the war on terrorism, 
but also recognizes that there is much to be done. The 
committee directs the Secretary of Defense to report to the 
congressional defense committees by December 31, 2004, any 
additional recommendations for measures to accelerate the more 
rapid transition and fielding of advanced technologies to meet 
emerging critical needs.

Advanced metal casting technology

    The budget request contained $27.5 million in PE 78011S, 
for manufacturing technology research and development, 
including $2.3 million for procurement readiness optimization--
advanced casting technology.
    The committee notes the success of collaborative problem 
solving environments that have been prototyped in several of 
the military services' engineering support activities, each of 
which has been custom designed to reflect the needs of the 
weapons systems and processes used by the military services. 
The committee also notes the development of casting technology 
for cost reduction, including advances in steel casting, 
development of a foundry tooling database, use of casting 
software visualization tools to reduce trial and error, 
improvements in melting and molding processes, use of cheaper 
tooling materials for short run production, and other 
technologies for reducing production time. The committee 
considers these interrelated programs to be of great value to 
the Department of Defense and to the national industrial base 
as well.
    The committee strongly encourages the Secretary of Defense 
and the secretaries of the military departments to allocate 
additional resources in future budgets for development of 
further improvements in collaborative problem solving and 
casting manufacturing technologies.

Advanced sensor applications program

    The budget request contained $17.6 million in PE 63714D8Z 
for the advanced sensor applications program. The committee is 
concerned that promising projects executed by the Navy's PMA 
264 program office are appreciably underfunded for special 
programs under development.
    Therefore, the committee recommends an increase of $10.0 
million in PE 63714D8Z for the advanced sensor applications 
program. Additional details are contained in the classified 
annex to this report.

Advanced tactical laser program

    The committee supports the efforts across the Department's 
science and technology community to develop tactically useful 
directed energy weapons. The committee believes that the 
attributes of such weapons, such as stealth, precision, and 
minimal collateral damage, make high powered laser tactical 
weapons ideal in the fight against terrorism. The committee is 
concerned, however, that the research effort is not directed as 
precisely as the weapons themselves. For example, the committee 
understands that chemical laser systems are the most highly 
developed high powered lasers, but that several efforts are 
underway to develop more tactically feasible solid state high 
powered laser systems. Given the large size of chemical laser 
systems, the committee believes that the Special Operations 
Command's (SOCOM) Advanced Concept Technology Demonstration 
(ACTD) for the development of a chemical laser system for an 
AC-130 gunship may not lead to a militarily useful system 
before solid state systems mature.
    Accordingly, the committee will continue to carefully 
monitor the SOCOM ACTD, and directs the Secretary of Defense to 
report to the Senate Committee on Armed Services and the House 
Committee on Armed Services should the military utility 
assessment for the advanced tactical laser be delayed beyond 
fiscal year 2007.

Anti-radiation drug and trials program

    The budget request contained $2.1 million in PE 63002D8Z 
for medical advanced technology development, including $120,000 
for development of the 5-adrostendiol (5-AED) advanced 
radioprotectant (``anti-radiation'') drug.
    The committee notes progress in the development of 5-AED, 
the Armed Forces Radiobiology Research Institute leading 
candidate for a whole body radioprotectant drug compound: pre-
clinical safety and toxicity assessments, small and large 
animal trials, and extension of the work to pre-clinical trials 
in a large animal model have been initiated.
    The committee recommends $7.1 million in PE 63002D8Z, an 
increase of $5.0 million to support final efficacy and human 
toxicity trials of the 5-AED radioprotectant drug.

Asymmetric protocols for biological defense

    The budget request contained $147.5 million in PE 62383E 
for biological warfare defense applied research.
    A military or terrorist scenario in which aerosolized 
biological agents such as anthrax spores or smallpox virus are 
used would almost certainly result in mass casualties. 
Weaponized forms of the agents offer significant challenges to 
medical treatments that are not found in naturally occurring 
forms. While antibiotics are the only approved method for 
treating anthrax, the 2003 bioterrorist anthrax attack in 
Washington, D.C., showed that antibiotics are unfortunately not 
adequate to provide full treatment against inhalation anthrax. 
The committee also notes that there are a number of biological 
agents that could, with appropriate development and 
weaponization, be used in biological warfare or in a terrorist 
attack. Developing specific protection against all possible 
biological agents presents a significant challenge. As a 
result, the committee believes there is a need for therapeutics 
that would provide broad spectrum protection against a range of 
possible biological agents and also work in concert with other 
methods of treatment.
    The committee notes research in therapeutics that shows 
good results from laboratory testing in mice against pox virus 
and against anthrax and appears to have the potential for 
providing broad spectrum protection. Other tests have involved 
therapeutics that may reinforce the innate immunity of the 
host. The committee believes that the results of the research 
to date are promising and the research should continue, but 
also believes that the research protocols and results to date 
should undergo an independent peer review. The committee 
directs the Director of Defense Research and Engineering to 
conduct such a review and report the results of the review to 
the congressional defense committees by December 31, 2004.
    The committee recommends an increase of $10.0 million in PE 
62383E to continue research in asymmetric protocols that would 
provide broad spectrum protection for biological defense.

Ballistic missile defense

    The budget request contained $9,200.0 million for ballistic 
missile defense.
    The committee notes that the budget request reflects an 
increase of $1,500.0 million over the fiscal year 2004 budget 
request and recommends a reallocation of the fiscal year 2005 
request to focus on near term missile defense capability 
development and testing.
    The committee recommends $9,023.0 million, a reduction of 
$177.0 million.
            Advanced concepts
    The budget request contained $256.2 million in PE 63879C 
for Advanced Concepts, Evaluations and Systems, an increase of 
$106.0 million from the fiscal year 2005 projection in the 
fiscal year 2004 budget request.
    The committee has reservations that such an increase is 
justified or that it can be effectively executed. The committee 
encourages the Department of Defense to focus their advanced 
concepts work on earlier block applications.
    The committee recommends $206.2 million in PE 63879C, a 
decrease of $50.0 million.
            Boost defense segment
    The budget request contained $492.6 million in PE 63883C 
for boost defense. The committee notes with approval the 
Department of Defense restructuring of the Airborne Laser (ABL) 
program in late 2003. The committee also recognizes that the 
future of the ABL program depends upon successful completion of 
the ground laser test and the flight test of the beam-control 
fire control system. These milestones must be completed in 
order for the committee to further support the program after 
fiscal year 2005. Therefore, the committee directs the 
Secretary of Defense to submit a report to the congressional 
defense committees by February 1, 2005, on the status of these 
two major component tests as well as a recommendation for the 
future of the program.
    The committee recommends the budget request for boost 
defense.
            Core
    The budget request contained $479.8 million in PE 63890C 
for system core activities.
    The committee notes that funding for the systems 
engineering and integration effort has increased significantly 
from fiscal year 2004. The committee recommends $449.8 million, 
a decrease of $30.0 million. The committee encourages the 
Director of the Missile Defense Agency (MDA) to focus the 
national team on the near term block 2004 and 2006 efforts.
    The committee also understands that development of wide 
bandwidth technology is critical for the MDA to transmit test 
data over extensive distances in support of the test and 
evaluation program. The committee is encouraged by the recent 
success of a feasibility demonstration of seamless 
collaboration utilizing mobile satellite communications from 
the Reagan Test Site to the Joint National Integration Center.
    Within the funds available, the committee recommends $4.0 
million for the development of wide bandwidth technology in 
support of the MDA test program.
            Midcourse defense segment
    The budget request contained $4,384.8 million in PE 63882C 
for the ballistic missile defense (BMD) midcourse defense 
segment.
    The Navy has previously funded research and development 
efforts for an S-band radar prototype. Development of a Solid 
State S-Band Radar will support future Aegis BMD system 
capability.
    The committee recommends $4,414.8 million in PE 63882C, an 
increase of $30.0 million for the development of a Solid State 
S-Band Radar to support Aegis BMD system radar capability.
            Post Ramos Project
    The committee notes that the Department of Defense 
announced its intention to terminate the Russian-American 
Observation Satellite (RAMOS) program earlier this year. The 
committee also understands that the Department desires to 
explore other opportunities for missile defense cooperative 
programs with the Russian Federation that build upon the 
experience gained in the RAMOS program.
    The committee recommends an increase of $5.0 million in PE 
63884C to explore future opportunities for missile defense 
cooperation with the Russian Federation.
            Products
    The budget request contained $418.6 million in PE 63889C 
for products.
    The committee notes that the request represents a $113.0 
million increase from a fiscal year 2005 projection in the 2004 
budget request. The committee also notes that the funding for 
Command and Control, Battle Management and Communications 
(C2BMC) has increased significantly from fiscal year 2004 with 
C2BMC efforts spread across blocks 2004, 2006 and 2008, even 
though block 2004 has not undergone full operational testing. 
While the committee supports in principle the concept of spiral 
development, it also notes that development of C2BMC software 
is complex and that successful spirals are grounded in 
successful testing of an initial baseline.
    The committee recommends $358.6 million in PE 63889C, a 
decrease of $60.0 million and urges the Department of Defense 
to focus C2BMC efforts on near term block requirements.
            Sensors
    The budget request contained $592.0 million in PE 63884C 
for sensors.
    The committee notes that funding in PE 63884C for block 
2006 ballistic missile defense radars has increased by $156.0 
million from the fiscal year 2004 budget request.
    The committee is concerned with the projected costs of the 
Forward Deployable Radar (FDR) since the FDR program uses radar 
technology already developed for the Terminal High Altitude 
Area Defense system.
    The committee recommends $536.0 million in PE 63884C, a 
decrease of $56.0 million for sensors.
            System interceptor
    The budget request contained $511.3 million in PE 63886C 
for system interceptor. The committee notes that the request 
reflects a $360.2 million increase from the fiscal year 2004 
authorization.
    The committee supports pursuing the land-based Kinetic 
Energy Interceptor (KEI) in block 2010 as an alternative to the 
Airborne Laser for boost phase defense. However, the committee 
also notes that the request contains funds for block 2012 even 
though the block 2010 effort just started in 2004. The block 
2012 program includes options for a sea-based KEI. The block 
2012 sea-based element is designed to integrate the block 2010 
land-based KEI element into operational sea-based platforms.
    The committee notes that block 2010 will serve as the 
foundation for the block 2012 program and that progress must 
first be achieved in the land-based KEI program prior to 
beginning work in earnest on future sea-based programs. The 
committee also notes that designation of a platform for the 
sea-based interceptor is dependent upon future decisions on 
future Navy force structure and ship design. At this stage of 
the KEI program, the committee views funding for a sea-based 
platform option as premature.
    The committee recommends $436.3 million, a decrease of 
$75.0 million for system interceptor. The committee authorizes 
no funding for sea-based options in block 2012 until 30 days 
after the Department of Defense has submitted a report to the 
congressional defense committees that contains a Navy-approved 
plan for future force structure and existing ship and/or future 
ship design requirements to support operational deployment of 
the sea-based interceptors envisioned for block 2012.
    The committee understands that the boost phase defense 
element is the least mature of the elements within the layered 
defense. Given the importance of intercepting a ballistic 
missile in the boost phase, the committee believes that the 
Department should be open to considering additional options for 
boost phase defense. The committee notes the speed with which 
United States and coalition forces have established air 
superiority in recent military operations. The committee is 
further encouraged by the successful operational demonstration 
of long duration unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) such as Global 
Hawk and the employment of the Predator UAV to remotely engage 
ground targets.
    The committee observes that the Air Force has conducted 
some preliminary studies into the feasibility of using the 
advanced medium range air-to-air missile launched from tactical 
aircraft to intercept missiles in boost phase ascent. The 
committee believes that tactical aircraft or UAVs may offer an 
alternate launch platform for air intercept missiles for boost 
phase defense.
    The committee recommends an increase of $8.0 million in PE 
63886C for assessments and demonstrations related to the use of 
tactical aircraft or UAVs as platforms from which to interdict 
threat ballistic missiles in their boost phase using ``hit-to-
kill'' technologies. The committee directs the Secretary of the 
Air Force to provide all required test equipment and logistical 
support including aircraft and range support to facilitate this 
demonstration.
            Technology
    The budget request contained $204.3 million in PE 63175C 
for ballistic missile defense technology.
    The committee is aware of the requirement for missile 
defense command and control elements to transmit large amounts 
of data to interceptors. The committee recognizes that high 
density optical networks can provide this capability for 
defense satellite systems.
    The committee recommends $208.3 million in PE 63175C, an 
increase of $4.0 million for research into massively parallel 
optical interconnects.
            Terminal defense segment
    The budget request contained $937.7 million in PE 63881C 
for the ballistic missile defense terminal defense segment.
    The committee notes that the Terminal High Altitude Area 
Defense (THAAD) program was negatively impacted by the boost 
motor propellant explosion in 2003. As a result of 
theexplosion, a number of block 2004 program activities were deferred. 
The committee is particularly concerned with the deferral of risk 
reduction activities and schedule delays.
    The committee recommends $984.7 million in PE 63881C, an 
increase of $47.0 million to reduce program risks and to 
prevent schedule delays in the THAAD program.

Business management modernization program

    The budget request contained $94.8 million in PE 65016D8Z 
for research, development, testing and evaluation for the 
business management modernization program (BMMP), a Department-
wide initiative to transform business processes while 
standardizing and integrating information systems using common, 
network centric processes and portfolio management.
    The committee supports such business transformation 
initiatives that would enable interoperability among financial, 
accounting, human resources, logistics, acquisition, 
information technology infrastructure, and strategic planning 
and budgeting systems. In addition, the committee believes the 
business enterprise architecture, once implemented and 
controlled, will be a good start towards achieving this goal. 
However, the committee has serious concerns that the final cost 
of this program will amount to almost $1.0 billion by fiscal 
year 2009. Additionally, the committee is also concerned that 
the enterprise architecture is still incomplete at the present 
time. Furthermore, the Department has yet to devise a strategy 
to monitor the progress of this program or measure the 
program's development. It remains unclear whether this program 
will meet the Department's 2007 deadline for providing a clean 
financial audit opinion.
    The committee notes that the Department's inability to 
control its business information technology investments has 
serious implications, including the continuous spending of 
billions of dollars on service-specific or non-interoperable 
system solutions that do not address longstanding business 
problems.
    Additionally, the committee has serious concerns that this 
program lacks adequate accountability and management oversight 
to manage the Department's business system investments of 
roughly $5.0 billion in the fiscal year 2005 budget request. 
The committee believes it is critical that the Department gain 
more effective control and accountability over its business 
systems funding and insists on a clear direction and an 
overarching architecture before funding at the level suggested 
in the budget request is approved.
    Accordingly, the committee recommends $45.8 million for PE 
65016D8Z for business management modernization, a decrease of 
$49.0 million.

Chemical/biological defense research, development, test and evaluation 
        program

    The budget request contained a total of $559.9 million for 
chemical/biological defense research, development, test, and 
evaluation, including $36.8 million in PE 61384BP for basic 
research, $104.4 million in PE 62384BP for applied research, 
$117.3 million in PE 63384BP for advanced technology 
development, $104.2 million in PE 63884BP for advanced 
component development and prototypes, $152.4 million in PE 
64384BP for system development and demonstration, $42.7 million 
in PE 65384BP for RDT&E management support, and $2.2 million in 
PE 67384BP for operational systems development. The budget 
request also contained $147.5 million in PE 62383E for the 
Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) biological 
warfare defense research program.
    The committee notes that the changing chemical and 
biological threat, both to U.S. armed forces on the world's 
battlefields and to U.S. homeland security, places more 
emphasis on the need for responsive technology options that 
could address the threat; the ability to quickly assess, 
develop, and demonstrate the technology; and then, the ability 
to rapidly insert or deploy the technology in fielded systems. 
The committee also continues to note the wealth of new concepts 
and technologies of varying levels of maturity that emerge 
annually from the nation's science and technology base. The 
committee recommends the continuation of two chemical and 
biological defense research and development initiatives 
established in the National Defense Authorization Act for 
Fiscal Year 2004 (Public Law 108-136), one in the applied 
research category and one in the advanced technology 
development category, and the establishment of a third 
initiative in chemical and biological defense basic research, 
that would provide the opportunity for emerging technologies 
and concepts to compete for funding on the basis of technical 
merit and on the contribution that the technology could make to 
the chemical and biological defense capabilities of the armed 
forces and to homeland defense. During its review of the fiscal 
year 2005 budget request the committee received proposals for 
establishment of a number of projects that the committee 
recommends be considered for possible funding under the 
appropriate initiative.
            Accelerating the research, development, and acquisition of 
                    medical countermeasures against biological warfare 
                    agents
    In the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 
2002 (Public Law 107-107), Congress directed the Secretary of 
Defense to accelerate the Department's efforts to develop 
medical countermeasures (licensed by the Food and Drug 
Administration) against biological warfare agents. In addition, 
Congress directed the Secretary to contract with the Institute 
of Medicine and the National Research Council (IOM/NRC) for a 
study of the review and approval process for new medical 
countermeasures in order to identify new approaches to 
accelerate that process and to identify methods for ensuring 
that new countermeasures would be safe and effective.
    IOM/NRC report ``Giving Full Measure to Countermeasures--
Addressing Problems in the DOD Program to Develop Medical 
Countermeasures against Biological Warfare Agents-2004,'' 
raises a number of issues concerning the current efforts of the 
Department of Defense chemical and biological defense program 
to produce medical biodefense countermeasures.
    The committee directs the Secretary of Defense to review 
and evaluate the IOM/NRC report and to report the results of 
that review to the congressional defense committees by December 
31, 2004. The Secretary's report shall contain an analysis of 
the recommendations made in the IOM/NRC report and the actions 
planned by the Department with respect to each of the 
recommendations.
    Elsewhere in this report the committee has directed the 
Secretary of Defense to report to the congressional defense 
committees on the actions taken to implement the authorities 
granted in Title XVI of the National Defense Authorization Act 
for Fiscal Year 2004 (Public Law 108-186). The Act provides the 
authority for the Secretary to establish an enhanced biomedical 
countermeasures program within the Department to protect 
members of the Armed Forces from attack with chemical, 
biological, radiological, or nuclear (CBRN) agents. The 
committee has also recommended a provision (section 1005) that 
would remove funding restrictions on the development of medical 
countermeasures against biological warfare threats and enable 
the Department to respond more effectively to the increased 
threat that could be posed by rapid advances in bio-technology.
    The committee directs the Secretary of Defense to provide 
to the congressional defense committees, with the submission of 
the fiscal year 2006 defense budget request, the Department's 
strategic plan detailing its response to recommendations 
contained in the IOM/NRC report: the implementation of the 
additional authorities granted in Title XVI for accelerated 
research, development; the procurement of advanced biomedical 
countermeasures; and the repeal of funding restrictions on the 
development of countermeasures against biological warfare 
threats. This plan should provide the basis for the development 
by the Secretary of Defense of a strategic plan for the rapid 
development of biomedical countermeasures for protection of 
members of the Armed Forces against current and future 
biological agent threats.
            Chemical/biological defense basic research initiative
    The committee recommends that the technologies to be 
considered for funding under the basic research initiative 
include, but are not limited to the following:
          (1) Engineered pathogen identification and 
        countermeasures (``Bug to Drug'');
          (2) Fluorescence activated sensing technology; and
          (3) Multi-purpose biodefense immunoarray.
    The committee recommends $51.8 million in PE 61384BP, an 
increase of $15.0 million for the chemical/biological defense 
basic research initiative.
            Chemical/biological defense applied research initiative
    The committee recommends that the projects and technologies 
to be considered for funding under the applied research 
initiative include, but are not limited to the following:
          (1) Adaptive infrared imaging spectroradiometer-wide 
        area-detector;
          (2) Air containment monitoring technology;
          (3) Automated system for liquid phase detectors of 
        toxic compounds;
          (4) Genomic-based bioterrorism agent detection and 
        countermeasures;
          (5) Heat shock protein vaccine creation process;
          (6) LHA-SAW biosensor prototype development;
          (7) Low cost chemical-biological protective shelters;
          (8) Membrane research for next generation chemical-
        biological protective suits;
          (9) Mustard gas antidote (STIMAL);
          (10) Rapid anti-body based biological 
        countermeasures; and
          (11) Rapid decontamination system for nerve agents.
    The committee recommends an increase of $25.0 million in PE 
62384BP for the chemical/biological defense applied research 
initiative.
            Chemical/biological defense advanced technology development 
                    initiative
    The committee recommends that the projects and technologies 
to be considered for funding under the advanced technology 
development initiative include, but not be limited the 
following:
          (1) Hand-held biological agent detection system;
          (2) Immuno biological/chemical threat agent detector;
          (3) Non-invasive vectored vaccine development; and
          (4) Recombinant protein vaccines.
    The committee recommends $152.3 million in PE 63384BP, an 
increase of $35.0 million for the chemical/biological defense 
advanced technology development initiative.
            Joint biological point detection system
    The budget request contained $152.4 million in PE 64384BP 
for chemical and biological defense system development and 
demonstration, including $8.6 million for joint biological 
point detection system (JBPDS) system development and 
demonstration.
    The committee recommends an increase of $5.0 million in PE 
64384BP for continued product improvement and enhancement of 
the JBPDS.
            Joint service lightweight standoff chemical agent detector
    The budget request contained $152.4 million in PE 64384BP 
for chemical and biological defense system development and 
demonstration, including $20.1 million for joint service 
lightweight standoff chemical agent detector (JSLSCAD) system 
development and demonstration.
    The committee recommends an increase of $8.0 million in PE 
64384BP to continue development and evaluation of the JSLSCAD.

Connectory for rapid identification of technology resources

    The budget request contained $27.5 million in PE 63712S for 
generic logistics research and development technology 
demonstrations, but included no funding for the connectory of 
rapid identification of technology sources for the Department 
of Defense. The connectory pilot would provide the Department 
with instant access to the industrial technology base, 
permitting rapid identification of promising sources of new, 
creative technical solutions for current combat and anti-
terrorism problems.
    The committee recommends an increase of $2.0 million in PE 
63712S for connectory for rapid indentification of technology 
resources.

Counter-terrorism technology support

    The combating terrorism technology support program develops 
technology and prototype equipment that address needs and 
requirements with direct operational application in the 
national effort to combat terrorism. The program addresses 
defense, interagency, and international requirements for 
combating terrorism technology. Projects support antiterrorism, 
counter terrorism, intelligence and terrorism consequence 
management activities to: conduct tactical operations; protect 
military forces, civilian personnel, installations, 
infrastructure elements and the general population from 
terrorist attack; detect, neutralize, and mitigate the effect 
of conventional and unconventional devices; conduct 
surveillance and tracking of terrorists; conduct threat and 
incident assessments; and process and disseminate information.
    The committee notes and highly commends the contributions 
made by the Technical Support Working Group (TSWG) in the 
development, demonstration, and fielding of advanced 
technologies for the fight against terrorism. The committee 
encourages the TSWG to coordinate with counterpart activities 
within the government of the United Kingdom and the government 
of Israel to take advantage of the experience of their 
activities in the development and fielding of advanced 
technologies for force protection and for combating terrorism.
    In title XV of this report, the committee has recommended 
an increase of $75.0 million for combating terrorism technology 
support. In addition, the committee directs that, of the funds 
provided in title II of this report for the Defense Advanced 
Research Projects Agency, up to $25.0 million may be made 
available for the establishment of cooperative programs with 
the government of the United Kingdom and the government of 
Israel for the development of advanced technologies and 
prototype equipment for combating terrorism. The committee 
further directs the Secretary of Defense to give priority 
consideration to the experience of the government of Israel and 
the government of the United Kingdom in establishing such 
programs.

Defense advanced research projects agency

    The Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) has 
been a leader and innovator in basic scientific research and 
defense science and technology for decades. The committee has 
supported ever-increasing funding for DARPA as the only agency 
not tied to a military service mission and the demands of a 
service budget to produce quick results. The committee 
encourages DARPA to continue to examine the ``far side,'' and 
investigate concepts that may never come to fruition.
    Nevertheless, DARPA remains a Defense Agency and must be 
closely attuned to real defense requirements. Furthermore, the 
pursuit of the more futuristic technologies on the ``far side'' 
must be tempered by the hard fact that we are a nation at war. 
Our commanders and troops in Iraq have immediate needs for 
innovative technical solutions across a variety of disciplines. 
The committee commends DARPA on its quick reaction support and 
fielding of advanced innovative technologies to meet emerging 
critical operational needs of our forces in Operation Iraqi 
Freedom and elsewhere in support of the global war on 
terrorism.
    The committee believes, however, that DARPA should redirect 
some of its more futuristic efforts to the solution of today's 
combat problems. Those immediate needs involving detection, 
sensing, protection, surveillance and a host of other issues 
may well be ``DARPA hard'' problems that the Agency should be 
examining, rather than some of the more futuristic efforts in 
the DARPA program.
    The committee recognizes that DARPA receives input from the 
military departments, Joint Staff, combatant commanders, and 
other defense agencies, as the agency leadership builds a 
program to address national-level problems, operational 
dominance, and exploitation of high-risk, high-payoff 
technologies. The committee commends the director of DARPA for 
his outreach program and operational liaison initiatives. The 
committee believes, however, that increased emphasis needs to 
be placed on liaison with the combatant commanders and directs 
the director of DARPA to establish continuing contact with 
engaged combatant commanders to determine how DARPA may assist 
in solving today's real world combat problems, while at the 
same time continuing promising research into long term creative 
technologies. In support of these liaison initiatives, the 
committee strongly recommends that additional military billets 
be assigned to DARPA and that military officers assigned to 
DARPA be given joint service credit at the completion of their 
tour of duty with the agency.
    Although the committee is pleased with the overall progress 
in the defense science and technology program, the committee 
believes that increased priority must be given to the nearer-
term requirements of the combatant commanders and U.S. armed 
forces in the field. Consequently, the committee makes a series 
of recommendations for general reductions in DARPA programs:

                        [In millions of dollars]

62301E--Computing systems and communications technology..........(20.0)
62702E--Tactical technology......................................(10.0)
62712E--Materials and electronics technology.....................(10.0)
63285E--Advanced aerospace systems...............................(20.0)
63739E--Advanced electronics technology...........................(5.0)
63760E--Command, control and communications systems..............(20.0)
63762E--Sensor and guidance technology...........................(25.0)
63765E--Classified DARPA programs................................(25.0)
63766E--Network-centric warfare technology.......................(15.0)

    These recommendations are made without prejudice to the 
particular account identified.

Defense science and technology funding

    The budget request contained $10.6 billion for the 
Department of Defense (DOD) science and technology program, 
including all defense-wide and military service funding for 
basic research, applied research, and advanced technology 
development. The request included $1.8 billion for the Army, 
$1.7 billion for the Navy, $1.9 billion for the Air Force, and 
$5.1 billion for Defense Agency science and technology, 
including $3.1 billion for the Defense Advanced Research 
Projects Agency (DARPA). The committee recommends $11.1 billion 
for the Department of Defense science and technology program, 
an increase of $874.0 million to the budget request. The 
committee's recommendation includes $2.1 billion for the Army, 
an increase of $304.8 million; $1.8 billion for the Navy, an 
increase of $ 201.7 million; $2.0 billion for the Air Force, an 
increase of $114.0 million; and $5.2 billion for Defense agency 
science and technology, an increase of $64.5 million (including 
$2.9 billion for DARPA, a decrease of $204.0 million). 
Elsewhere in this report the committee has recommended a 
provision (section 214) that would transfer funding for the 
joint experimentation program from the Navy to a Defense-wide 
account.
    The committee regards defense science and technology 
investment as critical to maintaining U.S. military 
technological superiority in the face of growing and changing 
threats to U.S. national security interests around the world. 
Adjusted for inflation, the fiscal year 2005 request represents 
an increase of about $200.0 million, but shows a decline from 
the fiscal year 2004 appropriation of $12.2 billion. The 
committee notes that the budget request at a level of 2.6 
percent of the total DOD budget, does not meet the goal of 3 
percent established by the 2001 Quadrennial Defense Review. 
However, the committee received testimony from DOD witnesses 
during the committee hearing on the defense science and 
technology program that confirmed that the goal for science and 
technology funding remains 3 percent of the total DOD budget.
    The committee notes that the military departments are 
responsible for approximately 51 percent of the defense science 
and technology budget (Army 17 percent, Navy 16 percent, and 
Air Force 18 percent) and Defense Agencies account for 49 
percent, including 29 percent in DARPA. Defense agencies focus 
on science and technology specific to the particular agency or, 
in the case of DARPA, on national-level problems, operational 
dominance, and exploitation of high-risk, high-payoff 
technologies. The military departments' science and technology 
programs focus on the development and transition of more mature 
technologies into future weaponssystems that are key to the 
ability of the individual military departments to achieve their 
transformation objectives.
    The past year has provided numerous examples of successful 
technology development and deployment. The men and women of the 
U.S. armed forces are better equipped, trained, and protected 
because of revolutionary breakthroughs emerging from the 
technology base. The committee commends the Department for the 
response of the Defense science and technology base to the 
emerging critical operational needs in support of the global 
war on terrorism and Operation Iraqi Freedom. Elsewhere in this 
report the committee has recommended increased funding to 
further accelerate the transition of advanced technologies.
    Despite the positive aspects of the Department's science 
and technology program, the committee is concerned about long-
term projections for reductions in DOD science and technology 
as a percentage of total obligation authority and in short-term 
trends in the science and technology accounts of some of the 
military departments and defense agencies. The committee cannot 
emphasize too strongly the need for the Department to maintain 
a strong and robustly funded science and technology program 
that will provide the advanced technologies needed to assure 
technical dominance of our armed forces on any current or 
future battlefield.

Expanding the role of small businesses in the defense acquisition 
        process

    The committee subscribes to the view that small businesses 
are the nation's engine of technology innovation. The 
Department of Defense (DOD) spends significant sums annually on 
Phase I and Phase II Small Business Innovative Research (SBIR) 
technology development. In many cases, however, successful 
results of the department's investment have not been 
transitioned into the mainstream of system acquisition 
programs.
    The committee believes that our soldiers, sailors, airmen, 
and marines deserve to have the best tools possible as they 
wage the global war on terrorism. The committee notes the 
recent Navy-Marine Corps quick-response SBIR solicitation 
seeking immediate innovative technology approaches for 
protecting Marines from improvised explosive devices, rocket-
propelled grenades, mortars, rockets, and missiles during 
combat. Broader participation by the nation's small business 
community is needed now to meet emergent DOD requirements in 
support of the global war on terrorism, as well as to improve 
the capability and lower the cost of weapon systems through 
application of advanced technologies developed by small 
businesses.
    The committee strongly endorses the President's Executive 
Order 13329, Encouraging Innovation in Manufacturing, directing 
that SBIR awards involving manufacturing and manufacturing 
technology be given priority. This is an essential step in 
broadening the defense industrial base and creating new 
manufacturing capacity in the United States. In recent years 
Congress has clarified SBIR Phase III contracting authority and 
data rights provisions in an attempt to clear the way for the 
military services to transition promising Phase I and Phase II 
SBIR technology development efforts to the mainstream of 
defense acquisition. The committee is encouraged by the small 
cadre of DOD program managers who have effectively transitioned 
SBIR technology into their programs through award of Phase III 
contracts. The committee believes that strong leadership from 
the Office of the Secretary of Defense is necessary in order to 
ensure that all the benefits from the Department's significant 
annual SBIR technology development investment are realized.
    The committee recognizes that an essential element of 
acquisition reform is the continuing evolution of the 
acquisition culture in the Department by program managers who 
possess the insight and commitment to take advantage of small 
innovative businesses through Phase III transition of SBIR 
technology. The committee directs that the Under Secretary of 
Defense for Acquisition, Technology and Logistics (USD (AT&L)) 
encourage DOD acquisition program managers and prime 
contractors to make significantly more SBIR Phase III contract 
awards than has been done in the past. The committee further 
directs the USD (AT&L) to provide a report to the congressional 
defense committees, by March 31, 2005, to (1) provide 
information on DOD SBIR Phase III awards during the past three 
years; (2) describe what action the Office of the Secretary of 
Defense has taken to encourage DOD acquisition program managers 
to award SBIR Phase III contracts at a higher rate and to make 
award of SBIR Phase III contracts a priority within the Defense 
Acquisition system; and (3) identify specific Phase III 
transitions that have been conducted or are planned in fiscal 
year 2005.

High-speed/hypersonic reusable demonstration

    The budget request contained $339.2 million in PE 62702E 
for tactical technology applied research, including $15.0 
million for the high-speed/hypersonic reusable demonstration.
    The committee supports the objectives of the high-speed/
hypersonic reusable demonstration. However, because there are 
higher priority, near-term requirements associated with the 
global war on terrorism, the committee believes that the DARPA 
high-speed, hypersonic reusable demonstration should be 
deferred.
    The committee recommends a decrease of $15.0 million in PE 
62702E, and no funding for the high-speed/hypersonic reusable 
demonstration.

Horizontal fusion

    The budget request contained $214.2 million in PE 35199D8Z 
for Net Centricity, which includes the horizontal fusion 
program, and $23.3 million for Washington Headquarters Services 
major equipment, which includes $10.5 million for horizontal 
fusion. The committee is aware that horizontal fusion reflects 
a significant shift in the Department of Defense's (DOD) 
approach to intelligence data. Currently intelligence analysts 
process and analyze data before delivering it to the field for 
use. The Department realized the more efficient way to provide 
timely intelligence to the warfighter is to post data quickly, 
allowing analysts in the field to do unit specific analysis. 
This philosophical shift necessitates significant changes in 
the systems that hold the information and form the basis of the 
DOD network.
    However, the committee is concerned that the scale of the 
Department's undertaking is unprecedented, even compared to the 
commercial sector's use of metadata, which tags data with 
descriptive information and lists it in a central registry, to 
manage its applications. The committee is concerned that the 
scope of this program to exploit data on this level without a 
systems architecture to define data and terms to ensure that 
the information is consistent for all users could compromise 
intelligence and cause technological failures. The committee 
believes the Department must set the rules, standards, 
protocols, and other parameters to determine who or what entity 
is ultimately responsible for the data, before the funding at 
the level proposed in the budget request can be productively 
expended.
    Accordingly, the committee recommends $144.2 million in PE 
35199D8Z for continued research, a reduction of $70.0 million, 
and $18.9 million for Washington Headquarters Services major 
equipment procurement, a reduction of $4.4 million for 
horizontal fusion.

Implementation of defense biomedical countermeasures

    Title XVI of the National Defense Authorization Act for 
2004 (Public Law 108-186) provides authority for the Secretary 
of Defense to establish an enhanced biomedical countermeasures 
program within the Department of Defense to protect members of 
the Armed Forces from attack with chemical, biological, 
radiological, or nuclear (CBRN) agents. This title of Public 
Law 108-136 parallels H.R. 2122, the Project Bioshield Act of 
2003, which was developed in response to the Bioshield 
initiative announced by the President in his State of the Union 
address to the Congress on January 20, 2004; passed in the 
House of Representatives; and introduced in the Senate. Title 
XVI addresses research and development, procurement, and 
emergency use of biomedical countermeasures.
    Section 1601 requires the Secretary of Defense to establish 
a program to accelerate research and development of biological 
countermeasures to CBRN threats and provides authorities to 
speed research.
    Section 1602 authorizes the Secretary of Defense to enter 
into an interagency agreement with the Secretaries of Homeland 
Security and Health and Human Services to provide for 
acquisition by the Secretary of Defense for use by the Armed 
Forces of biomedical countermeasures procured for the Strategic 
National Stockpile by the Secretary of Health and Human 
Services. Section 1602 also authorizes the Secretary of Defense 
to transfer those funds to the Secretary of Health and Human 
Services that are necessary to carry out such agreements and 
the Secretary of Health and Human Services to expend any such 
transferred funds to procure such counter-measures for use by 
the Armed Forces, or to replenish the stockpile.
    Section 1603 establishes conditions under which the 
Secretary of Health and Human Services may authorize emergency 
use by the general public of certain drugs, devices, or 
biological products based on a determination by the Secretary 
of Defense that there is a military emergency involving a 
heightened risk to United States military forces of attack with 
specified CBRN agents. Section 1603 would also authorize the 
President to waive the right of service members to refuse the 
administration of such a biomedical countermeasure.
    The committee directs the Secretary of Defense to report to 
the congressional defense committees by December 31, 2004, on 
the actions taken to implement the authorities granted in title 
XVI of the Act.

Man portable air defense system defense program

    The budget request included $14.1 million in PE 64618D8Z 
for systems development and demonstration (SDD) for a network-
centric, portable, ground-based, counter-man portable air 
defense system (MANPADS).
    SDD programs require validated requirements and 
technologies that have been demonstrated in at least a 
laboratory or test range environment. There are no validated 
requirements for this program, nor have any technologies been 
demonstrated. Further, the committee understands the concept 
for this program was considered by the Department of Homeland 
Security for its on-going program to protect civilian aircraft 
from the MANPADS threat and was rejected. Consequently, this 
program would be unique to the military services. Finally, the 
committee believes the Office of the Secretary of Defense (OSD) 
should not be managing programs that are inherently within the 
purview of the military services.
    If OSD, in its oversight role, believes that there is 
sufficient merit in the concept engendered in this request, it 
should mandate incorporation of the concept within one of the 
several counter-MANPADS programs resident within the military 
services and defense agencies as part of their research and 
development programs.
    The committee recommends no funds in PE 64618D8Z for fiscal 
year 2005, a decrease of $14.1 million.

Measures and signatures intelligence consortium

    The budget request contained no funds in PE 35884L for 
intelligence planning and review for the Measures and 
Signatures Intelligence (MASINT) Consortium.
    The MASINT Consortium, led by the Defense Intelligence 
Agency, began in fiscal year 2003 by congressional directive to 
coordinate basic and applied science research as it relates to 
the Intelligence Community (IC) and the Department of Defense. 
The committee believes this is an IC requirement that 
encourages the advancement of basic and applied systems 
research within the MASINT discipline. Amplifying information 
on this issue may be found in the classified annex to this 
report.
    The committee recommends an increase of $10.0 million in PE 
35884L for the MASINT Consortium.

Medical free electron laser

    The budget request contained $9.7 million in PE 62227D8Z 
for medical free electron laser applied research.
    The committee notes that the medical free electron laser 
program seeks to develop advanced, laser-based applications for 
military medicine and related materials research. Because free 
electron lasers provide unique pulse features and tunable 
wavelength characteristics that are unavailable in other laser 
devices, their use broadens the experimental options for the 
development of new laser-based medical technologies. The 
program is a merit-based, peer-reviewed, competitively awarded 
research program, the majority of which is focused on 
developing advanced procedures for rapid diagnosis and 
treatment of battlefield related medical problems.
    The committee recommends $19.7 million in PE 62227D8Z, an 
increase of $10.0 million to continue the merit-based, peer-
reviewed, competitively awarded program in medical free 
electron laser applied research.

Multi-wavelength surface scanning biologics sensor

    The budget request contained $17.6 million in PE 63714D8Z 
for the advanced sensor applications program.
    The committee notes on-going research in the use of multi-
wavelength excitation spectral technology for the detection and 
identification of biologic agents that are not discernible with 
conventional sensors. The committee understands that successful 
demonstration of this technology for two dimensional 
fluorescence that spectrally resolve the target in both 
excitation and emission dimensions could provide the capability 
to detect and identify biological agents and a significant 
improvement in the scanning and screening of potentially 
contaminated locations. Congress appropriated $2.0 million in 
fiscal year 2004 to continue previously funded work on the 
technology and support evaluation of a laboratory test bed 
system with a wide range of simulated and target bacteria and 
pathogens and environmental backgrounds. The committee 
understands that the success of these efforts has motivated 
further testing of the laboratory testbed prototype to support 
the design and development of a second generation or ``beta'' system 
with significantly expanded capabilities.
    The committee recommends an increase of $3.0 million in PE 
63714D8Z to continue the program for development and 
demonstration of two-dimensional fluorescence spectral sensing 
instruments for the real-time detection and identification of 
pathogens.

National Defense University technology pilot program

    The budget request contained $30.6 million in PE 65104D8Z 
for the Office of the Secretary of Defense technical studies, 
support, and analysis.
    The committee notes that the National Defense University 
(NDU), supported by funding provided by the Director of Defense 
Research and Engineering, has established a pilot research and 
analysis program focused on defense policy issues that have 
significant technology elements. The committee further notes 
that the objective of this program is to determine how the 
United States can maintain its competitive edge against other 
military adversaries at a time when commercial information 
technology (IT) is readily available on the global market. The 
committee is interested to learn the results of NDU's proposed 
pilot programs for fiscal year 2005 which include the use of IT 
for stabilization efforts and reconstruction operations in 
Iraq, and homeland security.
    Accordingly, the committee recommends $31.6 million for PE 
65104D8Z, an increase of $1.0 million for the NDU technology 
pilot program.

Nuclear weapons effects applied research

    The budget request contained $249.8 million in PE 62716BR 
for applied research in weapons of mass destruction defeat 
technology, including $67.8 million for applied research in 
weapons effects technology.
    The committee continues to note that the budget for nuclear 
weapons effects applied research has declined dramatically 
since the early 1990s and the decline in the budget has been 
accompanied by a decline in the capability for and expertise in 
analysis of nuclear weapons effects. The current program uses a 
combination of computer analysis, simulation and protection 
technology to address key issues regarding the survivability of 
critical U.S. systems in a potential nuclear environment, 
including missile defense interceptors, satellite electronics, 
and warfighting command, control, communications and 
intelligence (C3I) systems and facilities. The committee 
believes that the U.S. nuclear weapons effects analysis 
capability needs to be revitalized to address emerging 21st 
Century threats, such as the potential for terrorist use of 
radiological dispersion devices (``dirty bombs'') or crude 
nuclear weapons in an urban environment; the potential effect 
of electromagnetic pulse generated by a nuclear weapon on C3I 
and other electronic systems; the potential use of small 
nuclear weapons for defeat of chemical or biological agents, or 
for defeat of hard and buried targets; and analysis of 
requirements for defense of critical assets.
    The committee recommends $259.8 million in PE 62716BR, an 
increase of $10.0 million for nuclear weapons effects applied 
research.

Operationally responsive satellite

    The budget request contained $19.6 million in PE 65799D8Z 
for Force Transformation Directorate, but contained no funds 
for operationally responsive satellites.
    With the advent of operationally responsive launches, the 
committee believes research and development should begin on the 
use of satellites that would fit this new family of launch 
vehicles and address near-term warfighter requirements. These 
new satellites should provide critical capabilities from space 
in an affordable, reliable, and timely manner. This new 
perspective on satellite acquisition represents a truly 
transformational strategy and, as such, should be managed by 
the Secretary of Defense's new Office of Force Transformation.
    The committee recommends $44.6 million in PE 65799D8Z, an 
increase of $25.0 million for the development of operationally 
responsive satellites.

Smart machine platform initiative

    The budget request contained $11.0 million in PE 78011S for 
Industrial Preparedness, of which no funds were requested for 
the Smart Machine Platform Initiative.
    The committee has been encouraged by the efforts of the 
machine tool industry to develop breakthrough technology for 
defense manufacturing applications by which the next generation 
of machine technology will provide the capability to monitor 
and modify a work plan during the production process. This 
smart machine technology would substantially reduce both the 
cost and time to develop defense products.
    The committee recommends $23.2 million for PE 78011S, an 
increase of $12.2 million for the Smart Machine Platform 
Initiative.

Space and missile defense command simulation center

    The budget request contained $186.7 million for the high 
performance computing modernization program, which includes the 
Army Space and Missile Defense Command (SMDC) Simulation 
Center. The center is a mission critical computer facility 
established to provide supercomputer computational assets with 
high performance network and storage support for the 
development, testing, and integration of strategic defense 
technologies and simulations including computational physics 
and chemistry, weapons design, and force modeling for SMDC, the 
Missile Defense Agency (MDA), and the military services. The 
committee understands that the SMDC needs to upgrade its 
information technology systems to meet computational demands 
for simulation, testing, and evaluation of advanced 
interceptors and sensors. The committee believes the technology 
upgrades are important to the work the SMDC is presently 
conducting.
    Accordingly, the committee recommends $192.7 million in PE 
63755D8Z, an increase of $6.0 million for the SMDC.

Special operations advanced technology development

    The budget request contained $48.8 million in PE 116402BB 
for special operations advanced technology development, but 
contained no funding for development of long term battery-free 
power sources, the advanced target identification capability 
for AC-130U gunships, the ANGELFIRE active protection system, 
and the surveillance augmentation vehicle-insertable on request 
(SAVIOR) system.
    The committee is aware of the need for power sources that 
may be used to supply power to remote monitoring and 
surveillance sensors for long periods of duration. Furthermore, 
thecommittee understands that promising technology exists that 
may meet that military requirement by converting ambient light to 
power.
    The advanced target identification system is a significant 
enhancement to the gunship radar and will enable the crew to 
make accurate and near instantaneous identification of friendly 
and enemy vehicles on the battlefield. To complete the project, 
funding is needed to fully integrate identification software 
with a family of ground and airborne systems.
    ANGELFIRE is a promising integrated sensor and 
countermeasure package with the potential to provide increased 
protection to lightly protected military aircraft and vehicles 
in hostile environments. Such systems are urgently needed in 
today's increasingly lethal operating environments.
    The SAVIOR system also promises to increase force 
protection for troops operating in cluttered, urban 
environments. SAVIOR is a mobile, intelligent sensor suite that 
can alert ground forces to the presence of a threat with its 
intensive surveillance network.
    The committee recommends $64.8 million for PE 1160402BB 
special operations advanced technology development, increases 
of $4.0 million to develop battery free power sources for 
sensors, $3.0 million for the advanced identification 
capability for AC-130 gunships, $6.0 million to develop the 
ANGELFIRE active protection system, and $3.0 million for 
development of the SAVIOR system.

Special operations technology development

    The budget request contained $13.1 million in PE 116401BB 
for special operations technology development, but included no 
funding for shoulder fired smart round (SPIKE) urban warfare 
system development. The SPIKE missile fills a critical need for 
a low-cost, light-weight fire and forget missile for ground 
troops to use against lightly armored and other material 
targets and has possible maritime application as well.
    The committee recommends $16.1 million in PE 116401BB, an 
increase of $3.0 million for SPIKE missile development.

Stimulated isomer energy release

    The budget request contained $339.2 million in PE 62702E 
for tactical technology applied research, including $4.0 
million for stimulated isomer energy release.
    The committee is aware that the Defense Advanced Research 
Project Agency (DARPA) is funding research to investigate the 
feasibility of stimulating the release of energy stored in 
nuclear isomers. The committee understands that the DARPA-
sponsored research is investigating two of the most difficult 
technical challenges in this program and that the research is 
being conducted in the national laboratories, the Department of 
Energy, the military service laboratories, and other 
facilities. Given the significant policy issues associated with 
any eventual use of an isomer weapon and given the inability of 
distinguished scientists to replicate the reported successful 
triggering experiment of 1998, the committee believes that the 
Department of Defense should not be engaged in this research. 
The proper agency to investigate the feasibility of this 
technology is the National Nuclear Security Administration and 
its national laboratory complex. The committee questions the 
utility of this research in any circumstances and is 
particularly skeptical of research into nuclear isomer 
production before triggering is shown to be possible.
    Accordingly, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense 
to terminate this program, and recommends no funding for the 
stimulated isomer energy release in PE 62702E, a reduction of 
$4.0 million.

Tasking, processing, exploitation, and dissemination of SYERS-2 data

    The budget request contained no funding in PE 35102BQ for 
defense imagery and mapping.
    The committee is concerned that multi-spectral data from 
the SYERS-2 sensor is not being exploited by the National 
Geospatial Intelligence Agency (NGA).
    The committee recommends $3.0 million in PE 35102BQ, an 
increase of $3.0 million to permit the NGA to fully process, 
exploit, and disseminate SYERS-2 data.

Use of research and development funds to procure systems

    The committee has observed the increasing use of funds 
designated for research and development (R&D) purposes to 
acquire operational platforms. The fiscal 2005 budget proposal 
would take the practice to unprecedented levels, with three 
DD(X) and two LCS ships, three E-2C aircraft, and eleven VH-XX 
helicopters proposed for acquisition with R&D funds.
    The use of R&D funds for prototypes and truly developmental 
items is both proper and prudent. This practice also makes 
sense when, following the completion of testing, a test asset 
still has useful capability to bring to the operational fleet. 
However, it is difficult to believe that nearly half of the VH-
XX fleet, for example, qualifies as prototypes or dedicated 
test assets. The fact that the platforms may occasionally be 
used for some testing purposes does not, in the committee's 
view, qualify them as research craft. Indeed, the committee 
would be surprised were the department actually proposing to 
regularly carry the President on prototype aircraft.
    While the committee recognizes the increased flexibility of 
R&D funds in acquiring platforms, there is concern that placing 
acquisition programs in the R&D budget, particularly at their 
early, least stable stage, threatens other programs, 
particularly in science and technology. The R&D budget is a 
very small pool from which to fund acquisitions of large items 
like ships, and as procurements are must-pay bills, typical 
procurement cost-growth would put the rest of the R&D budget at 
risk.
    The committee's action with regard to particular programs 
funded in R&D should therefore be seen not only as a reflection 
of the merits of those items, but also as an expression of 
concern over the rapidly expanding portion of the R&D budget 
being used for purposes other than R&D.

Walrus

    The budget request contained $339.2 million in PE 62702E 
for tactical technology applied research, including $10.0 
million for the Walrus program, and $361.0 million in PE 63285E 
for advanced aerospace systems advanced technology development, 
including $10.0 million for the Walrus program.
    The committee notes that the Defense Advanced Research 
Projects Agency (DARPA) Walrus program would combine 
technologies for high-strength and low structural weight 
airframes, high efficiency propulsion systems; and heavy-lift 
cargo transport investigated in earlier DARPA programs. The 
Walrus program would develop and evaluate a very large 
``hybrid'' airlift vehicle concept that is designed to fly 
through a combination of aerodynamics and gas buoyancy. The 
first phase of the program would include system studies and 
development of a notional objective vehicle and would be 
followed by a competitive second phase that would lead to the 
development, design, build, and initial flight test of an 
advanced technology demonstration air vehicle with air lift 
capability comparable to a C-130 aircraft. As envisioned, an 
objective vehicle would be capable of lifting over 500 tons 
across intercontinental distances.
    The committee acknowledges the Department of Defense's 
objective of being able to deploy quickly to overseas theaters 
from the continental United States. Nevertheless, the committee 
is also aware of previous programs in the late 1980s and early 
1990s that envisioned very large, long-endurance airship 
concepts for inter-theater lift, which after some initial 
enthusiasm were not pursued because of the large costs 
associated with the development and production of such systems. 
The committee has also received no estimates of the potential 
development and production costs for the Walrus concept. 
Because there are higher priority, near-term requirements 
associated with the global war on terrorism, the committee 
believes that the work on the DARPA Walrus program should be 
deferred.
    Accordingly, the committee recommends no funding for the 
Walrus program, a reduction of $10.0 million in PE 62702E and a 
reduction of $10.0 million in PE 63285E.

                Operational Test and Evaluation, Defense


                                Overview

    The budget request contained $305.1 million for Operational 
Test and Evaluation, Defense.
    The committee recommends $305.1 million, no change to the 
budget request.


                         LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS


              Subtitle A--Authorization of Appropriations


              Section 201--Authorization of Appropriations

    This section would establish research, development, test 
and evaluation authorization levels for the Department of 
Defense for fiscal year 2005.

         Section 202--Amount for Defense Science and Technology

    This section would establish defense science and technology 
authorization levels for the Department of Defense for fiscal 
year 2005.

    Subtitle B--Program Requirements, Restrictions, and Limitations


          Section 211--Future Combat Systems Program Strategy

    This section would limit authorization of appropriations 
for Future Combat Systems (FCS) in fiscal year 2005 to $2.2 
billion until the following is submitted to Congress prior to 
the Milestone B update:
          (1) An independent program cost estimate;
          (2) A report on the maturity levels of critical 
        technologies;
          (3) A report on the status of the network and 
        command, control, communications, computers, 
        intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance 
        components; and
          (4) The key performance parameters.
    This section would also require the Secretary of the Army 
to certify that the following requirements are applied to the 
Future Combat Systems program:
          (1) At the design readiness review, 90 percent of 
        engineering drawings will be releasable to 
        manufacturing;
          (2) Before production facilitization and long lead 
        items are contracted for, the performance of the 
        information network is demonstrated to be acceptable, 
        including the contributions of complementary programs 
        such as the Joint Tactical Radio System and the 
        Warfighter Information Network-Tactical;
          (3) Before the initial production decision, 
        prototypes of each system demonstrate their collective 
        ability to meet system of system requirements when 
        integrated with the network.
    FCS is a revolutionary system of systems that the Army is 
developing to equip its future forces. FCS consists of an 
information network that links a suite of 18 new smaller and 
lighter manned and unmanned ground vehicles, air vehicles, 
sensors, and munitions. The success of FCS depends on the 
ability of the network to collect, process, and deliver vast 
amounts of information such as imagery and communications and 
the performance of the individual systems themselves.
    The committee supports the Army's transformation goals and 
the desired capabilities that the FCS program promises. 
However, the committee is greatly concerned about the Army's 
ability to deliver these capabilities within cost and schedule 
estimates. The Army has never managed any program of the size 
and complexity of FCS: 18 systems, 32 critical technology 
areas, 34 million lines of code, 129 trade studies, and 157 
other necessary systems outside of the FCS program structure.
    In its March 2004 report, the General Accounting Office 
indicated the FCS program has many of the same risk markers 
that have led to problems on other programs. These include:
          (1) An extremely challenging and unforgiving 
        requirement to outperform the current heavy force at a 
        fraction of the weight and logistics footprint;
          (2) Reliance on numerous advanced yet immature 
        technologies to meet the requirement; and;
          (3) A schedule that proceeds to production in an 
        unprecedented 5\1/2\ years.
    The committee is aware of the fiscal realities that make it 
difficult to fund simultaneously the development of 
transformational future military systems and the maintenance 
and sustainment of current military systems. FCS will field 15, 
brigade like, Units of Action by 2025. This will constitute 
about one-third of the active component of the Army. The Army 
does not have a plan and has not budgeted funds to sustain the 
current force through 2025. The committee believes that the 
current force must be provided with a sufficient sustainment 
and modernization budget such that this force remains capable, 
reliable, interoperable, and relevant until FCS can assume the 
majority of the responsibility for the Army's mission.

  Section 212--Collaborative Program for Research and Development of 
                    Vacuum Electronics Technologies

    This provision would require the Secretary of Defense to 
establish a program for research and development in advanced 
vacuum electronics technology to meet Department of Defense 
(DOD) requirements for radio frequency electromagnetic systems. 
The program would be carried out collaboratively by the 
Director of Defense Research and Engineering, the Secretary of 
the Navy, the Secretary of the Air Force, the Secretary of the 
Army, and other appropriate elements of the Department of 
Defense. The provision would also increase the fiscal year 2005 
budget request for vacuum technology research and development 
by a total of $15.0 million, an increase of $10.0 million in PE 
62771N for vacuum electronics applied research and an increase 
of $5.0 million in PE 63771N for vacuum electronics advanced 
technology development.
    The committee has long recognized the unique needs of the 
Department of Defense for high power vacuum electronics for 
radar and other electromagnetic systems, and has advocated 
increased funding for research and development in advanced 
vacuum electronics technology. The committee reports on H.R. 
1402 (H. Rept. 106-162) and on H.R. 4546 (H. Rept. 107-436) 
noted the committee's support for a robust vacuum electronics 
research and development program in the Department of Defense 
and other federal agencies. The committee has reviewed the 
results of the Secretary of the Navy's report to Congress on 
the DOD vacuum electronics program and the Department's April 
2001 Technology Area Review and Assessment (TARA) on creating a 
balanced tri-service investment strategy for RF vacuum 
electronics and solid-state power electronics technologies. In 
the committee report on H.R. 4546, the committee endorsed the 
TARA views on the criticality of support for both vacuum 
electronics and solid-state power electronics technologies. The 
committee notes the TARA review's recommendations for increased 
funding in the tri-service vacuum electronics program and for 
establishment of a combined tri-service initiative to rapidly 
advance wide band gap semiconductor device technology to enable 
advanced military radar and other systems requiring power 
electronics in the mid-to-long term.
    Section 212 of the National Defense Authorization Act for 
Fiscal Year 2002 (Public Law 107-107) required the Secretary of 
Defense to establish a collaborative program for development of 
advanced radar systems, which has focused on developing the 
technology for high frequency and high power wide band gap 
semiconductors recommended in the TARA review. Section 212 of 
this Act would implement the TARA recommendation for the tri-
service vacuum electronics program.
    The committee expects the Under Secretary of Defense 
(Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics), acting through the 
Director of Defense Research and Engineering, to ensure a 
balanced investment strategy for vacuum electronics and solid 
state power technologies that will meet DOD requirements for 
current and future systems that use radio frequency power 
electronics.

Section 213--Annual Comptroller General Report on Joint Strike Fighter 
                                Program

    This section would establish an annual review of the Joint 
Strike Fighter system development and demonstration (SDD) 
program by the Comptroller General to be submitted to Congress 
by March 15, of each year. The report would include the extent 
to which such SDD program is meeting established performance, 
cost, and schedule goals; the plan for such SDD for the next 
fiscal year; and a conclusion whether such SDD program is 
likely to be completed at a cost not in excess of the most 
recent Selected Acquisition Report. The final report required 
by this section would be submitted on March 15, 2009.

   Section 214--Amounts for United States Joint Forces Command to be 
                 Derived Only from Defense-wide Amounts

    This section would transfer funding for the joint warfare 
experimentation program and related Joint Forces Command 
programs from Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, Navy 
to a Defense-wide account.
    In 1998, the Secretary of Defense chartered the combatant 
commander, U.S. Joint Forces Command, as the executive agent 
for conducting joint warfighting concept development and 
experimentation within the Department of Defense. The committee 
believes that, as the Department's executive agent for joint 
warfighting concept development and experimentation, the 
command's budget for joint warfare experimentation and related 
programs should be independent of, and separate from the 
budgets of the military departments. The committee also notes 
that the precedent that has been established by the Department 
in maintaining the budgets for the Joint Staff and defense 
agencies separate from the budgets of the military departments. 
The committee also observes that maintaining the budget for the 
joint warfare experimentation and transformation programs as a 
part of budget request for the Navy's science and technology 
program tends to create a false impression of funding levels 
for the latter.
    The committee directs the transfer of funding for the Joint 
Forces Command joint experimentation, joint warfare experiments 
and joint warfare transformation programs from Research, 
Development, Test, and Evaluation, Navy to Research, 
Development, Test, and Evaluation, Defense-wide, as follows:
          (1) $167.7 million for Joint Experimentation from 
        Navy PE 32727N to Defense-wide PE 63xx1;
          (2) $26,000 for Joint Warfare Experiments from Navy 
        PE 63757N to Defense-wide PE 63xx2, and;
          (3) $22.5 million for Joint Warfare Transformation 
        Programs from Navy PE 64787N to Defense-wide PE 63xx3.

Section 215--Authority of Director of Defense Research and Engineering 
          to Award Prizes for Advanced Technology Achievements

    This section would amend the process by which the Secretary 
of Defense carries out a program to award cash prizes in 
recognition of outstanding achievements in basic, advanced, and 
applied research, technology development, and prototype 
development that have the potential for application to the 
performance of the military missions of the Department of 
Defense. The amendment would provide that the program would be 
carried out by the Secretary of Defense, acting through the 
Director of Defense Research and Engineering, rather than 
through the Director, Defense Advanced Research Projects 
Agency.

                     Section 216--Space Based Radar

    This section would prohibit the Space Based Radar program 
from proceeding to Department of Defense acquisition milestone 
B. The program may not proceed until 30 days after meeting the 
requirement to notify the congressional defense committees and 
the intelligence committees of the completion of an independent 
cost estimate, a technology maturity and readiness assessment, 
and the system design concept.

        Section 217--Mark-54 Torpedo Product Improvement Program

    This section would provide $2.0 million of funds authorized 
in Navy, Research and Development for the Mark-54 Product 
Improvement Program.

                 Subtitle C--Ballistic Missile Defense


    Section 221--Fielding of Ballistic Missile Defense Capabilities

    This section would allow the Department of Defense to use 
research, development, test and evaluation funding to develop 
and field ballistic missile defense capabilities with funds 
appropriated in fiscal years 2005 and 2006.
    The committee is concerned with the Department's plans to 
transition program elements of the ballistic missile defense 
program from the Missile Defense Agency to the military 
services. The committee notes that section 223(a) of the 
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2004 (Public 
Law 108-136) requires the Secretary of Defense to submit with 
the annual budget request the potential date of availability of 
individual ballistic missile defense program elements for 
fielding, and the estimated date for the transfer of individual 
ballistic missile defense system elements from the Director of 
the Missile Defense Agency to the secretary of a military 
department. The committee expects that the fielding and 
acquisition strategy provided by the Department will assist the 
committee in considering future requests by the Department to 
use research, development, test and evaluation funds for the 
development and fielding of ballistic missile capabilities.

                  TITLE III--OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE

                                OVERVIEW

    The budget request contained $140.6 billion for operation 
and maintenance funds throughout the Department of Defense 
(DOD). The committee reviewed this request to evaluate whether 
readiness accounts are properly funded and managed for a 
peacetime environment. The committee conducted a focused review 
on joint training, logistics transformation, prepositioned 
assets, as well as the overall readiness of military units.
    The committee believes the Secretary of Defense and DOD 
leadership recognize the importance of joint training and are 
taking appropriate action to implement the Joint National 
Training Capabilities program. DOD leadership also appears 
committed to improving logistics and providing total asset 
visibility of supplies and personnel to the combatant 
commanders. The committee will continue in its oversight role 
to evaluate whether various training exercises and logistics 
systems migrate toward a joint environment or whether military-
unique training and stove-piped logistics systems continue to 
be the norm. The committee believes any program identified as 
joint, total, or global will face some level of resistance. The 
burden will be on the Secretary of Defense and the secretaries 
of the military departments to adopt and endorse programs that 
benefit the Department as a whole, rather than merely 
benefiting a particular service or agency.
    The committee also believes the Secretary of Defense and 
the secretaries of the military departments have a unique 
opportunity to replenish their prepositioned materials and 
equipment in a manner most beneficial to global security. Many 
lessons were learned as to the value of prepositioned equipment 
and how to manage such assets. The committee hopes DOD 
leadership takes advantage of these lessons and adjusts its 
prepositioning program accordingly.
    Finally, the committee notes the challenge of evaluating a 
peacetime budget when the nation is at war. The budget request 
contained no additional funds to support the operating tempo 
for units deployed for Operation Iraqi Freedom and Operation 
Enduring Freedom. Title XV of this bill accordingly addresses 
this issue and the need for additional operational and 
maintenance funds.


                       ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST


                 Budget Request Adjustments--Readiness

    The committee recommends the following adjustments to the 
fiscal year 2005 budget request:

                        [In millions of dollars]

Department of the Army Adjustments:
    BA-1  Hydration on the Move....................................+3.0
    BA-1  Military Skills Engagement Training Simulator (Laser Shot 
      Software)....................................................+1.0
    BA-1  Vehicle Batteries........................................+2.5
    BA-1  Tactical Exploitation System............................(4.0)
    BA-1  Contractor Logistic Support--unjustified growth........(10.0)
    BA-1  Combat Training Centers--unjustified growth............(10.0)
    BA-3  Satellite Communications for Learning Project (SCOLA)....+3.0
    BA-3  Training Support--unjustified growth...................(15.0)
    BA-4  Administration--unjustified growth.....................(19.5)
    Unobligated Balances.........................................(52.3)
    Civilian Pay Overstatement...................................(82.0)
    Army Reserve--Family Assistance Centers........................+5.6
    Army National Guard--Hydration on the Move.....................+1.0
    Army National Guard--Family Support Programs..................+30.0
    Army National Guard--Unobligated Balances....................(14.5)
Department of the Navy Adjustments:
    BA-1  Stainless Steel Sanitary Spaces..........................+4.0
    BA-1  NULKA Electronic Decoy Cartridge.........................+2.0
    BA-1  Technical Publications.................................(25.0)
    BA-1  Fleet Response Plan Efficiencies.......................(15.0)
    BA-1  Combatant Commanders Program-unjustified growth........(40.0)
    BA-4  Small Ship Registry......................................+1.5
    Unobligated Balances.........................................(97.7)
    Civilian Pay Overstatement...................................(12.0)
United States Marine Corps Adjustments:
    BA-1  Hydration on the Move....................................+1.0
    BA-1  Vehicle Batteries........................................+2.5
    BA-1  Tent Lighting System.....................................+2.0
Department of the Air Force Adjustments:
    BA-1  B-1A Lancer Bombers....................................+157.4
    BA-1  Hydration on the Move....................................+2.0
    BA-1  Joint Crew Protection Mask...............................+1.4
    BA-1  KC-767 Tankers...........................................+3.5
    BA-1  Combat Air Systems Activities...........................(9.0)
    BA-1  Foreign Nat'l Indirect Hires--unjustified growth.......(10.5)
    BA-1  NORTHCOM--unjustified growth...........................(26.2)
    BA-1  Combatant Commander Intel Capabilities..................(4.0)
    BA-4  Personnel Programs......................................(9.5)
    BA-4  Base Support-unjustified growth........................(30.4)
    Civilian Separation Incentives...............................(40.8)
    Unobligated Balances.........................................(49.4)
    Civilian Pay Overstatement...................................(29.5)
    Depot Maintenance Realignment to ANG.........................(78.8)
    Air National Guard Depot Maintenance Realignment..............+78.8
    Air National Guard Unobligated Balances......................(33.7)
Defense-wide Activities Adjustments:
    Joint Chiefs of Staff--unjustified growth....................(38.9)
    Commercial Technologies for Maintenance Activities............+15.0
    Rapid Frequency Identification Technology......................+4.0
    Hydration on the Move..........................................+1.0
    Defense Technology Security Administration.....................+1.0
    Defense Threat Reduction Agency................................+8.7
    Washington Headquarters Services--BRAC Commission............(10.0)
    Office of Secretary of Defense--FEHB..........................+10.0
    Office of Secretary of Defense--Persistent Stratospheric 
      Vehicles.....................................................+4.2
    Office of Secretary of Defense--Research Technology Protection.+4.8
    Office of Secretary of Defense--Counterintelligence Law 
      Enforcement Watch Center.....................................+4.0
    Office of Secretary of Defense--Paralyzed Veterans Association.+1.0
    Office of Secretary of Defense--unjustified growth...........(95.8)
    Defense Security Service.....................................(50.0)
    Unobligated Balances.........................................(59.5)

           Commercial Technologies for Maintenance Activities

    The committee continues to support the Commercial 
Technologies for Maintenance Activities (CTMA) program. The 
Department of Defense (DOD) created the CTMA program in 1998 as 
the only program designed to bring the most modern and advanced 
manufacturing processes used by commercial industries to the 
DOD maintenance depots and organic maintenance activities. It 
is the committee's understanding that depot commanders support 
the economic efficiencies this program can provide.
    Therefore, the committee recommends the addition of $15.0 
million for the Defense Logistics Agency to continue the CTMA 
program. The committee believes the addition of these funds 
will allow depot-level activities to continue the successful 
participation in manufacturing technology demonstration 
projects in collaboration with more than 150 of the leading 
U.S. manufacturers.

                  Mid-Range Financial Improvement Plan

    The budget request contained $51.0 million for the 
Department of Defense, Office of Inspector General, to 
implement the Mid-Range Improvement Plan. The committee 
understands the goal of this plan is for the Department of 
Defense to obtain clean and auditable financial statements in 
fiscal year 2007. To date, the committee has not received any 
information estimating the cost of this plan in future fiscal 
years. As addressed elsewhere in this report, the committee 
cannot support the plan until additional information is 
provided, and thus recommends a decrease of $51.0 million to 
the Department of Defense, Office of Inspector General.

                     Paralyzed Veterans of America

    The committee supports programs sponsored by the Paralyzed 
Veterans of America (PVA) designated for servicemen and women 
returning from Operation Iraqi Freedom and Operation Enduring 
Freedom. Programs such as the PVA Outdoor Sports Heritage Fund 
encourage and assist soldiers to get out of the hospitals and 
engage in outdoor activities. Accordingly, the committee 
recommends $1.0 million for the Secretary of Defense to provide 
to the PVA Outdoor Sports Heritage Fund to continue this 
worthwhile effort.

                             Spare Engines

    The budget request contained no funds to purchase Navy 
spare aviation engines. Instead, the Secretary of the Navy 
intends to purchase these engines with obligation authority 
within the Department of Defense working capital fund. In the 
past, engines were purchased with appropriated aviation 
procurement funds. The committee believes it is inappropriate 
to fund spare aviation engines within the working capital fund. 
The proposed mechanism would delay using appropriated funds to 
purchase these engines. The committee notes that section 8041 
of the Department of Defense Appropriations Act, 2004 (Public 
Law 108-87) states, ``[T]he fiscal year 2005 budget request 
shall be . . . submitted to the Congress on the basis that any 
equipment which was classified as an end item and funded in the 
procurement appropriation account in this act shall be budgeted 
for the proposed fiscal year 2005 procurement appropriation and 
not in the . . . Department of Defense Working Capital Funds.'' 
Therefore, the committee recommends a transfer of $59.0 million 
from the defense working capital fund to the Department of the 
Navy's aviation procurement account.

                         Working Capital Funds

    Working capital funds serve a vital role in providing 
financial transaction flexibility for working capital fund 
activities and its customers. When working capital activities 
achieve a surplus in the annual operating result, consideration 
should be given to adjusting customer rates. Working capital 
activities that do not adjust rates are not appropriately 
returning surplus funds to customers. In addition, the 
committee is aware that many working capital fund activities 
have cash in excess of the Department of Defense rules. The 
committee, therefore, recommends the following reductions.

                        [In millions of dollars]

Air Force Working Capital Fund, Supply Management...............(150.0)
Air Force Working Capital Fund, Transportation..................(917.2)

                     Information Technology Issues


                                Overview

    The committee strongly believes information technology (IT) 
is a critical enabler for the Department of Defense (DOD) to 
meet and defeat both conventional and asymmetric threats in 
21st Century warfare. The committee supports the Department's 
goal to have joint, network-centric, distributed forces to 
provide rapid reaction for any situation. However, the 
Department is far from achieving that objective.
    While the Department has implemented and expanded the 
Global Information Grid's (GIG) potential capabilities, which 
will be an enormous enhancement in supporting our military 
forces, the committee remains concerned that warfighters may 
not be able to utilize these capabilities if individual service 
architectures, investments, and service specific systems limit 
interoperability. The crux of the issue is DOD execution, 
enforcement and evolution of its systems architecture to allow 
warfighters to capitalize on IT investments that use command, 
control, communications, computers, intelligence, 
reconnaissance, surveillance systems (C4ISR) which are enabled 
through the GIG.
    The committee supports the Department's design and 
implementation of an enterprise architecture to build and 
support a fully functioning network that every serviceman or 
woman can access and exploit. Such a network is intended to 
resolve the interoperability issues that currently plague the 
military services.
    The committee is concerned that the Department has not 
maintained adequate oversight and scrutiny over its business 
systems investments to ensure funds are spent on joint 
solutions that would provide the best value. While the 
Department is presently taking several actions to improve the 
situation, the committee is concerned that it has not put into 
place the organizational structure and process controls to 
properly align business systems investments with the business 
enterprise architecture. Therefore, the various military 
services and defense agencies have continued to make their own 
investment decisions, each following different criteria by 
designingand procuring its own business IT systems. This lack 
of an institutionalized investment strategy has contributed to the 
Department's current complex, error-prone, non-integrated IT systems 
environment.
    The committee proposes legislation that would increase the 
level of scrutiny and responsibility exercised by the business 
domain owners, and recommends a series of reductions in 
apparently redundant or legacy IT programs and those that lack 
proper justification to explain growth from last year's budget 
request.

               Information Technology Specific Reductions

    The Department of the Defense budget request for 
information technology (IT) includes both IT and national 
security systems (NSS). While the committee supports network 
centric operations and warfare initiatives that support 
military missions, as well as operational and organizational 
changes that have the net effect of supporting our warfighters, 
the committee remains concerned about the Department's lack of 
control and management oversight of the development and 
investments in business IT systems. The committee is also 
concerned that the Department has created joint IT systems 
whose program offices lack authority to devise, implement, and 
enforce systems architectures; control expenditures; or execute 
programs according to schedule and performance standards. The 
committee believes the Department needs to better manage and 
oversee many of the IT and NSS systems to prevent the 
proliferation of service-centric systems that do not 
interoperate with one another. Therefore, the committee 
recommends adjustments in the following programs:

                        [In millions of dollars]

Department of the Army Adjustments:
    Training Instrumentation for Air and Missile defense (AMD Units+5.0
    Army National Guard Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) Program.+3.5
    Army National Guard Nationwide Dedicated Fiber Optic Network 
      (NDFON)......................................................+6.0
    Deputy Chief of Staff for Information Management and Director of 
      Information Management (DCSIM/DOIM) Staff Operations........(2.2)
    Installation Management Activity.............................(10.0)
    Network Enterprise Technology Command (EAC Support)...........(9.0)
    Visual Information Support...................................(13.0)
    MEPCOM Management Information Reporting System...............(10.0)
    Recruiting Information Support System.........................(4.0)
    Army Human Resources Command Core Automation Support.........(20.0)
    Army Knowledge Enterprise Architecture........................(4.0)
    Army Personnel Electronic Records Management System...........(7.0)
    Defense Civilian Personnel Data System-Sustainment............(2.2)
    Information Technology Agency................................(12.4)
    Logistics Modernization Program...............................(2.7)
    Logistic Post Production Software Support.....................(3.5)
    Management Headquarters Information Management...............(13.0)
    Personnel Transformation.....................................(13.0)
Department of the Navy Adjustments:
    Navy Air Logistics Data Analysis.............................(15.0)
    Navy Converged Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) Program....(15.5)
    Navy/USMC Base Level Communications..........................(27.0)
    Other Navy Military Personnel and Readiness (Training and 
      Recruiting)................................................(12.0)
    Other Navy Military Personnel and Readiness (Admin and 
      Servicewide Activities)....................................(16.0)
Department of the Air Force Adjustments:
    Air Force Base Level Communications Infrastructure, Air Combat 
      Command.....................................................(8.0)
    Air Force Base Level Communications Infrastructure, Pacific...(9.0)
    Air Force Base Level Communications Infrastructure, Europe...(10.0)
    Air Force Engineering and Installations, Air Combat Command...(5.6)
    Air Force Engineering and Installations, Space Command........(4.0)
    Air Force Engineering and Installations, Air Mobility Command.(6.3)
    Air Force Engineering and Installations, Pacific..............(5.0)
    Air Force Engineering and Installations, Europe..............(10.0)
    Air Force Combat Information Transport System.................(6.4)
    Air Force Military Personnel Data System......................(2.4)
    Air Force Pentagon Communications Agency.....................(20.0)
Defense-wide Activities Adjustments:
    Chief Information Officer Programs, OSD......................(12.0)
    Comptroller Business Management Modernization Program........(25.4)
    Health Program...............................................(50.0)
    Horizontal Fusion.............................................(3.4)

Enterprise Resource Planning Program--Army National Guard

    The budget contained no funding for the Army National Guard 
enterprise resource planning program (ERP) which would identify 
the business processes in the Army National Guard and compare 
them to the Army ERP programs.
    The committee believes this may be a valuable study and 
could benefit the Army National Guard to determine how it may 
leverage existing Army and other Department of Defense's 
initiatives, to include the Business Management Modernization 
Program (BMMP). Such ERP would also allow the Army National 
Guard to do collaborative planning between national 
headquarters and the various state guard bureaus.
    Accordingly, the committee recommends $3.5 million for the 
Army National Guard enterprise resource planning program, and 
directs the Chief, Army National Guard to use the BMMP and the 
defense business enterprise architecture as the baseline and 
standards for this program's development and integration.

Nationwide Dedicated Fiber Optic Network

    The budget request contained no funding for the Nationwide 
Dedicated Fiber Optic Network (NDFON) for the Army National 
Guard.
    This program will provide a dedicated high-speed, high-
bandwidth fiber optic network backbone to service National 
Guard communications operations. NDFON will be a secure, 
reliable, and survivable network capable of supporting current 
and projected communications requirements. The committee notes 
that this program has the capability to provide the National 
Guard armories with a robust communications backbone to provide 
rapid, coordinated response to potential incidents. The 
committee understands that NDFON will comply with the Global 
Information Grid's architecture to maximize communications, 
networking, and collaboration between the armories and the 
Department of Defense.
    Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $8.0 
million in operation and maintenance for the Army National 
Guard to complete engineering studies for the NDFON program.

                       Navy Marine Corps Intranet

    The budget request contained $1.6 billion for the Navy 
Marine Corps Intranet (NMCI). The committee notes that over 
300,000 users are now supported by this program. The program is 
providing support and connectivity to hundreds of deployed 
troops in the Iraqi war zone.
    The committee notes that the focus of NMCI has changed from 
deploying systems to achieving efficient steady-state 
operations, as shown by the Department of the Navy and its 
contractor conducting negotiations to improve the execution of 
the $7.0 billion NMCI contract for all users. The contract 
presently supports a larger number of legacy systems for longer 
periods of time than envisioned when first awarded. The 
committee is aware the Navy may have underestimated the number 
of software applications in its inventory, initially estimating 
that it had only 5,000 applications, when the real number may 
be as high as 67,000. Additionally, the committee notes that 
the Navy has not practiced due diligence to identify and turn 
off these legacy applications and their associated computer 
networks. The committee is concerned because to date, only two 
legacy networks whose functionality is intended to migrate to 
the NMCI have been terminated. The committee understands the 
Navy operates other information technology systems that were 
never intended to operate in the NMCI environment.
    Accordingly, the committee directs the Secretary of the 
Navy to complete the migration or terminate all legacy networks 
and applications whose functionality is intended to migrate to 
the NMCI environment by September 30, 2005. If this transition 
is not completed by such date, the Secretary of the Navy will 
provide a report as to how the Department of the Navy plans to 
fund these legacy systems beyond September 30, 2005. The 
committee believes the contractor should not be held 
responsible to support those legacy networks and applications 
the Secretary of Navy does not migrate to the NMCI environment 
by this date.

                             Other Matters


                       Core Logistics Capability

    Under section 2464 of title 10, United States Code, the 
Department of Defense must maintain a core logistics 
capability. The committee understands that until recently, the 
Department of the Navy considered the maintenance and repair of 
subsystems to aviation mission essential weapon systems as a 
core logistics capability and thus performed at a public depot. 
The committee is concerned that the practice referred to above 
has been cancelled, yet a new policy is not in place. Thus, the 
committee directs the Secretary of Navy to continue with the 
older practice used to identify core logistics capability, 
until the Secretary notifies the Senate Armed Services 
Committee and the House Armed Services Committee of the new 
policy.

                  Fire Emergency and Services Program

    The Department of Defense, Inspector General, cited in its 
report, ``DoD Fire and Emergency Services Program,'' D-2003-
121, that staffing and apparatus shortfalls could adversely 
impact firefighter safety and installation missions. The 
committee is concerned that fire houses, personnel, and other 
fire suppression resources at military bases may be below 
minimal safety standards. The committee believes it is 
imperative that military base commanders operate fire 
departments at or above National Fire Protection Association 
standards as they apply to staffing, equipment and other 
readiness capabilities, and fulfill all of the Inspector 
General's recommendations.

                   Jinapsan Beach Properties in Guam

    The committee is concerned with a long-standing, unresolved 
issue regarding public access to Jinapsan Beach, Guam. This 
area of land is privately owned and accessible only through 
Department of Air Force or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service owned 
land. In response to the terrorist attacks of September 11, 
2001, the Air Force closed the public road through Andersen Air 
Base to Jinapsan Beach. The Department then initiated an 
environmental impact statement (EIS) to evaluate three 
alternative access routes. The EIS is still not complete. The 
Department and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service are in 
disagreement over the timing and circumstances of the EIS. The 
committee urges the parties to resolve this dispute and 
encourages the Secretary of the Air Force to employ the 
services of an outside organization conversant with these 
issues in order to expedite completion of the EIS and determine 
a permanent alternative route of access to privately-owned 
properties at Jinapsan Beach.

                 Moving Household Goods--Families First

    The Department of Defense spends more than $1,700.0 million 
annually on moving military families. The committee believes 
that the Department has long experienced problems with moving 
household goods. In November 2002, the Secretary of Defense 
submitted to various congressional committees three initiatives 
to improve the moving household goodsprogram, which would add 
an additional 13 percent over current program costs. The Comptroller 
General reviewed this report and concluded that all three initiatives 
offer solutions to several long standing problems and should be 
implemented (U.S. General Accounting Office, ``Monitoring Costs and 
Benefits Needed While Implementing a New Program for Moving Household 
Goods,'' April 2003). The Comptroller General raised a concern, 
however, on whether the three initiatives could be implemented within 
the proposed 13 percent cost increase. The committee, therefore, 
directs the Secretary to reevaluate its cost estimate, to quantify the 
risk or likelihood of achieving its goals within 13 percent cost 
projection, and to develop the range of possible cost increases 
associated with the risk, by December 1, 2004. The committee also 
directs the Comptroller General to review and report to the Senate 
Committee on Armed Services and the House Committee on Armed Services, 
by February 2, 2005, whether the Secretary has adequately performed the 
committee's directed task.

                  New Mexico Training Range Initiative

    The Committee is pleased with the Department of Air Force's 
progress towards the establishment of the New Mexico Training 
Range Initiative (NMTRI), including Melrose Range, Sumner Air 
Traffic Control Assigned Airspace and the Pecos and Taiban 
Military Operations Areas. It is the committee's understanding 
that the Air Force is projected to complete an environmental 
impact statement (EIS) by September 2005. The Committee 
encourages the Air Force and all other parties involved to 
continue to pursue September 2005 as the final deadline for the 
completed EIS with regards to the NMTRI at Melrose Range.

                                 Tents

    There are 36 major types of tents used in the military 
services. The Director, Defense Logistics Agency, is 
responsible for purchasing these tents, primarily from small 
businesses. There is, however, no regular or consistent 
requirement for additional or new tents. Thus, the small 
businesses that make up a significant portion of this 
industrial base have difficulty meeting surge requirements. The 
committee directs the Secretary of Defense to report to the 
Senate Committee on Armed Services and the House Committee on 
Armed Services by February 1, 2005, on what actions the 
Secretary can take to promote a more consistent requirement for 
tents or to assist the small business industrial base in 
meeting surge requirements.

                         LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS


              Subtitle A--Authorization Of Appropriations


             Section 301--Operation and Maintenance Funding

    This section would authorize $119.8 billion in operation 
and maintenance funding for the military departments and 
defense-wide activities.

                   Section 302--Working Capital Funds

    This section would authorize $2.8 billion for working 
capital funds of the Department of Defense and the National 
Defense Sealift Fund.

           Section 303--Other Department of Defense Programs

    This section would authorize $20.2 billion for other 
Department of Defense Programs for (1) the Defense Health 
Program; (2) Chemical Agents and Munitions Destruction; (3) 
Drug Interdiction and Counter-Drug Activities, Defense-Wide; 
and (4) the Defense Inspector General.

Section 304--Reimbursement of Members of the Armed Forces Who Purchased 
 Protective Body Armor during Shortage of Defense Stocks of Body Armor

    This section would authorize the Secretary of Defense to 
reimburse soldiers who purchased protective body armor for use 
while deployed in connection with Operation Noble Eagle, 
Operation Enduring Freedom, or Operation Iraqi Freedom, if the 
soldier did not receive the protective body armor before 
engaging in such operations where such body armor might be 
necessary. Reimbursement would be available to soldiers who 
purchased the body armor between September 1, 2001, and 
December 31, 2003.

                  Subtitle B--Environmental Provisions


 Section 311--Report Regarding Encroachment Issues Affecting Utah Test 
                        and Training Range, Utah

    This section would require the Secretary of the Air Force 
to provide a report to the Senate Committee on Armed Services 
and the House Committee on Armed Services, within one year of 
enactment of this Act, on the current and anticipated 
encroachments on the use and utility of the special use 
airspace of the Utah Test and Training Range (UTTR), including 
encroachments initiated by other executive agencies. The report 
would include recommendations the Secretary considers 
appropriate, including legislation that would address 
encroachment-related concerns.

                 Subtitle C--Workplace and Depot Issues


Section 321--Simplification of Annual Reporting Requirements Concerning 
       Funds Expended for Depot Maintenance and Repair Workloads

    This section would amend section 2466(d) of title 10, 
United States Code, to require the Secretary of Defense to 
submit to Congress a report on the percentage of funds expended 
or expected to be expended for depot maintenance and repair 
workloads in the public and private sectors. This report would 
cover prior, current, and budget years in which data is more 
reliable. The Comptroller General recommended such a change in 
its September 15, 2003, audit report, ``Depot Maintenance: 
DOD's 50-50 Reporting Should be Streamlined,'' (GAO-03-1023).

    Section 322--Repeal of Annual Reporting Requirement Concerning 
                     Management of Depot Employees

    This section would repeal section 2472(b) of title 10, 
United States Code, which currently requires the Secretary of 
Defense to report annually to the Senate Committee on Armed 
Services and the House Committee on Armed Services the number 
of Department of Defense employees employed and expected to be 
employed during that fiscal year to perform depot 
levelmaintenance and repair of materiel. The committee agrees to repeal 
this annual report and understands that the Secretary shall readily 
provide such data upon request.

Section 323--Public-Private Competition for Work Performed by Civilian 
                   Employees of Department of Defense

    This section would amend section 2461(b) of title 10, 
United States Code, to ensure the Secretary of Defense formally 
compares the cost of civilian employee performance with the 
costs of contractor performance before converting a function 
performed by 10 or more civilians. This section would also 
require the Secretary to conduct a formal comparison before 
modifying, reorganizing, dividing, or changing any function 
within the Department of Defense. Finally, this section would 
authorize the Secretary to waive the requirement of a formal 
comparison when there is a written determination that national 
security interests are so compelling as to preclude a 
comparison. The waiver would be required to be published within 
the Federal Register.

         Section 324--Public-Private Competition Pilot Program

    This section would require the Secretary of Defense to 
conduct a two-year pilot program under which 10 percent of all 
functions that are considered new are competed pursuant to 
Office of Management and Budget Circular A-76 (A-76). In those 
instances where the winning party is a small business or a 
contractor whose employees are represented by a private labor 
union, the Department of Defense shall not receive credit 
towards compliance with the 10 percent requirement. This 
section would also require the Secretary to conduct A-76 
competitions to determine whether work currently performed by a 
contractor should be performed by government employees. The 
Secretary shall conduct such studies so that the number of 
contractor employee studies are approximately 10 percent of the 
number of government employees studied. The Secretary does have 
authority to waive these requirements when national security 
interests are so compelling as to preclude compliance. This 
waiver would be required to be published in the Federal 
Register. This section would also require the Department of 
Defense, Inspector General, to report to Congress on the result 
of the pilot program.

Section 325--Sense of Congress on Equitable Legal Standing for Civilian 
                               Employees

    This section would express the sense of Congress that 
Department of Defense civilian employees should receive legal 
standing to challenge a public-private competition before the 
General Accounting Office or the United States Court of Federal 
Claims.

        Section 326--Competitive Sourcing Reporting Requirement

    This section would require the Department of Defense, 
Inspector General, to submit a report to Congress addressing 
whether the Department of Defense employs a sufficient 
workforce to conduct public-private competitions and whether 
the Secretary of Defense has implemented a tracking system to 
asses the cost and quality of service contractors. The system 
shall be made available to the public and updated quarterly. 
The tracking system shall include the cost to conduct a study 
under Office and Management and Budget Circular A-76; the cost 
of employee performance before the study began; the cost of the 
most efficient organization; the anticipated cost of contractor 
performance; the cost for the performance of the function by 
the contractor; a description of the quality control process 
used to monitor contract performance with an assessment whether 
contractor achieved, exceeded, or failed to achieve the quality 
control standards.

                   Subtitle D--Information Technology


 Section 331--Preparation of Department of Defense Plan for Transition 
                     to Internet Protocol Version 6

    This section would require the Secretary of Defense to 
prepare a transition plan to evaluate how the Department of 
Defense's (DOD) information technology (IT) systems may be 
impacted by the Department's decision to transition from the 
current protocols to Internet Protocol version 6 (IPv6). The 
committee is well aware that this decision affects every piece 
of network equipment that is used by DOD's Global Information 
Grid (GIG). While the committee is not a proponent of any 
particular protocol, the committee seeks to ensure that IPv6 
will provide, at a minimum, the same capabilities that are 
available today. Therefore, the committee has raised concerns 
about the possible implications of the Department's decision to 
move to this protocol, including quality of service issues and 
the use of best commercial practices to adopt this protocol. 
This section would also direct the Secretary to use the Naval 
Research Lab, in conjunction with the United States Strategic 
Command, to conduct and manage the tests required in this 
section.

     Section 332--Defense Business Enterprise Architecture, System 
  Accountability, and Conditions for Obligation of Funds for Defense 
                     Business System Modernization

    This section would repeal section 1004 of the Bob Stump 
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2003 (Public 
Law 107-314), that requires the development and implementation 
of a defense business enterprise architecture, and requires 
obligations over $1.0 million for defense business system 
modernization initiatives to be certified as consistent with 
that enterprise architecture. This section would, instead, 
establish accountability for defense business systems by 
assigning defense domains, or designated Department of Defense 
(DOD) officials, the authority and responsibility for their 
business systems, including the establishment of domain-
specific investment review processes. In addition, this section 
would improve transparency in defense business systems 
investments by requiring the Secretary of Defense to submit an 
annual budget that identifies such systems, the funds devoted 
to them, and the officials responsible for such systems. This 
section would also charge the domain owners for implementing 
and evolving their portion of the single DOD business 
enterprise architecture. The committee is concerned that the 
Department continues to invest billions of dollars in systems 
that fail to provide integrated business systems, timely and 
reliable information, and other important financial and 
business information for the daily operations. The committee 
believes the explicit assignment of management for the business 
enterprise architecture and definitive domain accountability, 
authority, and control is necessary to effectively achieve 
integrated business operations and systems to support the 
warfighter.

     Section 333--Establishment of Joint Program Office to Improve 
 Interoperability of Battlefield Management Command and Control Systems

    This section would establish a joint program office to 
manage the Department of Defense's myriad of battlefield 
management command and control systems to provide a common 
operational picture of the battlefield for all users. The 
committee understands that the Department has struggled for 
many years to develop and field command, control, 
communications, computers, and intelligence, surveillance, and 
reconnaissance (C4ISR) systems that interoperate effectively 
across all of the military services. A primary reason for this 
struggle is that the military services and other defense 
agencies plan and acquire systems to meet their own operational 
requirements, and not necessarily joint warfighting concepts.
    The committee notes that the Department recently drafted a 
Joint Battle Management Command and Control Roadmap that is 
intended to lead to a more integrated, interoperable set of 
command and control and battlespace awareness capabilities for 
joint force commanders to use in military operations. The 
committee understands that initially the United States Joint 
Forces Command (JFCOM) was given oversight and directive 
authority for the Family of Interoperable Operational Pictures 
(FIOP), which will eventually integrate air, ground, maritime, 
and possibly space into one common operational picture.
    Unfortunately, JFCOM estimates that it will take up to two 
years to develop a joint architecture, by which time, several 
hundred million dollars will have been spent on the single 
integrated air picture program, while the other supporting 
systems that the FIOP is intended to integrate will also be in 
various stages of development under the funding and direction 
of the military services.
    Furthermore, while JFCOM has authority to direct the FIOP 
development efforts, the actual program implementation will be 
done by the military services under separate program offices. 
The committee is deeply troubled by the lack of joint 
responsibility over program implementation that may jeopardize 
the possibility of achieving standardization and integration 
among these systems, and is concerned that funding for the 
various programs is the responsibility of the military 
services.

              Subtitle E--Readiness Reporting Requirements


   Section 341--Annual Report on Department of Defense Operation and 
                 Financial Support for Military Museums

    This section would require the Secretary of Defense to 
include in the annual budget justification materials a complete 
inventory of military museums operated with funds appropriated 
to the Department of Defense (DOD) or the military services. 
For each museum, this section would require the Secretary to 
provide:
          (1) A description of the museum facility;
          (2) Funds requested to operate, maintain, and repair 
        the museum facility;
          (3) The number of DOD civilian personnel and 
        uniformed service members employed or assigned to the 
        museum;
          (4) A list of non-museum functions performed at the 
        facility;
          (5) Justification for continued DOD funding; and
          (6) Funds received from organizations other than the 
        Department to operate, maintain, and repair the museum.
    The committee recognizes that museums provide and preserve 
important records, perspectives, and relics of military 
history. Due to the large number of museums supported with 
appropriated funds, however, the committee believes it is 
important for Congress to have greater visibility over the cost 
and mission of these museums. The committee notes that the 
Army, Army Reserve, and Army National Guard operate 122 
museums; and the Army has requested $25.0 million to operate 
its museums in fiscal year 2005.

       Section 342--Report on Department of Defense Programs for 
                Prepositioning of Material and Equipment

    This section would require the Secretary of Defense to 
evaluate and report to the congressional defense committees by 
October 1, 2005, the Department of Defense's strategic 
objectives for the military department's preposition programs. 
In recent operations, the United States dictated the time of 
the engagement and the tempo of operations, which allowed 
proper planning and measured decisions on how to deliver combat 
equipment, combat support and sustainment equipment. The 
committee believes if the timing of a future engagement is not 
within the control of U.S. forces, the value of an effective 
prepositioned strategy could be the difference in dictating the 
initial stages of a conflict.
    Presently, a majority of the prepositioned stocks are in 
use. The committee does not believe that restocking the 
existing preposition configuration will meet the Secretary's 
stated goal of deploying to a distant theatre in ten days, 
defeating an enemy within thirty days, and being ready for an 
additional conflict within another thirty days. The current 
strategy also fails to incorporate concepts of joint doctrine. 
The Department has a unique opportunity to reassess and 
reconfigure these programs in the context of the new deployment 
goals.

                       Subtitle F--Other Matters


    Section 351--Extension of the Arsenal Support Program Initiative

    This section would amend Section 343 of the Floyd D. Spence 
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2001 (Public 
Law 106-398) to authorize the Secretary of the Army to extend 
the Arsenal Support Initiative Program through fiscal year 
2008. This section would also require the Secretary to report 
to the Senate Committee on Armed Services and the House 
Committee on Armed Services by March 1, 2007, the benefits of 
the program, the extent to which the program met its goals, and 
whether the program should be made permanent.

 Section 352--Limitation on Preparation or Implementation of Mid-Range 
                       Financial Improvement Plan

    This section would prohibit the Secretary of Defense from 
obligating operation and maintenance funds to implement the 
Mid-Range Financial Improvement Plan until the Secretary 
provides information to the Senate Committee on Armed Services 
and the House Committee on Armed Services an explanation of how 
the operation and maintenance funds are to be utilized in 
fiscal year 2005 and the estimated cost for this plan in future 
fiscal years.

 Section 353--Procurement of Follow-On Contracts for the Operation of 
                  Five Champion-Class T-5 Tank Vessels

    This section would require the Secretary of Navy to limit 
the next competition for the operation and maintenance of the 
five champion class T-5 fuel tankers to a United States 
corporation, partnership, or association, as defined in section 
2 of the Shipping Act, 1916 (42App. U.S.C. 802). The committee 
strongly supports the Secretary of the Navy's intent to receive the 
best value using negotiated competitions.

Section 354--Sense of Congress on America's National World War I Museum

    This section would express the sense of Congress that the 
Liberty Memorial Museum in Kansas City, Missouri, is recognized 
as ``America's National World War I Museum.''

              TITLE IV--MILITARY PERSONNEL AUTHORIZATIONS

                        ITEM OF SPECIAL INTEREST


     Study of High Demand Low Density Military Units and Personnel

    Both the active and reserve components are undergoing 
various transformation initiatives in order to provide lighter, 
more lethal forces to meet the national security challenges of 
the 21st century. The global war on terrorism has compelled the 
services to begin efforts to divest structure and forces from 
the Cold War era and to develop and establish forces that are 
more responsive to current requirements. In this new 
environment, the armed forces have found certain units and 
personnel are experiencing extraordinary levels of deployment 
and utilization. These so called high demand-low density units 
and personnel include, for example, military police, civil 
affairs, intelligence, psychological operations, and linguists. 
The committee directs the Comptroller General to determine the 
extent of the reliance on these active and reserve component 
high demand low density units and personnel to meet new 
national security requirements, and to identify the 
effectiveness of the efforts by the armed forces to reduce or 
eliminate reliance on high-demand-low density units and 
specialties. Furthermore, the Comptroller General will assess 
whether additional units and resources beyond current levels 
are necessary to meet current and future demands. The 
Comptroller General should report the findings and 
recommendations of the assessment to the Senate Committee on 
Armed Services and the House Committee on Armed Services by 
March 31, 2005.

                         LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS


                       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, 2005.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                     FY 2005                   Change from
                                                FY 2004   ------------------------------------------------------
                   Service                     authorized                  Committee      FY 2005      FY 2004
                                               and floor     Request    recommendation    request     authorized
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Army........................................      482,400      482,400        482,400             0            0
Navy........................................      373,800      365,900        365,900             0       -7,900
USMC........................................      175,000      175,000        175,000             0            0
Air Force...................................      359,300      359,700        359,700             0          400
                                             -------------------------------------------------------------------
      DOD...................................    1,390,500    1,383,000      1,383,000             0       -7,500
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In addition to the fiscal year 2005 end strengths 
authorized by this section for the Army and the Marine Corps, 
sections 1531 and 1532 increase Army and Marine Corps end 
strengths by 10,000 and 3,000 respectively.

  Section 402--Revision in Permanent Active Duty End Strength Minimum 
                                 Levels

    This section would establish new minimum active duty end 
strengths for the Navy and the Air Force as of September 30, 
2005. These changes in minimum strengths reflect the committee 
recommendations shown in section 401.

 Section 403--Maximum Number of Reserve Personnel Authorized To Be on 
                  Active Duty for Operational Support

    This section would authorize, as required by section 115(b) 
of title 10, United States Code, the maximum number of reserve 
component personnel who may be on active duty or full-time 
national guard duty during fiscal year 2005 to provide 
operational support. The personnel authorized here do not count 
against the end strengths authorized by sections 401 or 412.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                              FY 2005
                         Service                             committee
                                                          recommendation
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Army National Guard.....................................         10,300
Army Reserve............................................          5,000
Naval Reserve...........................................          6,200
Marine Corps Reserve....................................          2,500
Air National Guard......................................         10,100
Air Force Reserve.......................................          3,600
------------------------------------------------------------------------
      DOD Total.........................................         37,700
------------------------------------------------------------------------

 Section 404--Accounting and Management of Reserve Component Personnel 
Performing Active Duty or Full-Time National Guard Duty for Operational 
                                Support

    This section would establish the requirement for an annual 
congressional authorization of the maximum number of reserve 
component personnel to be on active duty or full-time national 
guard duty providing operational support. The committee makes 
this recommendation to provide a new, comprehensive approach 
for managing and accounting for reserve component members on 
active duty in support of operational missions. The section 
would eliminate the current 180-day strength accounting metric 
that requires all reservists on active duty beyond that limit 
to count against active component end strengths. In its place, 
the section would authorize reserve component members who are 
voluntarily on active duty to serve for up to three years, or a 
cumulative three years over a four-year period, before counting 
against active end strengths. The section would also exempt 
reserve component personnel authorized by this section from 
certain officer and enlisted grade limits. The committee 
believes that such flexibility will encourage the use of 
volunteers both during normal peacetime operations, as well as 
during times of national emergency. The section would also 
require the Secretary of Defense to evaluate programs whose 
reserve component personnel are exempt from counting against 
any statutory manpower authorizations and report to the Senate 
Committee on Armed Services andthe House Committee on Armed 
Services by June 1, 2005, the Secretary's recommendations for including 
these personnel within such statutory manpower authorizations.

                       Subtitle B--Reserve Forces


            Section 411--End Strengths for Selected Reserve

    This section would authorize the following end strengths 
for selected reserve personnel, including the end strength for 
reserves on active duty in support of the reserves, as of 
September 30, 2005:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                     FY 2005                   Change from
                                                FY 2004   ------------------------------------------------------
                   Service                     authorized                  Committee      FY 2005      FY 2004
                                                             Request    recommendation    request     authorized
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Army National Guard.........................      350,000      350,000        350,000             0            0
Army Reserve................................      205,000      205,000        205,000             0            0
Naval Reserve...............................       85,900       83,400         83,400             0       -2,500
Marine Corps Reserve........................       39,600       39,600         39,600             0            0
Air National Guard..........................      107,030      106,800        106,800             0         -230
Air Force Reserve...........................       75,800       76,100         76,100             0          300
                                             -------------------------------------------------------------------
DOD Total...................................      863,330      860,900        860,900             0       -2,430
Coast Guard Reserve.........................       10,000       10,000         10,000             0            0
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 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, 2005:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                     FY 2005                   Change from
                                                FY 2004   ------------------------------------------------------
                   Service                     authorized                  Committee      FY 2005      FY 2004
                                                             Request    recommendation    request     authorized
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Army National Guard.........................       25,599       26,476         26,476             0          877
Army Reserve................................       14,374       14,970         14,970             0          596
Naval Reserve...............................       14,384       14,152         14,152             0         -232
Marine Corps Reserve........................        2,261        2,261          2,261             0            0
Air National Guard..........................       12,191       12,225         12,225             0           34
Air Force Reserve...........................        1,660        1,900          1,900             0          240
                                             -------------------------------------------------------------------
      DOD Total.............................       70,469       71,984         71,984             0        1,515
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The committee's recommendation would provide for a 2.1 
percent growth in the strength of these full-time reservists 
above the levels authorized in fiscal year 2004.

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

    This section would authorize the following end strengths 
for military technicians (dual status) as of September 30, 
2005:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                     FY 2005                   Change from
                                                FY 2004   ------------------------------------------------------
                   Service                     authorized                  Committee
                                                (floor)      Request    recommendation    FY 2005      FY 2004
                                                                            (floor)       request     authorized
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Army National Guard.........................       24,589       25,076         25,076             0          487
Army Reserve................................        6,949        7,299          7,299             0          350
Air National Guard..........................       22,806       22,956         22,956             0          150
Air Force Reserve...........................        9,991        9,954          9,954             0          -37
                                             -------------------------------------------------------------------
      DOD Total.............................       64,335       65,285         65,285             0          950
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The committee's recommendation would provide for a 1.5 
percent growth in the strength of military technicians above 
the levels authorized in fiscal year 2004.

 Section 414--Fiscal Year 2005 Limitation on Number of Non-Dual Status 
                              Technicians

    This section would establish the maximum end strengths for 
the reserve components of the Army and Air Force for non-dual 
status technicians as of September 30, 2005.

              Subtitle C--Authorization of Appropriations


                    Section 421--Military Personnel

    This section would authorize $1,046.5 million to be 
appropriated for military personnel. This authorization of 
appropriations reflects both reductions and increases to the 
budget request for military personnel that are itemized below.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                           Amount (in
                  Military personnel                        dollars)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
617: Reform Critical Skills Retention Bonuses.........         5,000,000
615: Reform Enlistment and Reenlistment Bonuses.......        15,000,000
616: Revised Foreign Language Proficiency Pay.........         2,000,000
619: Authorize Lateral Skills Training Bonus for               3,000,000
 Reserves.............................................
618: Authorize Officer Accession Bonus for Reserves...         5,000,000
605: Reserve Income Replacement Plan..................        60,000,000
620: Hazardous Duty Incentive Pay Military                     9,630,000
 Firefighters.........................................
631: Expansion of Travel for Survivors to Attend               2,000,000
 Burials..............................................
632: Enhanced Family Member Travel to Visit Wounded...         3,000,000
551: College First Delayed Enlistment Program.........         5,000,000
526: Continue Loan Repayments Following Commissioning.         1,000,000
525: Educational Assistance for Officers Commissioned          1,500,000
 from Military Junior Colleges........................
GAO estimate FY 2005 Active Component unexpended funds      -230,000,000
GAO Army Guard Underexecution due to Mobilization.....       -20,000,000
GAO Naval Reserve Underexecution due to Mobilization..       -15,000,000
Army Rotational Travel................................        -1,500,000
Air Force General Officer Personal Money Allowance....        -9,630,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------

               Section 422--Armed Forces Retirement Home

    This section would authorize $61,195.00 million to be 
appropriated for the operation of the Armed Forces Retirement 
Home during fiscal year 2005.

                   TITLE V--MILITARY PERSONNEL POLICY

                                OVERVIEW

    The committee recommends changes in this title to address 
not only matters of long-term military personnel policy reform, 
but also present near-term policy and process solutions to 
issues highlighted as a result of the global war on terrorism. 
For example, that war has required the mobilization of hundreds 
of thousands of reserve component members using an inefficient 
Cold War-era system that imposed undue stress on reserve 
component personnel and their families. The committee's 
recommendations would take substantial steps toward reforming 
that mobilization process. The committee is also recommending a 
series of reforms in the management of general and flag 
officers to permit these highly qualified officers increased 
opportunity for service in critical positions. To better 
recognize the service by military personnel in Afghanistan and 
Iraq, the committee would recommend the establishment of 
separate service medals. To facilitate recruiting and 
participation in the Senior Reserve Officer Training Corps, the 
committee recommends several measures to improve access to 
college and university campuses.
    The committee recommendations also include reforms for both 
joint officer management and joint professional military 
education. The committee's Report of the Panel on Military 
Education of the One Hundredth Congress, dated April 21, 1989, 
laid the foundation for joint officer development. That report, 
commonly known as the Skelton Report after the panel chairman, 
Rep. Ike Skelton, was the product of extensive study, and 
provided the analytical and philosophical foundation upon which 
to base both joint officer management policies and joint 
professional military education requirements. Since that time, 
the results of that study have enabled the Department of 
Defense to progress from operations in which the effort was to 
simply deconflict the services in the execution of their 
separate missions to the point today where recent combat 
experience demonstrates that the services have generally 
achieved integration in the execution of joint operations.
    Much of what the Skelton Report identified as requirements 
for joint officer management and joint professional military 
education clearly remains relevant today. However, the 
committee also understands that as the nature of warfare 
evolves so that future operations become more complex and joint 
at lower levels than before, the framework for developing 
persons skilled in joint matters must also evolve. Thus, while 
the committee's recommendations contained in this title are 
first steps in the construction of that evolving framework, 
much more analysis is required before any additional changes 
are enacted.

                       ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST


   Civilianization or Contracting Out of Military Chaplain Positions

    The committee is disturbed to learn that the military 
services are considering replacing military chaplains with 
civilian or contractor personnel. The committee believes that 
the implementation of such conversions would significantly 
undermine the ability of the military services to provide not 
only for the religious needs of uniformed personnel, but also 
for their families at home and overseas. The work of military 
chaplains is multifaceted. Regardless of the uniform they wear, 
chaplains share a common bond with their fellow soldiers, 
sailors, airmen, Marines and coast guardsman in the field. 
Regardless of their religion, they are brothers in arms. 
Military chaplains provide more than spiritual guidance. They 
are counselors and confidants to those who have witnessed first 
hand the horrors of war. Beyond this, military chaplains 
provide credible support and guidance to the families enduring 
the stress of deployments, and they comfort those who mourn the 
loss of loved ones. For these reasons, the committee does not 
believe that civilian or contract chaplains could adequately or 
effectively replace military chaplains. Therefore, the 
committee urges each of the secretaries of the military 
services to abstain from implementing any recommendations to 
civilianize or contract out military chaplain positions.

                 Curricula for Post-conflict Resolution

    The committee recognizes the important work that Department 
of Defense educational institutions have done in promoting 
inter-agency training for post-conflict operations. The 
committee recommends that curricula for joint training of 
military and civilian personnel continue to be developed and 
that the Department explore the utility of establishing a 
center for post-conflict reconstruction operations to pursue 
the following mission: (1) train key inter- agency personnel in 
assessment, strategy development, planning and coordination for 
post- conflict reconstruction; (2) develop and certify a cadre 
of post-conflict reconstruction experts who could be called to 
participate in future operations at both the headquarters and 
field levels; (3) provide pre-deployment training to 
interagency personnel tapped for specific operations; (4) 
develop a cadre of rapidly deployable training packages for use 
in the field; and, (5) conduct after-action reviews of real-
world operations to capture lessons learned, best practices and 
tools and designing mechanisms to feed them back into training 
and education programs.

                   Federal Voting Assistance Program

    The committee is very concerned that the Department of 
Defense (DOD) is not fully committed to securing the right to 
vote for the men and women in uniform serving our nation around 
the globe. Following the many absentee voting problems 
experienced by military members during the national election in 
2000, Congress included a provision in the National Defense 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2002 (Public Law 107-107) 
that expanded and improved the policies and procedures 
supporting the DOD-administered Federal Voting Assistance 
Program (FVAP) and DOD mail systems that carry voting materials 
between state and local voting officials and the service 
members.
    Reports from the United States General Accounting Office 
(GAO)(GAO-04-484) and the Inspector General of the Department 
of Defense (DOD IG)(D-2004-065, March 31, 2005) clearly 
demonstrate that the Department is not allocating the resources 
and management attention necessary to make the mail systems and 
the FVAP operate effectively. The GAO found that many of the 
problems from the Persian Gulf War of 1991 were repeated during 
Operation Iraqi Freedom because the United States Central 
Command's plan for postal service contained flawed assumptions, 
was not adequately resourced, and was not fully implemented. 
The DOD IG found that of the voting assistance programs at 10 
installations visited, 3 were partially effective and 7 were 
ineffective. Additionally, 58 percent of the respondents to a 
questionnaire did not know who their unit voting officer was.
    The committee believes that immediate command emphasis is 
required at all levels to ensure that mail systems are improved 
and the FVAP is fully implemented in time to protect the voting 
rights of service members during the national election in 
November 2004. Accordingly,the Secretary of Defense shall 
submit report's to the Senate Committee on Armed Services and the House 
Committee on Armed Services on August 1, 2004 and October 1, 2004 on 
his actions to ensure that DOD mail systems and the FVAP are operating 
effectively in support of absentee voting for service members and his 
perspective regarding the status of military voting on that date.
    In addition to improving the military postal system for the 
purposes of supporting military absentee voters, the committee 
sees another, equally important, purpose in supporting the 
morale of our deployed troops and their families. Mail destined 
for deployed members of the armed forces that is delayed for 
long periods of time, or not delivered at all, negatively 
affects the morale of our deployed forces and their families at 
home. The Department of Defense should improve the military 
mail systems so that they comply with the Department's own 
wartime standards for 1st class mail delivery.

                 Joint Advertising and Market Research

    The committee believes that the Department of Defense has 
an important corporate-level role to play in complementing the 
recruiting and advertising programs of the individual services. 
In that light, the committee believes that the Department's 
joint advertising and market research reinvention effort can 
have a direct, positive long-term impact on the ability of the 
Department and the military services to recruit quality 
personnel. The committee believes that such a capability is 
especially critical at a time when the recruiting efforts of 
the military services could soon be challenged by a range of 
factors. For that reason, the committee recommends an increase 
of $10.0 million to the budget request for the Department's 
joint advertising and market research effort.

 Meeting Department of Defense Requirements for Personnel with Foreign 
                    Language and Regional Expertise

    The committee notes that recent operational requirements 
with Operation Iraqi Freedom and Operation Enduring Freedom, as 
well as the global war on terrorism, place more emphasis on the 
need for foreign language and regional expertise among military 
personnel. The committee is concerned that the education and 
training provided to officers both before commissioning and 
throughout their careers may not adequately prepare military 
leaders with the skills needed for these and similar future 
operations. The committee is also interested in the degree to 
which officers with regional expertise and language ability are 
promoted and utilized within the force. The committee directs 
the Secretary of Defense to conduct a study of these matters, 
including current practices for education and training in 
language and regional studies, numbers who are so trained, 
types of languages and areas studied, and comparative promotion 
rates. The study should also provide recommendations for the 
enhancement of language and regional studies within the officer 
population. The committee directs the Secretary to submit this 
report by March 31, 2005 to the Senate Committee on Armed 
Services and the House Committee on Armed Services.
    The committee is also aware of the Department's efforts to 
transform its overall capability in foreign language and 
regional expertise. However, given the variety of required 
languages and extensive number of locations where DOD military 
and civilian personnel are operating and may operate, as well 
as the importance of these language and regional capabilities 
to overall defense strategy, this transformation will require a 
robust and sustained effort. The committee therefore directs 
the Secretary to establish a Defense Language Office within the 
Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and 
Readiness to ensure a strategic focus on meeting present and 
future requirements for language and regional expertise among 
military personnel and civilian employees of the Department. 
This office should establish and oversee policy regarding the 
development, management, and utilization of civilian employees 
as well as members of the armed forces; monitor the promotion, 
accession and retention of individuals with these critical 
skills; explore innovative concepts to expand capabilities; and 
establish policies to identify, track, and maximize the use to 
meet requirements for language and regional expertise.

              National Program for Citizen Soldier Support

    The committee believes that the increasing reliance on the 
National Guard and reserves that has occurred during the global 
war on terrorism requires the Secretary of Defense to take 
extraordinary measures to ensure that there is an effective 
support structure for reserve component personnel, their 
families and employers. The committee commends the Secretary 
for the broad efforts already underway to provide such support. 
The committee believes that the effectiveness of these support 
efforts could be enhanced and refined by incorporating the 
capabilities of university and community based organizations. 
The committee understands that the North Carolina based 
National Program for Citizen-Soldier Support is developing a 
comprehensive program that could prove useful to the Department 
of Defense in extending the reach and effectiveness of existing 
military-sponsored support agencies. The committee directs the 
Secretary to closely examine the National Program for Citizen-
Soldier Support and others like it to determine how they might 
be integrated into the Department's ongoing efforts.

                         LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS


              Subtitle A--General and Flag Officer Matters


           Section 501--Length of Service for Service Chiefs

    This section would authorize the President to extend the 
term of an officer serving as the Chief of Staff of the Army, 
the Chief of Naval Operations, the Chief of Staff of the Air 
Force, or the Commandant of the Marine Corps for a period of up 
to two-years beyond the initial four-year appointment. In time 
of war or national emergency, the President would be able to 
extend the term of office for such additional periods as the 
President determines necessary. However, the section would 
limit the total period of an officer's term as a service chief 
to eight years under any circumstance. Under current law, the 
chief of a military service is appointed for a four-year term 
and may only be reappointed during wartime or national 
emergency for up to four additional years.

  Section 502--Repeal of Requirement that Deputy Chiefs and Assistant 
Chiefs of Naval Operations Be Selected from Officers in the Line of the 
                                  Navy

    This section would require that candidates for selection as 
deputy chiefs and assistant chiefs of naval operations be 
chosen from the officers of the Navy on active duty. Current 
law specifies that candidates for deputy chiefs and assistant 
chiefs of naval operations be chosen only from among officers 
in the line of the Navy on active duty.

Section 503--Increase in Age Limit for Deferral of Mandatory Retirement 
             for Up to 10 Senior General and Flag Officers

    This section would increase from 64 to 66 the mandatory 
retirement age for senior general and flag officers whom the 
President had previously retained on active duty beyond the 
statutory limits on either time in grade or age. Under current 
law, not more than ten deferments of the mandatory retirement 
of three- and four-star general and flag officers may be in 
effect at any one time.

    Section 504--Increased Flexibility for Voluntary Retirement for 
                           Military Officers

    This section would authorize the Secretary of Defense and 
the secretaries of the military departments greater flexibility 
in determining the grade in which active duty and reserve 
officers may be retired. Specifically, the section would:
          (1) Require officers serving in grades above colonel, 
        or captain in the Navy, to serve a minimum of one year 
        time-in-grade before being allowed to retire in that 
        grade;
          (2) Replace the requirement for the Secretary of 
        Defense to notify Congress that officers have performed 
        satisfactorily in grades above major general, or rear 
        admiral (upper half) in the Navy, before being allowed 
        to retire in those grades with an authority for the 
        secretary of the military department concerned to 
        approve retirement of officers in those grades with the 
        concurrence of the Secretary of Defense.

  Section 505--Repeal of Requirement that No More than 50 Percent of 
  Active Duty General and Flag Officers be in Grades Above Brigadier 
                 General and Rear Admiral (Lower Half)

    This section would repeal the limitation that no more than 
50 percent of general and flag officers in a military service 
on active duty can be in grades above one-star, that is above 
brigadier general and rear admiral (lower half). There is no 
explicit statutory limitation on the numbers of two-star 
general and flag officers on active duty, and this section 
would not change either the total numbers of general or flag 
officers allowed on active duty or the statutory limits on the 
numbers of general and flag officers serving on active duty in 
three- and four-star grades. Therefore, the effect of the 
proposed repeal would be to permit each of the military 
services some additional flexibility in managing the 
distribution of one- and two-star general and flag officers.

 Section 506--Revision to Terms for Assistants to the Chairman of the 
      Joint Chiefs of Staff for National Guard and Reserve Matters

    The section would authorize the assistants to the Chairman 
of the Joint Chiefs of Staff for national guard and reserve 
matters to serve an initial term of four years. Under current 
law, the initial term is two years.

  Section 507--Succession for Position of Chief, National Guard Bureau

    This section would establish a chain of succession when 
there is a vacancy in the office of the Chief of the National 
Guard Bureau, or in the event that the chief is unable to 
perform the duties of the office. In such cases, the most 
senior ranking officer of the Army National Guard or of the Air 
National Guard on duty with the National Guard Bureau would 
serve as acting chief.

 Section 508--Title of Vice Chief of the National Guard Bureau Changed 
      to Director of the Joint Staff of the National Guard Bureau

    This section would change the title of the Vice Chief of 
the National Guard Bureau to better reflect the duties of the 
position now that the staff of the National Guard Bureau has 
been reorganized as a joint organization.

Section 509--Two-Year Extension of Authority to Waive Requirement that 
Reserve Chiefs and National Guard Directors Have Significant Joint Duty 
                               Experience

    This section would extend for two years, until December 31, 
2006, the authority of the Secretary of Defense to waive the 
requirement that the chiefs of the reserves and the directors 
of the Army and Air National Guard must have significant joint 
duty experience to be eligible for appointment.
    The requirement for officers to have significant joint duty 
experience as a condition of service in these most senior of 
reserve component general and flag officer positions was 
established in the National Defense Authorization Act for 
Fiscal Year 2000 (Public Law 106-65). In recognition of the 
challenge that reserve component officers face in getting joint 
duty experience, the public law provided the Secretary 
temporary three-year authority to waive the requirement. That 
waiver authority was extended in 2000, with the expectation 
that the Department and the military services would make a 
concerted effort to develop a system for ensuring reserve 
officers obtained the requisite joint experience. The 
committee, therefore, was disappointed when the budget request 
for fiscal year 2005 sought to make permanent the Secretary's 
waiver authority.
    The committee believes that a concerted effort must be made 
to develop a system to provide significant joint duty 
experience to those officers who will be candidates for the 
senior military leadership positions of the reserve components. 
For that reason, this section would also require that the 
Secretary develop a plan to ensure that officers selected after 
December 31, 2006, to be the chiefs of the reserves and the 
directors of the Army and Air National Guard, have significant 
joint duty experience.

Section 510--Repeal of Distribution Requirements for Naval Reserve Flag 
                                Officers

    This section would repeal the prescribed distribution of 
the 48 flag officers authorized for the Naval Reserve, thereby 
permitting greater flexibility for the Department of the Navy 
to adapt its reserve flag officer inventory to meet current 
requirements. Current law mandates the allocation of these flag 
officers among the line, Medical Department Staff Corps, 
Chaplain Corps and Judge Advocate General's Corps.

           Subtitle B--Other Officer Personnel Policy Matters


 Section 511--Transition of the Active-Duty List Officer Force to All 
                             Regular Status

    This section would authorize the Secretary of Defense to 
commission all new officer accessions as regular officers and 
transition all officers on the active-duty list to regular 
status.

Section 512--Mandatory Retention on Active duty to Qualify for Retired 
                                  Pay

    This section would clarify that section 12686 of title 10, 
United States Code, does not require that reservists serving on 
active duty with over 18 years of reserve service be retained 
on active duty for the purpose of qualifying the member for 
reserve retirement.

Section 513--Distribution in Grade of Marine Corps Reserve Officers in 
           an Active Status in Grades Below Brigadier General

    This section would correct a technical discrepancy in the 
grade table for the Marine Corps Reserve that has 
inappropriately limited the number of officers authorized in 
each grade below brigadier general.

              Section 514--Tuition Assistance for Officers

    This section would authorize the secretaries of the 
military departments to waive for reserve component officers 
the two-year active duty service obligation required as a 
condition for receipt of tuition assistance while on active 
duty. This section would also repeal the limit on the amount of 
tuition assistance that the Secretary of the Army was 
authorized to pay officers of the selected reserve who are 
pursuing a baccalaureate degree. At present, the Secretary is 
limited to paying for such officers not more than 75 percent of 
the charges of an educational institution.

                 Subtitle C--Reserve Component Matters


  Section 521--Revision to Statutory Purpose of the Reserve Components

    This section would clarify that the purpose of the reserve 
components is to provide trained units and qualified persons 
not just as the result of involuntary mobilizations but 
whenever more units and persons are needed than are in the 
active components. The revision recommended by this section 
more accurately reflects recent and future employment of the 
reserve components.

Section 522--Improved Access to Reserve Component Members for Enhanced 
                                Training

    This section would authorize units and members of the 
reserve components to be involuntarily mobilized for the 
purposes of training. Current law prohibits mobilizations for 
training, reflecting a Cold War construct that assumed, in the 
face of predictable threats, that there would be an extended 
period available for training reserve units and individuals 
prior to deployment. The global war on terrorism has pointed 
out the need to repeal the prohibition in order to increase the 
readiness of the reserve component units, shorten time between 
mobilization and deployment and provide for a more orderly, 
predictable and effective mobilization process that reduces 
stress on individuals, families and employers. To that end, the 
section would authorize units and individuals to be ordered to 
active duty to conduct required training. However, the section 
would require that the time spent in such training be counted 
against the mobilization time limits that are established in 
law.

  Section 523--Status Under Disability Retirement System for Reserve 
Members Released from Active Duty Due to Inability to Perform within 30 
                      Days of Call to Active Duty

    This section would clarify that mobilized reserve members 
may be separated when they are identified within 30 days as 
being unable to serve the full period for which they were 
mobilized due to preexisting medical conditions that were not 
aggravated while on active duty. Such member would be 
considered as serving under an order to active duty for a 
period of 30 days or less.

   Section 524--Federal Civil Service Military Leave for Reserve and 
                  National Guard Civilian Technicians

    This section would eliminate the restriction on the use of 
military leave specified in section 6323 of title 5, United 
States Code, during a war or national emergency declared by the 
President and would authorize reserve component members who are 
federal employees to participate in a leave status in 
operations outside the United States.

  Section 525--Expanded Educational Assistance Authority for Officers 
      Commissioned Through ROTC Program at Military Junior College

    This section would allow commissioned officers who graduate 
from a military junior college to receive additional financial 
assistance to complete their baccalaureate degree requirements. 
Individuals who participate in this program would be attached 
to a Senior Reserve Officers' Training Corps unit in order to 
ensure that they maintain their military training, bearing and 
education as they complete their post-secondary education.

    Section 526--Effect of Appointment or Commission as Officer on 
 Eligibility for Selected Reserve Education Loan Repayment Program for 
                            Enlisted Members

    This section would authorize the Secretary of Defense to 
continue to repay educational loans for enlisted members in a 
reserve component after they are commissioned as officers if 
the members continue to serve the period specified in the 
original loan repayment agreement.

          Section 527--Number of Starbase Academies in a State

    This section would authorize the Secretary of Defense, 
based on criteria he would prescribe, to permit a state to have 
more than two Starbase academies.

 Section 528--Comptroller General Assessment of Integration of Active 
                   and Reserve Components of the Navy

    This section would require the Comptroller General to 
review the Navy's implementation plans for the integration of 
the service's active and reserve components. The Comptroller 
General shall submit a report of the results of that assessment 
to the Senate Committee on Armed Services and House Committee 
on Armed Services by March 31, 2005.

  Section 529--Operational Activities Conducted by the National Guard 
                      Under Authority of Title 32

    This section would authorize the Secretary of Defense to 
provide funds to the governor of a state to employ national 
guard units and personnel to conduct operational activities 
that theSecretary determines to be in the national interest. 
This section would also establish a process by which the governor of a 
state may request funding from the Secretary for the operational 
activities of that state's national guard. The committee makes these 
recommendations in order to provide the Secretary with clear authority 
to more effectively incorporate national guard units and personnel into 
the planning and implementation of homeland security and other 
operational missions.

 Section 530--Army Program for Assignment of Active Component Advisers 
                    to Units of the Selected Reserve

    This section would reduce from 5,000 to 3,500 the minimum 
number of Army active component advisers that are required to 
be assigned to support the training and readiness of selected 
reserve units of the Army. The committee understands that the 
Chief of Staff of the Army requested this reduction in order to 
provide active component officers and non- commissioned 
officers as cadre for the new brigade units of action that the 
Army is creating. The committee supports that initiative. 
However, the committee is concerned that such a reduction of 
active component support could have both short- and long-term 
negative effects on the training and readiness of combat and 
key support elements of the Army reserve components. The 
committee is also concerned that the Army has neither fully 
assessed those effects, nor developed a plan to address them. 
For that reason, this section would prohibit the Secretary of 
the Army from making any reductions in the numbers of active 
component advisors until the Secretary reports to the Senate 
Committee on Armed Services and the House Committee on Armed 
Services, by March 31, 2005, on the impact of the reduction and 
his plan to remediate any negative impact on training and 
readiness.

                  Subtitle D--Joint Officer Management


   Section 531--Strategic Plan to Link Joint Officer Development to 
          Overall Missions and Goals of Department Of Defense

    This section would require the Secretary of Defense, with 
the advice of the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, to 
develop a strategic plan linking future requirements for 
military personnel trained and educated in joint matters to the 
resources required to develop those persons, in terms of 
manpower, formal education and practical experience and other 
requirements. Additionally, the strategic plan would identify 
the method or methods the Secretary will use to fulfill those 
requirements.
    Over the past several years, the committee has received 
multiple proposals from the Department of Defense to change 
significant aspects of joint officer management and joint 
military professional education enacted as a result of the 
Report of the Panel on Military
    Education from the One Hundredth Congress. The committee 
has consistently rejected these proposals because they were not 
offered in a coherent, comprehensive context--a context that 
presented the Department's overall vision for joint management 
and education. The strategic plan required by this section 
would provide the framework within which to consider what, if 
any, future changes to joint officer management and joint 
professional military education, are required.
    The strategic plan would consist of two phases. Phase I 
would focus on what has been traditionally referred to as 
``joint officers.'' This section would require the Secretary to 
submit phase I of the strategic plan to the Senate Committee on 
Armed Services and the House Committee on Armed Services by 
January 1, 2006. However, the committee believes that the 
requirement for persons trained and educated in joint matters 
is not confined to just the active component officer ranks. 
Therefore, phase II would address the roles that reserve 
component officers, non-commissioned officers, and civilians 
play in future joint matters, identify the resources required 
to develop them, and clarify the methods used by the Department 
as they integrate and manage persons trained and educated in 
joint matters. The section would require the Secretary to 
submit a report of his proposal for phase II to the Senate 
Committee on Armed Services and the House Committee on Armed 
Services by January 15, 2007.

   Section 532--Joint Requirements for Promotion to Flag or General 
                             Officer Grade

    This section would extend from September 30, 2007, to 
September 30, 2008, the date after which an officer must be 
selected for the joint specialty before promotion to the grade 
of brigadier general or rear admiral (lower half). The 
committee is aware of the difficulties some services may have 
in meeting this requirement but believes with close management 
each service will be able to comply with the extended 
implementation date. Furthermore, the committee believes that 
secretaries of the military departments must be more proactive 
in properly managing officers early in their careers to ensure 
that they receive the opportunities for joint professional 
military education at points that align them properly for 
consideration for promotion, without the use of waivers, to 
grades that have a joint education or service requirement.
    This section would also eliminate the requirement that an 
officer serve in a joint assignment at least 180 days prior to 
the convening of a promotion board for appointment to the grade 
of brigadier general or rear admiral (lower half).

Section 533--Clarification of Tours of Duty Qualifying as a Joint Duty 
                               Assignment

    This section would modify the definition regarding the term 
``tour of duty'' to allow officers to continue accumulating 
joint credit if they serve consecutive joint duty assignments, 
even if those assignments are not within the same organization.

       Section 534--Reserve Joint Special Officer Qualifications

    This section would authorize the Secretary of Defense to 
award the joint specialty officer designation to reserve 
officers who have met the prescribed requirements for such 
designation. The section would also require that reserve 
officers be included in Department of Defense management 
policies, procedures and practices for joint specialty 
officers.
    This section would exclude reserve officers who have or 
have been nominated for the joint specialty from being counted 
for against the joint officer promotion policy objectives.

              Subtitle E--Professional Military Education


  Section 541--Improvement to Professional Military Education in the 
                         Department of Defense

    This section would establish a chapter in title 10, United 
States Code, that combines new and existing sections of law 
related to professional military education. This new title 
containseight sections, sections 2151 through 2158. Section 
2151 would define the terms ``joint professional military education,'' 
``intermediate level service schools,'' and ``senior level service 
schools''. Section 2152, 2153 and 2154 would modify slightly and codify 
the Statement of Congressional Policy related to professional military 
education contained in section 1123 of the National Defense 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Years 1990 and 1991 (P.L. 101-189; 103 
Stat. 1556). The committee believes these provisions have a permanence 
and continuing importance that warrant codification. Section 2155 would 
require that the secretaries of the military departments use a written 
examination as a portion of the evaluation criteria in selecting 
officers for full-time attendance at intermediate level service 
colleges. This section would also provide that an officer selected by 
his service to attend an intermediate level service college would be 
eligible for attendance at all intermediate level service colleges. It 
is not the committee's intent to standardize school selection criteria 
across the services but to encourage the introduction of intellectual 
rigor in that selection process. Selection criteria based solely on a 
junior officer's record of duty performance at the tactical level in a 
single service environment or simply as a random result of the service 
assignment process is not a sufficient basis to identify those officers 
who have the best potential to grasp the complex intellectual concepts 
of joint matters and to ultimately excel in a joint operational 
environment. Additionally, the committee believes that one of the 
fundamental pillars of joint professional military education is an 
officer's personal continuing education program when not assigned to a 
formal school environment. The committee believes that a written 
entrance examination requirement for matriculation at the intermediate 
level service schools would provide a focus for such a continuing 
education program so that officers will prepare themselves for further 
formal education, well in advance of the actual school selection 
process. Section 2156 would require that after September 30, 2009, an 
officer must have completed joint professional military education phase 
I before attending phase II. This section would also prescribe phase II 
curriculum. Additionally, it would prescribe student and faculty ratios 
when phase II is taught at a senior level service school. It is the 
committee's intent to preserve the unique character of each of the 
senior level service schools while providing a mix of services 
represented in the student bodies and faculty that enables the cross-
service acculturation that is such a key component of joint officer 
education. The committee understands that current Department of Defense 
policy sets the ratios of military department representation in the 
student bodies and faculty at the Joint Forces Staff College and the 
Colleges of the National Defense University at approximately 30 percent 
for each military department. The committee believes this ratio is 
appropriate at those institutions and should not change. Section 2157 
would require that the length of the principal course of instruction at 
each intermediate and senior level service school be not less than 10 
months, and provide the Secretary of Defense with a waiver for that 
requirement. The section would also require that the length of the 
principal course of instruction at the Joint Force Staff College, which 
is now required to be 12 weeks, can not be less than 10 weeks. Section 
2158 would require that the Secretary include in his annual report to 
Congress the number of officers who have received joint professional 
military education phase II, but who were not selected for promotion. 
This section would also require the Secretary to report the number of 
officer students and faculty assigned from each service to a joint 
professional military educational institution. Finally, this would make 
conforming adjustments in the existing law.

  Section 542--Ribbons to Recognize Completion of Joint Professional 
                           Military Education

    This section would authorize the Secretary of Defense to 
award a military decoration to persons who have successfully 
completed joint professional military education phase I and to 
subsequently award a device to affix to that ribbon when a 
person has successfully completed joint professional military 
education phase II. These awards would be retroactive for any 
person who has completed either phase I or phase II since the 
sequenced approach to joint professional military education was 
enacted in 1989.
    The committee considers joint professional military 
education to be a vital contributing aspect to the excellence 
the Department of Defense has historically demonstrated. This 
education becomes even more important as the nature of modern 
warfare becomes more complex. The committee believes that an 
officer becomes fully competent in joint matters when joint 
professional military education is appropriately combined with 
practical joint operational experience. Officers who complete 
certain routine operational assignments are awarded service 
ribbons to signify successful completion of that assignment. 
With the establishment of this decoration, the status of 
completion of joint professional military education would be 
elevated to a level on par with those operational assignments.

Section 543--Increase in Number of Private-Sector Civilians Who May Be 
        Enrolled for Instruction at National Defense University

    This section would increase the maximum number of eligible 
private sector employees who work in organizations relevant to 
national security to receive instruction at the National 
Defense University from 10 to 20.

 Section 544--Requirement for Completion of Phase I Joint Professional 
     Military Education before Promotion to Colonel or Navy Captain

    This section would require, with certain exceptions, that 
after September 30, 2007, officers on the active duty list 
complete joint professional military education phase I or phase 
II prior to being appointed to the grade of colonel or Navy 
captain.

            Subtitle F--Other Education and Training Matters


         Section 551--College First Delayed Enlistment Program

    This section would permanently authorize the College First 
demonstration project originally authorized for the Army in 
section 573 of the National Defense Authorization Act for 
Fiscal Year 2000 (Public Law 106-65) and would extend the 
authority to implement the program to all the secretaries of 
the military departments. Under the College First program, 
entry on active duty for new recruits would be delayed for up 
to 30 months to allow the recruits the opportunity to pursue 
higher education, vocational, or technical training courses. 
During the delayed entry period, the recruits would be paid a 
subsistence allowance and the secretaries would have the option 
to pay an additional stipend that may not exceed $225.

    Section 552--Standardization of Authority to Confer Degrees on 
  Graduates of Community College of the Air Force with Authority for 
                    Other Schools of Air University

    This section would shift the authority for conferring 
associate degrees on graduates of the Community College of the 
Air Force from the commander of the Air Education and 
TrainingCommand to the commander of Air University. Such a shift would 
ensure that only the commander of Air University is responsible for 
conferring all degrees, thus addressing a concern that arose during the 
accreditation of Air University programs.

Section 553--Change in Titles of Heads of the Naval Postgraduate School

    This section would change the title of the head of the 
Naval Postgraduate School from Superintendent of the Naval 
Postgraduate School to President of the Naval Postgraduate 
School. The section would also establish a new civilian 
position of Provost and Academic Dean, and revise the 
procedures to fill the position.

Section 554--Increase from Two Years to Three Years in Period for which 
             Educational Leave of Absence May Be Authorized

    This section would expand the authority for service members 
to take educational leave from two years to three years.

    Section 555--Correction to Disparate Treatment of Disabilities 
                  Sustained During Accession Training

    This section would provide the capability to effectively 
respond to injury and illness sustained during accession 
training by authorizing military academy cadets and midshipmen 
to be disability retired and Senior Reserve Officer Training 
Corps cadets and midshipmen to receive medical and dental care 
appropriate for the treatment of the injury, illness, or 
disease incurred until the disability cannot be materially 
improved.

       Section 556--Prayer at Military Service Academy Activities

    This section would authorize the superintendent of a 
service academy to establish a policy with respect to the 
offering of a voluntary, nondenominational prayer at an 
authorized activity of the academy.

 Section 557--Revision to Conditions on Service of Officers as Service 
                        Academy Superintendents

    This section would repeal the requirement that the 
superintendents of the military service academies retire upon 
completion of their assignments. The committee makes this 
recommendation to permit the secretaries of the military 
departments flexibility with regard to future utilization of 
talented senior officers. However, the committee is concerned 
that tenure of officers assigned as superintendents be of 
sufficient length to permit those officers to make significant 
contributions in the oversight and management of these premier 
educational institutions. Therefore, this section would require 
that an officer serve at least a three-year tour as 
superintendent, and that if the officer is reassigned before 
that period, then the secretary of the military department 
concerned would be required to notify the Senate Committee on 
Armed Services and the House Committee on Armed Services of the 
reasons for the curtailed assignment.

   Section 558--Codification of Prohibition on Imposition of Certain 
                 Charges and Fees at Service Academies

    This section would add to title 10 of the United States 
Code, a provision of the National Defense Authorization Act for 
Fiscal Year 1995 (Public Law 103-337). That provision 
prohibited the imposition of charges for tuition, room or board 
at the United States Military Academy, the United States Naval 
Academy, the United States Air Force Academy, the United States 
Coast Guard Academy, and the United States Merchant Marine 
Academy.

Section 559--Qualifications of the Dean of the Faculty of United States 
                           Air Force Academy

    This section would require that a person selected to be the 
dean of faculty at the Air Force Academy, who is not an officer 
on active duty, must be either a retired or former officer of 
the armed forces. Furthermore, the section would prohibit the 
appointment or assignment of a person to be the dean of faculty 
unless that person held the highest academic degree in that 
person's academic field.

     Subtitle G--Medals and Decorations and Special Promotions and 
                              Appointments


Section 561--Separate Military Campaign Medals to Recognize Service in 
   Operation Enduring Freedom and Service in Operation Iraqi Freedom

    This section would require the President to establish 
separate campaign medals to recognize the service of members 
during Operation Enduring Freedom and Operation Iraqi Freedom.

   Section 562--Eligibility of All Uniformed Services Personnel for 
                     National Defense Service Medal

    This section would require the President to authorize the 
award of the National Defense Service Medal to members of the 
uniformed services.

Section 563--Authority to Appoint Brigadier General Charles E. Yeager, 
United States Air Force (retired), to the Grade of Major General on the 
                              Retired List

    This section would authorize the President to appoint, by 
and with the advice and consent of the Senate, Brigadier 
General Charles E. Yeager to the grade of major general on the 
retired list of the Air Force.

Section 564--Posthumous Commission of William Mitchell in the Grade of 
                       Major General in the Army

    This section would authorize the President, by and with the 
advice and consent of the Senate, to issue a posthumous 
commission as major general, United States Army, in the name of 
the late William Mitchell, formerly a colonel, United States 
Army, who resigned his commission on February 1, 1925.

                  Subtitle H--Military Justice Matters


  Section 571--Review on How Sexual Offenses Are Covered by Uniformed 
                        Code of Military Justice

    This section would require the Secretary of Defense to 
provide a proposal for changes regarding sexual offenses in the 
Uniformed Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) and the rationale for 
the changes to the Senate Committee on Armed Services and the 
House Committee on Armed Services by March 1, 2005. Recent 
congressional and Department of Defense focus on the problem of 
sexual assault in the military services suggest that it is 
necessary to examine how sexual offenses are treated in the 
UCMJ, primarily Article 120. Congress strongly encourages the 
Department to closely align the statutory language of sexual 
assault law under the UCMJ with federal law under sections 2241 
through 2247 of title 18, United States Code.

  Section 572--Service Time Not Lost When Confined in Connection with 
              Trial if Confinement Excused as Unavoidable

    This section would require the military departments to 
waive lost time when a service member is acquitted or released 
without trial, or has his conviction set-aside on legal grounds 
(as distinguished from clemency) or reversed based upon appeal. 
Existing law does not give the military departments any 
discretion to consider a service member's confinement if the 
member is acquitted or if there is another resolution of the 
case favorable to the member qualifying for service credit. 
Existing law requires service members to make up time lost for 
any period of confinement by civilian or military authorities.

 Section 573--Clarification of Authority of Military Legal Assistance 
    Counsel to Provide Military Legal Assistance without Regard to 
                         Licensing Requirements

    This section would clarify section 1044 of title 10, United 
States Code, so that licensed Department of Defense military 
legal assistance officers would have the authority to practice 
law in connection with their official duties independent of 
state regulations for those states where they are unlicensed.

           Subtitle I--Administrative and Management Matters


   Section 581--Three-Year Extension of Limitation on Reductions of 
Personnel of Agencies Responsible for Review and Correction of Military 
                                Records

    This section would extend through September 30, 2008, the 
prohibition precluding the secretaries of the military 
departments from reducing the number of military and civilian 
personnel assigned to duty within the boards until 90 days 
after the secretary of the military department concerned 
submits a report that describes the proposed reduction, 
provides the rationale for the reduction, and specifies the 
number of personnel that will be assigned to the board after 
the reduction is complete.

 Section 582--Staffing and Funding for Defense Prisoner of War/Missing 
                            Personnel Office

    This section would establish specific permanent minimum 
levels of military and civil personnel assigned to the Defense 
Prisoner of War Missing Personnel Office (DPMO). It would also 
require, should the actual assigned strength drop below the 
minimum levels, that the Secretary of Defense report publicly 
to the Senate Committee on Armed Services and the House 
Committee on Armed Services his plan to restore the manning 
levels to at least the required minimums. The committee 
believes such action is necessary because the DPMO, which 
performs a critical range of missions for the nation and the 
missing personnel of past and future wars, has not had the full 
support of the Department of Defense with regard to the 
adequacy of DPMO manning or funding. For example, the September 
2001 committee report on H.R. 2586 (H. Rept. 107-194), noting 
that DPMO manning had been reduced by 40 percent since its 
creation, directed the Secretary to increase DPMO resources in 
the fiscal year 2003 budget request. When the Secretary did not 
heed that direction and the committee learned that the 
Department was considering a further personnel reduction of 15 
percent, committee action in the Bob Stump National Defense 
Authorization Act of Fiscal Year 2003 (Public Law 107-314) led 
to the enactment of a prohibition any reduction of DPMO funding 
and personnel below the levels requested in the 2003 budget. 
Notwithstanding this statutory prohibition, the department's 
fiscal year 2005 budget request for DPMO proposed a 59 percent 
reduction in military spaces (from 46 to 19) and the repeal of 
the minimum funding requirement. The committee urges the 
Secretary to end any further efforts to reduce manning and 
resources in DPMO and to commit the department to ensuring that 
the DPMO is fully able to carry out the entire range of 
missions assigned to it.

Section 583--Permanent ID Cards for Retiree Dependents Age 70 and Older

    This section would require the service secretaries 
concerned to issue permanent identification cards to dependents 
of military retirees and survivors of military retirees 
eligible for benefits for periods after the dependent or 
survivor attains age 70.

    Section 584--Authority to Provide Civilian Clothing to Members 
            Traveling in Connection with Medical Evacuation

    This section would authorize the secretaries of the 
military departments to furnish members who have been medically 
evacuated civilian clothing at a cost not exceed $250 or to 
reimburse the member for the purchase of civilian clothing in 
an amount not to exceed $250.

  Section 585--Authority to Accept Donation of Frequent Flyer Miles, 
  Credits, and Tickets to Facilitate Rest and Recuperation Travel of 
        Deployed Members of the Armed Forces and Their Families

    This section would authorize the Secretary of Defense to 
accept the donation of frequent flyer miles, credits, and 
tickets for the purpose of facilitating the travel of members 
of the armed forces who are deployed away from their permanent 
duty station and are granted, during such deployment, rest and 
recuperation leave and certain other forms of leave and the 
travel of family members to be reunited with such a member.

 Section 586--Limitation on Amendment or Cancellation of Department of 
      Defense Directive Relating to Reasonable Access to Military 
       Installations for Certain Personal Commercial Solicitation

    This section would prohibit the Secretary of Defense from 
canceling or amending Department of Defense (DOD) directive 
1344.7, Personal Commercial Solicitation on DOD Installations, 
for a period of one year after the United States General 
Accounting Office reports to Congress on the findings of an 
ongoing review of the financial allotment system and the 
treatment of insurance agents by military finance offices and 
local managers and commanders on DOD installations.

 Section 587--Annual Identification of Reasons for Discharges from the 
              Armed Services During Preceding Fiscal Years

    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 detailed information 
regarding of the numbers of persons discharged from each of the 
military services in the preceding fiscal year. Information 
required to be included in the report would include the numbers 
and types of discharges, as well as the identification of the 
occupational specialties and reenlistment eligibility of 
discharged service members.

   Section 588--Authority for Federal Recognition of National Guard 
   Commissioned Officers Appointed from Former Coast Guard Personnel

    This section would make current and former officers and 
enlisted members of the Coast Guard, as well graduates of the 
United States Coast Guard Academy, eligible for federal 
recognition after becoming commissioned officers of the 
national guard.

      Section 589--Study of Blended Wing Concept for the Air Force

    This section would required the Secretary of the Air Force 
to submit a report on matters related to that service's current 
implementation of and future plans for blended wings to the 
Senate Committee on Armed Services and the House Committee on 
Armed Services by March 1, 2005. Blended wings are operational 
units whose membership is comprised of personnel from more than 
one component--active, national guard, or reserve. The report 
would also require the Secretary to provide the criteria used 
to determine what units become blended units.

    Section 590--Continuation of Impact Aid Assistance on Behalf of 
    Dependents of Certain Members Despite Change in Status of Member

    This section would temporarily adjust the process for 
computing the amount of funding provided by Department of 
Education to certain local educational agencies heavily 
impacted by dependents of military personnel. The adjustment, 
limited to school year 2004-2005, would require that certain 
children continue be counted as a child enrolled in school when 
computing the average daily attendance, which is a key 
component of the amount of aid the school might receive. Such 
children include those who attend the school but who no longer 
live on a military base because both parents are deployed, or 
are children who temporarily reside in military base housing 
following the death on active duty of a military parent.

                       Subtitle J--Other Matters


 Section 591--Employment Preferences for Spouses of Certain Department 
     of Defense Civilian Employees Subject to Relocation Agreements

    This section would expand the employment preference for 
spouses of Department of Defense (DOD) civilian employees who 
have been assigned under a mandatory mobility agreement or 
similar mandatory mobility program. The employment preference 
would include DOD appropriated and nonappropriated fund 
civilian positions. This authority would place spouses of 
civilian employees in an equivalent position to spouses of 
military members who already receive employment preferences.

    Section 592--Repeal of Requirement to Conduct Electronic Voting 
 Demonstration Project for the Federal Election to be Held in November 
                                  2004

    This section would repeal the requirement in section 1604 
of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2002 
(Public Law 107-107) for the Secretary of Defense to conduct a 
demonstration project to permit absentee uniformed service 
voters to cast their ballots through an electronic voting 
system. The committee regrets that the Deputy Secretary of 
Defense believed he had no option but to terminate the 
electronic voting demonstration project, but the committee 
understands that the decision was necessary to avoid any risk 
that the demonstration project would threaten the integrity of 
the election process.

 Section 593--Examination of Sexual Assault in the Armed Forces by the 
    Defense Task Force Established to Examine Sexual Harassment and 
               Violence at the Military Service Academies

    This section would require the Secretary of Defense to 
expand the mission of the Task Force on Sexual Harassment and 
Violence at the Military Service Academies that was established 
in the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2004 
(Public Law 108-136). Under the name of the Defense Task Force 
on Sexual Assault in the Military Services, the task force 
would examine matters related to sexual assault in the 
military. This section would require that the task force report 
findings and recommendations to the Secretary of Defense, and 
the secretaries of the military departments within 12 months of 
the initial meeting of the task force. Within 90 days of 
receiving the task force report, the Secretary of Defense would 
be required to provide the report, together with his evaluation 
of the report, to the Senate Committee on Armed Services and 
the House Committee on Armed Services. At the same time, the 
Secretary of Defense would also be required to provide to those 
committees an assessment of the effectiveness of the corrective 
actions being taken by the Department of Defense and military 
services as a result of various investigations and reviews into 
matters involving sexual assault.

Section 594--Renewal of Pilot Program for Treating GED and Home School 
   Diploma Recipients as High School Graduates for Determinations of 
                       Eligibility for Enlistment

    This section would reestablish the pilot program originally 
authorized by section 571 of the Strom Thurmond National 
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1999 (Public Law 105-
261). The program would permit participants in a National Guard 
Youth Challenge Program who receive a general education 
development certificate and those who complete their highschool 
requirements through a home schooling program to enlist in the armed 
forces as if they had received a high school diploma.

  Section 595--Assistance to Local Educational Agencies that Benefit 
  Dependents of Members of the Armed Forces and Department of Defense 
                           Civilian Employees

    This section would provide $50.0 million for assistance to 
local educational agencies. The committee makes this 
recommendation in connection with it continuing strong support 
of the need to help local school districts with significant 
concentrations of military students.

Section 596--Senior Reserve Officer Training Corps and Recruiter Access 
                  at Institutions of Higher Education

    This section would require that military recruiters be 
given access to campuses and students at institutions of higher 
education that is at least equal in quality and scope to the 
access provided to any other employer. The section would also 
require the Secretary of Defense to obtain an annual 
verification from colleges and universities who already support 
the Reserve Officer Training Corps (ROTC) program that they 
will continue to do so in the upcoming academic year. The 
section would also add two additional defense-related funding 
sources, the Central Intelligence Agency and the National 
Nuclear Security Administration of the Department of Energy, 
and would restore the funds of the Department of Transportation 
to the list of covered funds that potentially could be 
terminated if an institution is determined to prevent recruiter 
access or maintains anti-ROTC policies.

           Section 597--Reports on Transformation Milestones

    This section would require the Secretary of Defense to 
provide a number of reports to the Senate Committee on Armed 
Services and the House Committee on Armed Services on different 
aspects of transformational efforts underway in the Department. 
One report would provide information on the efforts to convert 
military to civilian positions, and a series of annual reports 
in fiscal years 2005 through 2007 would provide information on 
the conversion of military positions to other higher priority 
military positions. The section would also require the 
Secretary of Defense to examine the feasibility of 
implementing: (1) a system to embed within the military on a 
temporary basis persons with civilian skills that are of high 
value to the military, and (2) a personnel system that expands 
the capability of the armed forces to rapidly access, from 
other than the reserve components, civilian volunteers with 
skills needed by the armed forces. Finally, the section would 
also require the Secretary of the Army to report annually on 
the status of efforts to transform the Army from a division-
oriented system to a brigade oriented one.

          TITLE VI--COMPENSATIONS AND OTHER PERSONNEL BENEFITS

                                OVERVIEW

    The committee continues to support the strong and flexible 
compensation and benefit programs needed to recruit and retain 
a quality force in a wartime environment. Accordingly, the 
committee recommends authorization of an enhanced across-the-
board pay raise of 3.5 percent, restructured compensation 
programs for reserve forces to ensure equity with active duty 
members, and continued emphasis on pay and allowances for the 
warfighters.
    The committee remains committed to protecting military 
exchange and commissary benefits. Accordingly, the committee 
would include a series of provisions to define and expand the 
commissary benefit and protect military communities from 
unnecessary store closures.

                       ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST


                  Combat-Related Special Compensation

    The committee continues to receive complaints from combat-
disabled retirees and the organizations representing them that 
the processing time for Combat-Related Special Compensation 
applications is excessive. The committee is aware that the 
expanded criteria enacted in the National Defense Authorization 
Act for Fiscal Year 2004 (Public Law 108-136) are now 
generating thousands of additional applicants that will 
increase demands on the processing systems.
    The committee encourages the Secretary of Defense to 
examine the processing systems used by the military departments 
and consider methods for expediting the time required to review 
applications. The committee suggests that the Secretary 
consider consolidating the organizations currently evaluating 
applications into a more efficient central processing 
organization with increased personnel and fiscal resources.

              Commissary Funding After Closure of a Store

    The committee remains committed to preserving the 
commissary benefit for military members and their families and 
improving services whenever possible. Accordingly, the 
committee urges the Secretary of Defense to ensure that funding 
made available as a result of the closure of a commissary, 
whether closed as a result of a base realignment or closure 
action or other cause, be reallocated to the Defense Commissary 
Agency to support improved commissary operations at other 
locations.

                Consolidation of the Military Exchanges

    The committee remains concerned that the ongoing effort to 
evaluate the utility of consolidating the military exchanges is 
ill-advised and, if not managed carefully, will cause an 
erosion of the exchange benefit. The committee considers the 
military exchanges an important quality of life benefit that is 
pivotal to the welfare of military communities around the 
world. The committee understands that the cost of consolidation 
will likely exceed $300.0 million and that prior consolidation 
studies have concluded that such costs present too great a risk 
to the dividend paid by the exchanges to morale, welfare and 
recreation programs.
    Accordingly, the committee insists that any proposal to 
consolidate military exchanges include a strong business case 
that resolves all concerns about the fiscal implications of 
consolidation. The committee intends to reject any proposal 
that does not include a strong business case.
    The committee is also concerned about reports that the 
perspectives of all the stakeholders are not being fully 
considered during the evaluation process. The committee 
wouldview the failure of the Unified Exchange Task Force to consider 
the views and concerns of all participants as a major flaw that will 
taint any proposal.

 Homestead Air Reserve Base, Florida, Combined Commissary and Exchange 
                                 Store

    The committee is concerned that the Secretary of Defense 
continues to consider the closure of the combined commissary 
and exchange store at Homestead Air Reserve Base (ARB), 
Florida. The committee believes that closing the store would be 
a significant loss to the service members, retirees, and their 
families that reside in the Homestead ARB military community 
and throughout southern Florida. The committee is aware that 
there are force structure changes being considered for 
Homestead ARB that would significantly change the patron 
population that would use the store. The committee strongly 
encourages the Secretary to delay the decision to close the 
store until such time as any potential increase in the military 
population at Homestead ARB can be confirmed and measured. 
Assuming that current force projections are fulfilled, the 
committee also recommends that the Secretary consider opening a 
full service commissary at Homestead ARB as soon as the active 
duty population at the base increases beyond the minimum 
standard required under Department of Defense policy.

                         LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS


                     Subtitle A--Pay and Allowances


        Section 601--Increase in Basic Pay for Fiscal Year 2005

    This section would increase basic pay for members of the 
armed forces by 3.5 percent.
    This raise would continue to fulfill Congress' commitment 
to enhanced pay raises for the armed forces and would reduce 
the pay gap between military and private sector pay increases 
from 5.5 percent to 5.1 percent.

Section 602--Authority to Provide Family Separation Basic Allowance for 
                                Housing

    The section would authorize the service secretary concerned 
the discretion to decline to pay family separation housing 
allowances when the member's circumstances do not justify such 
payments.

 Section 603--Geographic Basis for Basic Allowance for Housing during 
    Short Changes of Station for Professional Military Education or 
                                Training

    This section would authorize service members who attend 
professional military education or training lasting 12 months 
or less to elect to leave their families at their previous duty 
station and receive basic allowance for housing based on the 
area where their dependents reside.

Section 604---Immediate Lump-Sum Reimbursement for Unusual Nonrecurring 
 Expenses Incurred by Members Serving Outside Continental United States

    This section would authorize the service secretary 
concerned to pay service members serving outside the 
continental United States for certain unusual nonrecurring 
expenses.

  Section 605--Income Replacement Payments for Reserves Experiencing 
       Extended and Frequent Mobilization for Active Duty Service

    This section would require the Secretary of Defense to pay 
involuntarily mobilized reserve members on a monthly basis the 
amount necessary to replace the income differential between 
their regular military compensation (RMC) plus any special or 
incentive pays and allowances paid to the member on a monthly 
basis and the average monthly income received by the member 
during the twelve months preceding the month during which the 
member was mobilized. This section would define the income 
differential as the amount by which the member's average 
monthly income prior to mobilization exceeds the member's RMC 
plus any special or incentive pays and allowances paid to the 
member on a monthly basis. Reserve members with private sector 
income that exceeds their active duty income would be eligible 
for the income replacement payment for any full month following 
the date that the member completes 12 continuous months of 
service on active duty or 18 months on active duty during the 
previous 60 months, or for any month during a mobilization that 
occurs within 6 months of the member's last active duty tour. 
Payments would be limited to a minimum of $50 each month and a 
maximum of $3,000 each month.

Section 606--Authority for Certain Members Deployed in Combat Zones to 
           Receive Limited Advances on Their Future Base Pay

    This section would authorize the secretary concerned to pay 
service members assigned to locations where they would receive 
imminent danger pay for 12 or more months up to 3 months of 
basic pay in advance upon the request of the member.

           Subtitle B--Bonuses and Special and Incentive Pays


  Section 611--One-Year Extension of Bonus and Special Pay Authorities

    This section would extend the authority for the following 
bonus and special pay authorities to December 31, 2005:
          (1) Nurse officer candidate accession program;
          (2) Aviation officer retention bonus;
          (3) Accession bonus for registered nurses;
          (4) Incentive special pay for nurse anesthetists;
          (5) Accession bonus for dental officers;
          (6) Accession bonus for pharmacy officers;
          (7) Reenlistment bonus for active and reserve 
        members;
          (8) Enlistment bonus for active and reserve members;
          (9) Special pay for nuclear-qualified officers 
        extending the period of active service;
          (10) Nuclear career accession bonus;
          (11) Nuclear career annual incentive bonus;
          (12) Retention bonus for members with critical skills 
        or other criteria; and
          (13) Accession or affiliation bonus for new officers 
        in critical skills.
    The provision would also extend the authority for repayment 
of educational loans for certain health professionals who serve 
in the selected reserve until January 1, 2006.

   Section 612--Reduction in Required Service Commitment to Receive 
                 Accession Bonus for Registered Nurses

    This section would reduce the service commitment required 
for the nurse accession bonus from four to three years of 
service.

 Section 613--Increase in Maximum Monthly Rate Authorized for Hardship 
                                Duty Pay

    This section would increase the maximum amount of hardship 
duty pay payable from $300 to $750 per month. The committee 
believes this increase provides the Secretary of Defense needed 
flexibility to ensure that service members receive appropriate 
compensation regardless of where they are required to serve 
during the global war on terrorism.

Section 614--Termination of Assignment Incentive Pay for Members Placed 
                           on Terminal Leave

    This section would require termination of assignment 
incentive pay when the member is placed on terminal leave and 
will not be returning to the assignment location.

    Section 615--Consolidation of Reenlistment and Enlistment Bonus 
             Authorities for Regular and Reserve Components

    This section would allow reserve component members to be 
paid enlistment and reenlistment bonuses using the same 
authority used to pay active duty members. The provision would 
also extend eligibility for the reenlistment bonus through 17 
years of service and grant the flexibility to use the 
reenlistment bonus during war and national emergency to address 
unit specific retention problems without regard to critical 
skill eligibility requirements. The committee intends that this 
authority be used to pay a bonus to former members of the armed 
forces to reenlist for service in a reserve component.

    Section 616--Revision of Authority to Provide Foreign Language 
                            Proficiency Pay

    This section would authorize the service secretary 
concerned to pay an annual bonus of up to $12,000 to members of 
the uniformed services who maintain proficiency in a foreign 
language.

  Section 617--Eligibility of Reserve Component Members for Critical 
   Skills Retention Bonus and Expansion of Authority to Provide Bonus

    This section would allow reserve component members to be 
paid retention bonuses using the same authority used to pay 
active duty members. The provision would also clarify that 
enlisted personnel on indefinite enlistments are eligible to 
receive bonuses and that bonuses may be paid based on criteria 
other than service in a critical skill as determined by the 
Secretary of Defense. The committee intends that this authority 
be used to pay bonuses, if required, to service members who 
agree to serve in an active status in any category of the ready 
reserve, affiliate with reserve component units, accept 
assignments to high priority reserve units, and continue to 
serve in critically short wartime health specialties.

    Section 618--Eligibility of New Reserve Component Officers for 
     Accession or Affiliation Bonus for Officers in Critical Skills

    This section would allow reserve component officers to be 
paid an accession or affiliation bonus using the same authority 
used to pay active duty officers.

  Section 619-Eligibility of Reserve Component Members for Incentive 
    Bonus for Conversion to Military Occupational Specialty to Ease 
                           Personnel Shortage

    This section would allow reserve component members to be 
paid bonuses for converting to critical occupational 
specialties using the same authority used to pay active duty 
members.

Section 620--Availability of Hazardous Duty Incentive Pay for Military 
                              Firefighters

    This section would establish a new hazardous duty incentive 
pay of $150 per month for members of the uniformed services who 
regularly perform duty as a member of a firefighting crew.

            Subtitle C--Travel and Transportation Allowances


   Section 631--Expansion of Travel and Transportation Allowances to 
Assist Survivors of a Deceased Member to Attend Burial Ceremony of the 
                                 Member

    This section would clarify that family members are 
authorized to travel at government expense to the burial site 
of a member who dies while on active duty or inactive duty and 
that the member's parents are always eligible to travel at 
government expense to attend the burial ceremony.

 Section 632--Transportation of Family Members Incident to the Serious 
         Illness or Injury of Members of the Uniformed Services

    This section would expand the number and categories of 
family members and other people that would be entitled to 
transportation at government expense and would authorize such 
persons to receive a per diem or be reimbursed for travel 
expenses.

    Section 633--Reimbursement of Members for Certain Lodging Costs 
          Incurred in Connection with Student Dependent Travel

    This section would authorize the service secretary 
concerned to reimburse a service member for lodging costs 
incurred by a dependent child traveling between the child's 
school and the member's overseas duty station when the lodging 
expenses are incurred for reasons beyond the control of the 
dependent child.

                     Subtitle D--Survivors Benefits


 Section 641--Computation of Benefits Under Survivor Benefit Plan for 
                     Surviving Spouses Over Age 62

    This section would eliminate the social security offset 
under the Survivor Benefit Plan (SBP) and increase the 
annuities paid to survivors of military retirees who are 62 or 
older from 35 percent of retired pay to the percentages 
indicated for the following fiscal years:
          (1) For months after September 2005 and before April 
        2006, 40 percent;
          (2) For months after March 2006 and before April 
        2007, 45 percent;
          (3) For months after March 2007 and before April 
        2008, 50 percent; and
          (4) For months after March 2008, 55 percent.
    This section would also make corresponding adjustments to 
the SBP supplemental annuity program and would require SBP 
annuities to be recalculated during October 2005, April 2006, 
April 2007, and April 2008 to ensure that beneficiaries receive 
the appropriate amount of annuity.

     Section 642--Open Enrollment Period for Survivor Benefit Plan 
                       Commencing October 1, 2005

    This section would authorize an open season for retired 
members to participate in the Survivor Benefit Plan (SBP) or 
increase the level of their participation if they were 
previously participating below the maximum allowed level. The 
open season would begin October 1, 2005 and continue for two 
years.

 Section 643--Source of Funds for Survivor Benefit Plan Annuities for 
            Department of Defense Beneficiaries Over Age 62

    This section would clarify that the payments into the 
Department of Defense Military Retirement Fund in support of 
the changes made in section 642 would be calculated by the 
Secretary of Defense and paid by the Secretary of the Treasury.

    Subtitle E--Commissary and Nonappropriated Fund Instrumentality 
                                Benefits


Section 651--Consolidation and Reorganization of Legislative Provisions 
  Regarding Defense Commissary System and Exchanges and other Morale, 
                  Welfare, and Recreational Activities

    This section would consolidate a wide range of sections 
from title 10, United States Code and other laws concerning 
commissaries, exchanges, and other morale, welfare, and 
recreation activities. The provision would also:
          (1) Define the commissary benefit and require the 
        Secretary of Defense to operate a commissary system;
          (2) Specify the criteria for establishment of 
        commissaries, determination of the size of 
        commissaries, and the closure of commissaries, to 
        include direction to consider the welfare of reserve 
        patrons in the same manner as active duty patrons are 
        considered when assessing the need to close a 
        commissary;
          (3) Require the Secretary to submit to Congress 
        written notice of the reasons supporting the closure of 
        a commissary, to include the impact of the proposed 
        closure on the quality of life of the patrons and the 
        welfare of the military community, and wait 90 days 
        before taking action to close the store;
          (4) Clarify the categories of the merchandize that 
        shall be sold in commissaries, to include the addition 
        of telephone cards, greeting cards, and film and one-
        time use cameras and a list of general merchandise 
        items that shall continue to be sold in commissaries on 
        a limited basis unless space or other considerations 
        prevent the sale of the items;
          (5) Establish a moratorium on studies to compare the 
        cost effectiveness of commissary operations employing 
        federal civilian employees and such operations 
        employing private sector employees through December 31, 
        2009; and
          (6) Specify that the priority in selecting Commissary 
        Operating Board members should be given to people with 
        skills and experience useful to the operating of 
        commissaries and that the board chairman shall be a 
        career military officer or career member of the Senior 
        Executive Service.

   Section 652--Consistent State Treatment of Department of Defense 
              Nonappropriated Fund Health Benefits Program

    This section would clarify that the Department of Defense 
Nonappropriated Fund Health Benefit Program is a federal health 
benefit program not subject to state, local, and territorial or 
other laws taxes, and health plan mandates. The provision would 
provide the same status to this single, uniform program that 
had existed previously for the separate programs that had been 
operated by the military departments prior to consolidation.

    Section 653--Cooperation and Assistance for Qualified Scouting 
  Organizations Serving Dependents of Members of the Armed Forces and 
                      Civilian Employees Overseas

    This section would require that professional staff 
supporting both the Boy Scouts of America and the Girl Scouts 
of the United States of America in overseas areas be made 
nonappropriated fund employees of the United States and would 
clarify that appropriated funds may be used to pay the costs of 
the employees. The committee believes that this action is 
required to confirm the status of scouting professionals in 
overseas areas and resolve any uncertainty regarding their 
treatment and access to support services in foreign countries.

                       Subtitle F--Other Matters


   Section 661--Repeal of Requirement that Members Entitled to Basic 
  Allowance for Subsistence Pay Subsistence Charges while Hospitalized

    This section would repeal the requirement for officers and 
certain enlisted members to pay subsistence charges when they 
are hospitalized.

Section 662--Clarification of Education Loans Qualifying for Education 
    Loan Repayment Program for Reserve Component Health Professions 
                                Officers

    This section would clarify that college loans involving 
both a basic professional qualifying degree and graduate 
education would qualify for repayment under section 16302 of 
title 10, United States Code.

  Section 663--Survey and Analysis of Effect of Extended and Frequent 
 Mobilization of Reservists for Active Duty Service on Reservist Income

    This section would require the Secretary of Defense to 
conduct a detailed study of the loss of income by mobilized 
reservists who have served on active duty in support of a 
contingency operation following September 11, 2001. The 
provision would require the Secretary to survey a minimum of 50 
percent of such reservists, collect demographic data on the 
surveyed members, identify members in critical skills, identify 
members who believe that replacing lost income would affect 
their retention decision, identify members who experience 
reduced income levels while on active duty, determine the 
amount of lost income in each case, and analyze the data. The 
provision would require the Secretary to report his findings 
and recommendations to address the problem of reduced income 
for mobilized reservists to Congress and the Comptroller 
General by January 31, 2006. The provision would require the 
Comptroller General to review the report of the Secretary and 
report his findings to Congress by March 31, 2006.
    The committee believes that accurate information regarding 
the loss of income by mobilized reservists is an important 
prerequisite to establishing a lasting solution to the problem. 
The committee is particularly interested in the data as it 
relates to military occupational specialty because that 
analysis is expected to reveal important insight regarding high 
demand skills that would benefit from specific financial 
incentives and force balancing initiatives.

                     TITLE VII--HEALTHCARE MATTERS

                                OVERVIEW

    The committee continues to be concerned about growing 
stress on the Defense Health Program which partly results from 
the strain faced by the civilian health care systems in the 
nation. In the face of the growing cost of health care in 
general, the military health system must provide for medical 
readiness and force health protection for our men and women in 
uniform and ensure health care services to all other 
beneficiaries. As the nation fights the global war on 
terrorism, the Department of Defense will transition from 
complex existing TRICARE contracts to challenging new and very 
different TRICARE contracts. No other healthcare system has 
ever faced a similar experience. In light of the many 
challenges faced by the military health system, the committee 
continues to believe that the Defense Health Program must be 
fully funded.
    The committee remains strongly committed to ensuring that 
the force health protection and the medical readiness of our 
service members have the highest priority. Accordingly, the 
committee recommends legislation to ensure the deployability of 
active and reserve component service members and their 
protection from health threats during military operations. In 
addition, several provisions would assist family members of 
activated reservists to transition in and out of the military 
health system.
    Finally, the committee is steadfast in its view that the 
transition to the new TRICARE contracts must not disrupt 
beneficiary health care, and that it optimizes military 
treatment facilities while preserving access to high quality 
health care. The committee is pleased by the TRICARE 
transformation efforts and spirit of cooperation by the various 
military and private sector health care entities. However, the 
committee remains concerned that some of the contracts carved 
out from the major managed care support contracts, such as 
those for patient appointment services, nurse triage and health 
information line, and resource sharing, may leave the 
transition process at risk for disruption of health care 
delivery and increased beneficiary dissatisfaction. The 
committee expects to be kept informed by the Department of 
Defense and the military services on the ongoing efforts to 
develop and implement the carved out contracts.

                       ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST


                  Collection of Perinatal Information

    The committee strongly supports the goal of the TRICARE 
Family-Centered Care program, which the Department of Defense 
established in August 2003, to improve and enhance family-
friendly care in the military health system. One aspect of the 
Family-Centered Care program was the importance of providing 
high quality perinatal care to pregnant service members and 
dependents. In order to ensure high quality care the committee 
supports the use of the National Perinatal Information Center 
that specializes in the collection of obstetric and neonatal 
data necessary to determine quality measures. The committee 
urges the Department to continue its efforts to measure quality 
perinatal care so that pregnant service members and dependents 
continue to receive high quality perinatal care in the military 
health care system.

  Coordination of TRICARE and Medicare Benefits and Provider Payments

    Recent changes to the Medicare program enacted by Congress 
may have created administrative and benefit disparities between 
Medicare and TRICARE for Medicare-eligible military 
beneficiaries. Such disparities cause complex problems for 
beneficiaries and may result in complications and 
inconsistencies that may deter health care providers from 
participation and acceptance of military beneficiaries. They 
also pose added costs to TRICARE contractors as a result of 
having to administer multiple sets of adjudication rules and 
respond to increased complaints and appeals from providers and 
beneficiaries. The committee believes that elimination of such 
disparities wherever possible is important to promoting 
provider participation and improving access to a consistent 
benefit for TRICARE beneficiaries.
    The committee directs the Secretary of Defense to conduct a 
study to identify disparities between benefits and 
administration methodologies within the Medicare and TRICARE 
programs. The study should also include an assessment of the 
impact of such disparities on program effectiveness, provider 
participation, and beneficiary understanding; a summary of 
actions taken to reduce those disparities; identification of 
the rationale for any differences that the Secretary deems 
necessary; and recommendations for legislative or other action 
needed to reduce such disparities. The committee directs the 
Secretary to submit a report by March 31, 2005, to the Senate 
Committee on Armed Services and the House Committee on Armed 
Services.

       Department of Defense Chemical and Biological Test Review

    The Bob Stump National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal 
Year 2003 (Public Law 107-314) required the Comptroller General 
to evaluate the efforts of the Secretary of Defense to disclose 
to the Department of Veterans Affairs all Department of Defense 
(DOD) records and information on Project 112. Such disclosure 
was to facilitate the provision of benefits by the Secretary of 
Veterans Affairs to members of the armed forces who 
participated in that project. The Comptroller General's review 
of DOD efforts recommends that the Department:
          (1) Determine the feasibility of addressing 
        unresolved issues associated with Project 112, and the 
        appropriateness of and responsibility for reporting new 
        information;
          (2) Finalize and implement a plan for identifying DOD 
        projects and tests conducted outside Project 112;
          (3) Designate a single point of contact for providing 
        information related to tests and potential exposures in 
        and outside Project 112.
    The committee directs the Secretary of Defense to implement 
these recommendations and submit a report on the status of the 
implementation by March 1, 2005, to the Senate Committee on 
Armed Services and the House Committee on Armed Services.

              Landstuhl Regional Medical Center Alteration

    The committee notes that Landstuhl Regional Medical Center 
(LRMC) serves as the primary medical treatment center for 
casualties of United States operations within Europe, Southwest 
Asia and the Middle East. With the increased need to 
accommodate casualties from the global war on terrorism, LRMC 
requires climate control in certain patient facilities. The 
committee recommends $10.0 million for the purpose of providing 
an air conditioning system in patient care areas at LRMC.

Military-Civilian Education Programs Related to Sexual Health Decision-
                                 Making

    The committee is aware of collaborative military-civilian 
education programs related to sexual health decision-making 
that demonstrates benefits through the reduction of unintended 
pregnancies and sexually transmitted infections among military 
personnel. The committee's support for such collaborative 
programs was demonstrated in the statement of managers 
accompanying the conference report on H.R. 4546 (H. Rept. 107-
772), which directed the Secretary of Defense to examine such 
programs and consider their use by the services. A military-
civilian demonstration project was set up in Colorado Springs, 
Colorado, as a collaborative effort to encourage sexual 
integrity and reduce sexually transmitted infections and 
unplanned pregnancies in the military. As a continued measure 
of support for those efforts and to further encourage the 
Secretary to examine the progress of the military-civilian 
demonstration project, the committee recommends $0.2 million 
for the purposes of continuing the demonstration project and to 
encourage program expansion of sexual integrity training to 
other military installations.

           Nurse Triage and Health Information Line Services

    The committee is deeply committed to ensuring a smooth 
transition from the current TRICARE contracts to the new 
TRICARE contracts. In particular, the committee is concerned 
that there are no transition plans for nurse triage and health 
care information line services that were eliminated from the 
new TRICARE contracts. The committee believes that the 
elimination of this service from the regional contracts may 
have a significant impact on beneficiary access to quality 
health care services. While the elimination of the nurse triage 
and health information line from the managed care support 
contracts may be prudent, the committee questions whether a 
return to an ad hoc, localized approach to providing triage and 
delivering health information will degrade uniformity and 
beneficiary satisfaction, and reduce the economies of scale and 
efficiencies across the military health system. The committee 
therefore directs the Secretary of Defense to provide the 
Senate Committee on Armed Services and the House Committee on 
Armed Services with a comprehensive plan for ensuring a smooth 
transition for nurse triage and health information line 
services by December 31, 2004. The plan shall include a 
detailed explanation of the Department of Defense proposal to 
fulfill nurse triage and health information line services, 
specifically addressing: (1) the elements of the plan; (2) the 
timeline and current status for implementation; (3) an 
assessment of the military services' abilities to perform the 
services; (4) any gaps in fulfilling these services; (5) how 
the Department will ensure uniformity within and across 
regions; and (6) the estimated cost of providing these 
services, taking into consideration not only the direct cost of 
providing the service, but also the cost in terms of health 
outcomes, provision of needed care, avoidance of unnecessary 
care, and redirection of care to a more appropriate level.

    Reserve Component Requirement for Medical and Dental Readiness 
                             Accountability

    The committee continues to be concerned about the medical 
and dental readiness of the reserve component. The number of 
reserve component soldiers activated for deployment with 
disqualifying medical and dental conditions highlights the 
greater need for medical personnel and operational commanders 
to strictly monitor the individual medical readiness of these 
personnel. The committee directs the Secretary of Defense to 
ensure the military departments have systematic processes for 
providing appropriate health examinations and assessments and a 
means for capturing health information. The Department of 
Defense and the military services should consider the 
recommendations of the Armed Forces Epidemiological Board in 
its report of September 17, 2003, and consider modeling their 
programs after the Air Force Preventive Health Assessment and 
Individual Medical Readiness Program. Equally important, the 
Department should incentivize commanders and hold them 
accountable for enforcing and monitoring medical and dental 
requirements to ensure the medical readiness.

                      Resource Sharing Agreements

    The committee is highly concerned about potential 
disruptions to providing quality patient care during the 
transition from the current TRICARE contracts to the new 
TRICARE contracts, especially as the carved out resource 
sharing programs evolve to new contractual agreements. The 
committee encourages the Secretary of Defense to take into 
account the use of all existing authorities to guarantee a 
smooth transition and to ensure that the new contracts: (1) are 
as cost effective as the current agreements, (2) provide for 
similar flexibility in staffing, and (3) provide uninterrupted 
care for beneficiaries during the transition from existing to 
new contracts.

                  State-of-the-Art Mobility Equipment

    The committee is strongly committed to ensuring that those 
who are injured or become ill serving the nation receive the 
finest rehabilitation efforts to maximize independence and 
accessibility. To that end, the committee supports efforts to 
provide service members, especially those individuals with 
orthopedic and neurologic disorders, with the finest mobility 
equipment. This equipment would allow users to walk on all 
surfaces and would be all-terrain in nature, providing maximum 
mobility. Equipment should (1) minimize any additional damage 
to the body as found in many instances with standard equipment, 
(2) be lightweight, and (3) require minimal energy expenditure.

                         LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS


         Subtitle A--Enhanced Health Care Benefits for Reserves


   Section 701--Demonstration Project for TRICARE Coverage for Ready 
                            Reserve Members

    This section would require the Secretary of Defense to 
conduct a three-year demonstration project to provide TRICARE 
coverage for Ready Reserve members not on active duty who are 
ineligible for employer-sponsored health benefits. The purpose 
of the demonstration would be to determine whether such 
coverage enhances medical readiness, recruiting, and retention 
of reserve component members. The Secretary would be required 
to report by April 1, 2007 on the results of the demonstration 
project to the Senate Committee on Armed Services and the House 
Committee on Armed Services. The section would require the 
Comptroller General to provide both periodic and final 
independent evaluations and reports of the demonstration 
project to the same committees.

Section 702--Comptroller General Report on the Cost and Feasibility of 
 Providing Private Health Insurance Stipends for Members of the Ready 
                                Reserve

    This section would require the Comptroller General to 
conduct a study of the cost and feasibility of providing a 
stipend to offset the cost of private health insurance to 
members of the reserves and their dependents, and to maintain 
continuity of health care for dependents when members are 
mobilized. The purpose of the study would be to examine 
recommendations for benefit amount; cost to the Department; 
potential effects on medical readiness, recruitment, and 
retention; participation rates; continuity of care; 
administrative and management considerations; and implications 
for employers.

 Section 703--Improvement of Medical Services for Activated Members of 
                  the Ready Reserve and Their Families

    This section would make permanent the now temporary 
eligibility of dependents of reserve component members to 
obtain TRICARE health care benefits up to 90 days before the 
date on which the member's period of active duty is to begin. 
The section would allow the Secretary of Defense to provide 
health care benefits to service members up to 90 days before 
the date on which the period of active duty is to begin. The 
current temporary authority for this health care benefit 
expires on December 31, 2004.

   Section 704--Modification of Waiver of Certain Deductibles Under 
                            TRICARE Program

    This section would authorize the Secretary of Defense to 
waive deductible payments required by certain TRICARE programs 
for dependents of certain reserve component members who are 
called or ordered to active duty for a period of more than 30 
days. This section would mitigate the financial hardship on 
activated reservists by allowing the TRICARE deductibles to be 
waived in cases where mobilized reservists had already paid 
deductibles for their civilian health care coverage.

   Section 705--Authority for Payment by United States of Additional 
  Amounts Billed by Health Care Providers to Activated Reserve Members

    This section would protect a dependent of a member of a 
reserve component who is ordered to active duty for a period of 
more than 30 days in support of a contingency operation from 
paying a health care provider any amount above the TRICARE 
maximum allowable cost, known as balance billing. In such 
cases, the Secretary of Defense would have authority to pay the 
balance billing amount.

   Section 706--Extension of Transitional Health Care Benefits After 
                      Separation from Active Duty

    This section would make permanent the authority to provide 
Transition Assistance Medical Program (TAMP) benefits to 
service members and their dependents for up to 180 days 
following separation from active duty. Under current law, the 
authority to provide the 180-day TAMP benefits expires on 
December 31, 2004. The section also would require that the TAMP 
eligibility would cease prior to the 180-day limit if the 
beneficiaries acquire employer-provided health insurance. The 
section would limit the outlays associated with the TAMP 
benefits provided after January 1, 2005 to not more than $170.0 
million.

                Subtitle B--Other Benefits Improvements


 Section 711--Coverage of Certain Young Children Under TRICARE Dental 
                                Program

    This section would permit certain dependents of service 
members who die while serving on active duty or who die as a 
member of the Ready Reserve to enroll in the TRICARE Dental 
Program regardless of the dependent's dental plan enrollment 
status on the date of the service member's death. Many 
dependents, due to their young age, are not enrolled in the 
TRICARE Dental Plan. In cases where the service member dies, 
the child's nonparticipation due to their young age 
disadvantages them from future eligibility. This section would 
authorize these dependents to participate in the dental plan in 
the same manner as other dependents of service members who die 
while on active duty.

  Section 712--Comptroller General Report on Provision of Health and 
    Support Services for Exceptional Family Member Program Enrollees

    This section would require the Comptroller General to 
evaluate the effect of the Exceptional Family Member Program 
(EFMP) on health and support services in select civilian 
communities near military communities with a high concentration 
of EFMP enrollees that use federal, state and local health and 
support services. The study mandated under this section would 
pay special attention to:
          (1) Identifying communities that have high 
        concentrations of EFMP enrollees that use local health 
        and support services;
          (2) Evaluating the needs, if any, that are not met by 
        federal, state and local health and support service for 
        EFMP enrollees;
          (3) Determining the burden, if any, placed on 
        federal, state and local health and support services 
        that provide care to EFMP enrollees;
          (4) Evaluating TRICARE's ability to meet the needs of 
        EFMP enrollees;
          (5) Examining the reason for any limitations of 
        TRICARE, the EFMP, and state and local health and 
        support services in providing assistance to military 
        families with EFMP members; and
          (6) Providing recommendations for more effectively 
        meeting the needs of EFMP enrollees.
    The study would examine no less than four major communities 
where EFMP enrollees live and in which several major military 
installations exist, including installations from multiple 
military services. The Comptroller General shall submit his 
report of findings and recommendations to the Senate Committee 
on Armed Services and the House Committee on Armed Services by 
March 31, 2005.

     Section 713--Exceptional Eligibility for TRICARE Prime Remote

    This section would allow the Secretary of Defense to waive 
all restrictions with regard to TRICARE Prime Remote medical 
care coverage for active duty family members that reside at a 
remote location without regard to their sponsor's current or 
past assignment. Such a waiver would occur if the Secretary 
determines that there are extenuating circumstances such that 
waiving the restrictions is consistent with the intent of the 
law.

  Section 714--Transition to Home Health Care Benefit Under Sub-acute 
                              Care Program

    This section would allow the Secretary of Defense to extend 
previous benefits for part-time or intermittent home health 
care after the transition to new managed care support contracts 
that result in a change in benefits.

  Section 715--Requirement Relating to Prescription Drug Benefits for 
      Medicare-Eligible Enrollees Under Defense Health Care Plans

    This section would prohibit the prescription drug cost-
sharing requirements for Medicare-eligible beneficiaries from 
being in excess of the cost-sharing requirements applicable to 
non-Medicare-eligible beneficiaries.

      Section 716--Professional Accreditation of Military Dentists

    This section would allow the secretaries of the military 
departments to authorize the treatment of no more than 2,000 
children, under the age of 13 per year at certain military 
facilities offering residency programs in oral and 
maxillofacial surgery and orthodontics. This authority would 
maintain the viability of military dental training programs by 
allowing treatment of a pediatric population, as required by 
the American Dental Association for the accreditation of such 
programs.

Section 717--Addition of Certain Unremarried Former Spouses to Persons 
    Eligible for Dental Insurance Plan of Retirees of the Uniformed 
                                Services

    This section would permit certain unremarried former 
spouses of a member or former member to participate in the 
TRICARE Retiree Dental Program if they do not have dental 
coverage under an employer-sponsored health plan.

Section 718--Waiver of Collection of Payments Due from Certain Persons 
                 Unaware of Loss of CHAMPUS Eligibility

    This section would allow the Secretary of Defense to waive 
the collection of certain payments for health care services 
provided during a period of ineligibility between July 1, 1999 
and December 31, 2004 for beneficiaries under age 65 entitled 
to Medicare on the basis of disability or end stage renal 
disease. The waiver would apply to those beneficiaries who were 
unaware of their loss of eligibility to receive health benefits 
at the time they were received. The amendment would also 
require the Department of Defense to report quarterly to 
Congress regarding DOD efforts to identify the eligibility 
status of individuals for such benefits and the actions taken 
when individuals are determined to be ineligible.

           Subtitle C--Planning, Programming, and Management


 Section 721--Pilot Program for Transformation of Health Care Delivery

    This section would require the Secretary of Defense to 
conduct a three-year pilot program to test a model for future 
health care delivery systems at one or more military 
installations where the military population is expected to 
expand. The model to be tested would focus on coordinating and 
leveraging the use of existing health care resources, to 
include federal, state, local, and contractor assets to meet 
increased health care requirements. Historically, the approach 
to providing military health care to military beneficiaries has 
centered on building a military treatment facility on the 
installation. With increasing requirements to repair or replace 
aging military treatment facilities it may be more feasible and 
cost effective to leverage non- military health care resources. 
The Secretary would be required to submit an interim report by 
July 1, 2005 on the implementation plan for the pilot program 
and a final report by July 1, 2007 on the results of the pilot 
program to the Senate Committee on Armed Services and the House 
Committee on Armed Services.

 Section 722--Study of Provision of Travel Reimbursement to Hospitals 
                for Certain Military Disability Retirees

    This section would require the Secretary of Defense to 
conduct a study of the feasibility and desirability of 
providing disability retirees travel and transportation 
benefits to receive medical treatment at military hospitals for 
two years after their retirement. The provision would direct 
the Secretary to report the results of the study to the 
congressional defense subcommittees by March 1, 2005.

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

                         LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS


Subtitle A--Amendments to General Contracting Authorities, Procedures, 
                            and Limitations


     Section 801--Rapid Acquisition Authority to Respond to Combat 
                              Emergencies

    This section would authorize the Secretary of Defense to 
establish a streamlined acquisition process for use when combat 
fatalities have occurred, the combatant commander has an urgent 
need of equipment, and delay would cause a continuation of 
combat fatalities. This process is to be used as a ``quick 
start'' bridge to the normal acquisition process.
    The committee finds that the current Department of Defense 
acquisition system cannot respond in a timely manner to the 
combatant commander's urgent need of combat equipment. A rapid 
response to emergency combat situations would minimize combat 
fatalities when reacting to changes in the opponent's 
battlefield tactics.

           Section 802--Defense Acquisition Workforce Changes

    This section would amend various sections in chapter 87 of 
title 10, United States Code. First, it would align the 
provisions in chapter 87 of title 10, United States Code, 
relating to defense acquisition workforce with similar 
provisions contained in chapter 99 of title 5, United States 
Code. Second, it would authorize the Secretary of Defense to 
designate critical acquisition positions. Third, it would 
require the Secretary and scholarship participants to enter 
written agreements that identify obligations and consequences 
for breach of contract.

      Section 803--Limitation on Task and Delivery Order Contracts

    This section would amend section 2304a of title 10, United 
States Code, to clarify that the Secretary of Defense has 
authority to enter into task and delivery contracts for a base 
period of up to five years, and that the contract may include 
additional options for a period of time as is deemed 
appropriate.

  Section 804--Funding for Contract Cancellation Ceilings for Certain 
                    Multiyear Procurement Contracts

    This section would amend section 2306b(g) and section 
2306c(d) of title 10, United States Code, to require the head 
of the agency concerned to provide written notification, to the 
congressional defense committees, in those instances when 
cancellation costs that are above $100 million are not fully 
funded. The written notification would include a financial risk 
assessment for not fully funding the cancellation ceiling.

 Section 805--Increased Threshold for Requiring Contractors to Provide 
    Specified Employee Information to Cooperative Agreement Holders

    This section would amend section 2416(d) of title 10, 
United States Code, by raising the $0.5 million reporting 
requirement to $1.0 million. Currently, the Secretary of 
Defense is required to provide some basic contractor 
information to certain organizations on contracts that have a 
value of $0.5 million or more.

 Section 806--Extension of Authority for Use of Simplified Acquisition 
                               Procedures

    This section would amend section 4202(e) of the Clinger-
Cohen Act of 1996 (Public Law 104-106) by extending until 
October 1, 2009, the time frame in which the secretary of an 
executive agency may use simplified procedures to purchase 
commercial items that have a value of $5.0 million or less.

Section 807--Authority to Adjust Acquisition-Related Dollar Thresholds 
                             for Inflation

    This section would authorize the Federal Acquisition 
Regulatory Council to amend the dollar threshold of procurement 
statutes in accordance with inflationary rates in order to 
maintain the constant dollar value of the threshold. In those 
instances where a procurement statute applies to a single 
agency, the secretary of that agency has authority to amend the 
dollar threshold. This section would require any proposed 
change to be coordinated with the Director of Office of 
Management and Budget and to be published in the Federal 
Register for public comment. This section would not authorize 
adjustments to the Davis-Bacon Act (40 U.S.C. 276(a)), the 
Service Contract Act of 1965 (41 U.S.C. 351 et. seq), or title 
III of the Trade Agreements Act of 1979 (19 U.S.C. 2511 et 
seq).

      Subtitle B--United States Defense Industrial Base Provisions


                 Section 811--Defense Trade Reciprocity

    This section would establish a defense trade policy based 
upon the principle of fair trade and reciprocity. Further, this 
section would require the Secretary of Defense to ensure that 
the offset regulations or policies of a foreign country are 
reduced to the same level as the domestic content requirements 
of the United States before the Secretary acquires defense 
products from a foreign firm operating in that country.
    Offsets are defined as compensation required as a condition 
of purchase in government-to-government or commercial sales of 
defense products or services. Therefore, in order to sell 
defense products to many of our foreign security partners, the 
majority of the manufacturing jobs and technology must be 
transferred to the purchasing country. In many cases, the value 
of the offset compensation of U.S. manufacturing jobs or 
technology exceeds the value of the product sold. The U.S. has 
no offset requirements for its foreign trading partners.
    The committee is concerned that the cost of offsets in 
foreign export defense sales is the loss of U.S. subcontractor 
jobs and the loss of U.S. technology paid for by the U.S. 
taxpayer.

        Section 812--Amendments to Domestic Source Requirements

    This section would amend section 2533a of title 10, United 
States Code, also known as the Berry Amendment, to require the 
Secretary of Defense to notify Congress and the public when the 
Secretary exercises a waiver.
    This section would also amend section 2533a to clarify the 
covered item described as clothing.

  Section 813--Three-Year Extension of Restriction on Acquisition of 
       Polyacrylonitrile (PAN) Carbon Fiber from Foreign Sources

    This section would require the Secretary of Defense to 
delay for three years, phasing out of the restriction of 
acquisition of Polyacrylonitrile (PAN) carbon fiber from 
foreign sources.
    The committee is aware of the January 2001 report that 
recommended phasing out of restriction on the acquisition of 
PAN carbon fiber form foreign sources.
    The committee finds that the aerospace market conditions 
have significantly declined since September 11, 2001, and the 
rationale for phasing out of the restriction is no longer 
valid.

    Section 814--Grant Program for Defense Contractors to Implement 
                Strategies to Avoid Outsourcing of Jobs

    This section would authorize the Secretary of Defense to 
award grants to qualified defense contractors in order to 
assist the contractor in avoiding the outsourcing of jobs. 
Grant funds would be used to implement strategies that would 
enable defense contractors to retain domestic employees. 
Examples of such strategies include retraining employees or 
plant upgrades. This provision would limit the grant to fifty 
percent of the cost of the strategy and require that the 
proposed strategy would retain at least ten domestic jobs 
dedicated to the performance of a defense contract.

    Section 815--Preference for Domestic Freight Forwarding Services

    This section would require the Secretary of Defense to 
grant preferences to freight forwarder companies owned and 
controlled by U.S. citizens that offer fair and reasonable 
rates in the award of transportation service contracts for 
transportation services to, from, or within Iraq or 
Afghanistan.

                 Subtitle C--Other Acquisition Matters


 Section 821--Sustainment and Modernization Plans for Existing Systems 
            while Replacement Systems are Under Development

    This section would require the Department of Defense to 
plan and budget for the sustainment and modernization of 
current military systems until such time that the replacement 
system under development is fielded and assumes responsibility 
for the mission.
    The committee is aware of the fiscal realities that make it 
difficult to fund simultaneously the development of 
transformational future military systems and the maintenance 
and sustainment of current military systems. In general, the 
military services map out program strategies for sustainment 
and modernization. However, significant gaps exist. In 2003, 
the General Accounting Office reported that 15 of the 25 
systems reviewed had insufficient funding requested by the 
Department of Defense or projected in the Future Years Defense 
Program to execute the military services' program strategies to 
sustain or replace their equipment.
    It is the responsibility of the Department of Defense to 
develop military systems that provide the armed forces with 
superiority over potential adversaries. However, funding for 
transformational future systems that are decades from field 
operational capability must not preclude the funding required 
to sustain and modernize the current force.
    The committee is concerned that escalating cost growth in 
development programs and accelerating transformation is funded 
by underinvestment in the current force which may undermine the 
readiness and capabilities of the forces that we must rely upon 
for the foreseeable future.

 Section 822--Review and Demonstration Project Relating to Contractor 
                               Employees

    This section would require the Secretary of Defense to 
conduct a review of Department of Defense policies, procedures, 
and practices relating to employees of defense contractors and 
their subcontractors. Specifically, it would require the 
Secretary to review DOD policies, procedures, and practices of 
ensuring compliance with Executive Order 12989, as amended by 
Executive Order 13286, which prohibits the secretaries of 
executive agencies from contracting with employers who hire or 
recruit unauthorized aliens. The committee is aware of numerous 
instances in which the Department contracted with vendors who 
employed unauthorized aliens for work on military 
installations. The review should identify problems with 
existing security policies, procedures, and practices, as well 
as develop and implement reforms to strengthen, upgrade, and 
improve the overall DOD contracting process. This section would 
require the Secretary to conduct the review within 180 days of 
enactment of this Act.
    This section would also require the Secretary to conduct a 
demonstration program for the procurement of military 
construction, renovation, maintenance or repair service on 
military installations, under which significant weight would be 
given to bidding contractors offering effective, reliable 
staffing plans that ensure all employees are properly 
authorized to be employed in the United States and properly 
qualified to perform the services required under the contract. 
The Secretary shall report to the Senate Committee on Armed 
Services and the House Committee on Armed Services by October 
1, 2005, the benefits of the demonstration program and the 
extent to which lessons learned from the program should be 
incorporated throughout DOD procurements.

   Section 823--Defense Acquisition Workforce Limitation and Reports

    This section would require the Department of Defense to 
reduce the defense acquisition workforce personnel by five 
percent on or before October 1, 2005. This provision would also 
require the General Accounting Office and Defense Acquisition 
University to submit a report to the Senate Committee on Armed 
Services and the House Committee on Armed Services on the 
current status of the Defense Acquisition Workforce by March 1, 
2005.

     Section 824--Provision of Information to Congress to Enhance 
                      Transparency in Contracting

    This section would require the Secretary of Defense to 
provide information on contract or task or delivery orders to 
the chairman or ranking member of the Senate Armed Services 
Committee or the House Armed Services Committee, within 14 days 
of the request.

      TITLE IX--DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE ORGANIZATION AND MANAGEMENT

                        ITEM OF SPECIAL INTEREST


                      National Defense University

    The committee commends the National Defense University 
(NDU) for its work in scenario modeling and simulation 
methodologies. The committee encourages the NDU to continue its 
work by employing advanced technologies that will increase the 
effectiveness, realism and creativity of these scenarios. The 
committee notes that the immersive technologies being developed 
by the Department of Defense are similar to some advanced 
technologies that the entertainment industry employs and 
encourages contact between the Department and entertainment 
industry technologists as a means of fully exploiting such 
technologies to the benefit of the armed forces.

                         LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS


 Section 901--Change in Title of Secretary of the Navy to Secretary of 
                       the Navy and Marine Corps

    This section would redesignate the title of the Secretary 
of the Navy to the Secretary of the Navy and Marine Corps. This 
provision would formally recognize the responsibility of the 
Office of the Secretary of the Navy over both the Navy and 
Marine Corps.

   Section 902--Transfer of Center for the Study of Chinese Military 
    Affairs from National Defense University to United States-China 
                Economic and Security Review Commission

    This section would transfer the Center for the Study of 
Chinese Military Affairs at the National Defense University, 
established in the National Defense Authorization Act for 
Fiscal Year 2000 (Public Law 106-65), to the United States-
China Economic and Security Review Commission, established in 
the Floyd D. Spence National Defense Authorization Act for 
Fiscal Year 2001 (Public Law 106-398).

 Section 903--Transfer to the Secretary of the Army of Responsibility 
          for Assembled Chemical Weapons Alternatives Program

    This section would transfer oversight of the Assembled 
Chemical Weapons Alternatives (ACWA) program (formerly the 
Assembled Chemical Weapons Assessment program) from the Under 
Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics 
to the Secretary of the Army not later than January 1, 2005. 
Additionally, this section would provide for management of the 
program as a part of the Department of the Army organization 
for management of the chemical weapons demilitarization program 
as specified in section 1521(e) of title 50, United States 
Code. Finally, this section would require the Army to fully 
implement the alternative technologies previously selected for 
the destruction of lethal chemical munitions at Pueblo Chemical 
Depot, Colorado, and Blue Grass Army Depot, Kentucky.
    Section 142 of the Strom Thurmond National Defense 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1999 (Public Law 105-261) 
provides that the Program Manager, ACWA shall manage the 
development and testing (including demonstration and pilot-
scale testing) of technologies for the destruction of lethal 
chemical munitions that are potential or demonstrated 
alternatives to the baseline program, which uses incineration 
for destruction of the stockpile of lethal chemical agents and 
munitions. This provision would further require that the 
program manager shall act independently of the Program Manager 
for Chemical Demilitarization (PMCD) and shall report to the 
Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Technology.
    Numerous General Accounting Office (GAO) reports and 
testimony to Congress state that effective management of the 
chemical demilitarization program has been hindered by its 
complex management structure. GAO specifically cites the 
division of program responsibility between the PMCD, who 
reports to the Secretary of the Army as executive agent for the 
program and is responsible for destruction of all elements of 
the chemical weapons stockpile except that stored at the Blue 
Grass Army Depot and the Pueblo Chemical Army Depot; and the 
Project Manager(PM), ACWA, who reports directly to the Under 
Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics 
and has responsibility only for destruction of those parts of 
the stockpile stored at Blue Grass and Pueblo. In 2003 the 
Secretary of the Army, with the concurrence of the Under 
Secretary of Defense (Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics) 
(USD (AT&L)), established the Chemical Material Agency, which 
is responsible for management of the chemical weapons 
destruction program and operation of the chemical weapons 
destruction plant facilities and stockpile storage sites. With 
the concurrence of the USD (AT&L), the Secretary of the Army 
assigned the PM, ACWA, as the Director of the Chemical Materiel 
Agency. The committee believes that the establishment of the 
new management structure, which brings together all elements of 
the chemical weapons demilitarization program under a single 
activity, will eliminate many of the management complexities 
cited by the GAO, contribute to the elimination of duplicative 
management overhead and support, and ensure more efficient 
management of the total program, while at the same time 
addressing the equities and concerns of those sites using 
assembled chemical weapons alternatives for destruction of the 
stockpile

   Section 904--Modification of Obligated Service Requirements under 
                  National Security Education Program

    This section would modify the service requirements to 
ensure that recipients of scholarships and fellowships obtain 
employment in a federal national security position that 
utilizes the unique language and region expertise acquired by 
the recipient. This section would also set 12 months as the 
minimum length of federal service for all recipients. This 
section would also require the recipient to gain employment in 
an approved position within three years of completion of the 
scholarship, or within two years in the case of a recipient of 
a fellowship.

         Section 905--Change of Membership of Certain Councils

    This section would make the Undersecretary of Defense for 
Policy a statutory member of the Nuclear Weapons Council and 
implement the corresponding technical changes in law. Current 
law (10 U.S.C. 179) establishes the Nuclear Weapons Council to, 
among other things, coordinate programming and budget matters 
pertaining to nuclear weapons programs between the Department 
of Defense and Department of Energy and to provide broad 
guidance on nuclear research and development priorities. By 
statute, the council comprises the Undersecretary ofDefense for 
Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics; the Vice Chairman of the Joint 
Chiefs of Staff; and the Undersecretary of Energy for Nuclear Security. 
As a result of the congressionally-mandated Nuclear Posture Review, 
which set out a new course in strategic policy, the Undersecretary of 
Defense for Policy has come to play an increasing role in coordinating 
nuclear weapons policy and making recommendations to the President.

         Section 906--Actions to Prevent the Abuse of Detainees

    This section would require the Secretary of Defense to 
prescribe policies regarding procedures for the Armed Forces, 
other elements of the Department of Defense, and Department of 
Defense contractor personnel in order to prevent the abuse of 
prisoners held by the United States as part of the Global War 
on Terrorism. The Secretary would be required to issue such 
policies within 120 days of the enactment of this Act, provide 
those policies to Congress immediately, and report to Congress 
on their implementation one year after their issuance.

           Section 907--Responses to Congressional Inquiries

    This section would require the Secretary of Defense, or any 
other official of the Department of Defense, to respond to 
written requests for information made by the respective 
Chairmen of the Senate Committee on Armed Services and the 
House Committee on Armed Services in writing within 21 days of 
the transmission of such a request.

                      TITLE X--GENERAL PROVISIONS

                       ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST


                        Counter-Drug Activities


                                Overview

    The budget request contained $852.7 million for drug 
interdiction and counter-drug activities, in addition to $160.2 
million, for operational tempo which is included within the 
operating budgets of the military services. The budget is 
organized in fiscal year 2005 to address three broad national 
priorities: (1) demand reduction; (2) domestic support; and (3) 
international support, intelligence and technology.
    The committee recommends an authorization for fiscal year 
2005 Department of Defense counter-drug activities as follows:

FY05 Drug Interdiction and Counter-Drug Request................$852,697
    Demand Reduction............................................122.209
    Domestic Support............................................207,998
    International Support, Intelligence and Technology..........522,590
Recommended Decreases:..............................................
    Intelligence, surveillance, reconnaissance and tanker support.2,000
    Tethered Aerostat Radar System................................5,000
Recommended Increases:..............................................
    Southwest Border Fence........................................5,000
    Northern Command Counter-Narcotics Support....................2,000
Recommendation..................................................852,697

                       Items of Special Interest


Intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance and tanker support

    The budget request contained $2.7 million for intelligence, 
surveillance, and reconnaissance and tanker support. The budget 
request for this activity in fiscal year 2004 was 0.4 million. 
Reductions in support activities are planned in light of other 
worldwide commitments and performance of depot-level 
maintenance on related assets.
    Accordingly, the committee recommends a decrease of $2.0 
million for this activity.

Northern Command counter-narcotics support

    The budget request contained $9.1 million to support the 
United States Northern Command (USNORTHCOM) counter-narcotics 
missions, including those which are performed through Joint 
Task Force-6 located at Fort Bliss, Texas.
    The committee is concerned that the current funding levels 
will diminish the ability to provide additional mobile training 
teams. The mobile training teams help train federal, state, and 
local law enforcement agencies across the country on a wide 
variety of subjects related to narcotics interdiction. Without 
the proper funding, the committee is concerned that law 
enforcement agencies will not be able to develop the critical 
skills necessary for effective counter-narcotics law 
enforcement, and in assisting in war against terrorism in the 
homeland.
    Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $2 
million for additional mobile training teams along with the 
attendant headquarters' support for this enhanced mission.
    The committee recognizes that, in order to utilize these 
funds, Joint Task Force-6 will need to be able to utilize 
authority provided by Congress in the National Defense 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2004 (Public Law 108-136). 
Section 1022 of that bill provided authority to joint task 
forces of the Department of Defense that provide support to law 
enforcement agencies conducting counter-drug activities to also 
provide support to those agencies conducting counter-terrorism 
activities. The committee understands that the Department of 
Defense has not yet issued policy guidance that would allow 
combatant commands and military services to use this authority. 
The committee urges the Department to issue such guidance 
immediately to permit intended missions to go forward.

Southwest Border Fence

    As part of the San Diego 14-Mile Border Infrastructure 
System, the Southwest Border Fence has served as an invaluable 
counter-narcotics resource for United States Border Patrol 
agents since the project's inception in 1997. However, the 
border fence construction project is still under construction, 
and the area remains one of the nation's most heavily utilized 
drug smuggling corridors. Since 1998, the California National 
Guard and other military personnel have been responsible for 
fence construction and general support of the border 
infrastructure system. Completion of the border fence would 
constitute a cohesive barrier against vehicle and pedestrian 
narcotics trafficking and allow counter-drug assets to be 
redeployed in other areas.
    Accordingly, the committee recommends an increase of $5.0 
million for this purpose.

Tethered Aerostat Radar System

    The budget request contained $32.3 million for the 
operation of the Tethered Aerostat Radar System at multiple 
locations in the United States. Of the $32.3 million requested, 
$6.7 million was included for the procurement of additional 
spare parts.
    The committee recommends a decrease of $5.0 million dollars 
in the procurement component of this request. The committee 
notes that the Congress has not received the detailed analysis 
it has requested to justify the continued increases in this 
program.

                            Other Activities


             Airlift Support for Homeland Defense Missions

    The committee is concerned that the Department of Defense 
(DOD) has not adequately considered the need for airlift 
support to speed uniquely capable DOD assets to wherever needed 
to perform urgent homeland defense missions. The Department has 
developed considerable expertise across a range of disparate 
skills that may be needed in a homeland defense mission, but 
this expertise is scattered in various locations across the 
country. The committee is aware of a proposal to provide such 
support through the use of C-130 equipped Air National Guard 
units and believes that the proposal has merit. The committee 
directs the Secretary of Defense to report by March 31, 2005, 
to the Senate Committee on Armed Services and the House 
Committee on Armed Services, his views on whether the 
Commander, Northern Command should have dedicated Air National 
Guard C-130 units at his disposal for the purpose of responding 
to attacks or incidents involving weapons of mass destruction.

                        Civil Reserve Air Fleet

    The committee understands that the Secretary of Defense 
requires that commercial air lines participating in the civil 
reserve air fleet receive at least 60 percent of its air 
transportation revenues from sources other than the Department 
of Defense. The committee is concerned that the Secretary is 
not enforcing this requirement. The committee, therefore, 
directs the Secretary to enforce this requirement, and directs 
the Secretary to report to the Senate Armed Services Committee 
and the House Armed Services Committee when this business 
practice is not followed, with an explanation as to why it was 
not followed.

                         Defense Transformation

    The committee supports the efforts of the Department of 
Defense to transform the armed forces into capabilities based, 
networked joint forces that are rapidly deployable and more 
lethal than today's highly capable military. Despite the 
Department's success in recent combat operations, the committee 
recognizes that the Department's transformation goals are long 
term, evolving objectives that will be very difficult to 
achieve without a joint strategy to guide it.
    The committee is encouraged that the Army has embarked on 
an aggressive transformation program that encompasses all 
aspects of the Army, including personnel policies, unit 
structure, doctrine, and equipment. While the committee has 
concerns about the development strategy for the Future Combat 
System, addressed elsewhere in this report, the committee 
believes the Army's plan to create more combat power by 
fielding at least 45 active maneuver brigades is the correct 
approach.
    Similarly, the Navy, the Marine Corps, and the Air Force 
have embraced transformation as an objective, and have proposed 
several specific concepts as transformational. The committee is 
concerned that each military service has embarked on its own 
transformational campaign, without an enforceable, integrated 
joint forces roadmap to ensure the services' plans are mutually 
supportive and overlap only when necessary. For that reason, 
the committee questions the services' plans to sustain 
excessive headquarters structure despite the services' 
increasing requests for information technology funding 
purportedly designed to flatten combat organizations.
    Accordingly, the committee believes that the Joint Forces 
Command should continue to evolve as the principal coordinator 
of service transformation efforts.

                        Global War on Terrorism

    The committee applauds and supports the valiant efforts of 
the men and women of America's armed forces who are prosecuting 
the global war on terrorism in increasingly hostile areas 
overseas. The committee believes that the war should be fought 
on the enemy's home ground, and does not believe that a more 
passive strategy of disengagement would be a prudent policy for 
the safety of the United States and its citizens. In that 
regard, the committee supports a number of initiatives intended 
to enhance the ability of the armed forces to respond to the 
demands of the global war on terror. These initiatives range 
from measures intended to speed the development and fielding of 
force protection measures urgently needed by our forces in 
Iraq, to measures that will enhance the Special Operations 
Command's ability to work in a variety of settings. The 
committee understands the prominent roles played by other 
agencies in this fight, particularly the Departments of State 
and Homeland Security, but the committee continues to believe 
that the Department of Defense has performed and will continue 
to perform the most critical missions in the global war on 
terror.

                        Homeland Defense Forces

    In hearings over the past two years, the committee has 
reviewed the Department of Defense's plans for use of the 
National Guard in homeland defense missions and encouraged the 
Department to include the Department of Homeland Security in 
this review. Since the National Guard is a strategic national 
force that is frequently deployed, the committee is concerned 
that homeland defense and homeland security plans, which are 
dependent on National Guard units, must consider the need for 
contingency assets.
    The committee is pleased to note the testimony of the 
Director, National Guard Bureau, describing his efforts to 
ensure that National Guard assets are continuously available 
for homeland defense missions. The committee is also heartened 
by the concept of the National Guard chemical, biological, 
radiological, nuclear (CBRNE) enhanced response force packages, 
which would augment existing civil support teams in each of the 
12 Federal Emergency Management Agency regions.
    The committee is interested to learn whether the ongoing 
force rebalancing measures will yield sufficient available 
assets, given recent overseas deployments, and whether the 
Department should consider augmenting the capabilities of state 
defense forces authorized by title 32, United States Code, with 
available training opportunities and surplus equipment.
    In that regard, the committee directs the Secretary of 
Defense, in consultation with the Secretary of Homeland 
Security and the Director, National Guard Bureau, to report any 
measures necessary to enhance the capabilities of the National 
Guard to perform homeland defense and homeland security 
missions. This report should address any unmet requirements 
related to CBRNE enhanced response teams and any necessary 
measures to augment the capabilities of state defense forces, 
and be provided to the Senate Armed Services Committee and the 
House Armed Services Committee by December 31, 2004.

        Wisconsin Project's International Export Control Center

    The committee notes that Wisconsin Project on Nuclear Arms 
Control began a public-private initiative to improve export 
controls in the former Soviet Union and Eastern Europe. This 
initiative was supported by the Department of Defense, the 
Department of State, and the Customs Service. The committee 
further notes that the Wisconsin Project is the leading source 
of unclassified information on world entities suspected of 
building weapons of mass destruction or have links to 
terrorism. The Wisconsin Project's database lists the 
activities of more than 3,700 suspected individuals and 
organizations.
    Recognizing the importance of tracking and updating 
information related to entities which are attempting to build 
weapons of mass destruction, the committee believes the 
Wisconsin Project should expand its efforts to help foreign 
governments improve their export control mechanisms.
    Accordingly, the committee recommends an additional $1.3 
million to the Defense Threat Reduction Agency for the 
expansion of the Wisconsin Project on Nuclear Arms Control's 
International Export Control Center.

                         LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS


                     Subtitle A--Financial Matters


                    Section 1001--Transfer Authority

    This section would provide fiscal year 2005 transfer 
authority to the Department of Defense for amounts up to $3.0 
billion. This would include $500 million of specific transfer 
authority between the services' active component and reserve 
component accounts.

    Section 1002--Budget Justification Documents for Operation and 
                              Maintenance

    This section would require the Secretary of Defense to 
include in congressional justification materials for the 
operation and maintenance budget request the baseline costs for 
programs in which there is an identified program increase or 
decrease. The Secretary of Defense (Comptroller) failed to 
identify these baseline costs, despite the direction to do so 
in the committee report on the H.R. 1588 (H. Rept. 108-106).
    This section would also require the Secretary of Defense to 
include in the operation and maintenance justification 
documents the amount of funds requested for personal service 
contracts and the number of personal service contractors 
expected to be compensated at an annual rate in excess of the 
annual rate of pay for the Vice President.
    This section would also require the Secretary of the Navy 
to distinguish the cost of ship depot-level maintenance and 
repair and ship intermediate maintenance when presenting 
justification material to support the budget request for 
operation and maintenance funds. Specifically, the Secretary 
would be required to present to Congress separate sub-activity 
groups for ship depot operations and ship intermediate 
operations. The Secretary failed to maintain separate sub-
activity groups when presenting the justification of estimates 
for fiscal year 2005 despite the direction to do so in the 
committee report on H.R. 1588 (H. Rept. 108-106).
    This section would also require the Secretary of Defense to 
include, in the justification materials for the operations and 
maintenance budget request, the average civilian salary cost by 
sub-activity group as a component of the personnel summary. The 
Secretary of Defense Comptroller) failed to identify such 
costs, despite the direction to do so in the committee report 
on H.R. 1588 (H. Rept. 108-106).
    This section would also require the Secretary of Defense to 
submit a report to the Senate Committee on Armed Services and 
the House Committee on Armed Services by January 1, 2006, that 
catalogues the elements of ``other costs'' and ``other 
contracts'', which are currently used in justification 
materials for the budget request. Although the committee 
directed in the committee report on H.R. 1588 (H. Rept. 108-
106) to provide this report by October 21, 2003, the Secretary 
of Defense (Comptroller) failed to do so.

  Section 1003--Retention of Fees from Intellectual Property Licenses

    The section would allow the Department of Defense to 
establish programs to license trademarks and insignias, and to 
retain associated fees. Fees received from the trademark 
licenses would be used to cover the costs incurred in securing 
trademark registrations. Any funds in excess of such costs 
would be available for military personnel recruiting and 
retention activities, as well as morale, welfare, and 
recreation activities.

   Section 1004--Authority to Waive Claims of the United States when 
         Amounts Recoverable are Less than Costs of Collection

    This section would authorize the Secretary of Defense or 
his designee to waive indebtedness when the cost of processing 
the transaction exceeds the amounts recoverable. The maximum 
amount that may be waived under this statue would be the micro-
purchase threshold, currently $2,500.

Section 1005--Repeal of Funding Restrictions Concerning Development of 
       Medical Countermeasures against Biological Warfare Threats

    This section would repeal section 2370a of title 10, United 
States Code, which requires that, of the funds allocated for 
the medical component of the biological defense research 
program within the Department of Defense, no more than 80 
percent may be obligated or expended for product development or 
research, development, test, and evaluation of medical 
countermeasures against near-term validated biowarfare threat 
agents. Additionally, no more than 20 percent may be obligated 
or expended for product development or research, development, 
test, and evaluation, of medical countermeasures against mid-
term or far-term validated biowarfare agents.
    The current law defines biological warfare threats 
primarily in intelligence terms. The committee believes that 
this is overly restrictive because intelligence on biological 
warfare threats is inherently limited due to the ease with 
which biological warfare programs can be concealed and 
dangerous pathogens and toxins can be acquired. The situation 
is further exacerbated by the rapid advancements in bio-
technology that are widely available throughoutthe world. 
Additionally, the current law categorizes biological warfare agents by 
the time period in which they may become threats: near-, mid-, and far-
term. For the same reasons that make it difficult to define biological 
warfare agents in terms of available intelligence, the committee 
believes that it is difficult to project the time periods during which 
such agents might become threats.
    In responding to such threats, the committee believes that 
more flexibility is needed in the medical components of the 
biological defense research program.

   Section 1006--Report on Budgeting for Exchange Rates for Foreign 
                         Currency Fluctuations

    This section would require the Secretary of Defense to 
submit a report to the Senate Committee on Armed Services and 
the House Committee on Armed Services by December 1, 2004, on 
the foreign currency exchange rate projection used in the 
annual Department of Defense budget.

                Subtitle B--Naval Vessels and Shipyards


Section 1011--Authority for Award of Contracts for Ship Dismantling on 
                             Net-Cost Basis

    This section would allow the Secretary of the Navy to 
accept bids for domestic warship dismantling contracts based on 
the estimated cost of performance as well as the estimated 
value of scrap and reusable equipment. This section would also 
allow contractors to retain proceeds from the sale of such 
scrap and reusable equipment. With the price of steel at very 
high levels, this provision is intended to allow for greater 
efficiencies in the disposal of obsolete former naval vessels. 
Nothing in the provision alters any environmental requirements 
pertaining to disposals.

  Section 1012--Independent Study to Assess Cost Effectiveness of the 
                     Navy Ship Construction Program

    This section would require the Secretary of Defense to 
establish an entity independent of the Department of Defense to 
conduct a study of the cost-effectiveness of the ship 
construction program of the Navy. The study would look at near-
term improvements to make shipbuilding more efficient, and 
long-term improvement to make the United States shipbuilding 
industry commercially competitive in the global market. This 
provision would require the Secretary to submit the report to 
the congressional defense committees by June 1, 2005.

 Section 1013--Authority to Transfer Specified Former Naval Vessels to 
                       Certain Foreign Countries

    This section would authorize the transfer of three obsolete 
former naval vessels to Chile, Portugal, and to the Taipei 
Economic and Cultural Representative Office in the United 
States.

      Section 1014--Limitation on Leasing of Foreign-Built Vessels

    This section would prohibit the secretary of a military 
department from entering into a contract for a lease or charter 
of a vessel for a term of more than 12 months (including all 
options to renew or extend the contract) if the hull, or 
superstructure of the vessel is constructed in a foreign 
shipyard. The President may waive this prohibition if he 
determines it is in the national security interests of the 
United States.

                   Subtitle C--Sunken Military Craft


         Sections 1021-28--Protection of Sunken Military Craft

    This section would protect sunken United States military 
vessels, aircraft, and spacecraft, as well as the remains and 
personal effects of their crews, from salvage, recovery, or 
other disturbance without proper authorization from the 
secretary of the military department concerned.
    Thousands of U.S. and foreign sunken military craft now lie 
within and beyond U.S. internal waters, the U.S. territorial 
sea, and the U.S. contiguous zone. Because of recent advances 
in science and technology, many of these sunken state craft 
have become accessible to scientists, researchers, salvors, 
treasure-hunters, and others. The unauthorized disturbance or 
recovery of these sunken state craft and any remains of their 
crews and passengers is a growing concern both within the 
United States and internationally. In addition to deserving 
respect as gravesites, theses sunken craft may contain objects 
of a sensitive, archaeological, or historical nature. They 
often also contain unexploded ordnance or other substances, 
including fuel oil and other hazardous liquids, which could 
pose a danger to human health and the marine environment if 
disturbed. This section would clarify the circumstances under 
which sunken military craft, entitled to sovereign immunity 
when they sank, remain the property of the flag state until 
officially abandoned. This section would also encourage and 
authorize the negotiation of international agreements with 
other nations to protect sunken military state craft and, 
through reciprocal treatment, to protect sunken U.S. warships.
    Finally, this section would allow the secretary of the 
military department concerned to issue and enforce permits for 
activities directed at sunken U.S. military craft, including 
contract salvage. It would not invalidate any permitting system 
currently in place nor would it affect any prior lawful 
transfer or express abandonment of title to any sunken military 
craft.

                  Subtitle D--Counter-Drug Activities


 Section 1031--Continuation of Authority to Use Department of Defense 
   Funds for Unified Counter-Drug and Counter-Terrorism Campaign in 
                                Colombia

    This section would authorize the Secretary of Defense to 
use funds available for drug interdiction and counter-drug 
activities to provide assistance to the government of Colombia 
to support not only a unified campaign against narcotics 
trafficking, but to also support a unified campaign against 
activities by organizations designated as terrorist 
organizations.

Section 1032--Limitation on Number of United States Military Personnel 
                              in Colombia

    This section would limit the number of United States 
military personnel in the Republic of Colombia to 500 at any 
given time. The Secretary of Defense is authorized to exclude 
certain military personnel from the limitation, including those 
personnel engaged in rescue efforts, members of the armed 
forces assigned to the U.S. Embassy in Colombia, members of the 
armed forces participating in relief efforts, non-operational 
transient military personnel, and members of the armed forces 
making a port call from a military vessel in Colombia.

                          Subtitle E--Reports


 Section 1041--Study of Continued Requirement for Two-Crew Manning for 
                      Ballistic Missile Submarines

    This section would require the Secretary of Defense to 
submit to the congressional defense committees a report on the 
current status of the requirement for two-man crewing of fleet 
ballistic missile submarines.

Section 1042--Study of Effect on Defense Industrial Base of Elimination 
         of United States Domestic Firearms Manufacturing Base

    This section would require the Secretary of Defense to 
submit to the congressional defense committees, within 60 days 
of enactment, a report detailing the impact on military 
readiness and the defense industrial infrastructure of the 
elimination of the United States domestic firearms 
manufacturing base as a result of ongoing civil litigation.

   Section 1043--Study of Extent and Quality of Training Provided to 
 Members of the Armed Services to Prepare for Post-Conflict Operations

    This section would require the Secretary of Defense to 
identify and assess the training that members of the armed 
forces assigned to support contingency operations receive in 
post-conflict operations. The Secretary would further be 
required to submit a report on his findings to the Senate 
Committee on Armed Services and the House Committee on Armed 
Services no later than March 15, 2005.

                      Subtitle F--Security Matters


 Section 1051--Use of National Driver Register for Personnel Security 
                   Investigations and Determinations

    This section would authorize federal agencies to access the 
National Driver Register for use in personnel security 
investigations with regard to federal employment. The Secretary 
of Transportation and the chief driver licensing official in 
each state, who provides driver licensing records to the 
National Driver Register, cooperatively manage the system. 
Access to the information is currently provided to multiple 
federal agencies.

   Section 1052--Standards for Disqualification from Eligibility for 
               Department of Defense Security Clearances

    This section would amend section 986 of title 10, United 
States Code, to allow decisions on granting meritorious waivers 
related to the granting of a security clearance to be delegated 
by the Secretary of Defense or the secretary of a military 
department to appropriate subordinates. This change is intended 
to improve the operation of the current program and decrease 
the time required to adjudicate security clearance eligibility 
without creating any additional risk to national security.

                   Subtitle G--Transportation Matters


 Section 1061--Use of Military Aircraft to Transport Mail to and from 
                           Overseas Locations

    This section would provide the Secretary of Defense 
authority to use military aircraft to transport mail and 
parcels to, from, and between overseas locations. This 
authority, however, would be limited to the following 
circumstances:
          (1) There is excess space on a scheduled military 
        flight;
          (2) There is no overall cost increase to the 
        Department of Defense or the United States Postal 
        Service;
          (3) The United States Transportation Command would 
        pay the cost of transporting mail from United States 
        Postal Service, to customs clearance facilities, and 
        military debarkation locations at rates not to exceed 
        Department of Transportation rates for commercial 
        airlines;
          (4) There is no degradation of mail service; and
          (5) There is no diversion of such military aircraft 
        during contingencies or other events.

 Section 1062--Reorganization and Clarification of Certain Provisions 
   Relating to Control and Supervision of Transportation within the 
                         Department of Defense

    This section would amend sections 4744 through 4747 of 
title 10, United States Code, by moving these sections from 
chapter 47 to chapter 26. This section would also repeal 
sections 9741, 9743, and 9746 of title 10, United States Code. 
These changes reflect the Secretary of Defense's role in 
transportation versus the individual role of the service 
secretaries.

    Section 1063--Determination of Whether Private Air Carriers are 
 Controlled by United States Citizens for Purposes of Eligibility for 
    Government Contract for Transportation of Passengers or Supplies

    This section would amend section 2710 of the Emergency 
Wartime Supplemental Appropriations Act, 2003 (Public Law 108-
11), to clarify that the Secretary of Transportation is 
responsible for certifying whether an air carrier is 
effectively controlled by citizens of the United States.

  Section 1064--Evaluation of Whether to Prohibit Certain Offers for 
               Transportation of Security-Sensitive Cargo

    This section would require the Secretary of Defense to 
evaluate whether, and under what circumstances, it would be 
appropriate to limit competition for domestic freight 
transportation of security-sensitive cargo to motor carriers 
that are not part of a group of motor carriers under common 
financial or administrative control. The Secretary would be 
required to submit the evaluation to the Senate Armed Services 
Committee and the House Armed Services Committee by January 1, 
2005.

Subtitle H--Other Matters Defense to Engage in Commercial Activities as 
         Security for Intelligence Collection Activities Abroad

    This section would provide for a two year extension of the 
authority of the Secretary of Defense to engage in commercial 
activities as security for intelligence collection activities.

     Section 1072--Assistance for Study of Feasibility of Biennial 
   International Air Trade Show in the United States and for Initial 
                             Implementation

    This section would require the Secretary of Defense to 
select and provide assistance to a community in conducting a 
joint study to determine the feasibility of establishing an 
international air trade show in that community. The committee 
believes that international air trade shows are an important 
component of efforts to demonstrate the effectiveness of United 
States military equipment to other nations and seeks to 
increase the importance of U.S. based air trade shows in the 
conduct of international aerospace trade. This provision would 
also require that the Secretary make his selection through 
competitive procedures, while giving preference to communities 
that already host an air show and have demonstrated a history 
of supporting air shows with local resources.

            Section 1073--Technical and Clerical Amendments

    This section would make a number of technical and clerical 
amendments to existing law of a non-substantive basis.

  Section 1074--Commission on the Long-Term Implementation of the New 
                 Strategic Posture of the United States

    This section would establish a new commission to review the 
long-term implementation of the Nuclear Posture Review.

 Section 1075--Liability Protection for Certain Department of Defense 
             Volunteers Working in the Maritime Environment

    This section would remedy an inadvertent oversight in 
existing law by extending to volunteers working in the maritime 
training environment the same status and legal protections 
presently available to volunteers working on land-based 
assignments.

   Section 1076--Transfer of Historic F3A-1 Brewster Corsair Aircraft

    This section would authorize the Secretary of the Navy to 
transfer ownership of a historic F3A-1 Brewster Corsair 
aircraft to a private citizen. The aircraft would be 
transferred in its current unflyable, ``as is'' condition, and 
at no cost to the United States.

           TITLE XI--DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE CIVILIAN PERSONNEL

                                OVERVIEW

    In the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 
2004 (Public Law 108-136), Congress enacted the Department of 
Defense National Security Personnel System (NSPS), as chapter 
99 of title 5, United States Code. In doing so, Congress 
created a more flexible and rewarding personnel system for the 
Department. The Secretary of Defense tasked the Secretary of 
the Navy with responsibility for designing and implementing a 
human resources management system in accordance with NSPS. The 
committee strongly supports the Secretary of the Navy's 
outreach to unions, executive agencies, and Congress, as he 
fulfills this task. The Secretary of the Navy has, thus far, 
promoted a thorough and thoughtful plan, with continued 
communication and collaboration with the employees and their 
representatives to ensure a responsible human resources 
management system.
    In light of the Department's current effort to implement 
NSPS, the committee recommends only minor changes to civilian 
personnel policy. These changes, however, exemplify the 
committee's continued respect for the civilian workforce and 
the need to reward properly individual accomplishments.

                         LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS


 Section 1101--Payment of Federal Employee Health Benefit Premiums for 
                      Mobilized Federal Employees

    This section would provide a federal government employee, 
who is a member of a reserve component ordered to active duty 
in support of a contingency and placed on leave without pay, to 
continue to receive coverage under the Federal Employee Health 
Benefit Program for 24 months. This section would also 
authorize the executive agency authority to pay both the 
employee's share and the agency's share of the premiums for 
continued coverage up to 24 months.

             Section 1102--Foreign Language Proficiency Pay

    This section would authorize the Secretary of Defense to 
offer special pay to a Department of Defense employee who is 
certified to be proficient in a language deemed necessary for 
national security interests and whose duties require such 
language proficiency. This section would repeal the requirement 
that the individual be assigned duties during a contingency 
operation in section 1596a of title 10, United States Code.

      Section 1103--Pay Parity for Civilian Intelligence Personnel

    This section would authorize the Secretary of Defense to 
use a performance appraisal system for personnel in the defense 
intelligence senior executive service to ensure pay parity for 
all personnel in the defense senior executive service.

Section 1104--Pay Parity for Senior Executives in Nonappropriated Fund 
                           Instrumentalities

    This section would authorize the Secretary of Defense to 
adjust the pay cap for Department of Defense nonappropriated 
fund executives to ensure that the compensation paid to such 
employees remains consistent with the Senior Executive Service 
employees.

 Section 1105---Prohibition of Unauthorized Wearing or Use of Civilian 
                         Medals or Decorations

    This section would prohibit any person from merchandising 
or wearing a Department of Defense civilian medal or decoration 
without the written permission of the Secretary of Defense.This 
section would also authorize the Attorney General to initiate a civil 
proceeding in a United States district court to enjoin the prohibited 
practice.

              TITLE XII--MATTERS RELATING TO OTHER NATIONS

                         LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS


 Subtitle A--Matters Relating to Iraq, Afghanistan, and Global War on 
                               Terrorism


    Section 1201--Documentation of Conditions in Iraq under Former 
   Dictatorial Government as Part of Transition to Post-Dictatorial 
                               Government

    This section would direct the Secretary of Defense to 
expedite, where practical, the review of documents seized from 
the Iraqi government and Ba'ath Socialist Party of Iraq 
relating to the functioning, crimes, and atrocities of those 
entities against the Iraqi people during the regime of Saddam 
Hussein. The Secretary would be further directed to transfer 
those documents, as appropriate, to Iraqi entities in Iraq 
dedicated to documenting the crimes and nature of the Hussein 
regime, to serve as a reminder of the dangers of tolerating 
dictatorship in Iraq. Analysts have found that such efforts in 
other post-dictatorial countries can contribute to the 
reconstruction and reconciliation process. The committee 
believes Iraqi democracy would benefit from a similar effort.

    Section 1202--Support of Military Operations to Combat Terrorism

    This section would authorize the Secretary of Defense, 
during fiscal year 2005, to expend up to $25.0 million in 
operation and maintenance funds authorized by Title XV of this 
Act to provide support to foreign forces, irregular forces, or 
individuals who actively support United States special 
operations forces engaged in military operations against 
terrorists. The section would not authorize U.S. special 
operations forces to engage in covert actions, as defined by 
the National Security Act of 1947 (50 U.S.C. 413b(e)). Thus, 
the intent is to provide additional resources to special 
operations forces engaged in clandestine operations, during 
which they often operate without the support of larger military 
units, but not to allow U.S. special operations forces to 
engage in activities traditionally performed by the 
intelligence community under title 50, United States Code. This 
section would require quarterly reports on how this authority 
is used.

          Section 1203--Commander's Emergency Response Program

    This section would authorize the Secretary of Defense to 
use up to $300.0 million in operations and maintenance funding 
available to the Secretary from funds made available by Title 
XV of the Act for the Commander's Emergency Response Program, 
under which commanders in Iraq and Afghanistan receive funds 
for use in small humanitarian and reconstruction projects in 
the areas in which they are deployed. The section requires 
quarterly reports on the source and use of funds under this 
section.

             Section 1204--Status of Iraqi Security Forces

    This section would require the Secretary of Defense, not 
later than 120 days after the enactment of this Act, to submit 
to Congress a strategic plan setting forth the manner and 
timeline under which the United States will achieve the goal of 
establishing viable and professional Iraqi security forces. The 
Secretary would further be required to submit updates on 
progress implementing the strategic plan every 90 days 
thereafter.

 Section 1205--Guidance and Report Required on Contractors Supporting 
                        Deployed Forces in Iraq

    This section would require the Secretary of Defense, within 
90 days of the date of the enactment of this Act, to issue 
guidance on the management of contractors that support deployed 
military forces and to direct the secretaries of the military 
departments to develop procedures to implement that guidance. 
The Secretary of Defense would further be required to report to 
Congress within 30 days of issuing the aforementioned guidance 
on how it addressed certain issues and to establish and 
implement a process for collecting information on contractors 
providing certain security services in Iraq.

Section 1206--Findings and Sense of Congress Concerning Army Specialist 
                              Joseph Darby

    This section would make a series of findings regarding the 
importance of Specialist Joseph Darby's actions in reporting 
abuses at the Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq and expresses the sense 
of Congress that Specialist Darby should be commended for his 
actions.

                       Subtitle B--Other Matters


Section 1211--Assignment of Allied Naval Personnel to Submarine Safety 
                                Programs

    This section would authorize the Secretary of Defense to 
assign military personnel from NATO countries and other 
countries, including Australia, Sweden, South Korea, and Japan, 
to United States commands for the purpose of working on the 
standardization, development, and interoperability of submarine 
safety and rescue systems and procedures. The Department of 
Defense requested authority to assign foreign naval personnel 
to the International Submarine Escape and Rescue Liaison Office 
within Allied Submarine Command.

 Section 1212--Expansion of Entities of the People's Republic of China 
   Subject to Certain Presidential Authorities when Operating in the 
                             United States

    This section would expand the definition of a ``Communist 
Chinese military company'' as defined in the Strom Thurmond 
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1999 (Public 
Law 105-261), to include Chinese firms owned or operated by a 
ministry of the People's Republic of China or an entity 
affiliated with the defense industrial base of the People's 
Republic of China, such as the China State Shipbuilding 
Corporation or the China Overseas Shipping Corporation. 
Existing law only applies the definition to entities owned or 
operated by the People's Liberation Army, thereby excluding a 
class of firms engaged in Chinese military modernization.

Section 1213--Report by President on Global Peace Operations Initiative

    This section would require the President to report to 
Congress on the Global Peace Operations Initiative, a new 
program announced by the administration after the submission of 
the budget request.
    On April 29, 2004, administration officials briefed 
committee staff on the Global Peace Operations Initiative. In 
general, the initiative is a joint venture between the 
Department of Defense and the Department of State to train and 
equip roughly 75,000 foreign military personnel in peacekeeping 
and peace enforcement operations over five years. The 
administration further proposed legislative authority for the 
Department of Defense to spend up to $100 million in operations 
and maintenance funding on training foreign military forces, 
either by transferring those funds to the Department of State 
or conducting the training itself. Over the next five years, 
the administration estimated that the total cost of the 
initiative would be $606 million and that the Department of 
Defense would be responsible for roughly eighty percent of the 
total. However, the administration did not request those funds 
for the Department of Defense in the fiscal year 2005 budget 
request and that they are not currently programmed in the five-
year defense plan.
    In general, the committee supports the goals of the Global 
Peace Operations Initiative. However, it is concerned about the 
process by which the administration seeks to fund the program 
and move it forward. Historically, the Department of State has 
trained and equipped foreign military forces for the United 
States under title 22 of the U.S. Code, which restricts the 
kinds of training that can be provided and the countries to 
which it can be provided in order to ensure that such 
activities are consistent with U.S. human rights practices and 
foreign policy. In this case, however, the administration 
proposed exempting the Global Peace Operations Initiative from 
those legal constraints and requested authority to use 
Department of Defense funding intended to pay for the 
operations and maintenance of U.S. forces. As a result, any use 
of the authority could mean depriving U.S. forces of the 
resources that the administration had requested, and which 
Congress had authorized and appropriated, for their operations 
and maintenance. Therefore, the committee recommends against 
granting the authority requested. Instead, it recommends a 
provision that would seek additional information on the Global 
Peace Operations Initiative.

   Section 1214--Procurement Sanctions against Foreign Persons that 
Transfer Certain Defense Articles and Services to the People's Republic 
                                of China

    This section would make it the policy of the United States 
to prevent destabilizing arms transfers to the People's 
Republic of China by denying Department of Defense procurement 
contracts to foreign companies that sell China items similar to 
those found on the U.S. Munitions List. The section would also 
require the Secretary of Defense to publish a list of such 
companies in the Federal Register.

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

                                OVERVIEW

    The budget request included $409.2 million for Cooperative 
Threat Reduction (CTR) programs with the states of the former 
Soviet Union for fiscal year 2005. This is $41.6 million less 
than requested for fiscal year 2004 and $39.4 million less than 
was appropriated for fiscal year 2004. The funding request 
breaks out as follows: $58.5 million for strategic offensive 
arms elimination in Russia; $48.7 million for nuclear weapons 
storage security in Russia; $26.2 million for nuclear weapons 
transportation security in Russia; $158.4 million for chemical 
weapons destruction in Russia; $55.0 million for biological 
weapons proliferation prevention in the states of the former 
Soviet Union; $40.0 million for weapons of mass destruction 
proliferation prevention in the states of the former Soviet 
Union; $8.0 million for defense and military contacts; and, 
$14.3 million for activities designated as Other Assessments/
Administrative Support. Programmatic funding levels are 
generally consistent with those requested in fiscal year 2004 
with one notable exception. The request for chemical weapons 
destruction in Russia is $41.9 million less than requested and 
appropriated for fiscal year 2004. According to the Department 
of Defense, the decrease in funding reflects the state of 
construction at the Russian chemical weapons dismantlement 
facility in Shchuch'ye.
    The committee continues to support the goals of the 
Cooperative Threat Reduction program and recommends funding at 
the levels requested. In particular, it notes the positive 
steps being taken to improve oversight of the program within 
the Department, such as beginning the process of identifying 
and deploying on-site managers to improve project oversight 
within states of the former Soviet Union and increased 
reporting as required in the National Defense Authorization Act 
for Fiscal Year 2004 (Public Law 108-136). The Department took 
the additional step of making officials within the Office of 
the Undersecretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and 
Logistics (OUSD/AT&L) responsible for oversight of Cooperative 
Threat Reduction programs. As a result, OUSD/AT&L established 
cost, schedule, and performance baselines, a milestone decision 
authority process, and a phased approach to project 
implementation that have long been lacking in CTR programs, and 
to which most acquisition programs are routinely subjected. 
Together, these efforts address many of the shortcomings that 
the committee identified and worked to address during the 
1990s.
    The committee further applauds the steps that Cooperative 
Threat Reduction partners have taken to increase their 
commitment of resources to the goals of the program. In 
particular, the committee notes increases in Russian funding 
for chemical weapons destruction from 2001 to 2002 and the 
President's December 6, 2003, certification that Russia would 
spend at least $33.0 million on the Shchuch'ye project in 2003. 
Additionally, during 2003, Russia took proactive steps to 
improve chemical weapons destruction by concluding in March 
2003 a legally binding agreement to destroy all nerve agents at 
a single site, which it reaffirmed in a September 2003 
amendment to the agreement. Together, these steps mark 
significant progress in meeting the conditions upon which 
Congress made continued assistance for the Shchuch'ye facility 
dependent. They also validate the committee's approach to 
funding CTR programs, in which the United States commitment is 
carefully matched to significant, concrete, and concurrent 
demonstrations of commitment by the respective CTR partner.
    Despite the improvements discussed above, some Russian 
behavior continues to suggest that the Russian government does 
not place as high a priority on the goals of the Cooperative 
Threat Reduction program as the United States. First, Russia 
continues to modernize its strategic nuclear forces, suggesting 
it views modernizing its strategic arsenal as more important 
than securing and dismantling excess weapons of mass 
destruction inherited from the Soviet Union. At the end of 
2003, for example, it deployed several new Topol-M 
intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs). In contrast, the 
United States has not deployed a new ICBM in almost two 
decades. Second, questions remain about the completeness and 
accuracy of Russia's declarations regarding the size of the 
chemical weapons stockpile in Russia. While U.S. andRussian 
negotiators continue to discuss the problem, Russian officials have 
consistently rejected U.S. proposals intended to increase visibility 
into Russian chemical weapons stockpiles. Third, Russia has not 
developed a comprehensive and credible plan for destroying its 
stockpile of nerve agents. Such a plan is necessary to ensure that the 
value of U.S. expenditures on the Shchuch'ye chemical weapons 
dismantlement facility is fully realized.
    As a result of these last two factors, the President cannot 
certify that Russia is in compliance with the preconditions for 
continuing U.S. CTR assistance in section 1305 of the National 
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2000 (Public Law 106-
65) as amended. Consequently, the President has again requested 
authority to waive those conditions.

                        ITEM OF SPECIAL INTEREST


                           Visa Requirements

    The committee is aware of concerns that efforts to tighten 
visa requirements after September 11, 2001 may have had the 
unintended consequence of hampering the effectiveness of the 
Department of Defense and the Department of Energy 
nonproliferation programs by imposing delays in collaborative 
programs and complicating the international cooperation and 
coordination required. Therefore, the committee directs that 
the Secretary of Defense and the Secretary of Energy submit a 
report no later than six months after the enactment of this 
Act, identifying the causes of any new delays and assessing the 
costs and benefits of various means by which those delays might 
be remedied.

                         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 authorize them at the level of the 
budget request. It would also make fiscal year 2005 Cooperative 
Threat Reduction funds available for three years.

                   Section 1302--Funding Allocations

    This section would allocate fiscal year 2004 funding for 
various Cooperative Threat Reduction purposes and activities at 
the levels requested by the President.

 Section 1303--Temporary Authority to Waive Limitation on Funding for 
            Chemical Weapons Destruction Facility in Russia

    This section would extend for one year the President's 
authority to waive preconditions established in section 1305 of 
the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2000 
(Public Law 106-65) for continuing certain Cooperative Threat 
Reduction programs. The President's current authority expires 
at the end of fiscal year 2004. The committee notes that Russia 
has made progress in meeting several of the aforementioned 
conditions and believes that the existence of those conditions 
serves as an incentive for further progress.

      TITLE XIV--EXPORT CONTROLS AND COUNTERPROLIFERATION MATTERS

                                OVERVIEW

    The committee agrees with the President that the nexus of 
weapons of mass destruction and terrorism is a critical threat 
facing the United States in the 21st century. The committee 
also agrees with the President's call on February 11, 2004 to 
strengthen export controls, both domestic and international, as 
a means of ensuring that terrorist groups and their state 
supporters are not able to acquire capabilities to design, 
develop, or employ weapons of mass destruction. In particular, 
it notes that proliferation networks have grown increasingly 
sophisticated at exploiting legitimate international trade to 
spread such capabilities. The network of Pakistani weapons 
scientist A.Q. Khan, for example, has been widely implicated in 
spreading nuclear technology to a number of countries of 
concern. At the same time, the committee notes the growing role 
of international consortia in producing advanced military 
capabilities. In general, certain exceptions in existing export 
control regimes were designed to govern state-to-state 
transactions, but are now being employed to facilitate 
international transactions among non-state actors. The 
committee is concerned that these two trends are beginning to 
intersect and that proliferation networks will begin to exploit 
loopholes in existing export control regimes to acquire 
dangerous capabilities. Therefore, the committee, in close 
cooperation with the Committee on International Relations, 
developed a series of provisions intended to rationalize and 
harmonize export controls with the new international security 
environment.
    Recognizing the importance of a multilateral approach, the 
committee also recommends provisions intended to assist other 
countries in improving their capacity to prevent proliferation 
networks from acquiring sensitive technology through illicit 
activities disguised as legitimate defense trade. These include 
domestic counterproliferation fellowships for foreign military 
and defense ministry personnel in order to improve their 
understanding and application of counterproliferation tools and 
an expansion of the Secretary of Defense's authority to provide 
assistance to existing programs by the U.S. Customs Bureau and 
Federal Bureau of Investigations to train foreign customs and 
law enforcement officials in the skills needed to stem the 
spread of weapons of mass destruction.

                       ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST


               Defense Technology Security Administration

    The budget request included $20.5 million for the Defense 
Technology Security Administration (DTSA), which seeks to 
safeguard the United States and its allies by controlling and 
monitoring international technology transfers and preventing 
inappropriate technology transfers. The committee recommends 
$21.5 million in order to bolster the Administration's ability 
to prevent U.S. high technology from falling into the hands of 
potential adversaries.

                    Defense Threat Reduction Agency

    The budget request included $325.5 million for the Defense 
Threat Reduction Agency (DTRA) which seeks to reduce the threat 
of future weapons of mass destruction being employed against 
the United States and its allies. The committee supports the 
work of DTRA andrecommends an increase of an additional $1.4 
million to the Defense Threat Reduction Agency in order to strengthen 
and expand the existing federal effort to help foreign governments 
improve their export control performance through an export control data 
base currently used by some 18 countries in Eastern Europe and the 
former Soviet Union. The committee recommends the funds be used to 
continue existing subscriptions of the export control database for 
foreign countries, supply the database to additional countries around 
the globe, provide education and training for its use worldwide, 
enhance the quality and utility of the database by expanding its 
coverage of weapons of mass destruction information, and perform 
related research and public education initiatives on export control 
policy.

                       Nonproliferation Education

    The committee notes that the next Nuclear Nonproliferation 
Treaty (NPT) review conference will be held in 2005, and will 
come at a time of heightened concern over the threat of 
proliferation of weapons of mass destruction (WMD). The 
committee welcomes the important steps taken by the 
Administration to enhance current U.S. counter and non-
proliferation efforts, including the four proposals offered by 
the President on February 11, 2004:
          (1) Expansion of the Proliferation Security 
        Initiative (PSI) to go beyond shipments and transfers, 
        to increase collaboration between intelligence, law 
        enforcement, and military agencies to target and shut 
        down weapons traffickers, WMD suppliers, their labs, 
        and buyers;
          (2) Strengthened laws and international controls 
        governing proliferation, including a new Security 
        Council resolution requiring all states to criminalize 
        proliferation, enact strict export controls, and secure 
        all sensitive materials within their borders;
          (3) Expansion of U.S. Nunn-Lugar efforts, where the 
        President noted great success since 1991 but also 
        added, ``We have more work to do there;'' and
          (4) Elimination of a Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty 
        loophole that has been exploited by nations such as 
        North Korea and Iran, which have been allowed to 
        produce nuclear material that can be used to build 
        bombs under the cover of civilian nuclear programs.
    The committee believes that increased attention to 
proliferation concerns provides an opportunity to stimulate and 
encourage new entrants into nonproliferation and international 
security careers, and a chance to increase public understanding 
of the national and international security ramifications of the 
NPT and other efforts to stem WMD proliferation. The committee 
commends efforts by universities and other non-government 
organizations to broaden awareness of these critical issues, 
and believes that efforts to encourage the study of 
nonproliferation and international security issues are a 
welcome addition to postsecondary educational curricula.

                         LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS


                      Subtitle A--Export Controls


        Section 1401--Definitions under Arms Export Control Act

    This section would clarify the definitions of ``license,'' 
``agent,'' and ``exporting agent'' as they are applied under 
the Arms Export Control Act (Public Law 90-629). Currently, 
such terms are not defined. The definition of ``license'' would 
require it to be in written form. While current regulations 
require licenses to be in writing, the Department of State 
recently unilaterally issued a ``verbal'' license to approve 
the export of military guidance and sensor chips to the 
People's Republic of China (PRC), at a time when such items are 
normally prohibited for sale to the PRC. The chips were 
embedded in a commercial aircraft sale, but can be used in 
missile guidance systems. The Department of State's explanation 
for this significant departure from normal practice--that 
weather conditions in Washington, DC precluded the timely 
issuance of a written license--is not acceptable given the 
sensitivity of the technology involved.
    The definition of ``agent'' would ensure that persons 
covered by the definition are in fact empowered by their 
governments to act as emissaries of those governments in some 
capacity. Restrictions on the transfer of exported goods 
generally limit such transfers among those governments or their 
agents. However, several European states have begun to re-
interpret ``agents'' to mean representatives of a commercial 
firm within their borders. This looser definition effectively 
creates a loophole in which exports to certain countries could 
be approved with the expectation that the only individuals who 
have access to those exports are government officials, but in 
which access is considerably broader. The committee believes 
this change is necessary to ensure that advanced technology 
entrusted to foreign governments continues to be controlled 
with the care that has historically been afforded to it.
    The definition of ``exporting agent'' means the freight 
forwarder or consignee as designated on a license application 
and authorized to act on behalf of the license applicant.

   Section 1402--Exemption from Licensing Requirements for Export of 
                     Significant Military Equipment

    This section would prohibit the President from creating 
regulatory exemptions for significant military equipment that 
would otherwise require an export license. Section 47 of the 
Arms Export Control Act (22 U.S.C. 2794) defines ``significant 
military equipment'' as articles for which special export 
controls are warranted and are identified on the United States 
Munitions List. As a practical matter, this limitation would 
result in little change from current practice. However, the 
Department of State recently proposed exempting a class of 
significant military equipment from the requirement to obtain a 
license, raising concerns about setting precedents for the 
license-free export of major combat systems. This section would 
inoculate the U.S. Government from pressures to export those 
systems without first giving such exports the added scrutiny 
and safeguards inherent in the licensing process.

   Section 1403--Cooperative Projects with Friendly Foreign Countries

    This section would create a process by which Congress has 
an opportunity to reject a cooperative project proposal it 
currently receives under the Arms Export Control Act (22 U.S.C. 
2767). Similar procedures already exist for commercial and 
military exports undertaken under the Arms Export Control Act 
(22 U.S.C. 2776). This section would also ensure that 
commercial exports embedded in an international cooperative 
project will require a license under Section 38 of the Arms 
Export Control Act governing commercial arms exports. 
Historically, cooperative projects with friendly foreign 
countries were conducted as government-to-government 
activities. However, in recent years, such projects have 
increasingly included corporate entities and accorded them 
growing authority in making project decisions, outside of the 
normal licensing process. As the United States makes increasing 
use of such projects in the research, development, and 
acquisition process, the committee is concerned that controls 
on the exports of sensitive military technologies are being 
inadvertently loosened in order streamline the 
project'sexecution. It is concerned that this process may take place 
without regard to the need to ensure sensitive military capabilities do 
not fall into the hands of potential adversaries or terrorist groups. 
By aligning the Congressional review process on cooperative projects 
with the review process on commercial arms exports and requiring a 
license for commercial entities embedded in a cooperative project, this 
section would ensure that security interests continue to predominate in 
such projects.

 Section 1404--Licensing Requirement for Export of Militarily Critical 
                              Technologies

    This section would require the President to require 
exporters of militarily critical technologies to obtain an 
export license for the export or re-export of any item on the 
Militarily Critical Technologies List published by the 
Department of Defense (DOD). The Export Administration Act of 
1979 established process for licensing import or export of 
dual-use technologies. It also required the Department of 
Defense to prepare a Militarily Critical Technologies List 
(MCTL). The Departments of Defense and Commerce are expected to 
integrate the MCTL into the list of dual-use goods and 
technologies that require a license to export under the Export 
Administration Act.
    However, in recent years, concerns have been raised that 
MCTL goods were not being appropriately controlled. Section 
1211 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 
2004 (Public Law 108-136) requires DOD to prepare a report on 
technologies needed to ensure U.S. military superiority and 
identify whether those items were controlled under any export 
control regime. That report was delivered on March 5, 2004 and 
identified several technologies that are not controlled under 
the Export Administration Regulations or the Arms Export 
Control Act, including, among others,: (1) Amorphous Silicon 
Focal Plane Arrays used in Night Vision Devices; (2) UAV kits 
to convert civil aircraft; (3) Precision Approach Radars 
containing electronically scanned arrays (useful in EW); (4) 
Surveillance Direction Finders; (5) GPS receivers with 
interference protection; and, (6) High-Precision, Multi-Axis 
Job Grinders, a machine tool used to make missile guidance 
components. These systems fall into categories identified on 
the MCTL, confirming that such technologies are not adequately 
controlled. This section would continue to allow exports of 
such militarily critical technologies, but would ensure that 
the exports remain consistent with national security.

Section 1405--Control of Exports of United States Weapons Technology to 
                     the People's Republic of China

    This section would prohibit the export of certain 
technologies to individuals or countries engaged in the sale of 
such items to the security services of the People's Republic of 
China unless certain conditions are met. Such conditions would 
require that a license was approved for that export, the 
Secretary of Defense concurs in the export, and the foreign 
person or country agrees in writing not to transfer title, 
possession of, or otherwise provide access to that item without 
prior, written, consent by the President.
    The committee is concerned by reports that military trade 
embargos imposed on the People's Republic of China after the 
Tiananmen Square massacre might be weakened or discontinued. 
The committee is also concerned that the weakening of such 
restrictions would send the wrong message about the importance 
of respecting human rights, undermine international controls 
intended to prevent the proliferation of sensitive dual-use and 
military technology, and exacerbate a serious military 
imbalance in Asia.

       Section 1406--Strengthening International Export Controls

    This section would make it the policy of the United States 
to seek continued negotiations to strengthen the international 
export control system for arms and militarily-sensitive goods 
and technologies to countries of concern. It requires a 
Presidential report on progress made in strengthening 
international controls 180 days after enactment and every six 
months thereafter.

                Subtitle B--Counterproliferation Matters


   Section 1411--Defense International Counterproliferation Programs

    This section would authorize the Secretary of Defense to 
expand existing programs to train foreign border and law 
enforcement officials in preventing the illicit transfer of 
weapons of mass destruction in the states of the former Soviet 
Union, Eastern Europe, and the Baltic states, by granting the 
Secretary authority to conduct those programs in any other 
country in which the Secretary determines a significant threat 
exists. The National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 
1995 (Public Law 103-337) established a joint program between 
the Department of Defense and the Federal Bureau of 
Investigation to conduct training of law enforcement officials 
in the former Soviet Union and Eastern Europe to deter, 
interdict, and counter any organized crime involvement in the 
illegal acquisition of weapons of mass destruction. The 
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1997 (Public 
Law 104-201) established a joint program between the Department 
of Defense and the United States Customs Service to assist 
customs and border guard entities in the former Soviet Union 
and Eastern Europe to prevent the unauthorized transfer and 
transportation of weapons of mass destruction and related 
material.

     Section 1412--Defense Counterproliferation Fellowship Program

    This section would direct the Secretary of Defense to 
establish a fellowship program to train and educate foreign 
defense policymakers and military officers in identifying and 
using counterproliferation tools to combat the spread of 
weapons of mass destruction. It would further direct the 
Secretary to establish a domestic fellowship program for the 
purposes of improving the Department of Defense's ability to 
exploit non-government expertise in combating the spread of 
weapons of mass destruction. The President has identified the 
nexus among terrorists, weapons of mass destruction, and rogue 
states as a critical threat to United States national security. 
Nonproliferation and counterproliferation tools, such as export 
controls and the Proliferation Security Initiative, can play a 
vital role in containing that threat worldwide.

  Subtitle C--Initiatives Relating to Countries of the Former Soviet 
                                 Union


                   Section 1421--Silk Road Initiative

    This section would make it the policy of the United States 
to establish and promote programs to prevent the proliferation 
from former Soviet scientists, engineers, and technicians of 
the expertise useful to the development of weapons of mass 
destruction. It further authorizes the Secretary of Energy to 
carry out a program known as the Silk Road Initiative to 
promote employment in the former Soviet republics in the 
Caucasus and Central Asia. It encourages the Secretary to begin 
a pilot program in the Republic of Georgia and authorizes the 
Secretary tospend up to $10.0 million on the program from 
within funds available for nonproliferation and international security 
in fiscal year 2005.

      Section 1422--Teller-Kurchatov Nonproliferation Fellowships

    This section would authorize the Secretary of Energy to 
conduct a fellowship program in which an American scientist 
serves as a fellow at the Kurchatov Institute in Russia and a 
Russian scientist to serve as a fellow in the Lawrence 
Livermore National Laboratory. It authorizes the Secretary to 
spend up to $10.0 million on the program from within funds 
available for nonproliferation and international security in 
fiscal year 2005.

Section 1423--Collaboration to Reduce the Risks of a Launch of Russian 
                            Nuclear Weapons

    This section finds that certain limitations of the Russian 
nuclear command and control system raise concerns about the 
prospects for an accidental or unauthorized launch of Russian 
strategic ballistic missiles. It directs the Secretary of 
Defense to submit a report to Congress no later than November 
1, 2005 on steps that might be taken to reduce that danger, 
including an assessment of the risks and opportunities 
associated with taking those steps.

  TITLE XV--AUTHORIZATION FOR INCREASED COSTS DUE TO OPERATION IRAQI 
                 FREEDOM AND OPERATION ENDURING FREEDOM

                                OVERVIEW

    The committee recommends authorization of $25 billion in 
funds to be appropriated for fiscal year 2005 to support the 
defense activities principally associated with Operation Iraqi 
Freedom, Operation Enduring Freedom and the global war on 
terrorism. These funds are designated for emergency contingency 
operations related to the global war on terrorism pursuant to 
H. Con. Res. 393, establishing the congressional budget for the 
United States Government for fiscal year 2005 and setting forth 
appropriate budgetary levels for fiscal year 2004 and 2006 
though 2009, as passed by the House of Representatives on March 
25, 2004.
    The increase in insurgent and terrorist action during the 
period preceding the return of sovereignty to the Iraqi 
government has increased the cost of operations. The committee 
believes that it is essential to recognize the change in 
operational level and ensure full funding is available to 
support U.S. troops and their needs.

                     SUMMARY TABLE OF AUTHORIZATION

    The following table provides a summary of the committee's 
authorization of funds for this purpose by appropriations 
account.


                       ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST


                              Procurement

    It is the highest priority of the committee that our troops 
be supported with the equipment necessary to successfully 
accomplish their missions in Operation Iraqi Freedom, Operation 
Enduring Freedom and the global war on terrorism. The committee 
recommends authorization for procurement to support force 
protection, the rapid fielding initiative for basic infantry 
combat equipment, combat losses of essential equipment, the 
Army's modularity initiative, and essential combat related 
unfunded requirements of our armed forces.
    The committee's recommendations for procurement in this 
title include full support of the force protection needs of our 
units. Included in the force protection recommendation is full 
funding for the Up Armor High Mobilility Multipurpose Wheeled 
Vehicle (HMMWV); bolt-on ballistic armor for HMMWVs and trucks; 
and Interceptor Body Armor (IBA), including funding for add-on 
protection for the shoulder and side body areas. Intelligence, 
surveillance and reconnaissance (ISR) are important elements of 
force protection and are critical to interdict, disrupt, and 
defeat the insurgent and terrorist threat. Therefore, this 
title also includes authorization to procure unmanned aerial 
vehicles (UAV) that are currently in production to provide 
these UAV assets to the units in theater in sufficient quantity 
to meet both their operational and ISR requirements.
    The committee fully supports the Army's efforts to 
transform the structure of its divisions into smaller 
organizations to create additional combat relevant units. This 
reorganization known as ``modularity'' will contribute to the 
reduction of stress on our troops due to the high operational 
tempo of operations in southwest Asia. This title authorizes an 
aggressive down payment for the equipment costs of both 
modularity and the rapid fielding initiative as displayed in 
the Army unfunded requirements list so that every infantry 
soldier has the equipment necessary to perform their mission.
    This title also provides authorization for the combat 
related, unfunded equipment requirements of the Marine Corp and 
Army as submitted by the service chiefs in February and March 
2004 and to replace combat losses in aviation and other 
equipment.

                       Operations and Maintenance

    The military departments and defense agencies need 
operations and maintenance (O&M) funds to pay for food, fuel, 
spare parts, maintenance, transportation, camp, post, and base 
expenses that have risen dramatically as a result of Operation 
Iraqi Freedom (OIF) and Operation Enduring Freedom (OEF). Much 
of these expenses are captured in the O&M funding for operating 
tempo. This cost is significant. Without additional funding at 
the start of fiscal year 2005, the military departments will be 
forced to use third and fourth quarter O&M funds in the initial 
months of fiscal year 2005 to pay for OIF and OEF costs. This 
presents significant accounting and budgetary hurdles and 
alters the ability to plan properly for the entire year. The 
committee, therefore, believes that O&M war-related costs 
should be funded prior to the start of the fiscal year. In 
addition, the committee is funding critical equipment for the 
Iraq and Afghanistan theater that will improve our troops' 
welfare and combat effectiveness. The committee believes that 
these items should be funded immediately.

                           Military Personnel

    The committee long has advocated for increases in active 
component manpower to sustain the full range of capabilities 
required of and missions assigned to the Armed Forces. Thus the 
committee recommended in the National Defense Authorization 
Acts for Fiscal Years 2003 and 2004 increases of 10,350 and 
6,240 respectively in active component manpower above the 
budget requests.
    More recently, the Army Chief of Staff announced a plan for 
a temporary increase of 30,000 in the Army's active component 
end strength, not only to improve its ability to meet the full 
range of its worldwide missions, but also to increase its 
current active combat capability from 33 brigades to 43-48 
brigades. To support the Army's need, the committee recommends 
in this title a cumulative active component increase of 30,000 
(to an end strength of 512,400), in increments of 10,000 each 
in fiscal years 2005 through 2007. The committee would also 
temporarily adjust the minimum end strength floors to reflect 
the increases in authorized end strength.
    To ensure the Marine Corps can continue to provide and 
sustain the force levels required of it by the national 
security strategy, the committee recommends in this title a 
cumulative active component Marine Corps increase of 9,000 (to 
and end strength of 184,000), in increments of 3,000 each in 
fiscal years 2005 through 2007. The committee would also adjust 
the minimum end strength floors to reflect the increases in 
authorized end strength.
    The committee recommends an additional $1,179 million for 
military personnel, operations and maintenance to fund the 
additional Army and Marine Corps active component manpower in 
fiscal year 2005. To fund increased Army and Marine Corps 
manpower in fiscal years 2006 and beyond, the committee 
recommends that starting in fiscal year 2006 the Secretary of 
the Treasury would assume the requirement for the annual 
payment to the Department of Defense Medicare-Eligible Retiree 
Health Care Fund that is now made by the Secretary of Defense. 
The committee expects that the Secretary of Defense will use 
the resulting funding flexibility to fully fund the costs of 
the Army transformation efforts and Marine Corps end strength 
growth in fiscal year 2006 and beyond.
    To address the concerns of the Secretary of Defense and the 
Chief of Staff of the Army that end strength increases should 
not be made permanent, the committee's recommendation provides 
for only temporary end strength growth through the end of 
fiscal year 2007--the point at which Army leadership has 
indicated it will be in a better position to assess future 
manning levels. Furthermore, this committee recommendation 
would require that if the Secretary of Defense, in coordination 
with the Secretary of the Army, or the Secretary of the Navy, 
believes changes should be made to the strength levels 
authorized by this title, then those changes must be provided 
to the committee prior to the submission of the budget request 
for any fiscal year.
    Finally, to provide for the active component and reserve 
component military manpower deployed in Iraq and Afghanistan 
for the first quarter of fiscal year 2005, the committee would 
authorize $4.4 billion. In addition, the committee would also 
authorize $141 million to extend the authority of the 
Department of Defense to continue paying higher levels of 
family separation allowance and imminent danger pay.

                         LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS


                         Section 1501--Purpose

    This section would establish this title as an authorization 
of appropriations for the Department of Defense for fiscal year 
2005, in addition to amounts otherwise authorized in this Act, 
to provide funds for additional costs due to Operation Iraqi 
Freedom and Operation Enduring Freedom.

              Subtitle A--Authorization of Appropriations


                     Section 1511--Army Procurement

    This section would authorize an additional $2,439.2 million 
for fiscal year 2005 Army procurement.

            Section 1512--Navy and Marine Corps Procurement

    This section would authorize an additional $136.6 million 
for fiscal year 2005 Navy and Marine Corps procurement.

                  Section 1513--Air Force Procurement

    This section would authorize an additional $99.0 million 
for fiscal year 2005 Air Force procurement.

           Section 1514--Defense-Wide Activities Procurement

    This section would authorize an additional $720.0 million 
for fiscal year 2005 Defense-Wide Activities procurement.

                Section 1515--Operation and Maintenance

    This section would authorize an additional $16,225.2 
million for fiscal year 2005 operation and maintenance 
programs.

                  Section 1516--Defense Health Program

    This section would authorize $75.0 million to be 
appropriated to the Defense Health Program (DHP) for operations 
and maintenance for fiscal year 2005.

                    Section 1517--Military Personnel

    This section would authorize $5,305.0 million to be 
appropriated to the Department of Defense for military 
personnel for fiscal year 2005.

          Section 1518--Treatment as Additional Authorization

    This section would authorize an additional $25 billion for 
emergency contingency operations related to the global war on 
terrorism to the amounts otherwise authorized in this Act.

                    Section 1519--Transfer Authority

    This section would provide fiscal year 2005 transfer 
authority of $2.5 billion to the Department of Defense for the 
authorizations contained in this title.

          Section 1520--Designation of Emergency Authorization

    This section would authorize $25 billion for fiscal year 
2005 to support emergency contingency operations related to the 
global war on terrorism.

                    Subtitle B--Personnel Provisions


    Section 1531--Three Year Increase in Active Army Strength Levels

    This section would increase the active Army end strength 
authorized for fiscal year 2005 by 10,000 above the 
authorization contained in section 401. This section would also 
authorize active Army end strengths for fiscal years 2006 and 
2007 of 502,400 and 512,400 respectively. This section would 
establish temporary new minimum active duty end strengths for 
the Army as of September 30, 2005, 2006 and 2007 respectively. 
These changes in minimum strengths reflect the committee's 
recommendations for Army end strength provided by this section. 
The section would also direct that if the Secretary of Defense, 
in consultation with the Secretary of the Army, determines that 
adjustments are necessary to the minimum end strength levels, 
then the Secretary of Defense shall submit a report of his 
recommendations and rationale for change to the Senate 
Committee on Armed Services and the House Committee on Armed 
Services prior to the submission of the budget request for the 
fiscal year in which the change would be effective.

   Section 1532--Three Year Increase in Active Marine Corps Strength 
                                 Levels

    This section would increase the United States Marine Corps 
active end strength authorized for fiscal year 2005 by 3,000 
above the authorization contained in section 401. This section 
would also authorize U.S. Marine Corps active end strengths for 
fiscal years 2006 and 2007 of 181,000 and 184,000 respectively. 
This section would establish temporary new minimum active duty 
end strengths for the Marine Corps as of September 30, 2005, 
2006 and 2007 respectively. These changes in minimum strengths 
reflect the committee's recommendations for Marine Corps active 
end strength provided by this section. The section would also 
direct that if the Secretary of Defense, in consultation with 
the Secretary of the Navy, determines that adjustments are 
necessary to the minimum end strength levels, then the 
Secretary of Defense shall submit a report of his 
recommendations and rationale for change to the Senate 
Committee on Armed Services and the House Committee on Armed 
Services prior to the submission of the budget request for the 
fiscal year in which the change would be effective.

Section 1533--Extension of Increased Rates for Imminent Danger Pay and 
                      Family Separation Allowance

    This section would make permanent the increase in the rate 
of imminent danger pay from $150 per month to $225 per month 
and the increase in the rate of family separation allowance 
from $100 per month to $250 per month.

                Subtitle C--Financial Management Matters


 Section 1541--Revised Funding Methodology for Military Retiree Health 
                             Care Benefits

    This section would revise the process for funding the 
annual payments that are required to be paid into the 
Department of Defense Medicare-Eligible Retiree Health Care 
Fund. Beginning in fiscal year 2006, the Secretary of the 
Treasury would make the annual payments from the general fund 
of the Treasury. Under current law the Secretary of Defense, as 
well as the secretaries of the other departments whose 
beneficiaries participate in the TRICARE for Life program, make 
these annual payments.

            DIVISION B--MILITARY CONSTRUCTION AUTHORIZATIONS

                                PURPOSE

    Division B provides military construction and related 
authorities in support of the military departments during 
fiscal year 2005. As recommended by the committee, Division B 
would authorize appropriations in the amount of $9,930,475,000 
for construction in support of the active forces, reserve 
components, defense agencies, and the North Atlantic Treaty 
Organization security infrastructure fund for fiscal year 2005.

                     MILITARY CONSTRUCTION OVERVIEW

    The Department of Defense (DOD) requested $5,308,879,000 
for military construction and $4,171,596,000 for family housing 
for fiscal year 2005. The committee recommends authorization of 
$5,778,709,000 for military construction and $4,151,766,000 for 
family housing in fiscal year 2005. The committee's 
recommendations are consistent with a total budget authority 
level of $9,930,475,000 for military construction and family 
housing in fiscal year 2005.
    The committee's recommendation to increase the budget 
request for military construction and family housing reflects 
continued concern about the state of DOD infrastructure. Every 
Congress for the past decade has acted on similar concerns by 
adding funds to military construction and family housing 
budgets. This historic trend is a clear indication that the 
annual budget requests for DOD infrastructure and facilities 
are routinely inadequate.
    Of additional concern is the fact that the fiscal year 2005 
budget request for military construction and family housing 
includes less funding than the fiscal year 2004 program, as 
enacted. Furthermore, the fiscal year 2005 request for these 
programs is nearly $1,400,000,000 smaller than was forecast in 
the fiscal year 2004 budget. Finally, the forecasted total for 
military construction over the fiscal year 2005 Future Years 
Defense Program (FYDP) is $6,000,000,000 less than the amounts 
forecasted in the fiscal year 2004 FYDP.
    Unless these forecasted increases become reality, the 
Department will not be able to meet its current facilities 
needs, nor will it be able to meet the substantial facilities 
requirements associated with Army transformation, increased 
Army force structure, and the Global Posture Review. 
Considering the importance of facilities and infrastructure to 
military readiness, quality of life, retention, and operational 
capabilities, the committee urges the Department to ensure that 
future military construction and family housing budget requests 
are properly resourced.
    With regard to maintenance, repair, and sustainment of 
facilities, the committee applauds the Department for 
implementing a legitimate model for determining sustainment 
budgets. However, the Department does not have an effective 
model for base operations, repair, and modernization budgets. 
As a result, these accounts continue to be funded at levels 
that do not support ``must pay'' bills for utilities and 
critical base services. While operations, maintenance, and 
repair budgets are primarily funded in title III of this Act, 
funding shortfalls in these areas directly affect the 
condition, usability, and lifespan of military facilities and 
family housing projects funded in Division B. Therefore, the 
committee urges the Department to fully fund facilities-related 
budgets, including military construction, family housing, base 
operations, sustainment, restoration, and maintenance programs.
    Finally, the Department continues to develop the Global 
Posture Review, a comprehensive review and restructuring of the 
Department's overseas basing strategy. While the Department has 
provided Congress glimpses of parts of the review, it has not 
yet finalized its overseas basing decisions, nor has it 
provided Congress with a complete picture of its plans.
    While this would be troubling in any year, the committee is 
particularly concerned that the review, which is expected to 
return significant numbers of overseas-based military personnel 
to the United States, will not be finalized until the base 
closure process is well under way. As a result, Congress will 
not have the opportunity to review and validate the 
Department's overseas basing decisions before they are 
implemented through the base closure process. Furthermore, the 
Department is in the midst of several additional evolving 
efforts that are likely to have significant effects on the 
infrastructure requirements of the military services, including 
force transformation and changes in endstrength related to the 
active and reserve personnel mix of the services. Therefore, 
the committee has included provisions in Division B to ensure 
that the Department presents Congress with a complete plan of 
future infrastructure requirements before proceeding with the 
base closure process.
    A tabular summary of the authorizations provided in 
Division B for fiscal year 2005 follows:


                            TITLE XXI--ARMY

                                SUMMARY

    The budget request contained $1,771,285,000 for Army 
military construction and $1,565,006,000 for family housing for 
fiscal year 2005. The committee recommends authorization of 
$1,866,209,000 for military construction and $1,562,606,000 for 
family housing for fiscal year 2005.

                       ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST


                          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: 
$750,000 for an aircraft maintenance hangar at Cairns Army Air 
Field, Fort Rucker, Alabama; $561,000 for a runway extension at 
Amedee Army Airfield, Sierra Army Depot, California; $2,250,000 
for a receptee barracks expansion at Fort Benning, Georgia; 
$310,000 for a law enforcement complex at Fort Gordon, Georgia; 
$365,000 for a consolidated shipping center at Bluegrass Depot, 
Kentucky; $278,000 for a child development center at Tobyhanna, 
Pennsylvania; $486,000 for a military operations on unbanized 
terrain collective training facility at Fort A.P. Hill, 
Virginia; and $500,000 for access roads at Fort Belvoir, 
Virginia.

                         LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS


    Section 2101--Authorized Army Construction and Land Acquisition 
                                Projects

    This section contains the list of authorized Army 
construction projects for fiscal year 2005. 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 
2005.

      Section 2103--Improvements to Military Family Housing Units

    This section would authorize new improvements to existing 
units of family housing for fiscal year 2005.

          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 
2005. 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 2004 Projects

    This section would amend the table in section 2101 of the 
Military Construction Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2004 
(division B of Public Law 108-136) to increase the amounts 
authorized for construction at Fort Stewart, Georgia, and Fort 
Drum, New York.

  Section 2106--Modification of Authority to Carry Out Certain Fiscal 
                           Year 2003 Project

    This section would amend the table in section 2101 of the 
Military Construction Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2003 
(division B of Public Law 107-314) to increase the amount 
authorized for construction at Fort Sill, Oklahoma.

                            TITLE XXII--NAVY

                                SUMMARY

    The budget request contained $1,060,455,000 for Navy 
military construction and $843,611,000 for family housing for 
fiscal year 2005. The committee recommends authorization of 
$1,077,862,000 for military construction and $835,411,000 for 
family housing for fiscal year 2005.

                       ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST


                          Planning and Design

    The committee recommends that, within authorized amounts 
for planning and design, the Secretary of the Navy complete 
planning and design activities for the following projects: 
$250,000 for an advanced sensors integration facility at Naval 
Air Weapons Station China Lake, California; $268,000 for 
physical gate security enhancements at Marine Corps Air Station 
Miramar, California; $150,000 for phase two of an aircraft 
parking apron at Naval Air Station Jacksonville, Florida; 
$150,000 for a consolidated operations support facility at 
Naval Air Station Jacksonville, Florida; and $1,032,000 for 
improvements to machine shops at Norfolk Naval Shipyard 
Detachment, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.

                         LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS


    Section 2201--Authorized Navy Construction and Land Acquisition 
                                Projects

    This section contains the list of authorized Navy 
construction projects for fiscal year 2005. 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 
2005.

      Section 2203--Improvements to Military Family Housing Units

    This section would authorize new improvements to existing 
units of family housing for fiscal year 2005.

          Section 2204--Authorization of Appropriations, Navy

    This section would authorize specific appropriations for 
each line item contained in the Navy's budget for fiscal year 
2005. This section also provides an overall limit on the amount 
the Navy may spend on military construction projects.

                         TITLE XXIII--AIR FORCE

                                SUMMARY

    The budget request contained $663,964,000 for Air Force 
military construction and $1,710,855,000 for family housing for 
fiscal year 2005. The committee recommends authorization of 
$792,054,000 for military construction and $1,701,625,000 for 
family housing for fiscal year 2005.

                       ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST


                          Planning and Design

    The committee recommends that, within authorized amounts 
for planning and design, the Secretary of the Air Force 
complete planning and design activities for the following 
projects: $880,000 for a security forces operational facility 
at Patrick Air Force Base, Florida; $8,000,000 for a 
consolidated Central Command facility at MacDill Air Force 
Base, Florida; $1,340,000 for a logistics readiness center at 
Mountain Home Air Force Base, Idaho; $1,332,000 for a 
consolidated mobility processing center at McConnell Air Force 
Base, Kansas; $890,000 for alteration of a fuel cell dock at 
Minot Air Force Base, North Dakota; $497,000 for runway repair 
at Offutt Air Force Base, Nebraska; $837,000 for a fire and 
crash rescue station at Nellis Air Force Base, Nevada; and 
$670,000 for a mission support complex at Fairchild Air Force 
Base, Washington.

                         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 2005. 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 2005.

      Section 2303--Improvements to Military Family Housing Units

    This section would authorize new improvements to existing 
units of family housing for fiscal year 2005.

        Section 2304--Authorization of Appropriations, Air Force

    This section would authorize specific appropriations for 
each line item contained in the Air Force's budget for fiscal 
year 2005. This section also provides an overall limit on the 
amount the Air Force may spend on military construction 
projects.

                      TITLE XXIV--DEFENSE AGENCIES

                                SUMMARY

    The budget request contained $699,437,000 for defense 
agency military construction and $49,624,000 for family housing 
for fiscal year 2005. The budget request also included 
$81,886,000 for chemical demilitarization construction projects 
in a separate title. The committee recommends including 
chemical demilitarization construction in Title XXIV. 
Therefore, the committee recommends authorization of 
$790,823,000 for military construction and $49,624,000 for 
family housing for defense agencies for fiscal year 2005.

                         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 2005. 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--Improvements to Family Housing Units

    This section would authorize improvements to existing units 
of family housing for fiscal year 2005.

               Section 2403--Energy Conservation Projects

    This section would authorize the Secretary of Defense to 
carry out energy conservation projects.

    Section 2404--Authorization of Appropriations, Defense Agencies

    This section would authorize specific amounts for each line 
item contained in the defense agencies' budgets for fiscal year 
2005. This section also provides an overall limit on the amount 
the defense agencies may spend on military construction 
projects.

   TITLE XXV--NORTH ATLANTIC TREATY ORGANIZATION SECURITY INVESTMENT 
                                PROGRAM

                                SUMMARY

    The budget request contained $165,800,000 for the North 
Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) infrastructure fund (NATO 
Security Investment Program) for fiscal year 2005. The 
committee recommends authorization of $165,800,000 for fiscal 
year 2005.

                         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 $165,800,000 as the U.S. 
contribution to the North Atlantic Treaty Organization Security 
Investment Program.

            TITLE XXVI--GUARD AND RESERVE FORCES FACILITIES

                                SUMMARY

    The budget request contained $619,936,000 for military 
construction of guard and reserve facilities for fiscal year 
2005. The committee recommends authorization for fiscal year 
2005 of $839,845,000 to be distributed as follows:

Army National Guard........................................$393,225,000
Air National Guard..........................................184,620,000
Army Reserve................................................116,955,000
Naval and Marine Corps Reserve...............................30,955,000
Air Force Reserve...........................................114,090,000
                                                       ________________
                                                       
      Total.................................................839,845,000

                       ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST


                Planning and Design, Air National Guard

    The committee recommends that, within authorized amounts 
for planning and design, the Secretary of the Air Force 
complete planning and design activities for the following 
projects: $772,000 for a composite operations and training 
facility at Montgomery, Alabama; $509,000 for a space warning 
system squadron support facility at Greeley Air National Guard 
Station, Colorado; $300,000 for the relocation of the base 
entrance at Capital Municipal Airport, Illinois; $650,000 for a 
fire and crash rescue station at Rosecrans Memorial Airport, 
Missouri; $990,000 for a pararescue complex at Francis S. 
Gabreski Airport, New York; and $501,000 for a fire and crash 
rescue station at Stewart International Airport, New York.

                    Planning and Design, Air Reserve

    The committee recommends that, within authorized amounts 
for planning and design, the Secretary of the Air Force 
complete planning and design activities for the following 
project: $954,000 for phase one of a joint services lodging 
facility at Youngstown Air Reserve Station, Ohio.

                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 projects: 
$789,000 for a joint armed forces reserve center at Daytona 
Beach, Florida; $844,000 for a armed forces reserve center at 
Gary, Indiana; $614,000 for a national guard and reserve center 
building at Lincoln Airbase, Nebraska; $485,000 for a readiness 
center at Hermitage, Pennsylvania; $1,999,000 for phase two of 
a readiness center addition and alteration at Nashville, 
Tennessee; $935,000 for a joint armed forces reserve center at 
Smyrna, Tennessee; $530,000 for a readiness center at 
Winchester, Virginia; and $2,014,000 for a readiness center 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: 
$843,000 for a reserve center at Garden Grove, California.

          Unspecified Minor Construction, Army National Guard

    The committee recommends that, within authorized amounts 
for unspecified minor construction, the Secretary of the Army 
execute the following project: $2,700,000 for a wastewater 
treatment facility at Camp Shelby, Mississippi.

                         LEGISLATIVE PROVISION


   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 2005. 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, 2007, or the date of enactment of an act 
authorizing funds for military construction for fiscal year 
2008, whichever is later. This expiration would not apply to 
authorizations for which appropriated funds have been obligated 
before October 1, 2007, or the date of enactment of an act 
authorizing funds for military construction for fiscal year 
2008, whichever is later.

 Section 2702--Extension of Authorizations of Certain Fiscal Year 2002 
                                Projects

    This section would extend fiscal year 2002 military 
construction authorizations until October 1, 2005, or the date 
of enactment of an act authorizing funds for military 
construction for fiscal year 2006, whichever is later. The 
extended authorization applies to the following projects: 
$23,000,000 for construction of a power plant cooling tower at 
Fort Wainwright, Alaska; $1,500,000 for Parker Ranch land 
acquisition at Pohakuloa Training Area, Hawaii; $11,400,000 for 
construction of family housing at Buckley Air Force Base, 
Colorado; and $7,300,000 to replace family housing at Barksdale 
Air Force Base, Louisiana.

Section 2703--Extension and Renewal of Authorizations of Certain Fiscal 
                           Year 2001 Projects

    This section would extend certain fiscal year 2001 military 
construction authorizations until October 1, 2005, or the date 
of enactment of an act authorizing funds for military 
construction for fiscal year 2006, whichever is later. The 
extended authorizations apply to the following projects: 
$250,000 for construction of family housing at Fort Jackson, 
South Carolina; $7,400,000 for Defense Finance and Accounting 
Service building renovation at Kleber Kaserne, Germany; and 
$843,000 for an elementary school classroom addition at Osan 
Air Base, Korea.

                      Section 2704--Effective Date

    This section would provide that titles XXI, XXII, XXIII, 
XXIV, XXV, and XXVI of this bill shall take effect on October 
1, 2004, or the date of enactment of this Act, whichever is 
later.

                    TITLE XXVIII--GENERAL PROVISIONS

                       ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST


                      Base Realignment and Closure

    By May 16, 2005, the Secretary of Defense must present 
recommendations for base closures and realignments to Congress 
and the base closure commission. With this deadline 
approximately one year away, the committee is increasingly 
concerned by the significant number of uncertainties and 
ongoing turbulent events that will dramatically affect the 
Department's infrastructure requirements both during and after 
the base closure process.
    For example, the demands of the global war on terrorism 
continue to change, the manpower and infrastructure 
requirements related to the effort to rebuild Iraq continue to 
evolve, the Department has not yet completed a global review of 
its overseas military installations, each of the military 
services is in the midst of force transformation, end strength 
requirements of the services continue to be unsettled issues, 
and the infrastructure and force requirements for the 
Department to meet homeland security missions have not yet been 
determined.
    Therefore, the committee includes a provision to require 
the Department to report to Congress on a number of unresolved 
infrastructure-related issues. Pending submission of these 
reports, the provision would suspend the base closure process 
until 2007.
    The committee notes that a two-year postponement of the 
base closure and realignment round would have several benefits. 
First, postponement would allow the Department to stabilize 
force and funding requirements related to Iraq, Afghanistan, 
the war against terrorism, and homeland security before making 
base closure and realignment recommendations. Second, 
postponement would allow DOD to understand the impact of, and 
in some cases resolve, significant infrastructure-related 
issues such as global basing and transformation before making 
irreversible base closure decisions. Finally, base closure 
actions historically result in significant up-front costs with 
net savings not occurring for several years after closure 
activities. Delay of the base closure round until 2007 would 
provide relief to significant budgetary pressures on the 
Department during the next five years.
    The committee also includes a provision to amend and codify 
the criteria used by the Department to make base closure and 
realignment recommendations. The committee's recommended 
changes address many of the comments that the Department 
received during the public comment period on the selection 
criteria.

Department of Defense and Veterans Affairs Health Care Facility Sharing

    The committee continues to support efforts by the 
Department of Defense and the Department of Veterans Affairs 
(VA) to design, construct, maintain, and operate health care 
facilities in a joint manner, and encourages the Department and 
VA to take advantage of opportunities to share health care 
facilities whenever possible. The committee report (H. Rept. 
108-106) accompanying the National Defense Authorization Act 
for Fiscal Year 2004, advocated DOD participation in and 
contribution to the VA's plans to build a new hospital at the 
site of the closed Fitzsimons Army Hospital in Colorado. The 
committee reiterates its support for a joint DOD-VA hospital at 
the Fitzsimons Hospital site, and encourages the Department of 
Defense to contribute funds, at a level representative of its 
medical requirements, to design and construct such a facility.

                     Housing Requirements Analyses

    The committee is aware that recent changes to methodology 
used in Housing Requirements Analyses have resulted in 
significant decreases to on-base housing requirements at many 
military installations, including McChord Air Force Base, 
Washington and Travis Air Force Base, California. Military 
Housing Privatization Initiative authorities do not prohibit 
privatized housing maintenance or construction in excess of the 
minimum requirement. As such, the committee encourages the 
services to inform housing privatization bidders of this point, 
particularly for those installations that have experienced 
significant decreases in on-base housing requirements as a 
result of the new housing methodology. In the specific case of 
McChord Air Force Base, the committee encourages the Secretary 
of the Air Force to explore joint efforts with the Army and the 
national guard to ensure that the privatized housing initiative 
at McChord is responsive to the needs of all active-duty 
military personnel in the region.

                 Military Housing Privatization Program

    The committee continues to support the Department of 
Defense's efforts to privatize military family and 
unaccompanied housing. By the end of fiscal year 2004, the 
Department anticipates having used the privatization program to 
leverage private investments to provide quality housing to more 
than 90,000 military families. The success of this program to 
date validates the committee's recommendation to eliminate the 
$850.0 million statutory ceiling on government investment in 
privatization projects (section 2806), effective October 1, 
2005.
    Furthermore, the committee believes that the housing 
privatization model may be a viable means of providing housing 
to military personnel at enduring overseas installations. As 
such, the committee urges the Department to consider the 
feasibility of expanding housing privatization authorities to 
permit overseas military family housing privatization.
    Finally, the committee notes that some local taxation 
authorities have chosen to levy real property taxes upon 
privatized housing projects. By taxing these properties, local 
authorities divert resources from reinvestment into military 
family housing facilities and cause significant reductions in 
the level of educational impact aid provided to communities 
with military dependents. Of particular concern are those cases 
where local taxation authorities have chosen to tax privatized 
family housing even though the local government is not 
providing municipal services such as trash collection and fire 
and police protection. The committee reminds local and state 
taxation authorities that taxation of privatized military 
family housing facilities has a direct effect on the quality of 
life of military personnel stationed in their communities, and 
urges such authorities to repeal and refrain from real property 
taxation of such projects.

                         LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS


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


     Section 2801--Increase in Certain Thresholds for Carrying Out 
            Unspecified Minor Military Construction Projects

    This section would amend section 2805(b) of title 10, 
United States Code, to increase from $750,000 to $1,000,000 the 
threshold at which service secretaries must approve the use of 
operation and maintenance funds for unspecified minor 
construction projects. This section would also amend section 
2805(c) to establish a single limit of $1,500,000 at which 
operation and maintenance funds may be used for unspecified 
minor construction projects.

Section 2802--Assessment of Vulnerability of Military Installations to 
      Terrorist Attack and Annual Report on Military Construction 
       Requirements Related to Antiterrorism and Force Protection

    This section would require the Secretary of Defense to 
establish guidance for the military services on appropriate 
levels of antiterrorism and force protection requirements for 
facilities construction and perimeter defenses (including gate 
and fence line construction). This section would also require 
the Secretary to certify that all major Department 
installations have been assessed for vulnerabilities to 
terrorist attack since September 11, 2001. Finally, this 
section would require the Department of Defense to provide an 
annual list of unfunded antiterrorism and force-protection 
military construction requirements.

   Section 2803--Change in Threshold for Congressional Notification 
  Regarding Use of Operation and Maintenance Funds for Facility Repair

    This section would amend section 2811(d) of title 10, 
United States Code, to lower the threshold at which 
congressional notification is required for facility repairs 
using operation and maintenance funds from $10,000,000 to 
$7,500,000.

Section 2804--Reporting Requirements Regarding Military Family Housing 
          Requirements for General Officers and Flag Officers

    This section would require the Department of Defense to 
conduct an analysis of general and flag officer housing 
requirements in the national capital region by March 30, 2005. 
This analysis must be based upon available housing in the local 
housing market as well as requirements for key and essential 
personnel to be housed in secure locations.
    The military services maintain more than 170 general and 
flag officer quarters in the national capital region. Although 
the committee recognizes the value of military family housing 
to quality of life, it is difficult to justify the high costs 
of building, operating, and maintaining a sizeable inventory of 
large general and flag officer quarters in the region. 
Therefore, this section would ensure that the Department 
determines whether the current number of such homes is 
appropriate.
    This section would also require the Department to report to 
Congress, by March 30, 2005, on its inventory of general and 
flag officer housing, including annual expenditures of each 
house for operations, utilities, and maintenance and repair 
over the past five years. The committee notes with concern the 
large expenditures on maintenance, repair, operations, and 
utilities on general and flag officers quarters reported in the 
fiscal year 2005 budget justification documents. This section 
is intended to provide the Congress with an historical 
perspective of the number and costs associated with general and 
flag officer quarters.
    Finally, this section would require the Department to 
provide as part of its annual budget justification documents, 
by March 30 of each year, a detailed list of each general and 
flag officer quarters for which operations, utilities, and 
maintenance and repair costs, in sum, are anticipated to exceed 
$20,000 in the coming year. Currently, annual appropriations 
laws require congressional notification prior to the 
expenditure of more than $35,000 for maintenance and repair for 
any single general or flag officer quarters. This section would 
enhance congressional oversight of total costs associated with 
general and flag officer housing.

Section 2805--Congressional Notification of Deviations from Authorized 
Cost Variations for Military Construction Projects and Military Family 
                            Housing Projects

    This section would amend section 2853(c)(3) of title 10, 
United States Code, to shorten the notice and wait period for 
significant project cost increases or scope decreases from 21 
days to 14 days, if notification is provided in an electronic 
format to Congress.

Section 2806--Repeal of Limitation on Use of Alternative Authority for 
         Acquisition and Improvement of Military Family Housing

    This section would amend section 2883 of title 10, United 
States Code, to repeal the limitation on budget authority for 
contracts and investments in military housing privatization 
projects, effective October 1, 2005.

  Section 2807--Temporary Authority to Accelerate Design Efforts for 
Military Construction Projects Carried Out Using Design-Build Selection 
                               Procedures

    This section would establish a demonstration program to 
allow the Department of Defense to enter into a design-build 
construction contract using design funds made available under 
sections 2807 and 18233 of title 10, United States Code, prior 
to the authorization of the project. Contracts entered into 
under this demonstration program must be selected using 
existing design-build contract procedures. In addition, the 
federal government's liability for termination for convenience 
of any such contract may not exceed the project's design cost. 
This section would permit the Department to enter into 36 
contracts through September 30, 2008, and would require a 
report to Congress on the value of the program by March 1, 
2007.

   Section 2808--Exchange or Sale of Reserve Component Facilities to 
                     Acquire Replacement Facilities

    This section would amend section 18233 of title 10, United 
States Code, to provide the Secretary of Defense the authority 
to receive facilities, cash, or a combination of facilities and 
cash for existing reserve component facilities. Existing law 
only permits the Secretary to exchange reserve facilities for 
replacement facilities.

Section 2809--One-Year Extension of Temporary, Limited Authority to Use 
 Operation and Maintenance Funds for Construction Projects Outside the 
                             United States

    This section would extend for one year the authority 
provided by section 2808 of the National Defense Authorization 
Act for Fiscal Year 2004 (Public Law 108-136) to permit the 
Secretary of Defense to utilize operation and maintenance funds 
to construct facilities necessary for temporary operational 
requirements related to a declaration of war, national 
emergency, or contingency.

        Subtitle B--Real Property and Facilities Administration


    Section 2811--Increase in Certain Thresholds for Reporting Real 
                         Property Transactions

    This section would amend section 2662 of title 10, United 
States Code, to increase from $750,000 to $1,500,000 the 
thresholds at which the military services must report to 
Congress real property transactions. This section would also 
make adjustments to annual reporting requirements for minor 
real property transactions.

  Section 2812--Reorganization of Existing Administrative Provisions 
                 Relating to Real Property Transactions

    This section would consolidate and reorganize sections of 
chapter 159 of title 10, United States Code.

   Section 2813--Treatment of Money Rentals from Golf Course at Rock 
                        Island Arsenal, Illinois

    This section would amend section 2667 of title 10, United 
States Code, to allow 50 percent of lease receipts from the 
Rock Island Arsenal Golf Club, a community club that leases and 
operates the arsenal's golf course for the general public and 
local military personnel, to be placed into the Rock Island 
Arsenal morale, welfare, and recreation fund.

  Section 2814--Number of Contracts Authorized Department-Wide Under 
 Demonstration Program on Reduction in Long-Term Facility Maintenance 
                                 Costs

    This section would amend section 2814 of the National 
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2002 (Public Law 107-
107) to adjust the number of contracts permitted under the 
building commissioning program. The existing program allows 
each military department to enter into 12 contracts for the 
construction and short-term maintenance of a facility. This 
section would adjust the limit to allow a total of 36 contracts 
for the Department of Defense.

   Section 2815--Repeal of Commission on Review of Overseas Military 
                Facility Structure of the United States

    This section would repeal section 128 of the Military 
Construction Appropriations Act, 2004 (Public Law 108-132), 
which established the Commission on the Review of Overseas 
Military Facility Structure of the United States.

Section 2816--Designation of Airmen Leadership School at Luke Air Force 
Base, Arizona, in Honor of John J. Rhodes, a Former Minority Leader of 
                      the House of Representatives

    This section would designate the Airmen Leadership School 
at Luke Air Force Base, Arizona, the John J. Rhodes Airmen 
Leadership School in honor of the former minority leader of the 
House of Representatives, Congressman John J. Rhodes. 
Congressman Rhodes served in the United States Army Air Corps, 
served in the Arizona National Guard as a staff judge advocate, 
and represented the congressional district containing Luke Air 
Force Base for the majority of his service in the House of 
Representatives.

  Section 2817--Elimination of Reversionary Interests Clouding United 
            States Title to Property Used as Navy Homeports

    This section would authorize the Secretary of the Navy to 
enter into agreements with holders of reversionary interests at 
Navy homeports to secure permanent title to the properties for 
the Navy. In exchange, the Navy may provide in-kind 
consideration including forfeiture of existing agreements that 
require payment to the Navy for real property improvements. The 
committee believes that such an exchange is in the interest of 
all parties, and would ensure that disposal of property at 
these homeports, should they be closed, realigned, or otherwise 
declared excess to Navy needs, is conducted in a manner that 
does not place local communities and developers at a 
disadvantage to locations which do not have reversionary 
agreements in place.

  Section 2818--Report on Real Property Disposal at Marine Corps Air 
                      Station, El Toro, California

    This section would require the Secretary of the Navy, 
within 180 days of enactment, to report to Congress on the 
effort to dispose of real property at Marine Corps Air Station 
El Toro, California, anticipated future uses of the property, 
and requests received from other federal agencies for property 
at the air station.

                Subtitle C--Base Closure and Realignment


     Section 2821--Two-Year Postponement of 2005 Base Closure and 
     Realignment Round and Submission of Reports Regarding Future 
            Infrastructure Requirements for the Armed Forces

    This section would amend current base realignment and 
closure law to postpone the 2005 base closure and realignment 
round until 2007, pending receipt of several reports on 
significant infrastructure issues.
    First, this section would require the Department of Defense 
to study and report to Congress on the following issues: the 
Department's Integrated Global Basing Strategy, including 
basing locations, rotational plans and policies, and overseas 
and domestic infrastructure requirements associated with that 
strategy; a study of the infrastructure requirements associated 
with force transformation efforts; a report on infrastructure 
requirements related to changes to the active and reserve 
personnel mixtures of the services; a study of the 
infrastructure requirements resulting from the Secretary of 
Defense's ``10-30-30'' objective; a reassessment of excess 
infrastructure capacity that is based upon infrastructure, 
facility, and space requirements of current, future, and surged 
military forces; and a definition of, and infrastructure 
requirements associated with, ``surge requirements'' as 
determined by the Secretary as required by section 2822 of the 
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2004 (Public 
Law 108-136). These reports must be submitted between January 
1, 2006, and March 15, 2006, or the authority to conduct an 
additional round of base closures would be terminated.
    In order to permit sufficient time for congressional review 
of these documents and to allow the Department to incorporate 
the findings of these reports into base closure and realignment 
recommendations, this section would suspend the base 
realignment and closure process until 2007.
    Finally, this section would require resubmission of a force 
structure plan based on an assessment of probable threats to 
national security during the 20 year period beginning with 
fiscal year 2007, including anticipated endstrength and force 
units necessary to meet those threats. It would also require 
the Secretary of Defense to certify the need for an additional 
round of base closures as part of the fiscal year 2007 budget 
justification materials.
    The committee notes that a two-year postponement of the 
base closure and realignment round would have several benefits. 
First, postponement would allow the Department to stabilize 
force and funding requirements related to Iraq, Afghanistan, 
the war against terrorism, and homeland security before making 
base closure and realignment recommendations. Second, 
postponement would allow DOD to understand the impact of, and 
in some cases resolve, significant infrastructure-related 
issues such as global basing and transformation before making 
irreversible base closure decisions. Finally, base closure 
actions historically result in significant up-front costs with 
net savings not occurring for several years after closure 
activities. Delay of the base closure round until 2007 would 
provide relief to significant budgetary pressures on the 
Department during the next five years.

  Section 2822--Establishment of Specific Deadline for Submission of 
Revisions to Force-Structure Plan and Infrastructure Inventory for Next 
                           Base Closure Round

    This section would amend section 2912(a)(4) of the Defense 
Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990 (part A of title XXIX 
of Public Law 101-510, as amended) to establish March 15 of the 
base closure round year as the final deadline for revision of 
the force structure plan or infrastructure inventory. The 
Secretary of Defense published an initial force structure plan 
and infrastructure inventory, as required by base closure law, 
in March 2004. This force structure plan and infrastructure 
inventory, along with selection criteria, will be used by the 
Secretary to make base closure and realignment recommendations. 
While section 2912(a)(4) of the Defense Base Closure and 
Realignment Act of 1990 permits the Secretary to revise the 
plan and inventory by submitting such a revision to Congress as 
part of the budget justification documents for fiscal year 
2006, existing law does not include a specific deadline for 
submission. This section would establish March 15, of the base 
closure round year as the deadline, thereby ensuring that any 
revision to the force structure plan and infrastructure 
inventory is made with sufficient time to permit congressional 
review and Department of Defense implementation.

 Section 2823--Specification of Final Selection Criteria for Next Base 
                             Closure Round

    This section would amend and codify the criteria that will 
be used by the Secretary of Defense in making recommendations 
for the closure or realignment of military installations inside 
the United States during the next base closure round.
    The Secretary published draft selection criteria in the 
Federal Register on December 23, 2003. Following a public 
comment period, during which the Secretary received comments 
relating to approximately 200 areas of concern, the final 
selection criteria were published on February 12, 2004. Despite 
the number of public comments and criticisms, the final 
published selection criteria were identical to the initial 
proposal. This section would modify the selection criteria to 
incorporate many of the comments and concerns received by the 
Department of Defense during the comment period and would 
codify the amended criteria into base closure law.

 Section 2824--Requirement for Unanimous Vote of Defense Base Closure 
 and Realignment Commission to Add to or Otherwise Expand Closure and 
        Realignment Recommendations made by Secretary of Defense

    This section would amend section 2914(d) of the Defense 
Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990 (part A of title XXIX 
of Public Law 101-510, as amended) to require a unanimous vote 
of the base closure commission to recommend closure, 
realignment, or expanded realignment of an installation not 
recommended for closure or realignment by the Secretary of 
Defense.

   Section 2825--Adherence to Certain Authorities on Preservation of 
    Military Depot Capabilities During Any Subsequent Round of Base 
                       Closures and Realignments

    This section would amend the Defense Base Closure and 
Realignment Act of 1990 (part A of title XXIX of Public Law 
101-510, as amended) to require that base closure and 
realignment actions comply with provisions of title 10, United 
States Code, that address government-owned, government-operated 
depot-level maintenance, repair, and logisticscapabilities 
within the Department of Defense. In addition, this section would 
prohibit any base closure or realignment action from including a waiver 
to sections 2464 or section 2466 of title 10, United States code, 
relating to the preservation of government-owned, government-operated 
depot facilities and the annual percentage of military department 
funding for depot level maintenance and repair activities that may be 
expended on private sector depot activities.

                      Subtitle D--Land Conveyances


                        Part I--Army Conveyances


 Section 2831--Transfer of Administrative Jurisdiction, Defense Supply 
                         Center, Columbus, Ohio

    This section would authorize the Secretary of the Army to 
transfer, without consideration, administrative jurisdiction 
over approximately 20 acres of real property to the Secretary 
of Veterans' Affairs to be used for the location of a veterans' 
outpatient clinic.

            Section 2832--Land Conveyance, Fort Hood, Texas

    This section would authorize the Secretary of the Army to 
convey approximately 662 acres at Fort Hood, Texas, to the 
Texas A&M University system of the state of Texas for the 
purpose of establishing Texas A&M University, Central Texas. In 
exchange, the Army shall receive fair market value in cash or 
in-kind consideration for the property. Finally, conveyance of 
the property is contingent upon the Secretary of the Army's 
determination that use of the land as a university will not 
adversely impact operations at Fort Hood's Robert Gray Army 
Airfield.

 Section 2833--Land Conveyance, Army National Guard Facility, Seattle, 
                               Washington

    This section would authorize the Secretary of the Army to 
convey, without consideration, approximately 10 acres of real 
property, including a portion of a national guard facility, to 
the state of Washington to support relocation of a guard unit.

                       Part II--Navy Conveyances


Section 2841--Transfer of Jurisdiction, Nebraska Avenue Naval Complex, 
                          District of Columbia

    This section would transfer jurisdiction of the Nebraska 
Avenue Naval Complex in Washington, D.C., from the Navy to the 
Administrator of General Services for the purpose of 
accommodating the Department of Homeland Security. The initial 
costs incurred by the Navy as a result of the transfer, 
including move-out costs and first-year lease costs, shall be 
paid for by the Department of Homeland Security, subject to 
appropriations.
    The section would also express the sense of Congress that 
long-term relocation costs incurred by the Navy, to include 
final relocation costs and permanent construction, shall be 
paid for from federal sources outside of the Department of 
Defense. In addition, the provision would require the 
President, after consultation with the chairmen and ranking 
members of the committees on Armed Services and Appropriations, 
to certify within three years of the transfer whether the 
Navy's costs related to its departure from the complex have 
been fully compensated. If the Navy's costs have not been fully 
compensated, the property shall revert to the jurisdiction of 
the Navy, which must then dispose of the property by 
competitive sale.

  Section 2842--Land Conveyance, Navy Property, Former Fort Sheridan, 
                                Illinois

    This section would authorize the Secretary of the Navy to 
convey, without consideration, a parcel of environmentally 
sensitive property to a nonprofit land conservation 
organization for the purpose of ensuring permanent protection 
of the lands.

    Section 2843--Land Exchange, Naval Air Station, Patuxent River, 
                                Maryland

    This section would authorize the Secretary of the Navy to 
convey approximately five acres of real property at Naval Air 
Station, Patuxent River, Maryland, to the state of Maryland. In 
exchange, the Navy shall receive approximately 1.5 acres of 
property of an equal value to the conveyance.

                    Part III--Air Force Conveyances


      Section 2851--Land Exchange, Maxwell Air Force Base, Alabama

    This section would authorize the Secretary of the Air Force 
to convey the Maxwell Heights Housing site at Maxwell Air Force 
Base, Alabama, to the city of Montgomery, Alabama. In exchange, 
the Air Force shall receive approximately 35 acres of land 
contiguous to Maxwell Air Force Base.

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

      TITLE XXXI--DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY NATIONAL SECURITY PROGRAMS

                                OVERVIEW

    The budget request contained $16,797.6 million for the 
national security activities of the Department of Energy for 
fiscal year 2005. Of this amount, $9,048.7 million is for the 
programs of the National Nuclear Security Administration, and 
$7,748.9 million is for environmental and other defense 
activities. The committee recommends $16,700.6 million, a 
decrease of $97.0 million.


                       ITEMS OF SPECIAL INTEREST


                National Nuclear Security Administration


                                Overview

    The budget request contained $9,048.7 million for the 
National Nuclear Security Administration for fiscal year 2005. 
The committee recommends $9,047.7 million, a decrease of $1.0 
million.

                   Adjustments to the Budget Request


Reductions

            Directed stockpile work
    The budget request contained $1,406.4 million for directed 
stockpile work.
    The committee notes that the nuclear weapon stockpile 
requirements that guide the stockpile life extension programs 
are under review by the Department of Defense as part of a 
periodic assessment of the Nuclear Posture Review. The 
committee also notes that it is difficult for the committee to 
support increases in funding for individual warhead life 
extension programs until this assessment is completed and 
forwarded to the congressional defense committees.
    The committee recommends $1,367.4 million, a decrease of 
$39.0 million.
            Campaigns
    The budget request contained $301.0 million for the science 
campaign.
    The committee notes with concern that the National Nuclear 
Security Administration (NNSA) reported mixed results in 
meeting the fiscal year 2003 science campaign performance 
targets contained in the NNSA Future-Year Nuclear Security 
Program.
    The committee recommends $281.5 million, a decrease of 
$19.5 million. This funding level represents an increase of 
$18.0 million over the fiscal year 2004 appropriation.
    The budget request contained $741.3 million for the 
Advanced Simulation and Computing (ASC) campaign. The committee 
notes that the ASC campaign has experienced cost growth and 
schedule slippage. The committee also notes that the campaign 
is apparently procuring a considerably larger set of computers 
than originally envisioned.
    The committee recommends $721.3 million, a decrease of 
$20.0 million. This funding represents funding at the fiscal 
year 2004 level.
            International nuclear materials protection and cooperation
    The budget request contained $43.0 million within the 
International Nuclear Materials Protection and Cooperation 
program for security enhancements at the MinAtom Weapons 
complex.
    The committee understands that the National Nuclear 
Security Administration (NNSA) has had limited success in 
completing security upgrades at these sites due to MinAtom not 
granting access. While the committee supports the goals of this 
program, it does not support authorizing funds for projects 
where NNSA does not have the access required to accomplish 
program objectives.
    The committee recommends $32.5 million, a decrease of $10.5 
million. The recommended funding is equivalent to the amount 
appropriated in fiscal year 2004. The committee directs the 
Administrator of the NNSA to submit a report with the fiscal 
year 2006 budget request on the status of NNSA access, as of 
the end of fiscal year 2004, to those MinAtom sites where 
Congress has authorized and appropriated funds for security 
upgrades.

Increases

            Engineering campaign
    The budget request contained $48.7 million in the 
engineering campaign for construction of the Microsystems and 
Engineering Sciences Application (MESA) complex at Sandia 
National Laboratories (project 01-D-108).
    The committee notes that when complete, MESA will be a 
significant facility for modernizing the electrical, optical, 
and mechanical components of the nuclear stockpile using 
computationally enabled micro-technologies. Accelerated 
construction of the MESA complex will ensure timely 
availability of critical tools for stockpile stewardship.
    The committee recommends $68.7 million, an increase of 
$20.0 million for further acceleration of MESA construction. 
The NNSA Administrator is directed to submit a revised MESA 
construction baseline with the fiscal year 2006 budget request 
that reflects congressional funding increases through the end 
of fiscal year 2005.
            Readiness in technical base and facilities
    The budget request contained $1,474.5 million for Readiness 
in Technical Base and Facilities.
    The committee has been encouraged by the progress made in 
the reduction of deferred maintenance backlogs in the defense 
nuclear complex.
    The committee recommends an increase of $50.0 million for 
replacement of aging equipment, correction of deferred 
maintenance, and disposition of legacy materials consistent 
with the National Nuclear Security Administration approved 10 
year comprehensive site plan as follows: $5.0 million at the 
Kansas City Plant, $8.0 million at Lawrence Livermore National 
Laboratory, $19.0 million at Pantex and $18.0 million at the Y-
12 plant.
    The committee is aware that accelerated construction and 
delivery of the Z Petawatt laser will add significant 
radiographic diagnostic capabilities to the stockpile 
stewardship campaign. The committee recommends an increase of 
$13.0 million for the Z Petawatt laser.
    The committee is aware that adding a second operations 
shift to the Z facility will meet the increased demand for 
experiments conducted on the Z machine. The committee 
recommends an increase of $5.0 million to fund a second shift 
operation at the Z facility.

         Advanced Concepts and Robust Nuclear Earth Penetrator

    The committee supports the budget request of $9.0 million 
for Advanced Concepts and $27.6 million for completion of the 
6.2/2A Air Force-led study on the Robust Nuclear 
EarthPenetrator (RNEP). The committee strongly reaffirms the importance 
of these two initiatives and authorizes the full amount of the request.
    The committee notes that the Administrator of the National 
Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) has stated in testimony 
before the committee that the RNEP study was being conducted at 
the request of the Department of Defense. The committee also 
takes note that a recent Defense Science Board Task Force study 
on Future Strategic Strike Forces specifically recommended that 
research be initiated on nuclear weapons that produce much 
lower collateral damage than those weapons in the existing 
nuclear stockpile. The committee also reminds the NNSA that any 
efforts beyond a study could only be pursued if the President 
approves and funds are authorized and appropriated by Congress.

              Advanced Technology Research and Development

    The committee notes that the budget requests funds for 
advanced technology research and development in several 
activities within the National Nuclear Security Administration. 
The committee encourages the Administrator to review individual 
advanced technology research and development programs to ensure 
they are coordinated with, and do not duplicate, other similar 
research and development efforts.

                       Los Alamos Public Schools

    The committee report on H.R. 1588 (H. Rept. 108-106) stated 
the concern that little progress has been made in developing an 
exit strategy for the Department of Energy to discontinue 
funding for the Los Alamos Public Schools system. The fiscal 
year 2005 budget request contained no funding for the Los 
Alamos Public Schools, ending a practice whereby for many years 
this school district was the only one receiving assistance from 
the Department.
    The Department, in its February 2004 report, ``Support for 
Public Education in the Vicinity of Los Alamos National 
Laboratory, New Mexico,'' concluded that the Los Alamos Public 
School District must receive stable financial support if the 
Los Alamos Public School District is to maintain the standard 
of educational excellence that the Los Alamos National 
Laboratory staff demands. According to the report, this support 
to the public schools is required in order for the laboratory 
to attract and retain the talented and highly educated 
individuals required to execute its national security mission. 
One option the report recommended for supplementing the 
resources of the Los Alamos Public Schools was to allow the 
management and operating contractor for Los Alamos National 
Laboratory to support the Los Alamos Public Schools within the 
confines of the existing operating contract.
    The committee understands the need to attract and retain 
highly talented personnel for the national laboratory complex. 
Therefore, the committee directs the Department, from within 
those funds authorized for Department activities at Los Alamos 
National Laboratory, to provide $8.0 million per year out of 
site contractor overhead, to support the Los Alamos Public 
School District.

                 Mixed Oxide Fuel Fabrication Facility

    The committee notes the National Nuclear Security 
Administration's (NNSA) recent announcement of a delay until 
the summer of 2005 for starting construction of the Mixed Oxide 
Fuel Fabrication Facility (MOX) in the Russian Federation due 
to delays in resolving a government-to-government liability 
agreement. Recent discussions with the NNSA indicate that the 
2005 commencement date may also be in jeopardy. The committee 
notes that the projected start of construction has slipped four 
years since the project began in fiscal year 2000.
    While the committee fully supports the MOX program 
objective of conversion of weapons grade plutonium into fuel 
for commercial reactors, it is concerned with these delays and 
does not want to further add to the existing uncommitted 
balances in the NNSA nonproliferation accounts. The committee 
directs the Administrator of the NNSA to notify the 
congressional defense committees within 30 days of any decision 
that construction of the MOX facility will not begin by the end 
of fiscal year 2005.

               Environmental and Other Defense Activities


                                Overview

    The budget request contained $7,748.9 million for 
environmental and other defense activities. The committee 
recommends $7,652.9 million, a decrease of $96.0 million.

                   Adjustments to the Budget Request


Reductions

            Waste incidental to reprocessing
    The budget request contained $350.0 million for a High 
Level Waste Proposal program within the Defense Site 
Acceleration Completion account to address a contingency for 
``Waste Incidental to Reprocessing.'' The budget materials 
state that these funds will only be requested to the extent 
that legal uncertainty concerning certain reprocessing wastes 
is satisfactorily resolved through pending litigation or by new 
legislation. This uncertainty was raised by a 2003 federal 
district court ruling that the Department of Energy's 
reclassification of waste streams generated by reprocessing of 
spent nuclear fuel violated the Nuclear Waste Policy Act 
(Natural Resources Defense Council v. Spencer Abraham, District 
Court of Idaho, 2003).
    The committee understands that this request concerns 
matters that are both pending the outcome of litigation and the 
subject of negotiations with individual states. The committee 
has not received formal transmittal of a legislative proposal. 
However, the committee notes that the Department is actively 
working with the states to achieve consensus on a legislative 
proposal that would clarify the law and allow cleanup 
activities to proceed. The committee also notes it does not 
appear that the federal court decision requires a cessation of 
all current waste cleanup activities and that the budget 
request contains $3,368.0 million for Defense Site Acceleration 
Completion for sites in Idaho, South Carolina, and Washington.
    The committee notes that some of the activities proposed to 
be funded in the High Level Waste Proposal may either be 
precluded by or imprudent to conduct under the federal district 
court ruling. The committee urges the Department to proceed 
with those cleanup activities that are not prevented by the 
federal district court ruling or are not otherwise deemed 
inappropriate due to the legal uncertainty resulting from the 
court ruling. The committee directs the Secretary of Energy to 
submit a report to the congressional defense committees by 
January 1, 2005 stating which of those activities listed under 
the High Level Waste Proposal can proceed consistent withthe 
current legal determination and those that cannot, clearly stating the 
rationale for each such determination. The committee also urges the 
Department to submit a legislative proposal at the earliest opportunity 
to clarify the law on Waste Incidental to Reprocessing in order to 
facilitate long-term cleanup plans across all defense sites.
    The committee recognizes the significant costs and schedule 
impacts for future defense site acceleration cleanup plans in 
the event the district court ruling stands and the Nuclear 
Waste Policy Act is not amended. The committee includes a 
legislative provision calling for a National Academy of 
Sciences study of the Department's plans to manage and treat 
prior to final disposal the high-level radioactive waste at the 
Savannah River Site, South Carolina, the Idaho National 
Engineering Laboratory, Idaho and the Hanford Reservation, 
Washington.
    The committee recommends $250.0 million, a decrease of 
$100.0 million. Should funds in excess of the amount authorized 
be required for site cleanup activities under the High Level 
Waste Proposal in fiscal year 2005, the Department of Energy is 
directed to submit a request for reprogramming of funds to the 
congressional defense committees.
            Worker and community transition
    The budget request contained $2.5 million for worker and 
community transition within the Office of Legacy Management.
    The committee notes that the budget request states that the 
need for worker transition assistance has considerably 
diminished in recent years and that there is no estimated need 
for community transition assistance during fiscal year 2005.
    The committee recommends no funds for worker and community 
transition and recommends the Department of Energy terminate 
the program.
            Office of future liabilities
    The budget contained $5.0 million for the Office of Future 
Liabilities. The committee notes that the Office of Future 
Liabilities was just recently established by the Department of 
Energy to fund and manage environmental liabilities not 
assigned to the Office of Environmental Management or other 
organizations within the Department. The committee also notes 
that the Department had previously established a new Office of 
Legacy Management in 2003.
    While the committee is encouraged that the Office of 
Environmental Management is taking a long term view of future 
management issues, it appears premature to establish an Office 
of Future Liabilities when the current Defense Site 
Acceleration Completion activities are scheduled to continue 
through fiscal year 2035.
    The committee recommends no funds for the Office of Future 
Liabilities and encourages the Department to perform those 
functions within the Office of Environmental Management or 
Office of Legacy Management.

Increases

            2035 defense site accelerated completions
    The budget request contains no funds for the Hazardous 
Materials Management and Emergency Response Training and 
Education (HAMMER) center.
    The committee is aware that the HAMMER center provides 
valuable training for emergency response personnel. The 
committee is also aware that the Department of Energy is 
reviewing whether the HAMMER center should be operated by the 
Office of Environmental Management or by the Office of Energy 
Security and Assurance.
    The committee recommends an increase of $6.0 million for 
operation of the HAMMER center. The committee also urges the 
Secretary to make a determination as to what office within the 
Department should have long-term responsibility for operation 
of the HAMMER center.
            Non-closure environmental activities
    The budget request contained $187.9 million for non-closure 
environmental activities.
    The committee is aware of a need to fund newly generated 
waste requirements and ground water cleanup activities at 
Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory.
    The committee recommends $191.9 million, an increase of 
$4.0 million for newly generated waste requirements and ground 
water cleanup activities at Lawrence Livermore National 
Laboratory (Project HQ-SW-0013Y).
            Idaho facilities management-other defense activities
    The budget request contained $20.9 million for Idaho 
Facilities Management-Other Defense Activities.
    The committee is aware that spent nuclear fuel, a portion 
of which is the responsibility of the Department of Energy 
through contracts by the Department and its predecessor federal 
agencies, is in long-term storage in aluminum canisters at the 
Lynchburg Technology Center operated by BWX Technologies in 
Lynchburg, Virginia. The committee also notes that both the 
Department and BWX Technologies have indicated that 
inspections, and possibly repackaging, of the stored spent 
nuclear fuel are required to ensure proper long-term storage.
    The committee recommends $22.4 million, an increase of $1.5 
million, for the Office of Nuclear Energy, Science and 
Technology to inspect and repackage, as appropriate, its spent 
nuclear fuel stored in outside storage wells at the Lynchburg 
Technology Center in Lynchburg, Virginia. After the spent 
nuclear fuel is inspected and appropriate repackaging is 
completed, it is to be replaced in refurbished storage wells. 
The specific spent nuclear fuel covered by this requirement is 
that spent nuclear fuel described in the storage contract (DE-
AC02-02NE23429) between the Department, as administered by the 
Office of Nuclear Energy, Science, and Technology, and BWX 
Technologies. The committee intends for this work to start in 
fiscal year 2005 and conclude no later than the end of fiscal 
year 2007.

                 Technology Deployment and Development

    The committee notes that several high-level waste 
separation technologies under development could potentially 
reduce costs and shorten schedules for high-level waste 
remediation. The committee encourages the Department, within 
funds authorized under Defense Site Acceleration Completion for 
technology deployment and development, to fund technology 
demonstrations that provide alternative solutions for high-
level waste separation.

       Energy Employees Occupational Illness Compensation Program

    The committee is concerned with the lack of progress the 
Department of Energy has made in processing the backlog of 
defense nuclear worker claims under Subtitle D of the Energy 
Employees Occupational Illness Compensation Act. The committee 
notes that recent Department statistics reflect that 2,257 
cases have been completed out of the 23,996 applications 
received for health-related claims under the Act. However, the 
committee also notes that only a handful of workers determined 
to have valid health-related claims have actually received any 
compensation. The committee also understands that a recent GAO 
report notes that the lack of a ``willing payer'' of workers'' 
compensation benefits for some workers means that some workers 
with valid defense nuclear complex health claims may receive no 
compensation.
    While the Department has made some progress in processing 
the claims, the committee notes that further improvements to 
processing are required to ensure that claims can be processed 
with proper physician advice in a manner that is both speedy 
and medically sound. The committee notes that the Department 
has requested increased funding and has requested legislative 
remedies that may improve the efficiency of the physician 
review panels.
    The committee remains concerned that these and possibly 
other improvements are needed to achieve timely physician 
review panel determinations and urges the Department to work 
with the committee to identify any additional actions required 
to expedite processing and payment of claims. The committee 
also urges the Department to continue to work with federal 
agencies and other organizations to propose solutions for the 
``willing payer'' problems.

                         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 2005, including funds 
for weapons activities, defense nuclear nonproliferation 
programs, naval reactor programs, and the Office of the 
Administrator.

             Section 3102--Defense Environmental Management

    This section would authorize funds for defense 
environmental management activities for fiscal year 2005, 
including funds for defense site acceleration completion and 
defense environmental services.

                 Section 3103--Other Defense Activities

    This section would authorize funds for other defense 
activities for fiscal year 2005.

              Section 3104--Defense Nuclear Waste Disposal

    This section would authorize funds for defense nuclear 
waste disposal for fiscal year 2005.

   Subtitle B--Program Authorizations, Restrictions, and Limitations


    Section 3111--Extension of Authority for Appointment of Certain 
            Scientific, Engineering and Technical Personnel

    This section would amend section 4601 of the Atomic Energy 
Defense Act (50 USC 2701) to extend authority for appointment 
of certain scientific, engineering, and technical personnel.

 Section 3112--Requirements for Baseline of Projects under Facilities 
              and Infrastructure Recapitalization Program

    This section would amend section 3114 of the National 
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2004 (Public Law 108-
136) to give the NNSA Administrator greater flexibility in 
adding projects or updating priorities to projects within the 
Facilities and Infrastructure Recapitalization Program.

                       Subtitle C--Other Matters


Section 3131--Transfers and reprogrammings of National Nuclear Security 
                          Administration funds

    Title XXXII of the National Defense Authorization Act for 
Fiscal Year 2000 (50 USC 2401), otherwise known as the ``NNSA 
Act'') established the National Nuclear Security Administration 
(NNSA). In passing the Act, Congress created the NNSA as a 
semi-autonomous agency within the Department of Energy. The 
mission of the NNSA is to enhance national security through the 
military application of nuclear energy, reduce global danger 
from weapons of mass destruction, and promote international 
nuclear safety. The cornerstone of this Act is a significant 
level of autonomy for the NNSA.
    Among the various functions assigned in the Act, the NNSA 
Administrator has authority over, and is responsible for, all 
programs and activities of the NNSA including budget 
formulation, guidance and execution, and other financial 
matters (50 USC 2402). The NNSA Act also provides for separate 
treatment of the NNSA budget request within the President's 
budget request (50 USC 2451) and for the Administrator to 
establish procedures for planning, programming, budgeting, and 
financial activities (50 USC 2452).
    The committee is concerned that execution of the NNSA 
budget process may not reflect the degree of autonomy intended 
in the NNSA Act. In order to carry out the above budget 
functions as intended by Congress, this provision directs the 
Administrator for Nuclear Security specifically to submit 
notifications and requests for reprogramming directly to the 
congressional defense committees, with the only role of the 
Department of Energy being for the Chief Financial Officer to 
certify whether funds covered by the notice or request are 
available. This provision is necessary to ensure responsive 
oversight and to safeguard the autonomy of the Administration.
    The committee remains concerned that there may be 
additional areas of the budget process in which the autonomy 
intended by Congress is not being exercised. The committee 
encourages the Administrator to review the budget and 
programming process to ensure NNSA is in complete compliance 
with the letter and spirit of the NNSA Act.

   Section 3132--National Academy of Sciences study on management by 
          Department of Energy of high-level radioactive waste

    This section would require the Secretary of Energy to enter 
into an agreement with the National Academy of Sciences to 
complete a study of the Department's ``residual'' waste streams 
management plans. These streams are from the Department's high-
level waste tanks, which are not planned for disposal into a 
high-level waste repository.
    This study should provide an explicit assessment of the 
waste streams that are planned for disposal in place in the 
tanks or that result from the processing of retrieved tank 
wastes at the Hanford Reservation in Washington, the Idaho 
National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory in Idaho, and 
the Savannah River Site in South Carolina. The examination 
should address the full range of ``residual wastes'' including, 
among others, the high-level waste tank remainders that the 
Department considers incidental to reprocessing, the streams 
from tank waste processing, such as saltstone at the Savannah 
River Site, and tank waste the Department plans to immobilize 
and ship for disposal to the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant.
    The National Academy of Sciences should deliver an interim 
report on the waste planned for disposal in place in the tanks 
to the committee and the Secretary six months after entering 
into the agreement to undertake this study. A final report 
addressing the remainder of the task objectives should be 
issued twelve months after funding is received. Within funds 
allocated for defense environmental management the Department 
authorizes up to $1,500,000 for the study.

   Section 3133--Contract to Review Waste Isolation Pilot Plant, New 
                                 Mexico

    The current five-year Congressional authorization for 
Independent Waste Isolation Pilot Plant Oversight expires at 
the end of fiscal year 2004. This section would direct the 
Secretary of Energy to enter into a new contract for 
independent reviews of the design, construction and operations 
of the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant in New Mexico.

          TITLE XXXII--DEFENSE NUCLEAR FACILITIES SAFETY BOARD

                         LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS


                      Section 3201--Authorization

    This section would authorize $21.3 million for the Defense 
Nuclear Facilities Safety Board for fiscal year 2005, an 
increase of $1.0 million to fund cost-of-living pay increases 
for permanent staff and to hire outside consultants as needed 
for technical oversight of new Department of Energy projects.

                TITLE XXXIII--NATIONAL DEFENSE STOCKPILE

                         LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS


   Section 3301--Authorized Uses of National Defense Stockpile Funds

    This section would authorize $59.7 million from the 
National Defense Stockpile Transaction Fund for the operation 
and maintenance of the National Defense Stockpile for fiscal 
year 2005. The provision would also permit the use of 
additional funds for extraordinary or emergency conditions 45 
days after Congress receives notification.

Section 3302--Revision of Limitations on Required Disposals of Certain 
                Materials in National Defense Stockpile

    This section would amend section 3306 of the National 
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2002 (Public Law 107-
107) by authorizing the Secretary of Defense to dispose of 
100,000 short tons of high carbon manganese ferro of the 
highest grade during fiscal year 2005, rather than 50,000 short 
tons as currently authorized.

  Section 3303--Authority to Dispose of Certain Materials in National 
                           Defense Stockpile

    This section would amend section 3303 of the Strom Thurmond 
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1999 (Public 
Law 105-261) to authorize the Secretary of Defense to dispose 
of materials in the National Defense Stockpile so as to result 
in $785.0 million in receipts by the end of fiscal year 2005, 
and $870.0 million in receipts by the end of fiscal year 2009.

                 TITLE XXXIV--NAVAL PETROLEUM RESERVES

                         LEGISLATIVE PROVISION


             Section 3401--Authorization of Appropriations

    This section would authorize $20.0 million for fiscal year 
2005 for the operation and maintenance of the Naval Petroleum 
and Oil Shale Reserves.

                  TITLE XXXV--MARITIME ADMINISTRATION

                         LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS


      Section 3501--Authorization of Appropriations for Maritime 
                  Administration for Fiscal Year 2005

    This section would authorize a total of $149.1 million for 
fiscal year 2005, an increase of $13.4 million above the budget 
request for the Maritime Administration. Of the funds 
authorized, $109.3 would be for operations and training 
programs, $4.8 million would be for administrative expenses 
related to providing loan guarantees authorized by title XI of 
the Merchant Marine Act, 1936, as amended, (46 App. United 
States Code 1271 et seq.), and $35 million would be for the 
disposal of obsolete ships in the National Defense Reserve 
Fleet. Within the funds provided for the disposal of obsolete 
vessels, the committee includes $2 million to begin the 
decommissioning, removal, and disposal of the nuclear reactor 
and hazardous materials aboard the Nuclear Ship Savannah, which 
is located at the James River facility in Virginia.

Section 3502--Extension of Authority to Provide War Risk Insurance for 
                        Merchant Marine Vessels

    This section would extend for five years the authority of 
the Secretary of Transportation to provide war risk insurance 
and reinsurance relating to merchant marine vessels. This 
section would also modify the existing provision to reflect the 
current Department of the Treasury practice of investing in 
public debt securities of the United States, with maturities 
and interest rates suitable to the needs of the fund.

                           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 11, 2004.
Hon. J. Dennis Hastert,
Speaker of the House of Representatives,
Washington, DC.
    Dear Mr. Speaker: The Department of Defense requests that 
the Congress enact the enclosed National Defense Authorization 
Bill for Fiscal Year 2005.
    The purpose of each proposal is stated in the accompanying 
section-by-section analysis.
    In the coming weeks, the Department will propose a few 
additional legislative initiatives for inclusion in the same 
Bill.
    The Office of Management and Budget advises that there is 
no objection, from the standpoint of the Administration's 
program, to the presenting of these legislative proposals for 
your consideration and the consideration of the Congress.
            Sincerely,
                                      William J. Haynes II,
                                                   General Counsel.
                                ------                                


                           COMMITTEE POSITION

    On May 12, 2004 the Committee on Armed Services, a quorum 
being present, approved H.R. 4200, as amended, by a vote of 60-
0.

                  COMMUNICATIONS FROM OTHER COMMITTEES

                          House of Representatives,
                  Committee on Education and the Workforce,
                                      Washington, DC, May 14, 2004.
Hon. Duncan Hunter,
Chairman, Committee on Armed Services,
House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
    Dear Chairman Hunter: Thank you for working with me in your 
development of H.R. 4200, the ``National Defense Authorization 
Act for Fiscal Year 2005,'' specifically:
    (1) Section 590. Continuation of impact aid assistance on 
behalf of dependents of certain members despite change in state 
of member.
    (2) Section 595. Assistance to local educational agencies 
that benefit dependents of members of the Armed Forces and 
Department of Defense civilian employees.
    (3) Section 596. Senior Reserve Officer Training Corps and 
recruiter access at institutions of higher education.
    (4) Section 904. Modification of obligated service 
requirements under National Security Education Program.
    As you know, these provisions are within the jurisdiction 
of the Education and the Workforce Committee. While I do not 
intend to seek sequential referral of H.R. 4200, the Committee 
does hold an interest in preserving its future jurisdiction 
with respect to issues raised in the aforementioned provisions 
and its jurisdictional prerogatives should the provisions of 
this bill or any Senate amendments thereto be considered in a 
conference with the Senate. We would expect to be appointed as 
conferees on these provisions should a conference with the 
Senate arise.
    Again, I thank you for working with me in developing the 
amendments to H.R. 4200 and look forward to working with you on 
these issues in the future.
            Sincerely,
                                            John Boehner, Chairman.
                                ------                                

                          House of Representatives,
                               Committee on Armed Services,
                                      Washington, DC, May 14, 2004.
Hon. John Boehner,
Chairman, Committee on Education and the Workforce,
House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
    Dear Mr. Chairman: Thank you for your letter regarding H.R. 
4200, the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 
2005.
    I agree that the Committee on Education and the Workforce 
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 Education and the 
Workforce is not waiving its jurisdiction. Further, this 
exchange of letters will be included in the Committee report on 
the bill.
    With best wishes.
            Sincerely,
                                           Duncan Hunter, Chairman.
                                ------                                

                          House of Representatives,
                          Committee on Energy and Commerce,
                                      Washington, DC, May 14, 2004.
Hon. Duncan Hunter,
Chairman, Committee on Armed Services,
House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
    Dear Chairman Hunter: On May 12, 2004, the Committee on 
Armed Services ordered reported H.R. 4200, the National Defense 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2005.As ordered reported by 
the Committee on Armed Services, this legislation contains a number of 
provisions that fall within the jurisdiction of the Committee on Energy 
and Commerce.
    These provisions include the following:
    Section 596. Reserve Senior Officer Training Corps and 
recruiter access at institutions of higher education.
    Section 601. Increase in basic pay for fiscal year 2005.
    Section 3111. Extension of authority for appointment of 
certain scientific, engineering, and technical personnel.
    Section 3112. Requirements for baseline of projects under 
Facilities and Infrastructure Recapitalization Program.
    Section 3131. Transfers and reprogrammings of National 
Nuclear Security Administration funds.
    Section 3132. National Academy of Sciences study on 
management by Department of Energy of high-level radioactive 
waste.
    Section 3133. Contract to review Waste Isolation Pilot 
Plant, New Mexico.
    Section 3201. Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board 
authorization.
    Recognizing your interest in bringing this legislation 
before the House expeditiously, the Committee on Energy and 
Commerce agrees not to seek a sequential referral of the bill. 
By agreeing not to seek a sequential referral, the Committee on 
Energy and Commerce does not waive its jurisdiction over these 
provisions or any other provisions of the bill that may fall 
within its jurisdiction. In addition, the Committee on Energy 
and Commerce reserves its right to seek conferees on any 
provisions within its jurisdiction which are considered in the 
House-Senate conference, and asks for your support in being 
accorded such conferees.
    I request that you include this letter as part of the 
report on H.R. 4200 and as part of the Congressional Record 
during consideration of this bill by the House.
            Sincerely,
                                              Joe Barton, Chairman.
                                ------                                

                          House of Representatives,
                               Committee on Armed Services,
                                      Washington, DC, May 14, 2004.
Hon. Joe Barton,
Chairman, Committee on Energy and Commerce,
House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
    Dear Mr. Chairman: Thank you for your letter regarding H.R. 
4200, the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 
2005.
    I agree that the Committee on Energy and Commerce 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 Energy and Commerce is 
not waiving its jurisdiction. Further, this exchange of letters 
will be included in the Committee report on the bill.
    With best wishes.
            Sincerely,
                                           Duncan Hunter, Chairman.
                                ------                                

                          House of Representatives,
                            Committee on Government Reform,
                                      Washington, DC, May 14, 2004.
Hon. Duncan Hunter,
Chairman, Committee on Armed Services,
House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
    Dear Chairman: On May 12, 2004, the Committee on Armed 
Services ordered reported H.R. 4200, the National Defense 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2005. As you know, the H.R. 
4200, as reported, contains a number of provisions within the 
jurisdiction of the Committee on Government Reform under Rule X 
of the Rules of the House of Representatives. These provisions 
implicate the committee's jurisdiction on a number of subject 
including: the disposition of Federal property, the Freedom of 
Information Act, the Federal civil service, and procurement.
    Because of your willingness to consult with this Committee, 
and because of your desire to move this legislation 
expeditiously, I will waive consideration of the bill by the 
Committee on Government Reform. By agreeing to waive its 
consideration of the bill, the Committee does not waive its 
jurisdiction over H.R. 4200. In addition, the Committee 
reserves its authority to seek conferees on any provisions of 
the bill that are within its jurisdiction during any House-
Senate conference that may be convened on this legislation. I 
ask your commitment to support any request for conferees by the 
Committee on H.R. 4200 or similar legislation.
    I request that you include this letter and your response in 
the Committee Report and in the Congressional Record during 
consideration of the legislation on the House floor. Thank you 
for your attention to these matters.
            Sincerely,
                                               Tom Davis, Chairman.
                                ------                                

                          House of Representatives,
                               Committee on Armed Services,
                                      Washington, DC, May 14, 2004.
Hon. Tom Davis,
Chairman, Committee on Government Reform,
House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
    Dear Mr. Chairman: Thank you for your letter regarding H.R. 
4200, the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 
2005.
    I agree that the Committee on Government Reform 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 Government Reform is not 
waiving its jurisdiction. Further, this exchange of letters 
will be included in the Committee report on the bill.
    With best wishes.
            Sincerely,
                                           Duncan Hunter, Chairman.
                                ------                                

                          House of Representatives,
                      Committee on International Relations,
                                      Washington, DC, May 11, 2004.
Hon. Duncan Hunter,
Chairman, Committee on Armed Services,
House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
    Dear Mr. Chairman: I write with respect to the export 
control provisions of this year's proposed National Defense 
Authorization Act (NDAA), H.R. 4200, which your Committee is 
preparing to mark up and report in the near future. I request 
that you include in H.R. 4200 those provisions in Title XIV, 
Subtitle A, relating to export controls. These provisions would 
strengthen military export controls in areas in which the 
Department of Defense plays a major role, often alongside U.S. 
private firms regulated under section 38 of the Arms Export 
Control Act. Other provisions would reinforce the role and 
responsibility of Congress to provide appropriate oversight in 
these areas.
    These provisions complement and reinforce the policy that 
the Committee on International Relations has long followed in 
these areas and are fully consistent with provisions in H.R. 
1950 (the State Department Authorization Act), which the House 
passed last year during the first session of the 108th 
Congress. In particular, I am very sympathetic to purposes 
which the NDAA export control provisions would advance 
concerning: (1) the need to strengthen (not relax) military 
export controls in the context of the global war on terror, and 
(2) to set high (not reduced) standards internationally for 
other governments to follow multilaterally, as well as in the 
administration of their national systems, regarding the control 
of weapons technology and military systems and equipment. 
Similarly, at a time when our European allies are seeking 
increasingly greater access to the United States defense 
procurement market and to our weapons technology in order to 
help meet their defense commitments to NATO, while 
simultaneously pursuing a process to expand weapons technology 
transfers to the People's Republic of China, it behooves our 
Government to ensure that fundamental principles of U.S. law 
and policy are upheld. This includes, above all, the right of 
the United States to consent to the re-export or retransfer of 
U.S. weapons technology by a foreign government or person to 
any third party or person, including the government of another 
country, before such a re-export or retransfer may take place.
    For the foregoing reasons, I strongly support adoption by 
your Committee of these provisions in the proposed NDAA.
    With best wishes, I am
            Sincerely,
                                           Henry J. Hyde, Chairman.
                                ------                                

                          House of Representatives,
                      Committee on International Relations,
                                      Washington, DC, May 14, 2004.
Hon. Duncan Hunter,
Chairman, Committee on Armed Services,
House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
    Dear Mr. Chairman: I understand that on Wednesday, May 12, 
2004, the Committee on Armed Services ordered favorably 
reported H.R. 4200, the National Defense Authorization Act for 
Fiscal Year 2005. 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.
    With respect to Section 1202, Assistance to Military or 
Security Forces of Iraq and Afghanistan, I will request from 
the Speaker a referral of H.R. 4200, should this provision not 
be removed from the bill before it is filed.
    Additional provisions within our Committee's jurisdiction 
are: (1) Section 811, Defense Trade Reciprocity; (2) Section 
1013, Authority to Transfer Specified Former Naval Vessels to 
Certain Foreign Countries; (3) Section 1027, Encouragement of 
Agreements with Foreign Countries; (4) Section 1031, 
Continuation of Authority to Use Department of Defense Funds 
for Unified Counter-Drug and Counter-Terrorism Campaign in 
Colombia; (5) Section 1204, Status of Iraqi Security Forces; 
(6) Section 1211, Assignment of Allied Naval Personnel to 
Submarine Safety Programs; (7) Section 1212, Expansion of 
Entities of the People's Republic of China Subject to Certain 
Presidential Authorities When Operating in the United States; 
(8) Section 1213, Report by the President on Global Peace 
Operations Initiative; (9) Section 1214, Procurement Sanctions 
Against Foreign Persons that Transfer Certain Defense Articles 
and Services to the People's Republic of China; (10) Title 
XIII, Cooperative Threat Reduction with the States of the 
Former Soviet Union; and (11) Title XIV, Export Controls and 
Counter-Proliferation Matters.
    Pursuant to Chairman Dreier's announcement that the 
Committee on Rules will move expeditiously to consider a rule 
for H.R. 4200 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.
    In that regard, I am particularly concerned about certain 
provisions in Title XIV, Subtitle B and C, regarding counter-
proliferation matters and initiatives related to the former 
Soviet Union. I look forward to working with you regarding my 
concerns about these provisions as H.R. 4200 moves forward in 
the legislative process.
    I would appreciate your including this letter as a part of 
the report on H.R. 4200 and as part of the record during 
consideration of the bill by the House of Representatives.
    With best wishes,
            Sincerely,
                                           Henry J. Hyde, Chairman.
                                ------                                

                          House of Representatives,
                                Committee on the Judiciary,
                                      Washington, DC, May 13, 2004.
Hon. Duncan Hunter,
Chairman, Committee on Armed Services,
House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
    Dear Chairman Hunter: In recognition of the desire to 
expedite floor consideration of H.R. 4200, the Department of 
Defense authorization bill, the Committee on the Judiciary 
hereby waives consideration of the bill. This waiver is made 
with the understanding that proposed sections that have been 
reviewed by the Committee on the Judiciary relating to the 
bankruptcy treatment of certain military bonuses and pay 
incentives, compensating employees who were exposed to 
radiation in certain government programs, and the title to 
sunken military ships (to the extent such provision contained 
matter within the jurisdiction of the Committee on the 
Judiciary) will not be included in the bill. These sections 
contain matters within the Committee on the Judiciary's Rule X 
jurisdiction.
    I further understand that proposed sections that have been 
reviewed by the Committee on the Judiciary relating to the 
misuse of civilian medals, Federal Tort Claims Act coverage for 
volunteers performing volunteer duties at sea and for committee 
members of the Employee Support for the Guard and Reserve, 
waivers of DOJ prison reviews for several land conveyances, 
state tax preemption for the Non-Appropriated Fund Health 
Benefits Programs, trademark licensing of military slogans and 
the like, military legal assistance, a public-private employee 
exchange program, and allowing assignment of contract claims to 
sureties will be included in the bill. If these sections are 
added to the bill, I will not seek a sequential referral based 
on inclusion.
    The Committee on the Judiciary takes this action with the 
understanding that the Committee's jurisdiction over these 
provisions is in no way diminished or altered. I would 
appreciate your including this letter in your Committee's 
report on H.R. 4200 and the Congressional Record during 
consideration of the legislation on the House floor.
            Sincerely,
                               F. James Sensenbrenner, Jr.,
                                                          Chairman.
                                ------                                

                          House of Representatives,
                               Committee on Armed Services,
                                      Washington, DC, May 14, 2004.
Hon. F. James Sensenbrenner, Jr.,
Chairman, Committee on the Judiciary,
House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
    Dear Mr. Chairman: Thank you for your letter regarding H.R. 
4200, the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 
2005.
    I agree that the Committee on Energy and Commerce 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 Energy and Commerce is 
not waiving its jurisdiction. Further, this exchange of letters 
will be included in the Committee report on the bill.
    With best wishes.
            Sincerely,
                                           Duncan Hunter, Chairman.
                                ------                                

                          House of Representatives,
            Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure,
                                      Washington, DC, May 14, 2004.
Hon. Duncan Hunter,
Chairman, Committee on Armed Services,
House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
    Dear Mr. Chairman: I am writing to you concerning the 
jurisdictional interest of the Transportation and 
Infrastructure Committee in matters being considered in H.R. 
4200, the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 
2005.
    Our Committee recognizes the importance of H.R. 4200 and 
the need for the legislation to move expeditiously. Therefore, 
while we have a valid claim to jurisdiction over a number of 
provisions of the bill, I do not intend to request a sequential 
referral. This, of course, is conditional on our mutual 
understanding that nothing in this legislation or my decision 
to forego a sequential referral waives, reduces or otherwise 
affects the jurisdiction of the Transportation and 
Infrastructure Committee, that every effort will be made to 
include any agreements worked out by staff of our two 
Committees in amendments as the bill is taken to the House 
Floor, and that a copy of this letter and of your response 
acknowledging our jurisdictional interest will be included in 
the Committee Report and as part of the Congressional Record 
during consideration of this bill by the House.
    The Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure also 
asks that you support our request to be conferees on the 
provisions over which we have jurisdiction during any House-
Senate conference.
    Thank you for your cooperation in this matter.
            Sincerely,
                                               Don Young, Chairman.
                                ------                                

                          House of Representatives,
                               Committee on Armed Services,
                                      Washington, DC, May 14, 2004.
Hon. Don Young,
Chairman, Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure,
House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
    Dear Mr. Chairman: Thank you for your letter regarding H.R. 
4200, the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 
2005.
    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, this exchange of letters will be 
included in the Committee report on the bill.
    With best wishes.
            Sincerely,
                                           Duncan Hunter, Chairman.
                                ------                                

                          House of Representatives,
                            Committee on Veterans' Affairs,
                                      Washington, DC, May 11, 2004.
Hon. Duncan Hunter,
Chairman, Committee on Armed Services,
House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
    Dear Mr. Chairman: I wish to inform the Committee on Armed 
Services that the Committee on Veterans' Affairs hereby waives 
any jurisdiction it has over the provisions of section 2831 of 
H.R. 4200, the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal 
Year 2005, regarding ``Transfer of Administrative Jurisdiction, 
Defense Supply Center, Columbus, Ohio.'' Our Committee does not 
desire referral of these provisions, a copy of which is 
enclosed.
            Sincerely,
                                    Christopher H. Smith, Chairman.
                                ------                                

                          House of Representatives,
                               Committee on Armed Services,
                                      Washington, DC, May 14, 2004.
Hon. Christopher H. Smith,
Chairman, Committee on Veterans' Affairs,
House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
    Dear Mr. Chairman: Thank you for your letter regarding H.R. 
4200, the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 
2005.
    I agree that the Committee on Veterans' Affairs 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 Veterans' Affairs is not 
waiving its jurisdiction. Further, this exchange of letters 
will be included in the Committee report on the bill.
    With best wishes.
            Sincerely,
                                           Duncan Hunter, Chairman.
                                ------                                

                          House of Representatives,
                          Select Committee on Intelligence,
                                      Washington, DC, May XX, 2004.
Hon. Duncan Hunter,
Chairman, Committee on Armed Services,
House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
    Dear Mr. Chairman: I am writing to confirm our mutual 
understanding with respect to consideration of H.R. 4200, the 
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2005. 
Certain provisions of this important legislation are within the 
jurisdiction of the House Permanent Select Committee on 
Intelligence (HPSCI). I support the legislation and shareyour 
desire to have it considered expeditiously by the House; hence, I do 
not intend to seek referral of this legislation to the HPSCI.
    However, I do so only with the understanding that this 
procedural route should not be construed to prejudice this 
Committee's valid jurisdictional interests and prerogatives on 
these provisions or any other similar legislation. Likewise, 
this should not be considered as precedent for consideration of 
matters of jurisdictional interest to the HPSCI in the future. 
Furthermore, should these provisions or similar provisions be 
included in any Senate amendments and considered in a 
conference with the Senate, I would request that the Speaker 
appoint Members of the HPSCI as conferees on those provisions. 
Finally, I would ask that you include a copy of our exchange of 
letters on this matter in your report to accompany the bill. I 
thank you for your consideration.
            Sincerely,
                                             Porter Goss, Chairman.
                                ------                                

                          House of Representatives,
                               Committee on Armed Services,
                                      Washington, DC, May 14, 2004.
Hon. Porter Goss,
Chairman, Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence,
House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
    Dear Mr. Chairman: Thank you for your letter regarding H.R. 
4200, the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 
2005.
    I agree that the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence 
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 Permanent Select Committee on 
Intelligence is not waiving its jurisdiction. Further, this 
exchange of letters will be included in the Committee report on 
the bill.
    With best wishes.
            Sincerely,
                                           Duncan Hunter, Chairman.
                                ------                                

                          House of Representatives,
                     Select Committee on Homeland Security,
                                      Washington, DC, May 11, 2004.
Hon. Duncan Hunter,
Chairman, Committee on Armed Services,
House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
    Dear Mr. Chairman: It has come to my attention that a new 
section has been added to the Defense Authorization Act for 
Fiscal Year 2005, incorporating the text of H.R. 3966, the 
``ROTC and Military Recruiter Equal Access to Campus Act of 
2004.'' As noted in my previous letter dated, March 19, 2004, 
provisions of H.R. 3966 directly impact the programs and 
operations of the Department of Homeland Security by limiting 
its ability to distribute funds to institutions of higher 
education by grant or contract. Although I believe that these 
provisions fall within the jurisdiction of the Select Committee 
under H. Res. 5, I will not seek a sequential referral given 
the importance of expediting passage of this bill, which I co-
sponsored and strongly support.
    The Select Committee on Homeland Security takes this action 
with the understanding that its jurisdiction over the provision 
as included in the Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 
2005 is in no way diminished or altered. I would appreciate 
your including this letter in the Committee Report on the bill. 
Thank you for your consideration.
            Sincerely,
                                         Christopher Cox, Chairman.
                                ------                                

                          House of Representatives,
                               Committee on Armed Services,
                                      Washington, DC, May 14, 2004.
Hon. Christopher Cox,
Chairman, Select Committee on Homeland Security,
House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
    Dear Mr. Chairman: Thank you for your letter regarding H.R. 
4200, the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 
2005.
    I agree that the Select Committee on Homeland Security 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 Select Committee on Homeland 
Security is not waiving its jurisdiction. Further, this 
exchange of letters will be included in the Committee report on 
the bill.
    With best wishes.
            Sincerely,
                                           Duncan Hunter, Chairman.

                              FISCAL DATA

    Pursuant to clause 3(d) of rule XIII of the Rules of the 
House of Representatives, the committee attempted to ascertain 
annual outlays resulting from the bill during fiscal year 2005 
and each of the following five fiscal years. The results of 
such efforts are reflected in the committee cost estimate, 
which is included in this report pursuant to clause 3(d)(2) of 
rule XIII of the Rules of the House of Representatives.

                  CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET OFFICE ESTIMATE

    Under clause 3(c)(3) of rule XIII of the House of 
Representatives and 402 of the Congressional Budget Act of 
1974, the committee has requested but not received a cost 
estimate for this bill from the Director of the Congressional 
Budget Office.

                        COMMITTEE COST ESTIMATE

    Clause 3(d)(2) of rule XIII of the Rules of the House of 
Representatives requires an estimate and a comparison by the 
committee of the costs which would be incurred in carrying out 
this bill.
    H.R. 4200 would authorize appropriations of $418.5 billion 
for fiscal year 2005 for the activities of the Department of 
Defense (DOD) and the national security programs of the 
Department of Energy (DOE). The budget authority implication of 
the authorization of appropriations in H.R. 4200 is $422.1 
billion. It would also authorize an additional $25 billion 
emergency appropriation for fiscal year 2005 to support 
Operations Iraqi Freedom and Enduring Freedom.
    The committee estimates that enacting H.R. 4200 would not 
increase mandatory budget authority for fiscal year 2004 or the 
following five years. In terms of discretionary and mandatory 
budget authority, H.R. 4200 is within the allocation provided 
by H. Con. Res. 393, as passed by the House on March 25, 2004, 
which establishes the Congressional budget for the United 
States Government for fiscal year 2005 and sets forth 
appropriate budgetary levels for fiscal years 2004 and 2005 
through 2009.
    The committee has been in close and constant consultation 
with the Congressional Budget Office and has provided copies of 
H.R. 4200 as ordered reported on May 12, 2004, to develop an 
estimate and comparison as required under section 402 of the 
Congressional Budget Act of 1974. The committee expects to 
receive this letter prior to the consideration of H.R. 4200 by 
the House of Representatives.

                           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 and are 
reflected in the body of this report.
    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 committee under clause 3(d)(2) of rule 
XIII of the Rules of the House of Representatives.

                GENERAL PERFORMANCE GOALS AND OBJECTIVES

    With respect to clause 3(c)(4) of rule XIII of the Rules of 
the House of Representatives, this legislation would address 
several general and outcome-related performance goals and 
objectives. The general goal and objective of this legislation 
is to improve the quality of life for military personnel and 
their families, military readiness, the modernization and 
eventual transformation of the armed forces, to enhance the 
development of ballistic missile defenses, and to improve the 
condition of military housing and facilities.
    With respect to the outcome-related goal of improving the 
quality of life for military personnel and their families, the 
objective of this legislation is to:
          (1) Add 10,000 Army personnel and 3,000 Marine Corps 
        personnel each year in fiscal years 2005, 2006, and 
        2007, enabling the military services to begin meeting 
        long-standing manpower shortages, as well as new 
        manning requirements;
          (2) Provide every military service member an across-
        the-board pay raise of 3.5 percent effective January 1, 
        2005; and
          (3) Eliminate out-of-pocket housing costs for 
        military personnel.
    With respect to the outcome-related goal of improving force 
protection for our troops, the objective of this legislation is 
to:
          (1) Provide over $2.0 billion for force protection 
        initiatives, including armor for vehicles, new 
        munitions and surveillance programs; and
          (2) Establish a streamlined acquisition process in 
        order to respond in a timely manner to urgent requests 
        for combat equipment by commanders in the battlefield.
    With respect to the outcome-related goal of successfully 
prosecuting continuing operations in Iraq and Afghanistan, the 
objective of this legislation is to:
          (1) Provide an additional $25.0 billion in emergency 
        contingency operations supplemental funding to be 
        appropriated for fiscal year 2005 to support the war on 
        terrorism's operational costs, personnel expenses and 
        the procurement of new equipment; and
          (2) Support the Army's efforts to transform the 
        structure of its divisions into smaller organizations 
        and create additional combat relevant units. This 
        reorganization known as ``modularity'' will contribute 
        to the reduction of stress on our troops due to the 
        high operational tempo of operations in Southwest Asia.
    With respect to the outcome-related goal of improving 
military housing and facilities, the objective of this 
legislation is to:
          (1) Provide $9.9 billion for military construction 
        and military family housing programs; and
          (2) Eliminate the statutory ceiling for the military 
        housing privatization program, allowing the Department 
        of Defense to leverage private sector investments and 
        business interests to build and revitalize family 
        housing at domestic military bases.

                   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. 4200. The 
record of these votes is attached to this report.
    The committee ordered H.R. 4200 reported to the House with 
a favorable recommendation by a vote of 60-0, a quorum being 
present.


         CHANGES IN EXISTING LAW MADE BY THE BILL, AS REPORTED

    The committee intends to take steps to make available the 
analysis of changes in existing law made by the bill, as 
required by clause 3(e) of rule XIII of the Rules of the House 
of Representatives.

                    ADDITIONAL VIEWS OF IKE SKELTON

    The 2005 defense authorization is a good bill that makes 
advances on a variety of issues. I am pleased that the 
committee worked largely in accordance with its nonpartisan 
traditions, and that important initiatives from each side were 
considered seriously and often adopted. A few of the bill's 
provisions are worthy of special mention.
    When the surviving spouse of a military retiree, usually a 
widow, becomes eligible for Social Security at the age of 62, 
her spousal survivor benefits drop from 55 percent of her 
spouse's retired pay to 35 percent. Democrats have consistently 
called for legislation to eliminate this ``Widow's Tax'' in the 
Survivors Benefit Program (SBP), and urged the committee to 
address this issue. I therefore applaud the inclusion of 
legislation in this bill to eliminate the SBP offset over a 
five-year period, beginning on October 1, 2005. I will continue 
to work to ensure that this legislative victory is preserved in 
conference with the Senate.
    I remain concerned by events in Iraq. June 30 is quickly 
approaching, and much remains unsettled about the transition of 
sovereignty to the Iraqis and the role of U.S. Armed Forces 
after the transition. The recent revelations of prisoner abuse 
at Abu Ghraib compound these difficulties, and point to a clear 
need for better congressional oversight over both the goals and 
conduct of U.S.-Iraqi policies.
    Several amendments to strengthen congressional oversight 
were adopted, including two that I offered. One is a progress 
report on Iraqi Security Forces, and the other is to require 
the Department of Defense to respond more expeditiously to 
congressional requests. Rep. Abercrombie successfully offered 
an amendment to better account for and manage civilian 
contractors in Iraq. The unsettling news of the alleged 
involvement of contractors in the prison abuses and the grisly 
beheading of an American businessman highlight the need for a 
better awareness of the number and role of contractors in Iraq. 
We need to ensure that their roles are appropriate and that 
their safety can be reasonably secured.
    Despite the adoption of these and other related amendments, 
I am not satisfied that Congress has the access to information 
to conduct proper oversight, nor am I confident that the 
civilian and military leadership at the Pentagon has access to 
all the information they need to make critical policy 
decisions. Rep. Meek introduced and withdrew an amendment 
regarding how critical information is relayed in the military 
chain of command. I look forward to working with him and others 
during consideration of the bill on the floor to ensure that 
both the Legislative and Executive branches of our government 
are fully informed of important events in Iraq and can provide 
more vigorous oversight and leadership.
    While Democrats also support the inclusion of a $25 billion 
authorization of an emergency supplemental for ongoing military 
operations in Iraq and Afghanistan, I am disappointed that the 
committee did not accept an amendment offered by Reps. Jim 
Cooper and Tim Ryan to authorize $67 billion. The Cooper-Ryan 
Amendment represents a more realistic, good-faith estimate of 
the likely cost, and would better ensure that Iraq and 
Afghanistan operations are not ``cash-flowed'' from regular 
Department of Defense appropriations. ``Cash-flowing'' involves 
using regular operations and maintenance and military personnel 
appropriations for contingency operations, and this practice 
invariably leads to disruptions in readiness levels, training, 
base operations, equipment maintenance, and other important 
peace-time military activities. The $25 billion supplemental 
will serve as a useful ``bridge'' to a future supplemental, but 
the Cooper-Ryan amendment was a more responsible approach both 
militarily and fiscally.
    A positive aspect of the $25 billion supplemental was that 
it also included much needed end-strength increases for the 
Army and Marine Corps. The stress on our ground forces has been 
tremendous. I know of soldiers who have returned home from one 
year of operations in Afghanistan, only to be told three months 
later that they will be deployed to Iraq for a year. The 
supplemental authorizes the end-strength increases (10,000 
annually for three years) that the Secretary of Defense 
indicated was needed by the Army to conduct their 
transformational activities while still meeting their 
operational requirements. It also provides a necessary increase 
for the Marine Corps (3,000 annually for three years) to meet 
their mission requirements.
    Finally, this Committee in 1989 laid the foundation for 
joint officer development and joint professional military 
education as it exists today. Recent combat experience 
demonstrates that the services have generally achieved a 
remarkable integration in executing joint operations. However, 
as the nature of warfare evolves, future operations will become 
more complex and joint at lower levels than before, and the 
framework for developing persons skilled in joint matters must 
also evolve. Our committee is again improving military 
education by raising joint military education requirements with 
a corresponding increase in joint military education 
opportunities. This is the first step in developing joint 
officers ready to face the challenge of 21st century warfare.
    America is a nation at war. The fiscal 2005 defense 
authorization recognizes that exigency and provides those who 
protect America the tools they need to do the job. I look 
forward to improving the bill even further as the legislative 
process proceeds.

                                                       Ike Skelton.

                  ADDITIONAL VIEWS OF SOLOMON P. ORTIZ

    The United States must take care to use a policy of 
impartial diplomacy in our future relations with both the 
Republic of China (Taiwan) and the People's Republic of China, 
at all levels of our diplomatic relationship. The Pacific Rim 
is an area of enormous economic trade with the United States. 
The One-China policy is a fundamental fixture of our 
international policy, and we must reinforce that at all levels 
of our government.
    As a Member of Congress who has traveled extensively in 
that area on military and trade missions, I have come to love 
the people of both China and Taiwan. They are so similar, yet 
so unique. People of both nations are peace-loving, yet anxious 
about their national character.
    Taiwan is currently finding their way through the emotional 
aftermath of a divisive 2004 presidential election, which has 
only worked to further strain their relationship with the 
People's Republic of China. This is a difficult moment for the 
U.S. as tensions simmer between our friends on the Pacific Rim. 
The United States has much at stake when it comes to a peaceful 
relationship between Taiwan and the People's Republic of China.
    As one of the few Americans who has traveled to North Korea 
and talked to officials there, I want to note that we have 
multiple, dangerous, strategic military concerns in this 
region. We must focus our attention on diplomacy and the One-
China policy. We must not step off that path. China helped to 
set up our meeting with North Korea, and continue to be an 
important intermediary between North Korea and us.
    The United States, as a country, has long recognized the 
One-China policy. It is our long-term guiding principle, and we 
must tread carefully along the path of diplomacy as Taiwan and 
China confront and deal with their differences.
    We must not implement policy that will fuel the fires of 
dissention that simmer between these two nations. Our 
obligation to the American people, and to peace in that region 
of the world, is to aid in the process of finding diplomatic 
solutions for our strategic interests through the One-China 
policy.
    We continue to hope China and Taiwan will be able to get 
together to work out the differences between them. The U.S. 
needs to give them the time and space to do that. The world has 
a great stake in their coming together.
                                                  Solomon P. Ortiz.

                    ADDITIONAL VIEWS OF STEVE ISRAEL

    The FY 2005 defense authorization is important because it 
recognizes that the greatest investment we can make is in our 
troops, by developing the sometimes intangible qualities of 
leadership, education, judgment, initiative and historic 
knowledge. I am pleased that the authorization bill understands 
the centrality of foreign language and cultural expertise to 
the success of military operations in Operation Iraqi Freedom 
and Operation Enduring Freedom, as well as the Global War on 
Terrorism.
    I commend the Committee and the Department of Defense for 
including legislative language in the bill that establishes a 
Defense Language Office within the Office of the Under 
Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness to ensure a 
strategic focus on meeting present and future requirements for 
language and regional expertise. Other language directing the 
Secretary of Defense to conduct a study on how the military 
educates and trains our soldiers in language and culture will 
prove invaluable. The technological revolution that has made 
possible our recent successes must be accompanied by a similar 
progression in the way we wage war.
    We must continue to build on the accomplishments of 
Representative Skelton and others on this committee who were 
instrumental in raising the standard of joint officer 
development and education that has been so critical to the 
success of our military. Faced with new challenges, we must 
recommit ourselves to creating the educational and training 
framework that will give our military the language and cultural 
expertise they need to succeed.
    I also want to recognize the contribution of Major General 
Robert Scales. As a leading voice for re-shaping our military 
to deal with the challenges of the 21st Century, his testimony 
before the full committee was helpful in focusing the 
Committee's attention on this issue. With more than 30 years of 
experience in the military and former commandant of the Army 
War College, he would be a valuable resource for the Department 
of Defense when it begins its assessment of military education 
and training.
    I look forward to working with my colleagues and the 
defense community to ensure that our men and women in uniform 
have the skill necessary to navigate the cultural and 
geopolitical complexities to conflict in the 21st century.

                                                      Steve Israel.

                  ADDITIONAL VIEWS OF KENDRICK B. MEEK

    There are many things about which to be proud in the 2005 
defense authorization bill. I am very pleased that this bill 
will provide additional funds over the original Pentagon 
request to provide for the current necessities of our fighting 
men and women in Iraq and Afghanistan. From equipping our 
troops with signal-jamming equipment to replacement of damaged 
air and ground vehicles to the over $700 million in added funds 
to completely up-armor our fleet of HMMWVs, the bill intends to 
outfit our troops in a manner befitting the heroes of a country 
with the greatest resources in the world.
    However, merely supplying our troops with the means and 
methods to fight an asymmetrical war gives them only two-thirds 
of what they, and we, need for ultimate success in Iraq and 
Afghanistan. I am concerned that information necessary for 
proper strategic planning is not being utilized in high-level, 
decision-making processes. While this information appears to be 
available at the operations level, the most critical elements 
of it do not always rise to the policy level.
    The United States finds itself in a quagmire resulting from 
detainee abuses at Abu Ghraib that not only complicates the 
stabilization of Iraq and the Middle East in general, but that 
brings into question the moral integrity of a country that has 
always fought hard, even within its own borders, for human 
rights. Unfortunately, had the Pentagon acted sooner, there is 
reason to believe this situation could have been at least 
contained, if not avoided altogether.
    In late August of 2003 and again in mid-October, Allied 
Forces Commander, Lt. General Ricardo Sanchez, commissioned two 
separate evaluation and assessment investigations of the 
detention and interrogation situation in Iraq. Both reports 
contained admonishments that policies were lacking, training 
subpar, and oversight non-existent. Among the similarities in 
the two reports:
         That there were no authorities or procedures in place 
        to affect a unified strategy to detain and interrogate 
        internees in Iraq;
         That there was a lack of active control of the 
        internees within the detention environment, and flawed 
        use-of-force procedures;
         That the general prison population was inappropriately 
        co-mingled with EPWs;
         That the soldier to detainee ratio was critically 
        deficient;
         That there was indication the MPs were actively, 
        though indirectly engaged in interrogation actions 
        despite Army Regulations to the contrary.
    Any one of these items is worthy of command level 
discussion and subsequent briefing to the Pentagon. Taken 
together, they constituted a warning shot over the bow. In 
fact, in the Article 15-6 Investigation performed by MG Taguba, 
the IO specifically states, ``Unfortunately, many of the 
systemic problems that surfaced during MG Ryder's team's 
assessment are the very same issues that are the subject of 
this investigation.'' [Taguba Report, page 12, pg 2]. However, 
current Army regulations do not require the transmittal of such 
information up the chain of command beyond the commissioning 
authority [AR 15-6, ss 3-18, 3-19].
    Currently, only Air Force HQ is aggressive in finding 
sensitive information and forwarding it up the chain of 
command, having done so since 1998. An office was set up within 
HQ whose sole purpose is to learn of sensitive information 
items and flag them. As part of the Air Force's formal rules, 
personnel who learn of explosive matters- including those 
``with potential community reaction or press coverage''--must 
inform the office for briefing to the Secretary of the Air 
Force. The Navy also has a limited version of the Air Force's 
program, though it is less ambitious.
    Secretary Rumsfeld said last week that it would be 
difficult for him to reach down through the myriad of legal 
cases climbing through the military justice system and find 
those that are potentially explosive in nature. I would counter 
that with the right guidance he would not have to reach down, 
but could expect that information to be pushed up, even before 
it reaches the criminal investigation stage.
    Military leadership has always required critical elements 
of information to make sound, timely, and informed decisions on 
the battlefield. Determining the information needed to make 
these decisions is crucial to a commander's ability to act 
decisively in the course of battle. That same depth and speed 
of information is necessary for the Pentagon to direct policy 
and decision-making in the course of stabilization efforts 
afterwards.
    The amendment that I offered during committee intends to 
move mission-critical information from the commissioning 
authority up to the highest-levels in short order when that 
information portends events or situations detrimental to our 
strategic plan. The language merely required that the Secretary 
give guidance to all Department of Defense personnel with 
authority to commission assessments, evaluations or 
investigations on what types of information would be necessary 
to pass up the chain of command. This guidance would 
specifically target those items of such potentially volatile 
nature as to give even the layman a reason to raise a red flag.
    Were it that MG Miller's assessment had been even a topic 
of discussion around the water cooler at the Pentagon, we might 
have been able to avoid the events at Abu Ghraib. Had more 
intense conversation happened after MG Ryder's investigation, 
we would have at least had the opportunity to contain the 
situation, develop a strategy for correcting the problem, and 
alert the world in a far less internationally embarrassing 
fashion. Instead of the issue being a part of Pentagon 
discussions in the summer and fall of 2003, it was left to a 
courageous specialist to try to put a stop to the vile episodes 
at Abu Ghraib in 2004, some five months after official reports 
highlighted conditions for a serious problem.
    It is not enough to arm our soldiers with the means and 
methods of war fighting. We must arm them with strategic 
planning. Proper planning is the offspring of proper 
information gathering and processing at the decision-making 
level. It is ironic that there are suggestions that we seek 
more information on seeking more information before we act. I 
hope that before the defense authorization bill leaves the 
House of Representatives we are able to improve an excellent 
bill even more by addressing this pertinent and timely issue.

                                                  Kendrick B. Meek.

           ADDITIONAL VIEWS OF REPRESENTATIVE MIKE D. ROGERS

    As the Committee moves forward with H.R. 4200, the National 
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2005, I want to share 
my concern over the Department of Defense's use of the 
Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) Green 
Building Rating System. The Air Force, Army, and Navy each 
utilize the LEED standard in some respects in its building 
projects. Although sustainable building design can be a 
valuable goal, the Department's use of the LEED standard is 
troubling.
    First, the LEED rating system clearly discriminates against 
the use of renewable wood products. Through several of its 
specific credits for steel and concrete, certain wood products 
are put at a significant disadvantage. It does not recognize 
that wood is among the most environmentally benign of all 
building materials, because, among other things, it is a 
renewable resource that sequesters huge amounts of carbon.
    Second, LEED discriminates against wood products 
manufactured in the United States. The LEED rating system 
provides a specific credit only for forest products that have 
been certified by the Forest Stewardship Council (FSC), a 
standard initially developed by international environmental 
groups to combat tropical deforestation. It is predominately 
recognized in Europe. FSC-certified products manufactured from 
wood grown in the U.S. are not readily available. However, 
products from other credible third party certification programs 
are readily available. No credits are given for wood products 
produced by companies independently third-party certified to 
the Sustainable Forestry Initiative (SFI) Program standard or 
the American Tree Farm System--the two largest sustainable 
forest management systems in the U.S.
    Third, LEED has not been developed through a consensus 
process open to all interested parties. The process used by the 
U.S. Green Building Council to create and operate LEED does not 
meet any generally accepted definition of a voluntary consensus 
standard. For example, the USGBC fails to satisfy the measures 
of the voluntary consensus standards development process set 
out by the American National Standards Institute (ANSI).
    And fourth, a recent National Institute of Standards and 
Technology (NIST) study, while recognizing that the LEED 
standard does have beneficial elements, concluded that it does 
not properly rate products based on environmental criteria. In 
the study, NIST was especially critical of LEED's arbitrary 
thresholds, its emphasis on cost rather than environmental 
impact measures, the lack of appropriate baselines and measures 
of improvement, and the program's inability to compare 
buildings in different locations on equal terms.
    To address this issue, I urge the committee to accept in 
conference the following report language from Title XXVIII of 
the Senate version of the bill, S. 2400:
Use of sustainable design standards by the Department of Defense
    Congress encourages the Department of Defense to utilize 
sustainable building design and construction methods to 
maximize the efficient use of renewable, recycled, and 
environmentally sound materials. However, concerns have been 
expressed that certain rating systems adopted by the Department 
to assess the standards of sustainable design and construction 
of facilities may unfairly discriminate against domestic 
producers of wood construction products. Therefore, the 
committee directs the Secretary of Defense to submit a report 
to the committee by June 1, 2005 which describes:
          (1) the standards used by each military department to 
        assess the use of sustainable design and construction 
        methods, including credits provided for products made 
        from renewable materials, as well as recycled 
        materials;
          (2) the extent to which such standards comply with 
        the requirements of Section 6002 of the Resource 
        Conservation and Recovery Act, section 6962 of title 
        42, United States Code, Executive Order 13101, Office 
        of Management and Budget Circular A-119, and other 
        applicable requirements of law and regulation; and
          (3) the extent to which the standards adopted by each 
        military department unfairly discriminate against the 
        use of products and materials manufactured in the 
        United States.
    The committee expects the Secretary to take appropriate 
action to address any noncompliance with applicable 
requirements of law or regulation and any unfair discrimination 
against any U.S. manufactured materials identified during the 
course of this review.

                                                    Mike D. Rogers.

   ADDITIONAL VIEWS OF REPRESENTATIVES VIC SNYDER AND MAC THORNBERRY

    We find ourselves in disagreement with the actions of the 
Committee regarding the delay contained in the bill of the Base 
Realignment and Closure (BRAC) process. The Chairman of the 
Readiness Subcommittee included in his mark language that 
essentially delayed the BRAC process for two years by demanding 
that a series of reports be submitted late in 2005 and that the 
process then hold for 18 months until the committee had a 
chance to consider the amendments.
    During the full committee markup process, an amendment was 
offered to cancel the entire BRAC process, to which a second 
degree amendment was offered reinstating the two year delay. 
This amendment was passed, although a number of members spoke 
against both amendments.
    Arguments were made that the process should be delayed, and 
several reports be submitted, because there is a war currently 
going on. During debate on the amendments, the argument was 
advanced that the process should be cancelled because the 
Department of Defense has not yet been able to nominate 
directly to Congress any individual base that should be closed, 
and that, should the Department do this, Congress is perfectly 
capable of voting to close or realign individual bases. In my 
opinion, both of these arguments represent seriously wrong 
approaches.
    We were pleased to see the committee reject the second 
argument. The BRAC process was created to ensure that politics 
and the self-interest of an individual district or member are 
removed from the process of base closure. To have the 
Department of Defense begin nominating bases and Congress 
voting to close individual bases would immediately cause even 
more tension in Congress and accusations of partisan bias in 
the system. This would result in gridlock and an utter failure 
to take needed action.
    The former argument, that the process should be delayed due 
to the current issues in Iraq, is similarly flawed. There will 
never be a time during which sufficient peace and stability 
reign for us to carry out the BRAC process. Many people regard 
the 1990s as a time of relative peace, forgetting that during 
this window of stability the U.S. military carried out actions 
in Panama, Iraq, Bosnia, Kosovo, and Somalia, to say nothing of 
scores of other minor military engagements. Simply put, we 
almost always have been, and probably always will be, bemoaning 
the disorder that seems to constantly reign supreme. In 
addition, the BRAC process is as much about realignment as it 
is closure, and the realignment is needed to assist the 
Department of Defense in carrying out the very changes in the 
military that are designed to allow us to better address the 
current chaos.
    There is a valid argument that the reports requested by the 
Committee in the provision contained in the bill should be 
submitted. We agree that the Committee should be better 
informed about the Global Posture Review, under which DoD is 
adjusting our overseas basing, and its diplomatic and military 
effects. Similarly, it would be beneficial to know more about 
the effects of homeland security missions and military 
transformation on basing. Nothing stops the Committee from 
demanding these reports now, and we believe that it would be 
entirely appropriate to do so. If we did so, presumably DoD 
could be ordered to produce the information by the spring of 
2005 at the latest, which would give the Committee, and 
Congress as a whole, 6 months to consider the reports, digest 
the information, and hold hearings. Nothing is stopping us from 
carrying out this needed oversight but our own timidity, but 
the reports do not require delaying a much needed process by 
two years.
    In conclusion, while the Committee has asked for much 
needed information, it has also delayed a needed process. It is 
my hope that the whole House, or at least the whole Congress 
acting through the conference committee, will reject the delay 
contained in the House bill and proceed with the process 
currently in law. Hoping for a respite in the current global 
environment is not only unrealistic, but does the military 
itself no favors.

                                   Vic Snyder.
                                   Mac Thornberry.

      ADDITIONAL VIEWS OF REPRESENTATIVES JIM COOPER AND TIM RYAN

    We commend Chairman Hunter for including a detailed 
authorization for $25 billion in this year's National Defense 
Authorization Act, but we are gravely concerned that this down 
payment on the cost of the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq in 2005 
fails to tell the whole truth to the American people.
    During committee consideration of the authorization bill, 
we offered an amendment authorizing a full-year supplemental 
appropriation of $67 billion. This larger figure reflects a 
realistic, detailed analysis of the likely total cost of the 
wars in Afghanistan and Iraq in 2005. This amendment included 
funding for all of the commendable items in the Chairman's 
bill, including funding for critical force protection 
equipment, deferred vehicle maintenance, new counter-terrorism 
technology, replacement vehicles for those destroyed in combat 
operations, and additional combat troops for the Army and 
Marine Corps. However, it also provided sufficient funds for 
combat operations in Iraq and Afghanistan for all of fiscal 
year 2005, not just the few months of funding that the 
Chairman's bill authorized.
    We offered this amendment because we believe the House bill 
should reflect the true costs of these wars. Piecemeal funding 
of these critical military efforts sends the wrong signal to 
our adversaries, the American people, and U.S. troops in the 
field. Our adversaries are watching our actions closely, and a 
robust full-year authorization would have sent the signal that 
despite the significant challenges we face in Iraq and 
Afghanistan, the United States is committed to victory. To 
Americans here at home, a full-year authorization would 
demonstrate that Congress takes seriously its duty to be honest 
with the American people, and that when it comes to providing 
funding for our troops in the field, politics should truly take 
a backseat. Finally, our troops in the field look to Congress 
to provide them what they need to accomplish the missions they 
are assigned. Authorization of a full-year supplemental would 
leave no doubt that Congress supports them and is willing to 
provide whatever is needed to win.
    We were disappointed that no Republican members of our 
committee chose to support our amendment. We believe the 
American people will continue to support the wars in Iraq and 
Afghanistan where critical U.S. interests are at stake, but 
only if we are honest about the cost.

                                   Jim Cooper.
                                   Tim Ryan.