Ask the Scholar

{
    "localId": "1562948",
    "label": "Defense - Procurement Authorization Bill",
    "core": "doc",
    "dtoType": "document",
    "citationUrl": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/1562948"
}

{
    "id": "1562948",
    "sourceUrl": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/1562948",
    "contentType": "document",
    "title": "Defense - Procurement Authorization Bill",
    "citationUrl": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/1562948",
    "collections": [
        "John O. Marsh Files (Ford Administration)",
        "John Marsh's General Subject Files"
    ],
    "subjects": [
        "Appropriations and expenditures",
        "Legislation"
    ],
    "iiifBase": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/opastorage/live/48/5629/1562948/content/library/document/0067/1562948.pdf",
    "thumbnailUrl": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/opastorage/live/48/5629/1562948/content/library/document/0067/1562948.pdf",
    "largeImageUrl": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/opastorage/live/48/5629/1562948/content/library/document/0067/1562948.pdf",
    "imageCount": 1,
    "hasImages": true,
    "source": "import",
    "hasTranscription": false
}

{
    "url": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/1562948",
    "naId": 1562948,
    "coverageEndDate": {
        "logicalDate": "1975-12-31",
        "month": 12,
        "year": 1975
    },
    "coverageStartDate": {
        "logicalDate": "1975-06-01",
        "month": 6,
        "year": 1975
    },
    "levelOfDescription": "fileUnit",
    "recordType": "description",
    "ocrSource": "nara-archive"
}

{
    "seq": 1,
    "pageIndex": 0,
    "type": "document",
    "url": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/opastorage/live/48/5629/1562948/content/library/document/0067/1562948.pdf",
    "mediaId": "bef6543ece165216",
    "ocrText": "The original documents are located in Box 12, folder \"Defense - Procurement\nAuthorization Bill\" of the John Marsh Files at the Gerald R. Ford Presidential Library.\nCopyright Notice\nThe copyright law of the United States (Title 17, United States Code) governs the making of\nphotocopies or other reproductions of copyrighted material. Gerald R. Ford donated to the United\nStates of America his copyrights in all of his unpublished writings in National Archives collections.\nWorks prepared by U.S. Government employees as part of their official duties are in the public\ndomain. The copyrights to materials written by other individuals or organizations are presumed to\nremain with them. If you think any of the information displayed in the PDF is subject to a valid\ncopyright claim, please contact the Gerald R. Ford Presidential Library.\nDigitized from Box 12 of The John Marsh Files at the Gerald R. Ford Presidential Library\nNATIONAL ARCHIVES AND RECORDS SERVICE\nWITHDRAWAL SHEET (PRESIDENTIAL LIBRARIES)\nFORM OF\nDOCUMENT\nCORRESPONDENTS OR TITLE\nDATE\nRESTRICTION\n1. Memo\nJack Marsh to the President re binary production 7/14/75\nA\n(2 pp. )\n2\nConnor to Marsh, 7/15/75\n2a. Memo\ncopy of item 1 (2 Pp.)\n7/14/75\nA\nFILE LOCATION Marsh Files\nGeneral Subject File\nDefense Procurement Authorization Bill\nBox 12\nRESTRICTION CODES\n(A) Closed by Executive Order 12356 governing access to national security information.\n(B) Closed by statute or by the agency which originated the document.\n(C) Closed in accordance with restrictions contained in the donor's deed of gift.\nWHM. 12/30/85\nGENERAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION\nGSA FORM 7122 (REV. 5-82)\nTHE WHITE HOUSE\nWASHINGTON\nMay 6, 1975\nMEMORANDUM FOR:\nLT. GEN. BRENT SCOWCROFT\nTHROUGH:\nJOHN MARSH\nMAX FRIEDERSDORF\nFROM:\nVERN LOEN VL\nSUBJECT:\nDefense Procurement bill\nThe House Armed Services Committee today reported a clean bill\n$3.7 billion below the budget request for FY76 and the three-month\ntransition period.\nAn Amendment by Rep. Sam Stratton (D-N.Y.), adopted on voice\nvote, would place a five percent cap on military pay increases,\nprovided:\n1. That the same five percent cap applies to civil\nservice employee pay increases,\nand\n2. That the estimated $900 million.savings be applied to\ncontinue subsidization of military commissaries\n(estimated cost $110 million).\ncc:\nJames Lynn\nDon Ogilvie\nLIBRARY GERALD FORD\nMAY 10 1970\nMEMORANDUM\nNATIONAL SECURITY COUNCIL\nMay 19, 1975\nMEMORANDUM FOR:\nJACK MARSH\nFROM:\nLES JANKA\nfer\nSUBJECT:\nDOD Legislation\nThe Senate will debate the Defense Procurement Authorization\nBill this week but will not vote on it until June 6. It has been\nsuggested that it might be a good idea to have Jim Schlesinger\naddress the Republican Policy Committee early that week to\nensure that our troops are in line and to provide them with as\nmuch support and argumentation as possible as the vote\napproaches.\nYou would probably be the best person to call Senator Tower\nand arrange for Schlesinger to be invited. Let me know what\nyou think.\nMax -\nCan Bill or Pat\nhandle?\nJack\nSTATEMENT OF DEFENSE ENSE\nOFFICE OF THE ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF DEFENSE\nWASHINGTON, D. C., 20301\nUNITED\nLEGISLATIVE\nAFFAIRS\nMay 28, 1975\n(Senate Affairs)\nMEMORANDUM FOR LES JANKA\nSUBJECT: S. 920; DoD Authorization Bill\n- - To be considered on floor of the Senate June 2-6.\n-- General debate June 2, 3.\n-- Voting on amendments to commence by noon June 4 and\ncompleted by June 6.\n-- More than 20 expected amendments set forth in a unanimous\nconsent agreement.\n-- Principal amendments expected are:\nOSD\n-- Ceiling. Not yet introduced. Expected to be sponsored\nby Cranston, Kennedy, Symington at a level of about 1. 2B\nbelow SASC mark of 25B.\n-- Counterforce Amendment #494 introduced by McIntyre\nand Brooke. McIntyre was Subcommittee Chairman favoring\nno funds for this category. Full Committee restored funds\nby vote of 10-4.\n-- Overseas Troop Cuts. Not yet introduced. Mansfield\nindicating will not advocate such this year. However,\nsomeone will undoubtedly sponsor it -- Cranston is\nopposed to large-scale cuts. Mondale will oppose cuts.\nDet File\n2\nArmy\n-- Site Defense. Not yet introduced. Anticipate sponsorship\nby Cranston or Symington. Half funding approved by full\ncommittee 10-5.\n-- 16 Division Army. Not yet introduced.\nNavy\n- -\nSea Launched Cruise Missile. Not yet introduced. Cranston\nhas argued 101 million should be cut.\n-- Patrol Frigates. Not yet introduced.\n-- Manpower. Not yet introduced.\nAir Force\n-- B-1. Not yet introduced. Sponsored by McGovern last year.\nAnticipate sponsorship by McGovern, Kennedy this year.\nCranston will not support amendment. Full committee approved\nfunds by 9-6.\n-- AWACS. Not yet introduced. Sponsored by Eagleton last year.\nAnticipate sponsorship by Eagleton, Symington, Cranston.\nFunding approved by full committee 9-4.\n- - Minuteman III. Not yet introduced. To be sponsored by\nCranston, Kennedy.\nDSanders\nDonald G. Sanders\nDeputy Assistant Secretary of Defense\nEncls: Data Sheets concerning each of\nthe principal amendments itemized\nabove.\neas\nNays\nYeas\nNays\nYeas\nNays\nMoss\nBaker\n<\n<\nAbourezk\nMuskie\nBartlett\nAllen\nNelson\nBeall\n\\\nBayh\nNunn\nJ\nBellmon\nBentsen\n?\nPastore\n\\\nBrock\n1\n1\nBiden\n\\\nPell\nBrooke\n?\nBumpers ?\nProxmire\nBuckley\n1\nBurdick\nRandolph\n1\nJ\nCase\nByrd (Va)\nJ\n\\\nRibicoff\nCurtis\n1\nByrd (WVa)\n1\nSparkman\n\\\nDole\n1\nCannon\n1\nStennis\nDomenici\n1\nChiles\n1\nS\nStevenson\nFannin\nJ\nJ\nChurch\n:\nStone\n)\nFong\nSymington\n?\nClark\nGarn\nJ\nCranston\nTalmadge\nJ\nGoldwater\n1\nCulver\n\\\nTunney\nGriffin\n1\nEagleton\nWilliams\n1\nHansen\n1\nEastland\nJ\nHatfield\n2\nFord\nRepublicans (39)\nHelms\n\\\nGlenn\n1\nHruska\n<\nGravel\nYEAS 6\nJavits\n1\nHart (Colo)\nNAYS 29\nLaxalt\nHart (Mich)\n? 3\nMathias\n\\\nHartke\nAbsent\nMcClure\n<\nHaskell\n(R) Total\n?\nPackwood\nHathaway\nPearson\nHollings\n1\nPercy\n?\nHuddleston\n1\nDemocrats (61)\n?\nRoth\n(\nHumphrey\nSchweiker\n7\nInouye\nYEAS 31\nScott (Pa)\nJackson\n?\nNAYS 23\nScott (Va)\nJohnston\n?\n7\nStafford\n\\\n1\nKennedy\nAbsent\nStevens\nLeahy\n(D) Total\nTaft\nLong\nThurmond\n\\\nMagnuson\nTower\n\\\n<\nMansfield\nWeicker\nMcClellan\n\\\nGRAND TOTAL (100)\nWyman(\nMcGee\n?\nYEAS 37\nYoung\n\\\nMcGovern\nNAYS 52\nMcIntyre\n1\n? 10\nMetcalf\nAbsent\nMondale\nTotal\n1\nMontoya\nMorgan\n?\n;\n*\nUp for Election\nAnnounced Retirement\nDATE: 5-30-75\nDEFENCE\nSUBJ: 5-920 DOD\nGERALD LIBRARY\nESTIMATE\nMIL. PROC. ArTIT.\nCEILING AMENDMENT\nSECTION\nOFFICE OF THE ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF DEFENSE\nWASHINGTON. D, C., 20301\nMay 30, 1975\nLEGISLATIVE\nAFFAIRS\n(Senate Affairs)\nJoch March 7yI\nLes\nMEMORANDUM FOR LES J ANKA\nSUBJECT: S.920; DoD Authorization Bill\nVote analyses for ceiling and B-1 amendments attached as you\nrequested. Suggested contact emphasis is also shown.\nConversion of Muskie on ceiling amendment would be a telling\nblow in view of his new position as Budget Committee Chairman.\nAlso essential that Bellmon remain with us on ceiling.\nHumphrey and Jackson would also be landmark allies on each.\nD Schanden\nDonald G. Sanders\nDeputy Assistant Secretary\nof Defense (Legislative Affairs)\nAttachments\nas stated\nBill file\nISSUE: CEILING (23.8B) : CUT AVTHORIZATION\nRECOMMENDED BY SASC?\n1974\nSPECIAL\nVOTE\nEMPHASIS\nSENATOR\nYES\nNO\nSOURCE\nCOMMENTS\nAbourezk\nSAME\nAllen\n\"\nBaker\n>\n\"\nBartlett\n\\\n11\nBayh\nASSENT\nBeall\nSAME\nBellmon\n\"\n*\nRANKING REP. BUDGET COM.\nBentsen 3\nNO\nPRES. CANDIDATE\nBiden\nSAME\nBrock\n\"\nBrooke ?\nNO\nto\nAN ECONOMY VOTE ?\nBuckley\n1\nASSENT.\nBumpers ?\nNEW.\nBurdick\nSAME\nByrd, H.\n=\nByrd, R.\n\"\nCannon\n\"\nCase\n\"\nof\nChiles\n\"\nChurch\nASSENT\nClark\nSAME\nCranston\n\"\nCulver\nNEW\nCurtis\nSAME\nDole\n\"\nDomenici\n\"\nEagleton\nSAME\nEastland\n\"\nFannin\n4\nFong\n\"\nFord\n?\nNEW\nGarn\n=\nGlenn\n\"\nGoldwater\nSAME\nGravel\n\"\nGriffin\nIf\nHansen\n\"\nHart, G.\nNEW\nHart, P.\nSAME\nHartke\n\"\nHaskell\n=\nHatfield\n\"\n*\nHathaway\n=\n30 MAY 1975\nISSUE:\n1974\nSPECIAL\nVOTE\nEMPHASIS\nSENATOR\nYES\nNO\nSOURCE\nCOMMENTS\nHelms\n\\\nSAME\nHollings\n\"\nHruska\n\"\nHuddleston\n\"\nHumphrey\n\"\n*\nInouye\n\"\nJackson 7\nNO\n%\nPRES. CANDIDATE\nJavits\nSAME\n**\nJohnston\n\"\nKennedy\n11\nLaxalt\nNEW\nLeahy\n11\nLong\nSAME\nMcClellan\n11\nMcClure\n\"\nMcGee\n?\nABSENT\nMcGovern\nSAME\nMcIntyre\n\"\nMagnuson\nof\nMansfield\n\"\nMathias\n\"\nMotcalf\nABSENT\nMondale\nSAME\nMontoya\n\"\nMorgan\nNEW\nMoss\nNO\nSTAFF PREPARING STATEMENT AGAINST CEILING.\nMuskie\nSAME\n*\nCHAIRMAN BUDGET COMMITTEE.\nNelson\n11\nNunn\n\"\nPackwood\n11\n*\nPastore\nIf\nPearson\n\"\nPell\n\"\nPercy\n?\nNO\nin\nProxmire\n\\\nSAME\nRandolph\n11\nRibicoff\n\"\nRoth\n\"\n*\nSchweiker ?\nNo\n+\nScott, H.\nSAME\nScott, W.\n\"\nSparkman\n\"\nStafford\n\"\nISSUE:\n1974\nSPECIAL\nVOTE\nEMCHASIS\nSENATOR\nYES\nNO\nSOURCE\nCOMMENTS\nStenni S\nSAME\nStevens\nIf\nStevenson\n\"\nStone\n\\\nNEW\nSymington ?\nNO\nTaft\nSAME\nTalmadge\n=\nThurmond\n\"\nTower\n\"\nTunney\n\"\nWeicker\n\"\n*\nWilliams\n\\\n\"\nYoung\n\"\n9\n37\n50\n21\n* H.H. ASSIST.\n1974 VOTE\n38- 52\nISSUE: B-1: CUT AUTHORIZATION RECOMMENDED BY SASC\n1974 SPECIAL\n**\nVOTA EMCHASE\nAss\nSENATOR YES\nNO\nsou RCE\nCOMMENTS\nAbourezk\nSAME\nAllen\n\"\nBaker\nIf\nBartlett\n\"\nBayh\n\"\nBeall\n\"\nBellmon\n\"\nBentsen\n11\nBiden\n\"\nBrock\n\"\nBrooke\n\"\nBuckley\n11\nBumpers ?\nNEW\nBurdick\nSAME\nByrd, H.\n\"\nByrd, R.\n\"\nCannon\n41\nCase\n\"\nChiles\n\"\nChurch\n\"\nClark\n\"\nCranston\n41\nCulver\nNEW\nCurtis\nSAME\nDole\n\"\nDomenici\n\"\nEagleton\n\"\nEastland\n\"\nFannin\n\"\nFong\n\"\nFord\nNSW\nGarn\nSAME\"\n\"\nGlenn\n\\\nNEW\nGoldwater\nSAME\nGravel\n\"\nHAS SOME CONCERN ABOUT ALASKA As PACIFIC\nGriffin\n\"\nFRONTH\nHansen\n\"\nHart, G.\nNEW\nHart, P.\nSAME\nHartke\nAESENT\nHaskell\nSAME\nHatfield\n\"\n22\nHathaway\n\"\nMAY 1975\nISSUE:\n1974 SPECIAL\nVOTE EMPHASIS\nSENATOR\nYES\nNO\nSOURCE\nCOMMENTS\nHelms\nSAME\nHollings\n\"\nHruska\n\"\nHuddleston\nABSENT\nHumphrey\nSAME\n*\nInouye\nABSENT\nPACIFIC CONCERNS; HAWAIIAN FRONTIER ?\nJackson ?\nNO\nOPPOSED SASC\nRESTORING SUBCOMMITTER CUTS.\nJavits\n\\\nSAME\nAte\nJohnston\n>\n\"\nKennedy\n\\\n\"\nLaxalt\nNEW\nLeahy\n\\\n\"\n\\\nLong\nSAME\nMcClellan\n\"\nMcClure\n\\\n11\nMcGee\nACTENT\nMcGovern\n\\\nSAME\nMcIntyre\n\"\nMagnuson\n=\nMansfield\n\"\nMathias\n11\n*\nMetcalf\n\"\nMondale\n11\nMontoya\nIf\nMorgan\n\\\nNEW\nMoss\n\\\nASSENT\n<\nMuskie\nSAME\nNelson\n\"\nNumn\n\\\n\"\nPackwood\n\\\nASSENT\n*\nPastore\nSAME\nPearson\n\"\nPell\nV\nPercy\n\\\n\"\nProxmire\n11\nRandolph ?\nNO\nRibicoff\n\\\nSAME\nRoth\nn\nSchweiker\n1\n\"\nScott, H.\n1\n\"\nScott, W.\n\"\nSparkman\nABSENT\nStafford\nASSENT\nX\nISSUE:\n1974 SPECIAL\nVOTE EMPHASIS\nSENATOR\nYES\nNO\nSOURCE\nCOMMENTS\nStennis\n>\nSAME\nStevens\n1\n#\nStevenson\n\"\nStone\nNEW\nSymington\n1\nABSENT\nTaft\nSAME\nTalmadge\n\\\n\"\nThurmond\n\"\nTower\n\\\n=\nTunney\nH\nWeicker\n\"\nWilliams\n\\\nIf\nYoung\n\"\n3\n34\n62\n17\nK W.H. ASSIST.\n1974 VOTE- 31-59\nRuss\n7y I\nfor\nKEY SENATE VOTES\ns\nDEFENSE PROCUREMENT AUTHORIZATION BILL\nJune13, 1975\nMARV system\nY\nNV\nNV\nN\nNV\nNV\n≥\nN\nY\nN\nN\nY\nNV\nY\nY\nN\nN\nN\nNV\nY\nN\nN\nN\nY\nN\nN\nN\nN\nN\nN\nY\nN\nN\nY\nX\nY\nY\nN\nAmendment:\nHumphrey's\nchases same type\nuntil NATO pur-\nAWACS funding\nY\nN\nN\nN\nY\nN\nN\nN\nY\nN\nY\nN\nY\nY\nN\nN\nN\nY\nN\nN\nY\nN\nN\nN\nN\nN\nN\nN\nN\nN\nN\nY\nN\nN\nY\nY\nY\nY\nY\nY\nN\nAmendment:delet\nEagleton's\nmissiles.\nIII Minuterm JO\nfunds for plrchas\nY\nNV\nN\nN\nNV\nN\nN\nY\nNV\nN\nY\nN\nN\nY\nN\nN\nN\nY\nN\nY\nN\nN\nN\nNV\nN\nN\nAmendment:delet\nKennedy-Cransto:\nfor B-1 bombers.\ndelete funding\nNV\nNV\nNV\nN\nY\nN\nY\nY\nN\nN\nN\nY\nN\nY\nY\nN\nN\nN\nN\nNV\nN\nN\nN\nN\nN\nN\nN\nY\nN\nN\nY\nY\nY\nY\nY\nY\nN\nAmendment: to\nMcGovern's\nDefense Program\nV\nfunds for Site\nY\nN\nN\nN\nN\nNV\nN\nN\nN\nY\nN\nY\nN\nY\nN\nN\nN\nN\nY\nN\nY\nN\nN\nN\nNV\nV\nN\nN\nN\nN\nN\nY\nN\nY\nN\nN\nY\nY\nY\nY\nY\nY\nN\nAmendment:no\nGravel's\nprograms.\nstrategic missle\nZZNZZZK\nNV\nV\nR&D S JOJ Supunj\nN\nY\nY\nY\nN\nN\nN\nN\nN\nN\nY\nN\nY\nY\nN\nN\nN\nY\nN\nN\nN\nY\nN\nN\nN\nY\nN\nN\nD\nY\nY\nY\nY\nY\nN\nAmendment: bar\nMcIntyre's\nditures.\ntotal DOD expen-\nthe uo ceiling e\nY\nN\nN\nN\nY\nN\nN\nN\nY\nN\nA\nN\nN\nY\nN\nN\nN\nY\nN\nY\nN\nN\nN\nNV\nN\nN\nN\nN\nN\nN\nN\nY\nN\nN\nY\nY\nY\nY\nY\nY\nN\nAmendmentplace\nCranston's\nbill\nment authorizat io)\nMilitary procure-\n-026 'S 07 methts\nProposed amend-\nAbourezk\nAllen\nBaker\nBartlett\nBayh\nBeall\nBellmon\nBentson\nBiden\nBrock\nBrooke\nBuckley\nBumpers\nBurdick\nByrd, H. F.\nByrd, R.\nCannon\nCase\nChiles\nChurch\nClark\nCranston\nCulver\nCurtis\nDole\nDomenici\nEagleton\nEastland\nFannin\nFong\nFord\nGarn\nGlenn\nGoldwater\nGravel\nGriffin\nHansen\nHart, G. W:\nHart, P.\nHartke\nHaskell\nHatfield\nHathaway\nHelms\nNV\nNV\nY\nY\nY\nY\nY\nNV\nN\nNV\nHumphrey\nY\nY\nY\nN\nY\nY\nN\nY\nY\nY\nY\nN\nN\nY\nN\nN\nNV\nN\nN\nN\nEagleton\nN\nNV\nNV\nN\nN\nY\nN\nN\nY\nN\nN\nY\nY\nY\nN\nY\nN\nN\nY\nY\nY\nN\nN\nY\nY\nN\nN\nNV\nN\nN\nN\nCranston -\nN\nN\nNV\nY\nN\nN\nY\nN\nY\nN\nY\nNV\nN\nN\nNV\nNV\nN\nN\nY\nY\nY\nY\nN\nN\nN\nNV\nY\nN\nN\nN\nN\nXZZZZZZZZ\nNV\nNV\nKennedy/\nN\nN\nN\nMcGovern\nN\n22\nNV\nN\nNV\nY\nN\nN\nY\nY\nY\nN\nN\nN\nN\nNV\nY\nN\nY\nY\nN\nY\nN\nY\nY\nY\nN\nNV\nN\nN\nNV\nY\nN\nN\nN\nN\nNV\nY\nN\nN\nY\nNV\nGravel\nY\nN\nN\nN\nY\nY\nN\nN\nY\nN\nY\nN\nY\nY\nY\nN\nY\nN\nN\nNV\nN\nN\nN\nMcIntyre\nN\nN\nY\nY\nNV\nN\nY\nN\nY\nN\nY\nN\nN\nN\nNV\nY\nY\nN\nY\nY\nY\nY\nN\nN\nN\nY\nY\nNV\nN\nN\nN\nN\nY\nNV\nN\nY\nN\nNV\nNV\nN\nN\nN\nN\nY\nN\nN\nN\nN\nY\nN\nY\nN\nZZZZZZZ\nCranston\nHollings\nHruska\nHuddleston\nHumphrey\nInouye\nJackson\nJavits\nJohnston\nKennedy\nLaxalt\nLeahy\nLong\nMcClellan\nMc McClure\nMcGee\nMcGovern\nMcIntyre\nMagnuson\nMansfield\nMathias\nMetcalf\nMondale\nMontoya\nMorgan\nMoss\nMuskie\nNelson\nNunn\nPackwood\nPastore\nPearson\nPell\nPercy\nProxmire\nRandolf\nRibicoff\nRoth\nSchweiker\nScott, H.\nScott, W.\nSparkman\nStafford\nStennis\nStevens\n-\nCranston\nMcIntyre\nGravel\nMcGovern\nKennedy-\nCranston\nEagleton\nHumphrey\nStevenson\nY\nY\nY\nY\nY\nY\nY\nStone\nN\nN\nN\nN\nN\nN\nN\nSymington\nY\nY\nY\nN\nNV\nY\nNV\nTaft\nN\nN\nN\nN\nNV\nN\nN\nTalmadge\nN\nN\nN\nN\nN\nN\nNV\nThurmond\nN\nN\nN\nN\nN\nN\nN\nTower\nN\nN\nN\nN\nN\nN\nN\nTunney\nY\nNV\nY\nN\nN\nY\nY\nWeicker\nY\nY\nN\nN\nNV\nN\nN\nWilliams\nY\nY\nY\nY\nY\nY\nY\nYoung\nN\nN\nN\nN\nN\nN\nN\nYeas-36\nYeas- 42\nYeas-39\nYeas- 32\nYeas-27\nYeas- 38\nYeas-43\nNays-59\nNays-52\nNays-54\nNays-57\nNays-56\nNays-58\nNays-41\nRejected\nRejected\nRejected\nRejected\nRejected\nRejected\nPassed\n[ca. 7/75]\nIt is my understanding that one of the differences in the\nconference on the Military Procurement Authorization Bill concerns\nthe language on binary chemical munitions.\nConcern\nThe President would recommend approval)of the R&D funds\nfor binary chemical munitions and the modification of the building\nat Pine Bluff, Arkansas, as a part of the Military Construction\nProgram.\nWith the approval of the foregoing items the other budgetary\nrequest for this program for procurement production could be\ndeferred to a later point in time.\n[In light of the above we hope that the Conference will not\ninsist on restrictive language that limits these above recommendations. ]\nTo: Mel Price\nSenator Stennis\nFORDO is DERVID LIBRARY\n[ca. 7/75]\nIt is my understanding that one of the differences in the\nconference on the Military Procurement Authorization Bill concerns\nthe language on binary chemical munitions.\nsomether\nThe President would recommend approval of the R&D funds\nfor binary chemical munitions and the modification of the building\nat Pine Bluff, Arkansas, as a part of the Military Construction\nProgram.\nWith the approval of the foregoing items the other budgetary\nrequest for this program for procurement production could be\ndeferred to a later point in time.\n[In light of the above we hope that the Conference will not\ninsist on restrictive language that limits these above recommendations.]\nTo: Mel Price\nSenator Stennis\nFORD is LIGRARY GERALD\nGERALD R. FORD LIBRARY\nThis form marks the file location of item number\n/\nlisted on the pink Withdrawal Sheet found at the front of this folder.\nJUL 16 1975\nTHE WHITE HOUSE\nWASHINGTON\nJuly 15, 1975\nADMINISTRATIVELY CONFIDENTIAL\nMEMORANDUM FOR:\nJACK MARSH\nFROM:\nJAMES CONNOR gl\nThe President has reviewed your memorandum of July 14th\nregarding binary production and approved the following\nrecommendation:\n\"Concur in the R & D approach only\"\nPlease follow-up with appropriate action.\ncc: Don Rumsfeld\nBrent Scowcroft\nGERALD R. FORD LIBRARY\nThis form marks the file location of item number\n2a\nlisted on the pink Withdrawal Sheet found at the front of this folder.\nJUL 16 1975\nRED TAG\nTHE WHITE HOUSE\nWASHINGTON\nJuly 15, 1975\nMEMORANDUM FOR:\nJACK MARSH\nTHRU:\nMAX FRIEDERSDORF\nM\nVERN LOEN\nvc\nFROM:\nCHARLES LEPPERT, JR.\nex.\nSUBJECT:\nConference on H.R. 6674,\nMilitary Procurement\nTalked to Rep. Charles Bennett on the Conference on H.R. 6674, Military\nProcurement. Bennett indicates that the Conference is going pretty well.\nThe only hang-up at this time is that the Conferees are awaiting a letter\nfrom the Secretary of the Navy stating that the Navy wants to build the\nstrike cruiser rather than the 42 DLGN (destroyer class).\nIf the Secretary of the Navy will write that letter to Senator Stennis the\nconference will be concluded Bennett says. Prior to the meeting today\nthere apparently was considerable tugging about how to handle the 42DLGN\nmatter without writing into the law that the Navy could not build the\n42DLGN. Bennett does not want to sign a Conference Report which tells\nthe Navy it cannot build the 42DLGN. Bennett feels that such action could\ncause some furor and does not want to have his name associated with that\nkind of direction to the Navy.\nJOHN c. STENNIS, MISS., CHAIRMAN\nSTUART SYMINGTON, MO.\nSTROM THURMOND, B.C.\nHENRY M. JACKSON, WASH.\nJOHN TOWER, TEX.\nHOWARD W. CANNON, NEV.\nBARRY GOLDWATER, ARIZ.\nTHOMAS J. MC INTYRE, N.H.\nWILLIAM L. SCOTT, VA.\nHARRY F. BYRD, JR., VA.\nROBERT TAFT, JR., OHIO\nSAM NUNN, GA.\nDEWEY F. BARTLETT, OKLA.\nUnited States Senate\nJOHN C. CULVER, IOWA\nGARY HART, COLO.\nPATRICK J. LEAHY, VT.\nCOMMITTEE ON ARMED SERVICES\nT. EDWARD BRASWELL, JR., CHIEF COUNSEL AND STAFF DIRECTOR\nWASHINGTON, D.C. 20510\nJuly 29, 1975\nDear\nIn urging your support for the military authorization conference bill, I\nwould like to highlight three items.\nFirst, in approving $25.8 billion for military procurement and R&D, the\nconference bill reduces the President's budget by $4.1 billion, or 13%. This\nreduction is well within the Congressional Budget Resolution which reduces the\noverall defense request by only 6.5%. The conference total was $756 million\nbelow the House-passed figure; $751 million or 2.9% above the Senate-passed\nfigure.\nSecond, the House was determined to authorize two ships not included in the\nSenate bill: $257 million for a nuclear missile frigate (DLGN-42) and $60\nmillion for a nuclear strike cruiser (CSGN). The Senate conferees were adamant\nin rejecting the nuclear frigate because of its relatively weak air defense\ncapability and its high cost. The nuclear frigate would not have the advanced\nAEGIS air defense system and the Navy could give no assurances that the ship\ncould be built within the requested funding. The Senate also refused to authorize\nunrestricted funds for the nuclear cruiser lead ship but did agree to include\n$60 million for only long lead nuclear components for the nuclear cruiser.\nThere is a mistaken notion that the long lead funds for the nuclear cruiser\ncommit the Congress to this ship and even to additional ships of this class.\nOn the contrary, no commitment has been made even for one ship. As a matter of\nlaw, the conference bill limits funding of the nuclear cruiser to only long\nlead items. Authorization of long lead funds does not constitute a decision\nto procure a ship - witness the cancellation of the nuclear frigate after\ncongressional authorization over a two year period of $110 million for long\nlead items.\nMoreover, the conference bill requires that the Secretary of Defense re-\ncommend the type of ship most suitable for the AEGIS system and submit a five-\nyear shipbuilding program. These provisions will raise next year the question\nof whether or not to proceed with a nuclear cruiser program and the so-called\nconventional/nuclear mix of any such program.\nThird, regarding the B-1 bomber, the conference bill provided funding for\ncontinued R&D and long lead items but did not authorize production. The Air\nForce is specifically prohibited by law from entering into any contractual\narrangement for the production of the B-1. The production decision on B-1\nwill be left to future congressional action.\nI shall discuss the full details of the conference bill on the floor.\nSincerely,\nJohn C. Stennis\nBelluo -\nDown 4 - =\nBeall-\n1\nclulls 1\nTumy OK\nJOHN c. STENNIS, MISS., CHAIRMAN\nSTUART SYMINGTON, MO.\nSTROM THURMOND, S.C.\nHENRY M. JACKSON, WASH.\nJOHN TOWER, TEX.\nHOWARD W. CANNON, NEV.\nBARRY GOLDWATER, ARIZ.\nTHOMAS J. MC INTYRE, N.H.\nWILLIAM L. SCOTT, VA.\nHARRY F. BYRD, JR., VA.\nROBERT TAFT, JR., OHIO\nSAM NUNN, GA.\nDEWEY F. BARTLETT. OKLA.\nUnited States Senate\nJOHN C. CULVER, IOWA\nGARY HART, COLO.\nPATRICK J. LEAHY, VT.\nCOMMITTEE ON ARMED SERVICES\nT. EDWARD BRASWELL, JR., CHIEF COUNSEL AND STAFF DIRECTOR\nWASHINGTON, D.C. 20510\nJuly 29, 1975\nDear\nIn urging your support for the military authorization conference bill, I\nwould like to highlight three items.\nFirst, in approving $25.8 billion for military procurement and R&D, the\nconference bill reduces the President's budget by $4.1 billion, or 13%. This\nreduction is well within the Congressional Budget Resolution which reduces the\noverall defense request by only 6.5%. The conference total was $756 million\nbelow the House-passed figure; $751 million or 2.9% above the Senate-passed\nfigure.\nSecond, the House was determined to authorize two ships not included in the\nSenate bill: $257 million for a nuclear missile frigate (DLGN-42) and $60\nmillion for a nuclear strike cruiser (CSGN). The Senate conferees were adamant\nin rejecting the nuclear frigate because of its relatively weak air defense\ncapability and its high cost. The nuclear frigate would not have the advanced\nAEGIS air defense system and the Navy could give no assurances that the ship\ncould be built within the requested funding. The Senate also refused to authorize\nunrestricted funds for the nuclear cruiser lead ship but did agree to include\n$60 million for only long lead nuclear components for the nuclear cruiser.\nThere is a mistaken notion that the long lead funds for the nuclear cruiser\ncommit the Congress to this ship and even to additional ships of this class.\nOn the contrary, no commitment has been made even for one ship. As a matter of\nlaw, the conference bill limits funding of the nuclear cruiser to only long\nlead items. Authorization of long lead funds does not constitute a decision\nto procure a ship - witness the cancellation of the nuclear frigate after\ncongressional authorization over a two year period of $110 million for long\nlead items.\nMoreover, the conference bill requires that the Secretary of Defense re-\ncommend the type of ship most suitable for the AEGIS system and submit a five-\nyear shipbuilding program. These provisions will raise next year the question\nof whether or not to proceed with a nuclear cruiser program and the so-called\nconventional/nuclear mix of any such program.\nThird, regarding the B-1 bomber, the conference bill provided funding for\ncontinued R&D and long lead items but did not authorize production. The Air\nForce is specifically prohibited by law from entering into any contractual\narrangement for the production of the B-1. The production decision on B-1\nwill be left to future congressional action.\nI shall discuss the full details of the conference bill on the floor.\nSincerely,\nJohn C. Stennis\nTHE WHITE HOUSE\nWASHINGTON\nAugust 1, 1975\nMEMORANDUM FOR:\nTHE PRESIDENT\nTHROUGH:\nDICK CHENEY\nFROM:\nSUBJECT:\nDefense JACK MARSH Procurement July\nBill\nThe Senate this afternoon rejected the Conference Report on the Defense\nProcurement Bill by a vote of 48-42. The House earlier this week adopted\nthe Conference Report by a vote of 348 to 60.\nIn the Senate adoption of the Conference Report was resisted by the Senate\nBudget Committee on the basis proposed spending would exceed the Joint\nHouse/Senate Budget ceiling. Many Members of the Appropriations\nCommittee joined with the Stennis Committee against Muskie who also had\nsupport of anti-Defense supporters.\nFor press guidance it should be pointed out that a substantial factor in the\nvote was a jurisdictional question involving the role and function of the\nnewly organized Budget Committee.\nSo far today there has been no further action in the House on the Turkey\nmatter.\nFORD\nFOR COMMCENTER USE ONLY\nIMM\nUNCLAS\nPRECEDENCE\nCLASSIFICATION\nDEX\nFROM: JACK MARSH\nDAC 070\nGPS\nTO: DICK CHENEY FOR\nLDX\nPAGES /\nTHE PRESIDENT\nTTY\nCITE\nINFO:\nD-TG: 011924ZA4675\nRELEASED BY:\nTOR: 0119482\nGE\nSPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS:\n'75 AUG I PM 3.58\nWOUS\nASOOH 311HM\nTHE WHITE HOUSE\nWASHINGTON\nAugust 1, 1975\nMEMORANDUM FOR:\nTHE PRESIDENT\nTHROUGH:\nDICK CHENEY\nFROM:\nSUBJECT:\nDefense JACK MARSH Procurement July\nBill\nThe Senate this afternoon rejected the Conference Report on the Defense\nProcurement Bill by a vote of 48-42. The House earlier this week adopted\nthe Conference Report by a vote of 348 to 60.\nIn the Senate adoption of the Conference Report was resisted by the Senate\nBudget Committee on the basis proposed spending would exceed the Joint\nHouse/Senate Budget ceiling. Many Members of the Appropriations\nCommittee joined with the Stennis Committee against Muskie who also had\nsupport of anti-Defense supporters.\nFor press guidance it should be pointed out that a substantial factor in the\nvote was a jurisdictional question involving the role and function of the\nnewly organized Budget Committee.\nSo far today there has been no further action in the House on the Turkey\nmatter.\nTHE WHITE HOUSE\nWASHINGTON\nJack --\nWe lost the following GOP Senators on the\nDOD authorization conference report. The\nvote was 42-48 and occurred on August 1, 1975.\nBeall\nMathias\nBellmon\nPackwood\nBrooke\nRoth\nCase\nSchweiker\nDole\nStafford\nDomenici\nThe following Senators were absent.\nEastland\nPercy\nFong\nStevenson\nGoldwater\nTaft\nJavits\nMcGee\nPell\nBob\nJack\nWe lost the following GOP\nSenators on the DOD authorization\nConference Deport The vote was\n42 -48 + occured on aug 1, 1975.\nBeall\nMathias\nBellmon\nPackwood\nBrooke\nRoth\nCase\nSchweiker\nDole\nDomenici\nStafford\nThe following Senators were absent.\nEastland\nPercy\nFong\nStevemen\nDollwater\nTaft\nJaints\nMc Dee\nPell\nPob\nCong Relation\nAugust 30, 1975\nMEMORANDUM FOR:\nMAX FRIEDERSDORF\nFROM:\nJACK MARSH\nSUBJECT:\nDefense Procurement Bill\nThere's a matter involving the Conference Report on the Defense\nProcurement bill which you should be aware of. It relates to\nseveral different things:\n1. The status of the strike cruiser.\n2. Congressional Relations by DOD with the Budget Committee.\n3. The status of the B-1 program.\nJOM/dl\nFORD is LIBRARY 938870\nof\nAugust 30, 1975\nMEMORANDUM FOR:\nMAX FRIEDERSDORF\nFROM:\nJACK MARSH\nSUBJECT:\nDefense Procurement Bill\nThere's a matter involving the Conference Report on the Defense\nProcurement bill which you should be aware of. It relates to\nseveral different things:\n1. The status of the strike cruiser.\n2. Congressional Relations by DOD with the Budget Committee,\n3. The status of the B-1 program.\nJOM/dl\nFORD LIBRARY s\nTHE WHITE HOUSE\nWASHINGTON\nSeptember 23, 1975\nMEMORANDUM FOR:\nJACK MARSH\nFROM:\nMAX FRIEDERSDORF m\nSUBJECT:\nArmed Services Conference Report\nWith regard to your memo requesting a status report on the\n17 Representatives who were absent or voted against a conference\nreport, I have the following information from the Senate staff\nfor your transmission to Senator Stennis.\nThe following Senators who voted against the conference report\non August 1 have switched to support the bill and will vote for\napproval tomorrow:\nSenators Bellmon, Dole, Dominici, Stafford and Packwood.\nThe following Senators who were absent on August indicate they\nwill vote for approval of the conference report:\nSenators Brock, Eastland, Fong, Goldwater, Taft and Laxalt.\nWe also have Muskie reported as a probable switch for the\nconference report and Senators Brook and Case are still listed\nas undecided but will probably vote in opposition to the\nconference report.\ncoclap stand above. dure the N 9/23\nour\niz\n1, Diplination\nPolicy Level\ncommo willnot\nbe submital\noffraids\nto cand\nmay tablety\n2\nop cables to\nan reco rec'd\ncount\nbut can't identy\n3\nJr + mind\ntogresser wely\nsubilvis8\nteslim 7\n38 { 3THW 3HT\n& can Gign\nSr. off. -\nwhen but +\nto w but they\ndaslay For Sv.\npassed up.\non no m their\nrugs\nдосо\n92\nCONIGRE\nMO steo\nTOTT\nlook\nreco.\nMTTT\nOU\n2116\n201\n4. w/Draw a our\nwhy of they\nknow there are\nON at order\nSEP 24 1975\nTHE WHITE HOUSE\nWASHINGTON\nSeptember 23, 1975\nMEMORANDUM FOR:\nJOHN MARSH\nTHROUGH:\nMAX FRIEDERSDORF\nFROM:\nPATRICK E. O'DONNELL\nSUBJECT:\nDefense Procurement Authorization\nConference Report is expected to be brought to Senate floor on Wednesday,\nSeptember 24th. The vote on August 1, was 47 to 41 in favor of recom-\nmital. Conferees have agreed to cut the controversial nuclear cruiser\nand, as a result, several Senators that voted against Stennis before are\nnow ready to support the Conference Report. Breakdown as follows:\nAgainst on 8/1 but\nAbsent on 8/1 but\nnow supportive\nsupportive\nBeall\nBrock\nBellmon\nEastland\nDole\nFong\nDomenici\nGoldwater\nStafford\nLaxalt\nPackwood\nTaft\nThis pick-up of 12 would give us a minimum of 53. Moreover, Sen. Bellmon\n(ranking on Budget Committee) feels that Chairman Muskie will now support\nStennis. If this is the case, he'll probably bring along most of the Democratic\nmembers of his committee.\nIn short, the prognosis is favorable.\nECFD\nGERALD ?\nTHE WHITE HOUSE\nWASHINGTON\nDate: 9.26-75\nTO:\nFROM: Max\nJack L. Friedersdorf marsh\nFor Your Information\nPlease Handle\nPlease See Me\nComments, Please\nOther\ngood news change. /\nSEP 26 1975\nTHE WHITE HOUSE\nWASHINGTON\nSeptember 25, 1975\nMEMORANDUM FOR:\nMAX FRIEDERSDORF\nFROM:\nPATRICK E. O'DONNELL\nPOO\nSUBJECT:\nMilitary Procurement Conference\nReport\nFlash - Senator Muskie has indicated to Chairman Stennis that he\nwill support the Conference Report. This development will probably\nbring support from most of the other Budget Committee Democrats.\nNow expect the Report to be brought to Senate floor late today or\ntomorrow (Friday).\n94TH CONGRESS\nHOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES\nREPORT\n1st Session\nNo. 94-710\nDEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE APPROPRIATIONS,\nFISCAL YEAR 1976\nDECEMBER 10, 1975.-Ordered to be printed\nMr. MAHON, from the committee of conference\nsubmitted the following\nCONFERENCE REPORT\n[To accompany H.R. 9861]\nThe Committee of Conference on the disagreeing votes of the two\nHouses on the amendments of the Senate to the bill (H.R. 9861) \"mak-\ning appropriations for the Department of Defense for the fiscal year\nending June 30, 1976, and the period beginning July 1, 1976, and end-\ning September 30, 1976, and for other purposes,\" having met, after full\nand free conference, have agreed to recommend and do recommend to\ntheir respective Houses as follows\nThat the Senate recede from its amendments numbered 15, 16, 24,\n36, 48, 55, 70, 76, 81, 87, 88, 89, 91, 92, 93, 94, 96, 99, and 100.\nThat the House recede from its disagreement to the amendments of\nthe Senate numbered 17, 18, 22, 26, 30, 32, 33, 37, 39, 44, 46, 47, 50, 56,\n57, 58, 59, 60, 61, 62, 63, 64, 65, 68, 90, and 95, and agree to the same.\nAmendment numbered 1:\nThat the House recede from its disagreement to the amendment of\nthe Senate numbered 1, and agree to the same with an amendment\nas follows:\nIn lieu of the sum proposed by said amendment insert $8,180,347,-\n000; and the Senate agree to the same.\nAmendment numbered 2 :\nThat the House recede from its disagreement to the amendment of\nthe Senate numbered 2, and agree to the same with an amendment\nas follows:\nIn lieu of the sum proposed by said amendment insert $2,064,635,-\n000; and the Senate agree to the same.\nAmendment numbered 3 :\nThat the House recede from its disagreement to the amendment of\nthe Senate numbered 3, and agree to the same with an amendment\nas follows:\nIn lieu of the sum proposed by said amendment insert $5,722,300,-\n000; and the Senate agree to the same.\n57-006 O\n2\n3\nAmendment numbered 4:\nAmendment numbered 12\nThat the House recede from its disagreement to the amendment of\nThat the House recede from its disagreement to the amendment of\nthe Senate numbered 4, and agree to the same with an amendment\nthe Senate numbered 12, and agree to the same with an amendment\nas follows:\nas follows:\nIn lieu of the sum proposed by said amendment insert $1,451,668,-\nIn lieu of the sum proposed by said amendment insert $59,525,000;\n000; and the Senate agree to the same.\nand the Senate agree to the same.\nAmendment numbered 5:\nAmendment numbered 13\nThat the House recede from its disagreement to the amendment of\nThat the House recede from its disagreement to the amendment of\nthe Senate numbered 5, and agree to the same with an amendment\nthe Senate numbered 13, and agree to the same with an amendment as\nas follows:\nfollows:\nIn lieu of the sum proposed by said amendment insert $1,806,377,-\nIn lieu of the sum proposed by said amendment insert $70,652,000;\n000; and the Senate agree to the same.\nand the Senate agree to the same.\nAmendment numbered 6:\nAmendment numbered 14\nThat the House recede from its disagreement to the amendment of\nThat the House recede from its disagreement to the amendment of\nthe Senate numbered 6, and agree to the same with an amendment\nthe Senate numbered 14, and agree to the same with an amendment as\nas follows:\nfollows:\nIn lieu of the sum proposed by said amendment insert $460,117,000;\nIn lieu of the sum proposed by said amendment insert $28,082,000;\nand the Senate agree to the same.\nand the Senate agree to the same.\nAmendment numbered 7\nAmendment numbered 20:\nThat the House recede from its disagreement to the amendment of\nThat the House recede from its disagreement to the amendment of\nthe Senate numbered 7, and agree to the same with an amendment\nthe Senate numbered 20, and agree to the same with an amendment as\nas follows:\nfollows:\nIn lieu of the sum proposed by said amendment insert $7,251,524,000;\nIn lieu of the sum proposed by said amendment insert $1,779,000,000;\nand the Senate agree to the same.\nand the Senate agree to the same.\nAmendment numbered 8:\nAmendment numbered 21 :\nThat the House recede from its disagreement to the amendment of\nThat the House recede from its disagreement to the amendment of\nthe Senate numbered 8, and agree to the same with an amendment\nthe Senate numbered 21, and agree to the same with an amendment as\nas follows:\nfollows:\nIn lieu of the sum proposed by said amendment insert $1,776,677,000;\nIn lieu of the sum proposed by said amendment insert $8,069,400,000;\nand the Senate agree to the same.\nand the Senate agree to the same.\nAmendment numbered 9:\nAmer dment numbered 23\nThat the House recede from its disagreement to the amendment of\nThat the House recede from its disagreement to the amendment of\nthe Senate numbered 9, and agree to the same with an amendment\nthe Senate numbered 23, and agree to the same with an amendment as\nas follows:\nfollows:\nIn lieu of the sum proposed by said amendment insert $468,879,000;\nIn lieu of the sum proposed by said amendment insert $497,110,000;\nand the Senate agree to the same.\nand the Senate agree to the same.\nAmendment numbered 10\nAmendment numbered 25\nThat the House recede from its disagreement to the amendment of\nThat the House recede from its disagreement to the amendment of\nthe Senate numbered 10, and agree to the same with an amendment\nthe Senate numbered 25, and agree to the same with an amendment as\nas follows:\nfollows:\nIn lieu of the sum proposed by said amendment insert $165,299,000;\nIn lieu of the sum proposed by said amendment insert $7,498,697,000;\nand the Senate agree to the same.\nand the Senate agree to the same.\nAmendment numbered 11 :\nAmendment numbered 27\nThat the House recede from its disagreement to the amendment of\nThat the House recede from its disagreement to the amendment\nthe Senate numbered 11, and agree to the same with an amendment\nof the Senate numbered 27, and agree to the same with an amendment\nas follows:\nas follows:\nIn lieu of the sum proposed by said amendment insert $200,035,000;\nIn lieu of the matter stricken and inserted by said amendment,\nand the Senate agree to the same.\ninsert the following:\nFor expenses, not otherwise provided for, necessary for the opera-\ntion and maintenance of activities and agencies of the Department\n5\n4\nAmendment numbered 29\nof Defense (other than the military departments and the Defense\nCivil Preparedness Agency), as authorized by law; as follows: for\nThat the House recede from its disagreement to the amendment of\nthe Secretary of Defense activities, $787,753,000, of which $515.041,000\nthe Senate numbered 29, and agree to the same with an amendment as\nshall be available only for the Civilian Health and Medical Program\nfollows:\nof the Uniformed Services, and $211,391,000 shall be available only\nIn lieu of the sum proposed by said amendment insert $20,000,000;\nfor Overseas Dependents Education; for the organization of the Joint\nand the Senate agree to the same.\nChiefs of Staff, $11,599,000; for the Office of Information for the\nAmendment numbered 31\nArmed Forces, $16,242,000; for the Defense Contract Audit Agency,\nThat the House recede from its disagreement to the amendment of\n$68,123,000; for the Defense Investigative Service, $25,397,000; for\nthe Senate numbered 31, and agree to the same with an amendment as\nthe Defense Mapping Agency, $185,032,000; for the Defense Nuclear\nfollows:\nAgency, $22,509,000; for the Uniformed Services University of the\nIn lieu of the sum proposed by said amendment insert $284,425,000;\nHealth Sciences, $3,981,000; for the Defense Supply Agency, $789,-\nand the Senate agree to the same.\n654,000; and for intelligence and communications activities, $565,-\nAmendment numbered 34\n141,000; in all: $2,475,431,000: Provided, That of the total amount\nof this appropriation, not to exceed $9,208,000 can be used for emer-\nThat the House recede from its disagreement to the amendment of\ngencies and extraordinary expenses, to be expended on the approval m\nthe Senate numbered 34, and agree to the same with an amendment as\nauthority of the Secretary of Defense, and payments may be made\nfollows:\non his certificate of necessity for confidential military purposes: Pro-\nIn lieu of the sum proposed by said amendment insert $322,430,000;\nvided further, That not less than $26,000,000 of the total amount of\nand the Senate agree to the same.\nthis appropriation shall be available only for the maintenance of real\nAmendment numbered 35\nproperty facilities: Provided further, That the Secretary of Defense\nThat the House recede from its disagreement to the amendment of\nmay transfer up to 3 per centum of the amount of any subdivision of\nthe Senate numbered 35, and agree to the same with an amendment as\nthis appropriation to any other subdivision of this appropriation, but\nfollows:\nno subdivision may thereby be increased by more than 5 per centum\nIn lieu of the sum proposed by said amendment insert $81,190,000;\nand the Secretary of Defense shall notify the Congress promptly of\nand the Senate agree to the same.\nall transfers made pursuant to this authority.\nAmendment numbered 38\nFor \"Operation and maintenance. Defense agencies\" for the period\nJuly 1, 1976, through September 30, 1976, as follows: for the Secre-\nThat the House recede from its disagreement to the amendment of\ntary of Defense activities. $195,365,000. of which $130,358,000 shall\nthe Senate numbered 38, and agree to the same with an amendment as\nbe available only for the Civilian Health and Medical Program of\nfollows:\nthe Uniformed Services, and $50,018,000 shall be available only for\nIn lieu of the sum proposed by said amendment insert $697,100,00;\nOverseas Dependents Education; for the organization of the Joint\nand the Senate agree to the same.\nChiefs of Staff. $3,057,000; for the Office of Information for the\nAmendn ent numbered 40:\nArmed Forces, $4,097,000; for the Defense Contract Audit Agency,\nT hat the House recede from its disagreement to the amendment of\n$17,342,000; for the Defense Investigative Service, $6,144,000; for the\nthe Senate numbered 40, and agree to the same with an amendment as\nDefense Mapping Agency, $46,160,000; for the Defense Nuclear\nfollows:\nAgency, $5,603,000; for the Uniformed Services University of the\nRestore the matter striken by said amendment, amended to read as\nHealth Sciences, $1,254,000; for the Defense Supply Agency, $201,-\nfollows:\n555,000; for intelligence and communications activities, $147,148.000;\nARMY STOCK FUND\nin all: $627,725,000, of which not to exceed $1,964,500 can be used for\nemergencies and extraordinary expenses: Provided, That the Secre-\nFor the Army stock fund, $20,000,000.\ntary of Defense may transfer up to 3 per centum of the amount of\nAnd the Senate agree to the same.\nany subdivision of this appropriation to any other subdivision of this\nAmendment numbered 41\nappropriation, but no subdivision may thereby be increased by more\nthan 5 per centum and the Secretary of Defense shall notify the Con-\nThat the House recede from its disagreement to the amendment of\ngress promptly of all transfers made pursuant to this authority;\nthe Senate numbered 41, and agree to the same with an amendment as\nfollows:\nAnd the Senate agree to the same.\nRestore the matter stricken by said amendment, amended to read as\nAmendment numbered 28\nfollows:\nThat the House recede from its disagreement to the amendment of\nNAVY STOCK FUND\nthe Senate numbered 28, and agree to the same with an amendment\nas follows:\nFor the Navy stock fund, $10,000,000.\nIn lieu of the sum proposed by said amendment insert $310,710,000;\nAnd the Senate agree to the same.\nand the Senate agree to the same.\n7.\n6\nAmendment numbered 54\nAmendment numbered 42:\nThat the House recede from its disagreement to the amendment of\nThat the House recede from its disagreement to the amendment of\nthe Senate numbered 54, and agree to the same with an amendment\nthe Senate numbered 42, and agree to the same with an amendment as\nas follows:\nfollows:\nIn lieu of the sum proposed by said amendment insert $321,700,000;\nRestore the matter striken by said amendment, amended to read as\nfollows:\nand the Senate agree to the same.\nMARINE CORPS STOCK FUND\nAmendment numbered 66\nThat the House recede from its disagreement to the amendment of\nFor the Marine Corps stock fund, $2,000,000.\nthe Senate numbered 66, and agree to the same with an amendment\nAnd the Senate agree to the same.\nas follows:\nAmendment numbered 43\nIn lieu of the sum proposed by said amendment insert $1,829,-\nThat the House recede from its disagreement to the amendment of\n700,000; and the Senate agree to the same.\nthe Senate numbered 43, and agree to the same with an amendment as\nAmendment numbered 67\nfollows:\nThat the House recede from its disagreement to the amendment of\nRestore the matter striken by said amendment, amended to read as\nthe Senate numbered 67, and agree to the same with an amendment as\nfollows:\nfollows:\nAIR FORCE STOCK FUND\nIn lieu of the sum proposed by said amendment insert $464,500,000;\nand the Senate agree to the same.\nFor the Air Force stock fund, $15,000,000.\nAnd the Senate agree to the same.\nAmendment numbered 69\nAmendment numbered 45\nThat the House recede from its disagreement to the amendment of\nthe Senate numbered 69, and agree to the same with an amendment as\nThat the House recede from its disagreement to the amendment of\nfollows:\nthe Senate numbered 45, and agree to the same with an amendment\nas follows:\nIn lieu of the sum proposed by said amendment, insert the following\n$3,933,700,000. of which $251,200,000 shall be available to fully fund\nIn lieu of the matter inserted by said amendment, insert the\nfollowing:\nOnly four E-3A Airborne Warning and Control System (AWACS)\naircraft\nNATIONAL BOARD FOR THE PROMOTION OF RIFLE PRACTICE, ARMY\nAnd the Senate agree to the same.\nAmendment numbered 71\nFor the necessary expenses, in accordance with law, for construc-\nThat the House recede from its disagreement to the amendment of\ntion, equipment, and maintenance of rifle ranges; the instruction of\nthe Senate numbered 71, and agree to the same with an amendment as\ncitizens in marksmanship: the promotion of rifle practice; and the\nfollows:\ntravel of rifle teams, military personnel, and individuals attending\nIn lieu of the sum proposed by said amendment insert $1,723,900,000;\nregional, national, and international competitions; $233,000, of which\nand the Senate agree to the same.\namount not to exceed $7,500 shall be available for incidental expenses\nof the National Board; and from other funds provided in this Act,\nAmendment numbered 72\nnot to exceed $280,000 worth of ammunition may be issued under\nThat the House recede from its disagreement to the amendment of\nauthority of title 10, United States Code, section 4311.\nthe Senate numbered 72, and agree to the same with an amendment as\nAnd the Senate agree to the same.\nfollows:\nAmendment numbered 51 :\nIn lieu of the sum proposed by said amendment insert $233,000,000;\nand the Senate agree to the same.\nThat the House recede from its disagreement to the amendment of\nthe Senate numbered 51, and agree to the same with an amendment\nAmendment numbered 73\nas follows:\nThat the House recede from its disagreement to the amendment of\nIn lieu of the sum proposed by said amendment insert $912,300,000;\nthe Senate numbered 73, and agree to the same with an amendment as\nand the Senate agree to the same.\nfollows:\nAmendment numbered 52\nIn lieu of the sum proposed by said amendment insert $2,046,400,000;\nThat the House recede from its disagreement to the amendment of\nand the Senate agree to the same.\nthe Senate numbered 52, and agree to the same with an amendment\nas follows:\nIn lieu of the sum proposed by said amendment insert $1,172,-\n600,000; and the Senate agree to the same.\n8\n9\nAmendment numbered 74\nAmendment numbered 86:\nThat the House recede from its disagreement to the amendment of\nThat the House recede from its disagreement to the amendment of\nthe Senate numbered 74, and agree to the same with an amendment as\nfollows:\nthe Senate numbered 86, and agree to the same with an amendment as\nfollows:\nIn lieu of the sum proposed by said amendment insert $353,000,000;\nIn lieu of the sum proposed by said amendment insert $50,018,000;\nand the Senate agree to the same.\nand the Senate agree to the same.\nAmendment numbered 77\nAmendment numbered 97\nThat the House recede from its disagreement to the amendment of\nthe Senate numbered 77, and agree to the same with an amendment as\nThat the House recede from its disagreement to the amendment of\nfollows:\nthe Senate numbered 97, and agree to the same with an amendment as\nfollows:\nIn lieu of the sum proposed by said amendment insert $1,948,823,000;\nand the Senate agree to the same.\nIn lieu of the matter stricken and inserted by said amendment, insert\nthe following:\nAmendment numbered 78:\n40-mile.\nThat the House recede from its disagreement to the amendment of\nAnd the Senate agree to the same.\nthe Senate numbered 78, and agree to the same with an amendment as\nThe committee of conference report in disagreement amendments\nfollows:\nnumbered 19, 49, 53, 75, 83, 98, and 101.\nIn lieu of the sum proposed by said amendment insert $504,452,000;\nGEORGE MAHON,\nand the Senate agree to the same.\nROBERT L. F. SIKES,\nAmendment numbered 79\nDANIEL J. FLOOD,\nThat the House recede from its disagreement to the amendment of\nJOSEPH P. ADDABBO (except\nthe Senate numbered 79, and agree to the same with an amendment as\nas to amendments Nos. 49,\nfollows:\n50, 69, 79, 81)\nIn lieu of the sum proposed by said amendment insert $3,238,390,-\nJOHN J. McFall,\n000; and the Senate agree to the same.\nJOHN J. FLYNT JR.,\nBILL CHAPPELL,\nAmendment numbered 80:\nBILL D. BURLISON,\nThat the House recede from its disagreement to the amendment of\nJACK EDWARDS,\nthe Senate numbered 80, and agree to the same with an amendment as\nJ. K. ROBINSON,\nfollows:\nJACK F. KEMP,\nIn lieu of the sum proposed by said amendment insert $818,722,000;\nE. A. CEDERBERG,\nand the Senate agree to the same.\nManagers on the Part of the House.\nAmendment numbered 82:\nJOHN L. McClellan,\nThat the House recede from its disagreement to the amendment of\nJOHN C. STENNIS,\nthe Senate numbered 82, and agree to the same with an amendment as\nJOHN O. PASTORE,\nfollows:\nWARREN G. MAGNUSON,\nIn lieu of the sum proposed by said amendment insert $901,014,000;\nGALE W. McGEE,\nand the Senate agree to the same.\nJOSEPH M. MONTOYA,\nDANIEL K. INOUYE,\nAmendment numbered 84:\nSTUART SYMINGTON,\nThat the House recede from its disagreement to the amendment of\nMILTON R. YOUNG,\nthe Senate numbered 84, and agree to the same with an amendment as\nROMAN L. HRUSKA,\nfollows:\nCLIFFORD P. CASE,\nIn lieu of the sum proposed by said amendment insert $146,550,000;\nHIRAM L. FONG,\nand the Senate agree to the same.\nTED STEVENS,\nAmendment numbered 85:\nRICHARD S. SCHWEIKER,\nThat the House recede from its disagreement to the amendment of\nManagers on the Part of the Senate.\nthe Senate numbered 85, and agree to the same with an amendment as\nfollows:\nIn lieu of the sum proposed by said amendment insert $211,391,000\nand the Senate agree to the same.\nH. Rept. 94-710 2\nJOINT EXPLANATORY STATEMENT OF THE COMMITTEE\nON CONFERENCE\nThe managers on the part of the House and the Senate at the con-\nference on the disagreeing votes of the two Houses on the amendments\nof the Senate to the bill (H.R. 9861), making appropriations for the\nDepartment of Defense for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1976 and\nthe period beginning July 1, 1976, and ending September 30, 1976,\nand for other purposes, submit the following joint statement to the\nHouse and the Senate in explanation of the effect of the action agreed\nupon by the managers and recommended in the accompanying con-\nference report:\nTITLE I-MILITARY PERSONNEL\nMILITARY PERSONNEL, ARMY, 1976\nAmendment No. 1: Appropriates $8,180,347,000 instead of $8,162,-\n738,000 as proposed by the House and $8,185,666,000 as proposed by\nthe Senate.\nThe Conferees are in agreement that the specific changes to the\nrequest made by the House and agreed to by the Senate are to be\naccomplished by the Department of the Army. In addition, the con-\nferees reached agreement with respect to the following areas of differ-\nence as explained below:\n1. Recruiting.-The conferees agreed to restore $5,500,000 to the\n$68.4 million provided by the House for pay of military personnel.\nThis agreement provides a total of $73.9 million for pay of military\npersonnel assigned to the Army Recruiting Command exclusive of\nfiscal year 1976 pay raises. Personnel assigned to unit of choice re-\ncruiting, Armed Forces Entrance and Examining Stations and medical\nrecruiting programs are not included in the estimate. This is an item of\nspecial interest to the Committees.\n2. Enlistment Bonus.-The House receded to the Senate on this\nmatter restoring $3,000,000. The conferees also agreed that the $53,-\n000,000 provided should not be considered a ceiling and the Army may,\nif it becomes necessary, apply additional funds from within total\nenacted resources. However, the appropriate Committees will be noti-\nfied if it is necessary to increase these bonuses beyond $53,000,000.\n3. Enlisted Separation Pay.-The Senate receded to the House, re-\nstoring $6,140,000 to the request.\n4. Enlisted Grade Enhancement.-The conferees agreed to a reduc-\ntion of $6,233,000 instead of a reduction of $3.233,000 as proposed by\nthe Senate and $9.233,000 as proposed by the House. The bill provides\napproximately $12.3 million to increase the average grade level of\nArmy enlisted personnel.\n5. Counselors.-The conferees agreed to the reduction of $2,917,000\nas proposed by the Senate instead of a reduction of $3,500,000 as pro-\n(11)\n13\n12\n5. Subsistence.-The conferees agreed to a reduction of $1,535,000 as\nposed by the House. The Army is directed to provide a report by\nproposed by the House. A total of $57.3 million is included in the bill\nFebruary 1, 1976 detailing the position that will be eliminated to\nfor subsistence in kind.\ncomply with the reduction.\n6. Enlisted Clothing Allowance.-The conferees agreed to a reduc-\n6. Telecommunications Staffing.-The conferees agreed to restore the\ntion of $1,635,000 as proposed by the House. A total of $33.2 million is\n$2,470,000 deleted by the House.\nincluded in the bill for enlisted clothing allowances.\n7. Subsistence.-The conferees agreed to the reduction of $6,122,000\n7. Permanent Change of Station Travel.-The conferees agreed to a\nas proposed by the House. A ceiling of $226.4 million has been estab-\nreduction of $11,000,000 instead of a reduction of $14,000,000 as pro-\nlished for procurement of subsistence in kind.\nposed by the House and $8,000,000 as proposed by the Senate. The bill\n8. Enlisted Clothing Allowance.-The conferees agreed to a reduc-\nprovides a total of $153,600,000 for PCS travel during the transition\ntion of $7,055,000 instead of a reduction of $9,708,000 as proposed by\nquarter.\nthe House and $4,400,000 as proposed by the Senate. A total of $119.8\n8. Safeguard ABM System.- The conferees agreed to restore the\nmillion has been provided for enlisted clothing allowance.\n$504,000 deleted by the House.\n9. Permanent Change of Station Travel.-The conferees agreed to a\n9. Postal Services.-The conferees agreed to a reduction of $534,000\nreduction of $12,500,000 instead of a reduction of $16,000,000 as pro-\nas proposed by the Senate.\nposed by the House and $9,000,000 as proposed by the Senate. A total\n10. Strength Reduction.-The conferees agreed to a general strength\nof $520 million has been provided for permanent change of station\nreduction of $1,985,000 instead of the $3,970,000 reduction proposed\ntravel, which is considered an item of special interest to the\nby the Senate.\nCommittees.\nMILITARY PERSONNEL, NAVY, 1976\n10. Safeguard ABM System.-The conferees agreed to restore the\n$590,000 deleted by the House. The conferees are in agreement that\nAmendment No. 3: Appropriates $5,722,300,000 instead of $5,721,-\nmilitary personnel assigned to the program, with the exception of those\n114,000 as proposed by the House and $5,722,484,000 as proposed by the\nneeded to operate the Perimeter Acquisition Radar and associated\nSenate.\nequipments, will be reassigned at the earliest possible opportunity.\nThe conferees are in agreement that the specific changes to the re-\nOther details regarding the termination of this program are addressed\nquest made by the House and agreed to by the Senate are to be accom-\nin Title III, Operation and Maintenance, Army.\nplished by the Navy Department. In addition, the conferees reached\n11. Postal Services.-The conferees agreed to the Senate reduction\nagreement with respect to the following areas of difference as ex-\nof $1,067,000 for postal services. The conferees are in agreement that\nplained below:\nthe Department of Defense should transfer stateside military postal\n1. Recruiting.-The conferees agreed to a reduction of $5,475,000 in-\noperations to the United States Postal Service at the earliest practical\nstead of $8,200,000 as proposed by the House and $2,750,000 as pro-\ntime, with a view toward completing such transfer by July 1, 1976.\nposed by the Senate. This agreement provides a total of $48 million\n12. Strength Reduction.-The conferees agreed to a reduction of\nfor pay of military personnel assigned to the Navy Recruiting Com-\n$2,625,000 instead of $5,250,000 as proposed by the Senate. This reduc-\nmand exclusive of fiscal year 1976 pay raises. This is an item of spe-\ntion is to be applied against total Army strength in such a manner SO\ncial interest to the Committee.\nas not to disrupt the orderly transition to the new 16 division force\n2. Graduate Training.-The conferees agreed to a reduction of\nstructure.\n$1,232,000 as proposed by the Senate instead of a reduction of $2,-\nMILITARY PERSONNEL, ARMY, 197T\n310,000 as proposed by the House.\n3. Enlisted Separation Pay.-The conferees agreed to a reduction of\nAmendment No. 2: Appropriates $2,064,635,000 instead of $2,062,-\n$7,990,000 instead of a reducation of $6,0 0,000 as proposed by the\n994,000 as proposed by the House and $2,064,644,000 as proposed by\nHouse and a reduction of $11,990,000 as proposed by the Senate.\nthe Senate.\n4. Counselors.-The conferees agreed to a reduction of $2,043,000 in-\n1. Recruiting.-The conferees agreed to restore $1,156,000 to the\nstead of a reduction of $3,500,000 as proposed by the House and $583,-\n$17.1 million provided by the House for pay of recruiting personnel.\n000 as proposed by the Senate. The Navy is directed to provide a report\nThe $18.2 million provided in the bill is $600,000 less than the amount\nby February 1, 1976 detailing the positions that will be eliminated to\nproposed by the Senate.\ncomply with the reduction.\n2. Enlistment Bonus.-The House conferees receded, providing a\n5. Telecommunications Staffing.-The conferees agreed to restore the\ntotal of $15,700,000 for enlistment bonuses.\n$1,970,000 deleted by the House.\n3. Enlisted Separation Pay.-The conferees agreed to a reduction of\n6. Subsistence.-The conferees agreed to a reduction of $5,270,000 as\n$7,000,000 instead of a reduction of $3,000,000 as proposed by the\nproposed by the House instead of a reduction of $3,261,000 as proposed\nHouse and $10,000,000 as proposed by the Senate.\nby the Senate. A ceiling of $201.1 million has been established for pro-\n4. Enlisted Grade Enhancement.-The conferees agreed to a reduc-\ncurement of subsistence in kind.\ntion of $1,036,000 as proposed by the Senate.\n14\n15,\n7. Enlisted Grade Enhancement.-The conferees agreed to a reduc-\n8. Telecommunications Staffing.-The conferees agreed to restore\ntion of $3,500,000 as proposed by the Senate instead of a reduction of\nthe $985,000 deleted by the House.\n$5,500,000 as proposed by the House.\n9. Subsistence.-The conferees agreed to a reduction of $1,325,000\n8. Postal Services.-The conferees agreed to the Senate reduction of\nproposed by the House instead of a reduction of $815,000 as proposed\n$54,000. The conferees are in agreement that the Department of De-\nby the Senate. A total of $50.2 million is provided for subsistence in\nfense should transfer stateside military postal operations to the United\nkind.\nStates Postal Service at the earliest practical time, with a view toward\n10. Bachelor Officer Quarters and Messes.-The conferees agreed\ncompleting such transfer by July 1, 1976.\nto the reduction of $4,005,000 as proposed by the Senate.\n9. Bachelor Officer Quarters and Messes.-The conferees agreed to a\n11. Postal Services.-The conferees agreed to the reduction of $27,-\nreduction of $6,000,000 instead of a reduction of $8,010,000 as pro-\n000 as proposed by the Senate.\nposed by the Senate. The conferees have also agreed that the change-\nover from appropriated funding to reimbursement for enlisted services\nMILITARY PERSONNEL, MARINE CORP, 1976\nat BOQ's and Commissioned Officer Messes (closed) dining facilities\nneed not take place by January 1, 1976 as proposed by the Senate. A\nAmendment No. 5: Appropriates $1,806,377,000 instead of $1,802,-\nschedule for the changeover has not been established, but the conferees\n843,000 as proposed by the House and $1,810,335,000 as proposed by\nexpect the Navy to proceed as rapidly as good management practices\nthe Senate.\nwill permit.\nThe conferees are in agreement that the specific changes to the\nMILITARY PERSONNEL, NAVY, 197T\nrequest made by the House and agreed to by the Senate are to be\naccomplished by the Marine Corps. In addition, the conferees reached\nAmendment No. 4: Appropriates $1,451,668,000 instead of $1,451,-\nagreement with respect to the following differences as explained\n568,000 as proposed by the House and $1,451,878,000 as proposed by\nbelow:\nthe Senate.\n1. Recruiting.-The conferees agreed to a reduction of $2,100,000\n1. Recruiting.-The conferees agreed to restore $600,000 to the $11.6\ninstead of a reduction of $3,700,000 as proposed by the House and\nmillion provided by the House for pay of recruiter personnel. The\n$1,237,000 as proposed by the Senate. This agreement provides a total\n$12.2 million provided in the bill is $622,000 less than the amount\nof $22.8 million for pay of military personnel assigned to Marine\nproposed by the Senate.\nCorps recruiting activities exclusive of fiscal year 1976 pay raises.\n2. Reenlistment Bonus.-The conferees agreed to a reduction of\n2. Enlistment Bonus.-The conferees agreed to a reduction of $1,-\n$2,000,000 as proposed by the Senate. This will provide a total of $18.0\n000,000 as proposed by the Senate instead of a reduction of $1,700,000\nmillion for reenlistment bonuses during the transition period.\nas proposed by the House. The agreement provides a total of $6.2\n3. Graduate Training.-The conferees agreed to a reduction of\nmillion for enlistment bonuses during fiscal year 1976. The Marine\n$416,000 as proposed by the Senate instead of a reduction of $866,000\nCorps can utilize additional funds for this purpose from within total\nas proposed by the House.\navailable resources.\n4. Full-time Enlisted Training.-The conferees agreed to a reduc-\n3. Full-Time Enlisted Training.-The conferees agreed to restore\ntion of $364,000 as proposed by the Senate instead of a reduction of\nthe $200,000 reduction proposed by the House. The conferees also\n$714,000 as proposed by the House. The conferees also agreed that new\nagreed that new entrance into full-time precommissioning education\nentrance into full-time precommissioning education programs will be\nprograms will be permitted SO long as the Marine Corps is fully utiliz-\npermitted SO long as the Navy is fully utilizing all available ROTC\ning all available ROTC graduates, is not forcing officers in the grades\ngraduates, is not forcing officers in the grades of 0-3 or below to leave\nof 0-3 or below to leave the service, nor asking these officers to volum-\nthe service, nor asking these officers to volunteer for early release. New\nteer for early release. New entrance to full-time degree completion\nentrance into full-time degree completion programs will be limited to\nprograms will be limited to personnel training to fill positions which\npersonnel training to fill positions which require a college degree. The\nrequire a college degree. The conferees also agreed that tuition sub-\nconferees also agreed that tuition subsidies will no longer be provided\nsidies will no longer be provided as proposed by the Senate.\nas proposed by the Senate.\n4. Enlisted Separation Pay.-The conferees agreed to a reduction\n5. Enlisted Separation Pay.-The conferees agreed to a reduction of\nof $3,000,000 as proposed by the House instead of a reduction of $2,-\n$2,500,000 instead of a reduction of $1,500,000 as proposed by the\n650,000 as proposed by the Senate.\nHouse and a reduction of $4,000,000 as proposed by the Senate.\n5. Telecommunications Staffing.-The conferees agreed to restore\n6. Enlisted Grade Enhancement.-The conferees agreed to a reduc-\nthe $478,000 deleted by the House.\ntion of $138,000 as proposed by the Senate instead of a reduction of\n6. Subsistence.-The conferees agreed to a reduction of $1,595,000\n$263,000 as proposed by the House.\nas proposed by the House instead of a reduction of $1,025,000 as pro-\n7. Counselors.-The conferees agreed to a reduction of $900,000\nposed by the Senate. A ceiling of $56.3 million has been established for\ninstead of a reduction of $1,500,000 as proposed by the House and\nprocurement of subsistence in kind.\n$300,000 as proposed by the Senate.\n7. Marginal Performer Discharges.-The conferees agreed that a\nreduction of $2,500,000, instead of a reduction of $4,500,000 as pro-\nposed by the House, is appropriate.\n16\n17\n8. Postal Service.-The conferees agreed to the Senate reduction\nof $1,119,000. The conferees are in agreement that the Department\nThe conferees are in agreement that the specific changes to the re-\nof Defense should transfer stateside military postal operations to the\nquest made by the House and agreed to by the Senate are to be accom-\nUnited States Postal Service at the earliest practical time, with a view\nplished by the Department of the Air Force. In addition, the conferees\ntoward completing such transfer by July 1, 1976.\nreached agreement with respect to the following areas of difference as\n9. Bachelor Officer Quarters and Messes.-The conferees agreed to\nexplained below:\na reduction of $325,000 instead of a reduction of $650,000 as proposed\n1. Recruiting.-The conferees agreed to a reduction of $3,700,000\nby the Senate. The conferees are also in agreement that the change-\ninstead of a reduction of $5,500,000 as proposed by the House and a\nover from appropriated funding to reimbursement for enlisted serv-\nreduction of $2,000,000 as proposed by the Senate. This item is of\nices at BOQ's and Commissioned Officer Messes (closed) dining facil-\nspecial interest to the Committees.\nities need not take place by January 1, 1976, as proposed by the Sen-\n2. Reimbursable Collections (Foreign Pilot Training).-The con-\nate. A schedule for the changeover has not been established, but the\nferees agreed that the Air Force should collect $18,750,000 in this ap-\nconferees expect the Marine Corps to proceed as rapidly as good man-\npropriation from foreign governments for the training of their pilots.\nagement practices will permit.\nThe Senate had assumed collection of only $11,050,000.\n3. Graduate Training.-The conferees agreed to a reduction of\nMILITARY PERSONNEL, MARINE CORPS, 197T\n$1,750,000 as proposed by the Senate instead of a reduction of $2,790,-\nAmendment No. 6: Appropriates $460,117,000 instead of $459,-\n000 as proposed by the House.\n863,000 as proposed by the House and $460,190,000 as proposed by the\n4. Full-Time Enlisted Training.-The conferees agreed to a reduc-\ntion of $3,000,000 as proposed by the House instead of a reduction of\nSenate. 1. Recruiting.-The conferees agreed to a reduction of $608,000 in-\n$1,500,000 as proposed by the Senate. The conferees are in agreement\nstead of a reduction of $925,000 as proposed by the House and $315,000\nthat the Air Force should not allow additional personnel to enter SO\nas proposed by the Senate. This agreement provides a total of $5.6\nlong as it is forcing officers in the grade of 0-3 and below to leave the\nmillion for pay of military personnel assigned to Marine Corps re-\nservice, or asking them to volunteer for early release, or is not fully\nutilizing available ROTC graduates.\ncruiting activities, exclusive of future pay raises. This item is of\n5. Enlisted Separation Pay.-The conferees agreed to a reduction of\nspecial interest to the Committees.\n2. Enlistment Bonus.-The conferees agreed to a reduction of\n$25,000,000 as proposed by the House instead of a reduction of\n$200,000 as proposed by the Senate instead of a reduction of $500,000\n$27,740,000 as proposed by the Senate.\n6. Counselors.-The conferees agreed to a reduction of $2,100,000\nas proposed by the House.\n3. Reenlistment Bonus.-The conferees agreed to a reduction of\ninstead of a reduction of $3,500,000 as proposed by the House and\n$700,000 as proposed by the Senate. The Air Force is directed to pro-\n$600,000 as proposed by the Senate instead of a reduction of $1,200,000\nvide a report by February 1, 1976 detailing the positions that will be\nas proposed by the House.\neliminate to comply with the reduction.\n4. Full-Time Enlisted Training.-The conferees agreed to restore\n7. Telecommunications Staffing.-The conferees agreed to restore the\n$80,000 as proposed by the Senate.\n$303,000 deleted by the House.\n5. Enlisted Separation Pay.-The conferees agreed to a reduction\n8. Subsistence.-The conferees agreed to a reduction of $2,126,000 as\nof $1,144,000 instead of reduction of $750,000 as proposed by the House\nproposed by the House instead of a reduction of $1,326,000 as proposed\nand $1,544,000 as proposed by the Senate.\nby the Senate. A ceiling of $78.5 million has been established for pro-\n6. Telecommunications Staffing.-The conferees agreed to restore\ncurement of subsistence in kind.\nthe $239,000 deleted by the House.\n9. Postal Services.-The conferees agreed to a reduction of $1,935,000\n7. Subsistence.-The conferees agreed to a reduction of $436,000 as\nas proposed by the Senate. The conferees are in agreement that the\nproposed by the House instead of a reduction of $256,000 as proposed\nDepartment of Defense should transfer stateside military postal opera-\nby the Senate. A total of $18.1 million is provided in the bill for sub-\ntions to the United States Postal Service at the earliest practical time,\nsistence in kind.\nwith a view toward completing such transfer by July 1, 1976.\n8. Bachelor Officer Quarters and Messes.-The conferees agreed to\n10. Aerial Port Staffing.-The conferees agreed to the reduction of\nthe reduction of $325,000 as proposed by the Senate.\n$7,272,000 as proposed by the Senate.\n9. Postal Services.-The conferees agreed to the reduction of\n11. Strategic Airlift Crew Ratios.-The conferees agreed to the re-\n$563,000 as proposed by the Senate.\nduction of $1,056,000 as proposed by the Senate.\n12. Tactical Fighter Crew Ratios.-The conferees agreed to a reduc-\nMILITARY PERSONNEL, AIR FORCE, 1976\ntion of $5,000,000 instead of a reduction of $22,000,000 as proposed by\nAmendment No. 7: Appropriates $7,251,524,000 instead of $7,262,-\nthe Senate.\n661,000 as proposed by the House, and $7,244,884,000 as proposed by\n13. Civilian Substitution.-The conferees agreed to a reduction of\n$417,000 as proposed by the Senate.\nthe Senate.\nI.Rept, 94-710 3\n18\n19\nMILITARY PERSONNEL, AIR FORCE, 197T\n1. Commercial Air Transportation.-The conferees agreed to a re-\nduction of $1,550,000 instead of a reduction of $3,100,000 as proposed\nAmendment No. 8: Appropriates $1,776,677,000 instead of $1,777,-\nby the House. The amount provided is not to be considered a ceiling.\n928,000 as proposed by the House and $1,764,481,000 as proposed by\nResources otherwise available may be utilized for commercial air\nthe Senate.\ntransportation if adequate support cannot be obtained from the Mili-\n1. Recruiting.-The conferees agreed to a reduction of $875,000 in-\ntary Airlift Command.\nstead of a reduction of $1,375,000 as proposed by the House and\n2. Pay Group D.-The conferees agreed to a reduction of $500,000\n$475,000 as proposed by the Senate. This agreement provides a total of\nas proposed by the House instead of a reduction of $200,000 as pro-\n$7.5 million for pay of military personnel assigned to Air Force re-\nposed by the Senate. House guidance with respect to using only volun-\ncruiting activities during the transition period.\nteers to fill Pay Group D positions will be adhered to by the Army\n2. Reenlistment Bonus.-The conferees agreed to a reduction of\nReserve.\n$1,800,000 as proposed by the Senate instead of a reduction of $4,500,-\n3. Conversion Pay Group A to B.-The conferees agreed to a reduc-\n000 as proposed by the House.\ntion of $1,371,000 instead of a reduction of $2,743,000 as proposed by\n3. Reimbursable Collections (Foreign Pilot Training).-The con-\nthe Senate. The conferees are also in agreement that instead of con-\nferees agreed to a reduction of $4,700,000 as proposed by the House\nverting 10 percent of Pay Group A positions to Pay Group B or its\ninstead of a reduction of $3,100,000 as proposed by the Senate.\nequivalent, a goal of 5 percent is appropriate. It is agreed that a\n4. Graduate Training.-The conferees agreed to a reduction of\nsmaller number (less than 5 percent) could be placed in even lower\n$492,000 as proposed by the Senate instead of a reduction of $1,046,000\npay groups or that certain low skill positions could be deleted from\nas proposed by the House.\nthe Ready Reserve to provide the required savings.\n5. Full-Time Enlisted Training.-The conferees agreed to a reduc-\ntion of $750,000 as proposed by the House instead of a reduction of\nRESERVE PERSONNEL, ARMY, 197T\n$380,000 as proposed by the Senate.\n6. Enlisted Separation Pay.-The conferees agreed to a reduction of\nAmendment No. 10: Appropriates $165,299,000 instead of $168,-\n$5,000,000 as proposed by the House instead of a reduction of $15,-\n120,000 as proposed by the House and $164,527,000 as proposed by the\n556,000 as proposed by the Senate.\nSenate.\n7. Enlisted Grade Levels.-The conferees agreed to a reduction of\n1. Authorized Strength Increases.-The conferees agreed not to add\n$1,210,000 as proposed by the Senate instead of a reduction of $1,910,-\nadditional funds for authorized strength increases as proposed by the\n000 as proposed by the House.\nHouse. Accordingly, the $3,000,000 addition made by the House has\n8. Counselors.-The conferees agreed to a reduction of $600,000 as\nbeen deleted.\nproposed by the Senate instead of a reduction of $1,500,000 as pro-\n2. Commercial Air Transportation.-The conferees agreed to a re-\nposed by the House.\nduction of $600,000 instead of a reduction of $1,000,000 as proposed\n9. Telecommunications Staffing.-The conferees agreed to restore\nby the House and $200,000 as proposed by the Senate. The conferees\nthe $76,000 deleted by the House.\nare also in agreement that the funds provided for commercial air\n10. Subsistence.-The conferees agreed to a reduction of $521,000 as\ntransportation are not to be considered a ceiling but that additional\nproposed by the House instead of a reduction of $331,000 as proposed\nfunds can be used from within the total available if the Reserve\nby the Senate. A total of $19 million is provided for subsistence in\nComponent finds that the Military Airlift Command cannot totally\nkind.\nfulfill its transportation requirements.\n11. Postal Services.-The conferees agreed to a reduction of $972,000\n3. School Training.-The conferees agreed to a reduction of\nas proposed by the Senate.\n$900,000 as proposed by the Senate instead of a reduction of $1,700,000\n12. Aerial Port Staffing.-The conferees agreed to a reduction of\nas proposed by the House.\n$3,636,000 as proposed by the Senate.\n4. Special Training.-The conferees agreed to a reduction of $430,-\n13. Strategic Airlift Crew Ratios.-The conferees agreed to a reduc-\n000 as proposed by the Senate instead of a reduction of $780,000 as\ntion of $528,000 as proposed by the Senate.\nproposed by the House.\n14. Tactical Fighter Crew Ratios.-The conferees agreed to a reduc-\n5. Pay Group D.-The conferees agreed to the reduction of $200,000\ntion of $1,300,000 instead of a reduction of $5,500,000 as proposed by\nas proposed by the House.\nthe Senate.\n6. Conversion Pay Group A to B.-The conferees agreed to a reduc-\n15. Civilian Substitution.-The conferees agreed to the reduction of\ntion of $1,371,000 instead of a reduction of $2,743,000 as proposed by\n$245,000 as proposed by the Senate.\nthe Senate.\nRESERVE PERSONNEL, NAVY, 1976\nRESERVE PERSONNEL, ARMY, 1976\nAmendment No. 11: Appropriates $200,035,000 instead of $204,-\nAmendment No. 9: Appropriates $468,879,000 instead of $468,700,-\n390,000 as proposed by the House and $189,450,000 as proposed by\n000 as proposed by the House and $469,357,000 as proposed by the\nthe Senate.\nSenate.\n21\n20\n1. Authorized Strength Increases.-The conferees agreed to provide\ncent of Pay Group A positions to Pay Group B or its equivalent, a\nfunding for an average strength of 102,000 personnel. The amount\n5 percent goal is appropriate. It is also agreed that a smaller number\nprovided is $10,000,000 more than the level provided by the Senate,\n(less than five percent) could be placed in even lower pay groups or\nbut $4,000,000 less than that proposed by the House.\nthat certain low-skill positions could be deleted from the Ready Re-\n2. Coastal and River Squadrons.-The conferees agreed to restore\nserve to provide the required savings.\nthe $230,000 deleted by the House.\n3. Commercial Air Transportation.-The conferees agreed to a re-\nRESERVE PERSONNEL, MARINE CORPS, 197T\nduction of $200,000 instead of a reduction of $300,000 as proposed\nAmendment No. 14 Appropriates $28,082,000 instead of $27,850,000\nby the House and $100,000 as proposed by the Senate. The amount\nas proposed by the House and $28,313,000 as proposed by the Senate.\nprovided for commercial air transportation is not to be considered a\n1. Commercial Air Transportation.-The conferees agreed to a re-\nceiling. However, the conferees expect the Reserve Components to\nduction of $600,000 instead of a reduction of $1,000,000 as proposed by\nobtain the maximum transportation augmentation possible from the\nthe House, and a reduction of $200,000 as proposed by the Senate.\nMilitary Airlift Command.\n2. Conversion Pay Group A to B.-The conferees agreed to a reduc-\n4. Conversion Pay Group A to B.-The conferees agreed to a reduc-\ntion of $168,000 instead of a reduction of 337,000, as proposed by the\ntion of $685,000 instead of a reduction of $1,370,000 as proposed by\nSenate.\nthe Senate. The conferees also agreed that instead of converting\nRESERVE PERSONNEL, AIR FORCE, 1976\n10 percent of Pay Group A positions to Pay Group B or its equivalent\nas proposed by the Senate, a 5 percent goal is appropriate. It is agreed\nAmendment No. 15: Appropriates $157,500,000 as proposed by the\nthat a smaller number (less than 5 percent) could be placed in even\nHouse instead of $152,700,000 as proposed by the Senate.\nlower pay groups, or that certain low-skill positions could be deleted\n1. Special Training.-The conferees agreed to a reduction of\nfom the Navy Ready Reserve to provide the required savings. The\n$2,000,000 instead of a reduction of $2,500,000 as proposed by the\nconferees further agreed that Senate references to Naval Reserve Con-\nHouse and $1,500,000 as proposed by the Senate.\nstruction Battalions converting from pay group A to B should not be\n2. Undergraduate Pilot Training.-The conferees agreed to a reduc-\nconsidered a specific direction, and that these units should be subject\ntion of $200,000 instead of a reduction of $400,000 as proposed by the\nto drill reduction only to the extent deemed appropriate by the\nHouse.\nDepartment.\n3. Strategic Airlift Crew Ratios.-The conferees agreed to a reduc-\nRESERVE PERSONNEL, NAVY, 197T\ntion of $700,000 instead of a reduction of $6,200,000 as proposed by the\nSenate.\nAmendment No. 12: Appropriates $59,525,000 instead of $61,-\nRESERVE PERSONNEL, AIR FORCE, 197T\n935,000 as proposed by the House and $54,715,000 as proposed by the\nSenate.\nAmendment No. 16: Appropriates $48,260,000 as proposed by the\n1. Authorized Strength Increases.-The conferees agreed to pro-\nHouse instead of $47,160,000 as proposed by the Senate.\nvide an additional $4,200,000 instead of $6,000,000 as proposed by the\n1. Special Training.-The conferees agreed to a reduction of $500,-\nHouse.\n000 as proposed by the Senate instead of a reduction of $1,000,000 as\n2. Commercial Air Transportation.-The conferees agreed to a re-\nproposed by the House.\nduction of $225,000 instead of a reduction of $300,000 as proposed by\n2. Undergraduate Pilot Training.-The conferees agreed to restore\nthe House and $150,000 as proposed by the Senate.\n$100,000 deleted by the House.\n3. Conversion Pay Group A to B.-The conferees agreed to a reduc-\n3. Strategic Airlift Crew Ratios.-The conferees agreed to a reduc-\ntion of $685,000 instead of a reduction of $1,370,000 as proposed by the\ntion of $600,000 instead of the reduction of $1,700,000 as proposed by\nSenate.\nthe Senate.\nRESERVE PERSONNEL, MARINE CORPS, 1976\nNATIONAL GUARD PERSONNEL, AIR FORCE, 1976\nAmendment No. 13: Appropriates $70,652,000 instead of $69,320,000\nas proposed by the House and $71,983,000 as proposed by the Senate.\nAmendment No. 17: Appropriates $212,318,000 as proposed by the\n1. Commercial Air Transportation.-The conferees agreed to a re-\nSenate instead of $211,318,000 as proposed by the House.\nduction of $1,500,000 instead of a reduction of $3,000,000 as proposed\n1. New Mission Programs.-The conferees agreed to restore the\nby the House. The amount provided for commercial air transportation\n$1,000,000 deleted by the House.\nis not to be considered a ceiling, and additional resources can be used\nfor this purpose if adequate transportation support cannot be obtained\nOTHER MATTERS RELATED TO AMENDMENTS 1-17\nfrom the Military Airlift Command.\n2. Conversion Pay Group A to B.-The conferees agreed to a re-\nThe following matters concern report language differences which\nduction of $168,000 instead of a reduction of $337,000 as proposed by\nwere agreed to by the conferees as explained below:\nthe Senate. The conferees also agreed that instead of converting 10 per-\nUse of All Advertising Media.-The Senate conferees agreed with\nthe House direction that all advertising media be used in the most cost-\n22\n23\neffective manner from within the funds available for recruit\nplanning for a deployment of about 20,000 personnel by the end of\nadvertising.\nfiscal year 1978.\nExamining.-The Senate conferees agreed with House direction that\nNonsponsored Dependents in the Far East.-The conferees are in\nall pre-induction testing be done at the Armed Forces Entrance and\nagreement that each military department shall have the option of\nExamining Stations (AFEES) rather than in recruiter's offices. The\ndeciding whether or not to extend the tour of a person who brings into\nSenate conferees also agreed with a House recommendation that the\nthe command, or obtains while in the command, nonsponsored de-\nArmy study the feasibility of separating AFEES management from\npendents. The House report recommended the automatic extension\nthe Army Recruiting Command.\nof tours when nonsponsored dependents were brought into Far East\nFlight Training and the Use of Flight Simulators.-The Committee\ncommands. However, in no case will nonsponsored dependents be per-\non Conference discussed various differences in each report relating to\nmitted to use support services when the sponsors' tour remains the\nmatters of flight training and the use of simulators in flight training.\nshort \"all others\" or without-dependents tour. Those services (bene-\nThe conferees are in agreement that the Department of Defense should\nfits) which are clearly authorized by law will be continued. A review\npursue the following course of action (a) attempt to procure one new\nof these services indicates that only medical care is required by law.\nmulti-engine trainer to meet both Air Force and Navy requirements;\nThe conferees are also in agreement that marriage to a local national\n(b) study and revise requirements for personnel, bases, and aircraft in\nshould not in and of itself be considered a reason for not permitting\nview of latest pilot training needs and application of modern simula-\na serviceman to extend his tour.\ntor technology; (c) integrate flight simulators into the training pro-\nFar East Tour Lengths.-The conferees agreed that the normal tour\ngrams through the establishment of formal requirements and standards\nlengths for accompanied personnel in the Fast East should be increased\nfor the certification of flight training devices, and (d) award credit for\nto 36 months, with an exception allowed in areas where full support\nsimulator time in a manner similar to the recording of actual flight\nservices are not available. The House receded from its recommenda-\ntime on pilot records. In addition, the conferees are in agreement that\ntion that unaccompanied personnel serve an 18-month tour. The con-\nthe Department of Defense should not initiate any action to proceed\nferees agreed that the 12-month unaccompanied tour should remain in\nwith the consolidation of the services pilot training programs without\neffect. However, the conferees agree with the House direction with re-\nthe approval of the Appropriations and Armed Services Committees\nspect to developing a personnel management system which will en-\nof the Congress.\nable the military services to notify a serviceman of his next duty loca-\nCivil Air Patrol.-The Senate directed that the Department of\ntion prior to his leaving on a short tour.\nDefense issue new directives stressing the value of the Civil Air\nPostal Training.-The conferees are in agreement that the Depart-\nPatrol (CAP) and directed implementation of methods by which\nment of Defense should study the feasibility of eliminating separate\nCAP needs could be met with equipment of the best condition and of\npostal training courses.\nrecent manufacture. The House did not address this item. The con-\nChaplain Schools.-The Senate receded with respect to the House\nferees agreed that the Civil Air Patrol should be provided support\ndirection that the three chaplain schools currently operated within the\nconsistent with its vital role, although it appears that present directives\nDepartment of Defense should be consolidated into a single school.\nand the degree of such support are based upon currently applicable\nThe Senate report had recommended more study with a view toward\nlaw. It is understood, however, that legislation has been introduced\neliminating all chaplain schools and using regular officer candidate\nwhich would permit wider availability of equipments and facility\nschools and similar training courses in their place.\nuse for the Civil Air Patrol. The conferees believe that whenever\nOverseas Unaccompanied Baggage.-The Senate recommended uti-\ndeemed in the best interests of the Air Force, the Civil Air Patrol\nlization of U.S. Postal Service (space available mail) for shipment\nshould be provided serviceable materiel and support levels allowed\nof overseas unaccompanied baggage. The confereees agreed that addi-\nunder prevailing statutes. The Air Force should continue to emphasize\ntional information is needed before such a system could be placed into\nto all commanders the need for support of the Civil Air Patrol at\ngeneral operation. Accordingly, the conferees are agreed that the De-\nthe installation and individual unit level.\npartment of Defense should develop plans for and proceed with a\nLegislative Affairs Activities.-The House conferees agreed to the\nfeasibility test of this method prior to implementation. The area se-\nSenate direction to revise Department of Defense accounting for per-\nlected should represent a typical application if this method were to be\nsonnel and costs associated with legislative activities.\nused. It is suggested that Korea be considered for such a test.\nUndergraduate Full-Time Education for Officers.-The House con-\nNavy Reserve Headquarters.-The conferees are in agreement that\nferees receded to the Senate on this matter, recommending continua-\nthe Navy Reserve should proceed with its plans to establish a readiness\ntion of undergraduate full-time study SO long as such study is limited\ncommand structure. The conferees also agreed that House direction\nto 18 months and no tuition or other educational subsidy is provided.\nwith respect to the shift of reserve manpower assets from the Navy\nU.S. Forces in Korea.-The conferees agreed that the Department\nDistrict Commandants to the Readiness Commands will be under-\nof Defense should develop plans for a phasedown of U.S. forces in\ntaken. This changeover will take place as rapidly as good management\nKorea. However, it was also agreed that these plans should be de-\nprocedures will permit.\nveloped without initial Congressional specification as to numbers of\nCoastal River Division 21.-The House conferees receded to the\npersonnel involved or time phasing. The House had recommended\nSenate on this matter with regard to specifying that Coastal River\n24\n25\nDivision 21 be phased out. However, the conferees are in agreement\nthat the Naval Reserve has too high a proportion of its manpower de-\nagreed to specific reductions of 20,334 to the various Service requests\nvoted to these tasks in view of the fact that the Coast Guard and Coast\nand the remaining 3,203 are unallocated and are to be applied by the\nGuard Reserve have similar missions. Accordingly, the Navy Reserve\nSecretary of Defense.\nis directed to reduce overall manpower devoted to this and similar\nRegarding the Army, the request was for an end strength of 406,447\nfunctions either by the phaseout of Coastal River Division 21, some\nat September 30, 1976. The House reduced this request by 12,806. The\nother coastal and river division, or a general reduction among these\nSenate agreed to specific reductions of 8,800 made by the House. The\nunits.\nconferees agreed to a specific Army reduction of 8,904. The conferees\nPay Group L.-Personnel in Pay Group L are awaiting basic train-\nagreed to restore 3,571 positions for Army depot operations, 227 for\ning (active duty for training) in a reserve unit but are being paid for\nadditional personnel at Walter Reed Hospital, and 104 in Army re-\nattending drill sessions, although they have no military skills. In re-\ncruiting operations.\nviewing this program, both the House and Senate reported that the\nvarious reserve components had obligated funds far in excess of the\nMilitary Personnel Strength\namount requested in the fiscal year 1976 budget. Accordingly, the Sen-\nate directed that new input into this program be terminated effective\nBased upon reductions in the authorized military personnel strength\nJanuary 1, 1976 until such time as requirements have been validated to\nof the Army, the House reduced operation and maintenance funds\nthe satisfaction of that Committee. The House receded to the Senate\nused in support of these personnel by $6,800,000. The Senate restored\non this matter with the proviso that the Department of Defense is to\n$600,000 of the House reduction. The conferees agreed to the House\nsubmit necessary reprogramming actions at the earliest opportunity\nreduction and the Senate receded.\nin order to enable the Congress to address in detail the need for this\nparticular form of payment. The conferees believe that more informa-\nStock Fund Surcharge\ntion is needed on the future cost of this pay, the reasons for the large\nnumber of delays in calls to active duty for training, and the need for\nThe Army had requested $141,400,000 associated with a Department\nthis category of pay as a recruiting incentive. The individual repro-\nof Defense stock fund surcharge increase. The House denied this in-\ngramming actions should separately identify costs already incurred\ncrease; however, the Senate restored $61,900,000. The conferees agreed\nfrom costs to be incurred from new input after January 1, 1976, assum-\nthat a restoration of $30,000,000 is adequate.\ning the individual Reserve Components desire to continue this cate-\nFor fiscal year 1976 the Department of Defense requested a total of\ngory of pay.\n$788,200,000 to implement a surcharge increase of 15 percent of all\ncommodities sold by each stock fund operated by the Department. The\nTITLE IHI-OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE\nrequest for the transition period amounted to $197,600,000. The House\ndenied both the $788,200,000 requested for fiscal year 1976 and the\nOPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, ARMY, 1976\n$197,600,000 requested for the transition period. The Senate, although\nagreeing with the House in principle that the surcharge should not\nAmendment No. 18: Appropriates $7,052,000,000 as proposed by the\nbe implemented, believed that a portion of the funds requested for\nSenate, instead of $6,984,830,000 as proposed by the House.\nfiscal year 1976 should be provided because the surcharge had been\nin effect on some stock funded commodities since the beginning of the\nCivilian Personnel Strength\nfiscal year and on others since September 1975. The Senate agreed\nThe budget requested $2,389,213,000 for Army civilian personnel.\nthat no funds should be provided for the transition period.\nThe House reduced this amount by $87,250,000. The Senate restored\nThe conferees agreed that the amount provided by the Senate for\n$48,700,000 on the basis of an adjustment made to the Army's overall\nfiscal year 1976 exceeded the requirements for the period for which\npersonnel strength and a repricing of average civilian personnel\nthe surcharge has been in effect and that generally only one-half of\nsalary cost. The conferees agreed that a restoration of $30,000,000 is\nthe amounts provided will be needed to cover the additional cost in-\nadequate based upon the Senate adjustments.\ncurred by the Services. The conferees' position is based upon the fact\nThe total civilian personnel end strength requested by the Depart-\nthat the surcharge should have been terminated by the Department\nment of Defense for the fifteen month period ending September 30,\nupon reporting of the Defense Appropriation Bill by the Senate on\n1976, was 1,087,937. The Defense Appropriation Authorization Act for\nNovember 6, 1975. The conferees also agreed that the stock fund will\nfiscal year 1976 and the transition period reduced the budget request by\nhave adequate cash balances if the Department implements procedures\n23,537 positions, establishing an authorized strength of 1,064,400. The\nto collect overdue fund bills expeditiously.\nHouse applied the total reduction of 23,537 to specific activities or\noperations of the Department. The Senate applied specific reductions\nGSA Leasing Program\nof 19,629 and the remaining 3,908 were unallocated and were to be\nThe Army's budget request for reimbursement to the General Serv-\napplied by the Secretary of Defense as he desired. The conferees have\nices Administration for the rental of leased space amounted to $102,-\n335,000. The House provided $86,985,000. The Senate further reduced\nH. Rept. 94-710 4\n27\n26\nthe request by $2,900,000, providing $84,085,000. The conferees agreed\ndepot employment in fiscal year 1976 is less than half of the normal\nannual turnover in the Army depots from retirement, resignations, and\nto the Senate position.\nother personnel adjustments.\nMaintenance of Real Property\nCamouflage Screens\nThe House reduced the Army's budget request for the maintenance\nThe budget request for fiscal year 1976 was $28,100,000 to purchase\nof real property by $18,000,000, providing $428,300,000. The Senate\n40,000 camouflage screens. The House reduced this request by $11,-\nrestored $4,500,000 of the House reduction. The conferees agreed to\n600,000. The Senate restored this reduction. The conferees agreed that\nthe House reduction and the Senate receded.\nthese funds should be restored.\nTravel Funds\nChemical Warfare Clothing\nFor fiscal year 1976 the Army requested $201,796,000 for the\nThe House included $8,800,000 for the purchase of protective cloth-\ntemporary duty travel of civilian and military personnel. The House\ning for chemical warfare training. The Senate denied these funds. The\nreduced the request by $17,000,000, allowing $184,796,000. The Senate\nconferees agreed that these funds should be provided the Army.\nrestored $3,600,000 of the House reduction. The conferees agreed to\nthe House position.\nReserve Equipment Overhaul\nRecruiting Support\nOn the basis of testimony supporting the premise that equipment\nFor the support of recruiting operations in fiscal year 1976 the\ntransferred to the Army Reserve was not being provided in ready-for-\nArmy requested $79,435,000. The House reduced the Army's request\nissue condition the House transferred $6,800,000 from the request for\nby $12,700,000. The Senate restored $11,000,000 of the House reduc-\nOperation and Maintenance, Army Reserve to the Army's depot op-\ntion. The conferees agreed that a restoration of $6,000,000 is sufficient\neration account in order that such equipment be properly reconditioned\nfor this operation, which provides a total amount of $72,735,000.\nbefore transfer to the Reserves. The Senate was subsequently advised\nthat $400,000 would be sufficient to properly overhaul all equipment\nRecruit Advertising\nin ready-for-issue condition before transfer. Therefore, the Senate\nFor its recruit advertising program for fiscal year 1976 the Army\nreduced the House transfer by $6,400,000 and the conferees agreed to\nrequested $49,150,000. The House reduced the request by $17,800,000\nthe Senate position on this matter. An equivalent increase is included\nand the Senate restored $8,100,000. The conferees agreed that the\nin the Army Reserve appropriation (see Amendment No. 28).\nHouse allowance of $31,350,000 is sufficient for fiscal year 1976.\nInflation Factoring\nSafeguard Operations\nThe Army included in its budget request $513,000,000 for the cost\nThe Army requested $85,252,000 for operation of the Safeguard anti-\nof inflation which occured during fiscal year 1974 and up to the time\nballistic missile (ABM) system during fiscal year 1976. The House\nof the preparation of the budget request for fiscal year 1976. The\nreduced the request by $40,000,000. The conferees agreed that the\nSenate determined that the inflationary factors used by the Army\nfull request of $85,252,000 should be appropriated but that certain\nwere overstated and reduced the appropriation request by $50,000,000.\nother actions should be taken as stated under Amendment No. 19 dis-\nThe conferees agreed with the Senate position and the House receded.\ncussed subsequently.\nJoint Chiefs of Staff Exercises\nDepot Operations\nThe budget request for depot operations for fiscal year 1976\nFor fiscal year 1976 the Army requested $23,775,000 for Joint Chiefs\nof Staff exercises. The House funded the full amount. The Senate\namounted to $489,993,000. The House reduced the request by $30,-\n000,000 in addition to the request for additional civilian personnel.\nreduced the request by $4,400,000. Based upon the Senate position the\nThe Senate restored $20,000,000 of the House reduction. The conferees\nconferees agreed that a reduction of $2,430,000 is appropriate.\nagreed to the restoration of these funds and are convinced that the\nfunds provided for Army depot operations, which represent an in-\nProficiency Flying\ncrease of 40 percent above the fiscal year 1975 funding level, will, if\nFor proficiency flying of air crews during fiscal year 1976 the Army\nproperly managed by the Army, result in a sizeable decrease in the\nrequested $16,501,000. The House allowed the total request. The Senate\nbacklog of items requiring overhaul. In addition, the conferees agreed\nreduced the request by $12,700,000. The conferees agreed that an ap-\nthat because of this substantial increase, no depot personnel reduc-\npropriation of $7,801,000 is sufficient funding for the Army proficiency\ntions in force will be required if the Army manages its civilian person-\nflying program and therefore agreed upon a reduction of $8,700,000.\nnel resources properly. The small reduction of personnel strength in\n29\n28\ngovernment and country must be protected. The non-tactical facilities\nCommissary Store Operations\nat the site-hospital, chapel, community center, gym and similar per-\nThe Army requested $59,700,000 for the support of commissary\nmanent structures-should not be dismantled. These facilities should\nstore operations during fiscal year 1976. The Army request was based\nbe used to fill other federal requirements, if any; sold; or given to the\nlocal communities.\nupon the Department of Defense proposal that all commissary opera-\ntions become fifty percent self-supporting on October 1, 1975, and\nThe conferees direct the Defense Department to provide the Com-\nfully self-suporting on October 1, 1976. The House rejected this pro-\nmittees on Appropriations of the House and Senate a report of the\nposal and fully funded this operation for fiscal year 1976 and the\nplans to deactivate and terminate the site at Grand Forks, North\ntransition period, thus increasing the Army's request by $38,700,000\nDakota. The report should be submitted by February 1, 1976, how-\nand $12,900,000 for fiscal year 1976 and the transition period, respec-\never, initiation of closure actions should not be delayed because of this\ntively. The Senate disagreed with the House position and reduced the\nreport requirement.\nArmy's request for fiscal year 1976 by $57,630,000. The Senate also\nThe conferees also understand that approximately $2,500,000 of\ndirected that all commissary support be phased out in five years. The\nCommunity Impact funds remain from prior year appropriations.\nconferees agreed, first, that the Army could not sustain such a funding\nSuch funds can be used to provide assistance qualifying under the\nreduction without curtailing commissary operations for the remainder\nprovisions of Section 610 of the Military Construction Authorization\nof the fiscal year and, second, that appropriation support for commis-\nAct, 1971 (84 Stat. 1224) which are a direct result of the negative com-\nsary operations should not be phased out at this time. The Senate,\nmunity impact caused by the termination and deactivation of the Safe-\ntherefore, receded on both the fund reduction and the appropriation\nguard ABM site (other than the Perimeter Acquisition Radar) near\nsupport phaseout requirement.\nGrand Forks, North Dakota. For example, the conferees are aware that\nAmendment No. 19.-Reported in technical disagreement. The man-\nthe Safeguard-affected community supporting service activities such\nagers on the part of the House will offer a motion to recede and concur\nas telephone and electrical utilities which have incurred obligations\nin the Senate amendment that provides that the Operation and Main-\nincluding indebtedness will now be left without anticipated revenues\ntenance funds included in this Act for the operation and maintenance\nfrom taxes or customers. The Defense Department is expected to pro-\nof the Safeguard system, other than the funds provided for operation\nvide the maximum assistance possible to these problems within the\nand maintenance of the Perimeter Acquisition Radar (PAR), can be\n$2,500,000 which remains available.\nused only for the expeditious termination and deactivation of all op-\nerations of the Safeguard facility. The House had no similar\nOPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, ARMY, 197T\nlanguage.\nThe Senate amendment follows:\nAmendment No. 20: Appropriates $1,779,000,000 instead of $1,752,-\n542,000 as proposed by the House, and $1,781,442,000 as proposed by\nProvided further, That funds provided in this Act for the\nthe Senate.\noperation and the maintenance of the antiballistic-missile\nFor the transition period from July 1 through September 30, 1976,\nfacility (other than funds provided for operation and main-\nthe conferees generally agreed to the same positions on the items in\ntenance of the Perimeter Acquisition Radar) may be used\nconference which were included in the agreements on the request for\nonly for the purpose of the expeditious termination and de-\nfiscal year 1976. The conferees' position is shown in the following\nactivation of all operations of that facility.\nschedule:\nAs discussed under Amendment No. 18, the conferees agreed to re-\n[Amounts in thousands]\nstore the House reduction of $40,000,000 for operation of the Safe-\nguard system and provide the total of $85,252,000 requested for fiscal\nBudget\nHouse\nSenate\nConference\nItem\nrequest\nallowance\nallowance\nyear 1976. The conferees agreed that the funds provided for Safe-\nagreement\nguard be used to perform expeditiously (1) any and all actions re-\nCivilian personnel strength\n$581, 596\n$530, 496\n$565, 496\n$551, 096\nquired SO that the site can be completely abandoned, except for the\nGSA leasing program\n25,583\n21,733\n19,033\n19,033\nMaintenance of real property\n107,887\n102,887\n103,887\n102,887\nPerimeter Acquisition Radar and related facilities needed to sup-\nTravel funds\n46,293\n43,293\n42,893\n43,293\nport the radar for the attack characterization mission, and (2) operate\nRecruiting support\n19,090\n15,915\n18,715\n17,315\nRecruit advertising\n17,150\n11,150\n13,150\n11,150\nand maintain the Perimeter Acquisition Radar. The intent is to close\nSafeguard operations\n19,500\n0\n19,500\n19,500\nDepot operations\n137,914\n128,914\n134,714\n134,714\nthe site, except for the Perimeter Acquisition Radar and related equip-\nCamouflage screens\n7,000\n4,500\n7,000\n7, 000\nment, in such a manner that no future funding, unless related to com-\nReserve equipment overhaul\n2,400\n100\n100\nInflation factoring\n149,000\n149,000\n136,500\n136,500\npletion of dismantlement and disposal of Safeguard facilities, will be\nJCS exercises\n4, 788\n4, 788\n3,688\n4,188\nProficiency flying\n4,126\n4,126\n0\n984\nrequired.\nCommissary store operations\n11,800\n24,700\n10,700\n24,700\nThe conferees expect that the interceptor missiles and warheads will\nbe expeditiously evacuated. The remaining facilities and equipment\nUnit Station of Choice\nwill be disposed of consistent with established procedures. In those\ncases, if any, where procedures are non-existent the interest of the\nFor the transition period the Army requested $4,325,000 for unit\nstation of choice support. The House allowed $2,100,000. The Senate\n30\n31\ndisallowed the total request. The conferees agreed with the Senate posi-\n$9,700,000. The Senate restored $2,800,000. The conferees agreed that\ntion because the program is to be terminated during fiscal year 1976 as\nthe funds should not be restored and the Senate receded.\npreviously discussed.\nAircraft Depot Operations\nOPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, NAVY, 1976\nThe Navy requested $642,144,000 for aircraft depot overhaul and\nAmendment No. 21: Appropriates $8,069,400,000 instead of $7,974,-\nrepair operations for fiscal year 1976. The House reduced the request\n615,000 as proposed by the House, and $8,108,615,000 as proposed by\nby $34,000,000, allowing $608,144,000. The Senate allowed $638,144,-\nthe Senate.\n000, restoring $30,000,000 of the House reduction. The conferees\nCivilian Personnel Strength\nagreed to the Senate restoration and the House receded.\nThe conferees are in agreement that the funds included in the bill\nThe Navy requested $3,235,000,000 for civilian personnel during fis-\nfor Navy aircraft depot operations which represent an increase of\ncal year 1976. The House reduced the request by $17,250,000. The Sen-\nabout 11 percent above the fiscal year 1975 level, if properly man-\nate restored $5,000,000. The conferees agreed that a restoration of $2,-\naged by the Navy, will result in a decrease in the backlog of items re-\n500,000 is sufficient based on various adjustments in personnel strength.\nquiring overhaul and an increase in the number of aircraft available\nThe Navy requested an end strength of 334,589 for the period ending\nfor operations. In addition, the conferees agreed that no personnel\nSeptember 30, 1976. The House reduced the request by 6,168. The Sen-\nreductions in force will be required if the Navy properly manages its\nate agreed to specific House reductions of 5,473. The conferees agreed\ncivilian personnel working in aircraft depot operations.\nto specific reductions of 5,823. The conferees agreed to restore 35 posi-\ntions for supervisors of shipyards operations, 300 shipyard employees,\nAlteration, Overhaul, and Repair of Naval Vessels\nand 10 additional personnel for recruiting support.\nThe Navy requested $1,882,595,000 for the alteration, overhaul, and\nMilitary Personnel Strength\nrepair of Naval vessels in fiscal year 1976. The House provided $1,-\n857,595,000 amounting to a reduction of $25,000,000. The Senate re-\nThe House reduced the Navy request by $2,000,000 because of au-\nstored the House reduction. The conferees agreed to the Senate posi-\nthorization reductions in military personnel strength. The Senate re-\ntion and the House receded. Furthermore, the House had directed that\nstored $1,000,000 of the House reduction. The conferees agreed to the\nall 85 overhauls programmed for fiscal year 1975 be performed within\nHouse reduction and the Senate receded.\nthe funds provided. The Senate directed that the Navy perform as\nmany overhauls as possible within the funds provided in the bill and\nStock Fund Surchage\nthe conferees agreed.\nCalibration Program\nThe Navy requested $221,800,000 for the increased stock fund sur-\ncharge in fiscal year 1976. The House disallowed the total request and\nFor fiscal year 1976 the Navy requested $43,800,000 for its calibra-\nthe Senate restored $96,900,000. The conferees agreed to restore $50,-\ntion program. The House provided $35,500,000, a reduction of $8,-\n000,000 for the reasons previously discussed.\n300,000. The Senate restored $4,100,000. The conferees agreed that a\nrestoration of $2,000,000 is sufficient, providing a funding level of\nGSA Leasing Program\n$37,500,000.\nProficiency Flying\nFor support of the GSA leasing program in fiscal year 1976 the\nNavy requested $42,847,000. The House reduced the request by $7,125,-\nThe Navy requested $10,575,000 for proficiency flying in fiscal year\n000. The Senate made a further reduction of $1,400,000 to which the\n1976. The House allowed the full amount. The Senate reduced the\nconferees agreed. Total funds provided amount to $34,322,000.\nrequest by $2,400,000. The conferees agreed to a reduction of $1,200,-\n000 and a program level of $9,375,000.\nRecruiting Support\nFlying Hour Program\nFor recruiting support for fiscal year 1976 the Navy requested\n$37,495,000. The House provided $31,995,000, reducing the request by\nFor its flying hour program for fiscal year 1976 the Navy requested\n$5,500,000. The Senate restored $2,200,000. The conferees agreed to the\n$454,599,000. The House funded the full amount. The Senate reduced\nrestoration of only $1,000,000 and total funding of $32,995,000.\nthe program by $26,200,000. The conferees agreed to a reduction of\n$13,115,000, reducing the program to $441,484,000.\nRecruit Advertising\nOperation of Closed Messes\nFor fiscal year 1976 the Navy requested $27,589,000 for recruit ad-\nvertising. The House allowed $17,889,000, reducing the request by\nTo operate its closed messes during fiscal year 1976 the Navy\nrequested $4,800,000. The House allowed the full amount. The Senate\n32\n33\nreduced the request to $1,800,000. The conferees agreed with the\nRecruiting Support\nSenate reduction and directed that this type of support funding be\nphased out as soon as possible, as previously discussed in this report.\nFor fiscal year 1976 the Marine Corps requested $12,435,000 to sup-\nport its recruiting activities. The House reduced this request by\nOPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, NAVY, 197T\n$1,900,000. The Senate restored $1,100,000. The conferees agreed to the\nrestoration of funds by the Senate and total funding of $11,635,000.\nAmendment No. 22: Appropriates $2,133,557,000 as proposed by\nthe Senate, instead of $2,121,157,000 as proposed by the House.\nRecruit Advertising\nFor the transition period the conferees agreed to the funding of\nitems in disagreement as shown in the following schedule\nThe Marine Corps requested $12,235,000 for its recruit advertising\nprogram for fiscal year 1976. The House reduced this request by\n[Amounts in thousands]\n$4,500,000. The Senate restored $1,200,000. The conferees agreed to\nBudget\nHouse\nSenate\nConference\nthe House reduction and total funding of $7,735,000.\nItem\nrequest\nallowance\nallowance\nagreement\nBachelor Officer Quarters\nCivilian personnel strength\n$809,000\n$800,\n$802, 500\n$801, 000\nReduced military strength\n84,264\n83,764\n84,064\n83,764\nGSA leasing program\n10,746\n8,966\n7, 666\n7,666\nIn support of bachelor officer quarters for fiscal year 1976 the Ma-\nRecruiting support\n9, 421\n8,046\n8, 546\n8, 246\nRecruit advertising\n5, 993\n893\n4, 593\n3, 893\nrine Corps requested $2,022,000. The House provided the total amount\nAircraft depot operations\n163,413\n153,413\n160,913\n160,913\nrequested. The Senate reduced the request by $450,000. The con-\nCalibration program\n9,812\n6,312\n7,212\n6, 712\nOverhaul program\n646,281\n636,281\n646, 281\n646,812\nferees agreed to provide the Marine Corps request but directed that\nProficiency flying\n659\n2,659\n2,059\n2, 359\nFlying hour program\n113,429\n113,429\n106,829\n109,829\nthis type of support funding be phased out as soon as possible, as\nClosed messes\n500\n1,500\n0\n0\npreviously discussed.\nOperation of Closed Messes\nOPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, MARINE CORPS, 1976\nAmendment No. 23: Appropriates $497,110,000 instead of $492,-\nThe Marine Corps requested $1,100,000 for support of its closed\n910,00 as proposed by the House, and $499,210,000 as proposed by the\nmess opertions during fiscal year 1976. The House provided the full\nSenate.\namount. The Senate reduced the request by $550,000. The conferees\nMilitary Personnel Strength\nagreed to fully fund this operation during fiscal year 1976 but di-\nrected that this type of support funding be phased out as soon as\nThe House reduced the Marine Corps request by $900,000 because of\npossible.\nauthorization reductions in military personnel strength. The Senate\nrestored $500,000 of the House reduction. The conferees agreed with\nOPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, MARINE CORPS, 197T\nthe Senate restoration and the House receded.\nAmendment No. 24 Appropriates $125,506,000 as proposed by the\nStock Fund Surcharge\nHouse, instead of $125,856,000 as proposed by the Senate.\nFor the transition period the conferees agreed to the funding of\nFor fiscal year 1976 the Marine Corps requested $8,900,000 to imple-\nitems in disagreement as shown in the following schedule:\nment the new stock fund surcharge. The House disallowed the full\n[Amounts in thousands]\namount. The Senate restored $3,900,000. The conferees agreed that\n$2,000,000 is sufficient for the Marine Corps costs incurred under this\nBudget\nHouse\nSenate\nConference\nItem\nrequest\nallowance\nallowance\nagreement\nprogram.\nGSA Leasing Program\nReduced military strength\n$29,441\n$29,191\n$29,341\n$29,291\nGSA leasing program\n1,031\n866\n766\n766\nThe Marine Corps requested $4,125,000 to support the GSA leasing\nTravel funds\n4,509\n4, 009\n4, 409\n4,409\nRecruiting support\n3,286\n2, 811\n3,111\n3,111\nprogram in fiscal year 1976. The House reduced the request by $660,000.\nRecruit advertising\n2, 966\n916\n2, 216\n916\nBachelor officer quarters\n700\n700\n0\n0\nThe Senate made a further reduction of $100,000. The conferees agreed\nto the additional reduction of the Senate which provides a total of\n$3,365,000.\nOPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, AIR FORCE, 1976\nTravel Funds\nAmendment No. 25 Appropriates $7,498,679,000 instead of $7,437,-\nFor the travel of civilian and military personnel in fiscal year 1976\n079,000 as proposed by the House, and $7,586,479,000 as proposed by\nthe Marine Corps requested $18,267,000. The House reduced this re-\nthe Senate.\nquest by $1,000,000 and the Senate restored $700,000. The conferees\nagreed to the Senate restoration and total funding of $17,967,000.\n34\n35\nCivilian Personnel Strength\nby $5,000,000. The Senate restored $1,200,000 of the House reduction.\nBoth the House and Senate agreed to reduce the Air Force request\nThe conferees agreed to the House reduction and the appropriation of\nfor civilian personnel funds by $8,100,000. However, there were dif-\n$10,000,000.\nferences in the number of civilian personnel to be reduced. The House\nForeign National Pilot Training\nreduced civilian personnel by 1,080 and the Senate made reductions\nof 2,439. The conferees agreed to a total reduction of 2,450 in the\nThe House reduced the Air Force Operation and Maintenance\nbudget request by $56,250,000 on the basis that the correct amount was\ncivilian personnel strength of the Air Force. Both the House and\nSenate agreed on specific reductions of 1,050. In addition, the House\nnot being charged foreign governments for the training of their pilots.\nreduced civilian personnel associated with recruiting activities by\nThe Senate agreed with the House position on this subject but believed\n30 positions. The Senate restored 23 of these positions. The conference\nthat the reduction made by the House exceeded anticipated reimburse-\nments. The Senate restored $36,700,000 of the House reduction. The\nagreed that only 12 should be restored. The Senate made other specific,\nreductions of 1,382. The conferees agreed to these reductions.\nconferees agreed that $25,000,000 should be restored and the appro-\npriation reduced by $31,250,000.\nMilitary Personnel Strength\nThe conferees agreed that applicable Defense regulations should\nbe revised to require that Foreign Military Sales charges for pilot\nThe House reduced the Air Force request by $3,300,000 because of\ntraining include realistic estimates of the full and proportionate cost\nauthorization reductions in military personnel strength. The Senate\nof training support, base operations support, and training organiza-\nrestored $1,200,000 of the House reduction. The conferees agreed with\ntion overhead.\nthe House reduction and the Senate receded.\nUnsubscribed Airlift\nFor fiscal year 1976 the Air Force requested $82,300,000 for Military\nStock Fund Surcharge\nAirlift Command training flights without carrying cargo. The House\nFor fiscal year 1976 the Air Force requested $344,900,000 for stock\nreduced this request by $43,000,000. The Senate restored the full\nfund surcharge. The House disallowed the total request. The Senate\namount. The conferees agreed that $25,000,000 should be restored.\nrestored $150,800,000 of the House reduction. The conferees agreed\nthat a restoration of $75,000,000 is sufficient to fund the surcharge\nCommercial Cargo Augmentation\nfor the period it has been in effect.\nFor fiscal year 1976 the Air Force requested $8,200,000 for commer-\ncial cargo augmentation on scheduled air carrier operations. The\nGSA Leasing Program\nHouse disapproved the request on the basis that sufficient cargo is un-\nThe Air Force requested $16,200,000 to pay the cost of the GSA\navailable to operate the Air Force's own fleet of cargo aircraft effi-\nleasing program for fiscal year 1976. The House allowed $13,660,000,\nciently and funds were being requested for unsubscribed airlift. The\nreducing the request by $2,540,000. The Senate made a further reduc-\nSenate restored $4,100,000 of the House reduction because the program\ntion of $500,000. The conferees agreed to the additional Senate reduc-\nshould first be tested on an experimental basis. The conferees agreed\ntion and the House receded.\nthat the program should not be funded and the Senate receded.\nTravel Funds\nAdvanced Logistic System\nThe Air Force requested $199,189,000 for travel during fiscal year\nThe Air Force requested $58,831,000 for support of its data Process-\n1976. The House reduced this request by $10,000,000. The Senate made\ning Advanced Logistic System (ALS), during fiscal year 1976. The\na further reduction of $2,200,000. The conferees agreed to the further\nHouse reduced the request by $33,831,000 and directed that the program\nSenate reduction and the appropriation of $186,989,000.\nbe terminated. The Senate restored $23,800,000 and agreed to the pro-\nposed Air Force redirection of ALS with certain modifications, such\nRecruiting Support\nas the deferral of the leasing of certain ancillary equipment.\nThe conferees agreed to an increase of $12,000,000 over the House\nFor recruiting support for fiscal year 1976 the Air Force requested\nallowance, a total appropriation of $37,000,000. The conferees fur-\n$15,500,000. The House reduced the request by $2,500,000. The Senate\nther agreed that the Air Force should terminate ALS and design and\nrestored $1,900,000 of the House reduction. The conferees agreed to\ndevelop a new automated logistic system based upon the latest com-\nthe House reduction and the appropriation of $13,000,000.\nputer technology to satisfy its long-term logistical information needs.\nThe conferees also agreed that a thorough review of Air Force logistic\nRecruit Advertising\nrequirements be made before any new system is developed. Funds are\nprovided only for mission-essential ADP support of the Air Force\nTo support its recruit advertising program during fiscal year 1976\nLogistic Command until a complete assessment of all ADP support re-\nthe Air Force requested $15,000,000. The House reduced the request\n36\n37\nquirements has been completed and a comprehensive support plan ap-\nproved by the Secretary of Defense.\nbe flown by pilots in mission aircraft by an amount equal to the hours\nTo meet this objective various steps must be taken by the Air Force.\nflown in low cost aircraft. The conferees agreed to the Senate position\non this matter.\nExisting real-time computers should be operated until a new system\ncan be designed, tested, and implemented. These computers can be aug-\nmented if necessary. The Air Force must restudy its logistical informa-\nIncreased C-5/C-141 Crew Ratio\ntion requirements before initiating any new design effort. Specifically,\nThe Air Force requested $36,200,000 to increase its C-5/C-141 air-\nthe Air Force must determine the data elements and management\ncraft crew ratio. This increase was discussed in both the House and\ninformation required to provide improved logistical support for its\nmission responsibilities. This information must be used as the basis\nSenate reports on the Defense Appropriation bill. The House, while\nfor the new design effort. In the interim any new logistic system de-\nobjecting to the increase, did not make any reduction in the budget\nveloped should use machine transferable data management software\nrequest. The Senate deleted the full amount. The conferees agreed with\nthe Senate reduction and direct that the increase in crew ratio for these\nwhich can effectively operate on the equipment of two or more vendors,\naircraft not be implemented.\nto insure competition.\nThe Secretary of the Air Force is directed to review the functional\napplication proposed in the interim plan on the basis of mission-\nTactical Fighter Crew Ratio\nessentiality, and approve only those applications which cannot be de-\nThe Air Force requested in its budget for fiscal year 1976 $61,100,000\nferred until completion of the comprehensive ADP support plan. The\nto increase its tactical fighter crew ratio from 1.1 to 1.25 per aircraft.\nCommittees should be kept advised of all systems being implemented\nThe House funded the full amount requested. The Senate reduced the\nin the interim plan.\nrequest by $37,900,000 and recommended that the tactical fighter air-\nUnder the current ALS contract the Air Force has earned $55 mil-\ncrew augmentation proceed at a more modest rate, pending further\nlion of lease/purchase credits toward the procurement of the new\nanalysis. The conferees agreed to fund the program at $41,100,000,\nequipment installed. The conferees have been advised that about an\nmaking a reduction of $20,000,000 and agreed to the Senate position\nadditional $11 million is required for outright purchase of this equip-\non proceeding more slowly than the Air Force had planned.\nment. In order to avoid the loss of the $55 million in credits already\nearned, the Air Force is directed to complete the purchase of this\nMAC Aerial Ports\nequipment from the $35 million appropriated for this purpose in fiscal\nyear 1975. The remaining procurement funds should be returned to\nThe Senate reduced the Air Force request by $3,000,000 to eliminate\nthe Treasury as directed by the House.\noverstaffing and excess luxuries at Military Airlift Command (MAC)\nThe conferees direct that all automated system design, development\naerial ports. The House did not address this subject. The conferees\nor procurement, software maintenance, and equipment evaluation and\nagreed to the Senate reduction and position on this matter.\nselection required by any Air Force element will be accomplished by\nthe Air Force Data Automation Agency using organic resources or\nForeign Military Sales Personnel\ncommercial contract. Support commands will be restricted to defini-\ntion and justification of functional requirements, participation in ac-\nThe Air Force requested $600,000 to employ additional foreign mili-\nceptance tests, operation of accepted systems and maintenance of\ntary sales personnel. The House funded this request. The Senate denied\naccepted hardware.\nthe total amount. The conferees agreed to the Senate reduction.\nJoint Chiefs of Staff Exercises\nReimbursement to Postal Service\nThe Air Force requested $73,085,000 for Joint Chiefs of Staff exer-\nFor fiscal year 1976 the Air Force requested $30,502,000 for reim-\ncises in fiscal year 1976. The House appropriated the full amount.\nbursement to the United States Postal Service. The House provided\nThe Senate reduced the request by $15,600,000. The conferees agreed to\nthe full amount. The Senate increased the amount provided by $1,000,-\na reduction of $7,000,000 and an appropriation of $66,085,000.\n000 on the basis that the Postal Service should provide, and be reim-\nbursed for services now being performed by Air Force military per-\nProficiency Flying\nsonnel. The conferees agreed that the additional services could not be\nprovided during fiscal year 1976 and therefore did not increase the\nFor fiscal year 1976 the Air Force requested $13,155,000 for pro-\nbudget request. However, the conferees agreed that the Air Force\nficiency flying. The House allowed the full amount. The Senate re-\nshould arrange for these services to be provided by the end of fiscal\nduced the request by $13,000,000. The conferees agreed to a reduction\nyear 1976.\nof $5,000,000 and an appropriation of $8,155,000.\nSpecial Projects\nThe Senate directed the termination of the Air Force low cost air-\ncraft program unless the Air Force reduced the annual flying hours to\nThe Senate reduced the Air Force request for special projects by\n$2,000,000. The conferees agreed to this reduction.\n38\n39\nOPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, AIR FORCE, 197T\nferees agreed that the program should be increased by $4,600,000 for\nAmendment No. 26 Appropriates $1,897,495,000 as proposed by the\na total appropriation of $211,391,000.\nSenate, instead of $1,906,245,000 as proposed by the House.\nRegarding Overseas Dependents Education the House directed that\nFor the transition period the conferees agreed to the funding of items\nthe geographical managers concept be discontinued and all manage-\nin disagreement as shown in the following schedule:\nment be placed under the Office of Overseas Dependents Education\n(OODE). The reasons therefore are explained on page 167 of the\n[Amounts in thousands]\nHouse report (94-517). The Senate disagreed with the House position\nand recommended that the geographical managers concept be con-\nBudget\nHouse\nSenate\nConference\nItem\ntinued and that precise management relationships between the field\nrequest\nallowance\nallowance\nagreement\ncommanders and OODE be resolved without further delay. The con-\nReduced military strength\n$140,125\n$139,275\n$138,725\n$139,275\nferees agreed with the House directive that the geographical man-\nGSA leasing program\n4,000\n3, 365\n2,865\n2, 865\nTravel funds\n52,599\n50,599\n49,499\n50,099\nagers concept be discontinued immediately and that full responsibility\nRecruting support\n3, 200\n575\n975\n2,575\nfor the management of the Overseas Dependents Education program\nRecruit advertising\n4, 000\n3,370\n3,670\n3, 370\nForeign national pilot training\n-14,050\n-5,350\n-8,300\nbe vested in OODE SO that there will be only one educational program\nUnsubscribed airlift\n16,700\n6, 700\n16,700\n12,500\nCommercial cargo augmentation\n1, 900\n0\n900\n0\nfor the dependents of military personnel overseas rather than the\nAdvanced logistic (ADP) system\n12,129\n5,000\n10,100\n7,600\nthree now in existence.\nJCS exercises\n18,204\n18,204\n14,304\n16,204\nProficiency flying\n7,250\n251\n251\n4,551\nC-5/C-141 crew ratio\n9,500\n9,500\n0\n0\nManpower and Research Data Analysis Center\nTactical fighter crew ratio\n18,800\n18,800\n8, 700\n12,600\nMAC aerial ports.\n-1,500\n-1,500\nForeign military sales personnel\n300\n300\n0\n0\nThe Senate reduced the request for the Manpower and Research\nReimbursement to Postal Service\n7,650\n7,650\n7,950\n7,950\nData Analysis Center (MARDAC) by $800,000 and directed that it\nbe disestablished. The conferees agreed to restore the Senate reduction\nOPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, DEFENSE AGENCIES\nin funds on the basis that the organization will be consolidated into\nthe Office of the Secretary of Defense and made more effective, less\nAmendment No. 27 The House provided specific appropriations for\ncostly, and have a lower personnel end strength. The Department\nthe various Defense Agencies and/or activities included in this budget\nadvised the conferees that civilian personnel end strength at Septem-\nrequest. The Senate deleted in total the House language and provided\nber 30, 1976, will be reduced to 28 positions. The conference agreement\nin lieu thereof a lump sum appropriation for all Defense Agencies\nwill reduce MARDAC's authorized strength by 24 positions.\nand/or activities. The conferees agreed that specific appropriations\nas provided by the House should be continued and the Senate receded.\nAssistant Secretary (Health and Environment)\nFiscal Year 1976\nThe budget requested $812,000 for operation of the Office of the\nAssistant of Defense for Health and Environment. The House pro-\nAppropriates, in all, $2,475,531,000 instead of $2,460,631,000 as pro-\nvided the full amount. The Senate reduced the request by $30,000\nposed by the House and $2,497,876,000 as proposed by the Senate.\nassociated with the reduction of 3 civilian positions. The conferees\nagreed to restore these funds and positions.\nSecretary of Defense Activities\nAssistant Secretary (Program Analysis and Evaluation)\nFor Secretary of Defense Activities the budget requested $818,023,-\n000. The House reduced the request by $34,370,000, recommending an\nFor the operations of the Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense\nappropriation of $783,653,000. The conferees agreed to provide\nfor Program Analysis and Evaluation and Department requested\n$787,753,000.\n$2,749,000 for fiscal year 1976. The House allowed the full request. The\nThe House provided $515,041,000 for the Civilian Health and Med-\nSenate reduced the request by $200,000 and denied 20 civilian positions.\nical Program of the Uniformed Services (CHAMPUS). The Senate\nThe Senate was also of the opinion that the functions of this Office\nincreased the House allowance by $12,700,000. The conferees agreed\ncould be better performed if it were integrated into the Office of the\nthat the additional funds should not be provided. The reasoning for\nAssistant Secretary of Defense (Comptroller). The conferees agreed\ndisallowance is associated with various changes in CHAMPUS bene-\nwith the Senate on all its actions.\nfits proposed by the House, with amendments thereto as proposed by\nthe Senate, and the conference agreement thereon as discussed sub-\nReview of Management, Organization, and Responsibilities\nsequently in conjunction with Amendments 97 and 98.\nThe conferees direct the Department to examine its headquarters\nFor Overseas Dependents Education the House provided $206,791,-\norganizations, giving serious consideration to a substandial consolida-\n000. The Senate increased the House amount by $7,975,000. The con-\ntion of functions with the objectives of improving management effec-\n41,\n40\nby $1,939,000. The Senate made a further reduction of $100,000 in the\ntiveness and use of resources, fixing management responsibilities, and\ntravel fund request of the Agency. The conferees agreed to the addi-\nreducing the size of the headquarters and their supporting activities.\ntional Senate reduction and an appropriation of $22,509,000.\nThis review should concentrate on the Office of the Secretary of De-\nfense and the Organization of the Joint Chiefs, but should also include\nDefense Supply Agency\nthe Service Secretariats and Military Staffs. Day-to-day management\nresponsibility should be delegated to the greatest extent possible to\nFor the Defense Supply Agency (DSA) for fiscal year 1976 the\nthe Services, but with accountability clearly established. The Con-\nDepartment requested $820,914,000. The House reduced the request\ngress will be prepared to consider proposals which implement such\nby $29,160,000. The Senate restored $4,100,000 of the House reduction\nchanges when submitted.\nin four separate actions. The Senate restored $1,200,000 for additional\nlogistic support and $5,000,000 of the House general reduction. It\nOrganization of the Joint Chiefs of Staff\nreduced DSA's request for travel funds by $1,000,000 and made a fur-\nther reduction of $1,100,000 in the GSA leasing program. The con-\nFor the Organization of the Joint Chiefs of Staff the Department\nferees agreed that the Senate should recede on the restoration of the\nrequested $12,084,000 for fiscal year 1976. The House reduced this re-\nHouse reductions and that the Senate reductions should be made. The\nquest by $385,000. The Senate further reduced the request by $100,-\ntotal appropriation agreed to by the conferees is $789,654,000.\n000 for travel funds. The conferees agreed to the Senate reduction\nand the appropriation of $11,599,000.\nIntelligence and Communications\nDefense Contract Audit Agency\nThe Department requested $586,266,000 for intelligence and com-\nmunications activities for fiscal year 1976. The House reduced the\nThe Department requested $68,653,000 for the Defense Contract\nrequest by $19,325,000. The Senate further reduced the request by\nAudit Agency for fiscal year 1976. The House reduced this request by\n$1,800,000. The Defense Communications Agency was reduced $400,000\n$230,000. The Senate made a further reduction of $300,000 for travel\nfor computer support, $200,000 for 20 new civilian position associated\nfunds. The conferees agreed with the Senate reduction and an ap-\nwith increased automatic data processing support for the World Wide\npropriation of $68,123,000.\nMilitary Command and Control System, and $300,000 for travel funds.\nAlso, the travel fund requests of the National Security Agency and the\nDefense Investigative Service\nDefense Intelligence Agency were reduced $700,000 and $200,000,\nrespectively. The conferees agreed to the further reduction of the\nFor fiscal year 1976 the Department requested $28,437,000 for sup-\nSenate for an appropriation of $565,141,000.\nport of the Defense Investigative Service (DIS). The House reduced\nthe request by $6,440,000. The Senate restored $4,400,000 of the House\nTransition Period\nreduction in two separate actions. It restored $4,500,000 of a House\nreduction in personnel and reduced the request for travel funds by\nAppropriates, in all, $627,725,000 instead of $623,925,000 as proposed\n$100,000. The conferees agreed to restore $3,500,000 of the personnel\nby the House, and $631,855,000 as proposed by the Senate.\nreduction for a total appropriation of $25,397,000.\nThe agreement of the conferees to items in conference is shown in\nThe House had reduced the DIS civilian personnel strength by 765\nthe following table:\npositions. The Senate restored 665 of these positions and directed\n[Amounts in thousands]\nthe civilianization of an additional 100 military positions. The con-\nferees agreed to restore 400 positions and also agreed to the civiliani-\nHouse\nSenate\nConference\nzation program.\nItem\nallowance\nallowance\nagreement\nDefense Mapping Agency\nCHAMPUS\n$130,358\n$131,558\n$130,358\nOverseas dependents education\n47,618\n51,368\n50,118\nThe budget request for the Defense Mapping Agency amounted to\nMARDAC\n400\n0\n400\nAssistant Secretary, H. & E.\n205\n185\n205\n$189,112,000 for fiscal year 1976. The House reduced the request by\nAssistant Secretary, P.A. & E\n699\n599\n599\n$15,780,000. The Senate restored $11,700,000 of the House reduction\nDefense Investigative Service\n5, 444\n6,544\n6,144\nDefense Mapping Agency\n43,230\n46,230\n46,230\nin two separate actions. It restored $12,000,000 of the House general\nDefense Supply Agency:\nAdditional logistic support.\n0\n300\n0\nreduction of $15,000,000 and made a further reduction of $300,000 in\nGSA leasing program\n-1,100\n-1,100\ntravel funds. The conferees agreed to both Senate actions and to an\nIntelligence and communications\n147,738\n147,438\n147,438\nAdditional Senate travel reductions:\nappropriation of $185,032,000.\nOffice of the Secretary of Defense\n-70\n-70\nOverseas dependents education\n-100\n-100\nDefense Contract Audit Agency\n-70\n-70\nDefense Communications Agency\n-70\n-70\nDefense Nuclear Agency\nDefense Supply Agency\n-300\n-300\nDefense Intelligence Agency\n-20\n-20\nNational Security Agency\n-200\n-200\nThe Department requested $24,548,000 for support of the Defense\nDefense Mapping Agency\n-70\n-70\nNuclear Agency for fiscal year 1976. The House reduced the request\n42\n43\nThe conferees agree to the following amounts for the various sub-\nvided $7,300,000 for this item. The conferees agreed to provide $3,-\nappropriations included in this appropriation:\n600,000 for the reasons previously discussed.\nAmount\nAgency and/or activity\nThe conferees agreed to provide $2,112,000 for temporary duty\nSecretary of Defense activities\n$195, 365, 000\ntravel. This is the same amount as provided in the Senate bill, and\nCHAMPUS\n(130, 358, 000)\nOverseas Dependents Education\n(50, 018, 000)\n$700,000 less than provided in the House bill.\nOrganization of the Joint Chiefs of Staff\n3, 057, 000\nOffice of Information for the Armed Forces\n4, 097, 000\nOPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, NAVY RESERVE, 197T\nDefense Contract Audit Agency\n17,342,000\nDefense Investigative Service\n6, 144, 000\nAmendment No. 32: Appropriates $73,250,000 as proposed by the\nDefense Mapping Agency\n46, 160, 000\nSenate, instead of $73,500,000 as proposed by the House.\nDefense Nuclear Agency\n5, 603, 000\nUniformed Services University of the Health Sciences\n1, 254, 000\nThe conferees agreed to provide $453,000 for temporary duty travel.\nDefense Supply Agency\n201, 555, 000\nThis is the same amount as provided by the Senate bill, and $300,000\nIntelligence and communications activities\n147, 148, 000\nless than provided in the House bill.\nOPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, ARMY RESERVE, 1976\nOPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, MARINE CORPS BRESERVE, 1976\nAmendment No. 28: Appropriates $310,710,000 inseead of $305,-\nAmendment No. 33: Appropriates $12,000,000 as proposed by the\n760,000, as proposed by the House and $311,460,000 as proposed by the\nSenate, instead of $11,900,000 as proposed by the House.\nSenate.\nThe budget requested $200,000 for the stock fund surcharge. The\nAs discussed earlier under Amendment No. 18, the conferees agreed\nHouse provided no funds for this item, while the Senate recommended\nto provide the same amount recommended by the Senate for overhaul\nthat $100,000 be provided. The conferees agreed with the Senate\nof reserve equipment. Therefore, the conferees agreed to restore $6,400,-\nrestoration.\n000 to the Army Reserve appropriation and the House recedes.\nThe conferees agreed to provide $19,811,000 for temporary duty\nOPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, AIR FORCE RESERVE, 1976\ntravel. This is the same amount as provided in the Senate bill, and is\n$2,200,000 less than provided in the House bill.\nAmendment No. 34: Appropriates $322,430,000 of $327,330,000 as\nThe budget request included $3,400,000 for the stock fund surcharge.\nproposed by the House, and $318,530,000 as proposed by the Senate.\nThe House disallowed the total request, while the Senate provided\nThe budget requested $9,500,000 for the stock fund surcharge. The\n$1,500,000. The conferees agreed to provide $750,000 for reasons previ-\nHouse disallowed the total request, while the Senate provided $4,-\nously discussed.\n200,000. The conferees agreed to provide $2,100,000.\nThe conferes agreed to provide $3,376,000 for temporary duty travel.\nFLOOR ON MAINTENANCE OF REAL PROPERTY\nThis is the same amount provided by the Senate, and is $300,000 less\nthan proposed by the House.\nAmendment No. 29: Provides that $20,000,000 shall be available\nThe budget request included $12,750,000 for increased C-5C-141\nonly for the maintenance of real property, instead of $25,500,000 as\ncrew ratios in the Air Force Reserve. The House provided the total\nproposed by the House and $15,500,000 as proposed by the Senate.\namount requested, while the Senate provided none of these funds. The\nconferees agreed to provide $6,000,000 for the additional crew ratios.\nOPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, ARMY RESERVE, 197T\nOPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, AIR FORCE RESERVE, 197T\nAmendment No. 30 Appropriates $91,100,000 as proposed by the\nSenate, instead of $91,400,000 as proposed by the House.\nAmendment No. 35 Appropriates $81,190,000 instead of $83,190,000\nThe Senate recommended $9,500,000 for overhaul of reserve equip-\nas proposed by the House and $79,590,000 as proposed by the Senate.\nment, while the House had provided $7,200,000 for this purpose. For\nThe conferees agreed to provide $763,000 for temporary duty travel\nreasons discussed earlier, the conferees agreed to provide $9,500,00.\nfunds, the same amount proposed by the Senate and $300,000 less than\nThe conferees agreed to provide $4,764,000 for temporary duty\nthe amount provided by the House.\ntravel as proposed by the Senate in lieu of the $7,364,000 as proposed\nThe budget request included $3,300,000 for increased C-5/C-141\nby the House.\ncrew ratios. The House provided the full amount requested, while the\nSenate provided none of these funds. The conferees agreed to provide\nOPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, NAVY RESERVE, 1976\n$1,600,000 for the additional crew ratios.\nAmendment No. 31: Appropriates $284,425,000 instead of $281,-\nOPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, ARMY NATIONAL GUARD, 1976\n525,000 as proposed by the House, and $288,125,000 as proposed by the\nSenate.\nAmendment No. 36 Appropriates $649,930,000 as proposed by the\nThe budget request included $16,600,000 for the stock fund sur-\nHouse, instead of $650,330,000 as proposed by the Senate.\ncharge. The House disallowed the total request, while the senate pro-\n44\n45\nThe budget request included $12,700,000 for the stock fund sur-\ncharge. The House disallowed the total request, while the Senate\nThe conferees agreed that the Defense Department has not justified\nprovided $5,500,000. The conferees agreed to provide $5,100,000 for\nthe large increase requested this year for war reserve material procure-\nfor this item.\nment. However, the conferees agreed to provide an appropriation that\nis generally at the same level as provided from available stock fund\nThe conferees agreed to provide $10,436,000 for temporary duty\ncash in recent years for these items. Accordingly, the conferees agreed\ntravel. This is the same amount as provided in the Senate bill, and is\nto provide $20,000,000 for procurement of war reserve materiel in the\n$5,100,000 less than the amount provided in the House bill. The House\nArmy Stock Fund.\nrecedes.\nThe conferees agreed that future requests for procurement of these\nitems should be accompanied by detailed requirements analysis and\nOPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, ARMY NATIONAL GUARD, 197T\njustification along the lines required in the Senate report.\nAmendment No. 37 Appropriates $173,285,000 as proposed by the\nSenate instead of $174,385,000 as proposed by the House.\nNAVY STOCK FUND, 1976\nThe conferees agreed to provide $2,621,000 for temporary duty\nAmendment No. 41 Appropriates $10,000,000 instead of $42,000,000\ntravel as proposed by the Senate, instead of $3,721,000 as proposed\nas proposed by the House. The Senate denied this request.\nby the House. The House recedes.\nThe conference agreed to provide $10,000,000 for the procurement of\nwar reserve stocks as explained earlier under Amendment No. 40.\nOPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, AIR NATIONAL GUARD, 1976\nMARINE CORPS STOCK FUND, 1976\nAmendment No. 38 Appropriates $697,100,000 instead of $690,100,-\n000 as proposed by the House and $703,400,000 as proposed by the\nAmendment No. 42 Appropriates $2,000,000 instead of $8,700,000 as\nSenate.\nproposed by the House. The Senate denied this request.\nThe budget request included $9,200,000 for new mission flying\nThe conferees agreed to provide $2,000,000 for the procurement of\nhours. The House provided $6,000,000 for this item, while the Senate\nwar reserve stocks as explained earlier under Amendment No. 40.\nprovided $7,800,000. The conferees agreed to provide the $7,800,000\nallowed by the Senate.\nAIR FORCE STOCK FUND, 1976\nThe budget request included $28,800,000 for the stock fund sur-\ncharge. The House disallowed the total request, while the Senate\nAmendment No. 43 Appropriates $15,000,000 instead of $82,100,000\nprovided $12,600,000. The conferees agreed to provide $6,300,000.\nas proposed by the House. The Senate denied this request.\nThe conferees agreed to provide $5,700,000 for temporary duty travel\nThe conferees agreed to provide $15,000,000 for the procurement of\nfunds as proposed by the Senate instead of $6,800,000 as proposed by\nwar reserve stocks as explained earlier under Amendment No. 40.\nthe House.\nDEFENSE STOCK FUND, 1976\nOPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, AIR NATIONAL GUARD, 197T\nAmendment No. 44. Appropriates $88,000,000 as proposed by the\nAmendment No. 39 Appropriates $181,200,000 as proposed by the\nSenate instead of $250,000,000 as proposed by the House.\nSenate instead of $181,500,000 as proposed by the House.\nIn this appropriation, the House provided the full $250,000,000 re-\nThe conferees agreed to provide $1,400,000 for temporary duty\nquested for procurement of war reserve stocks, including petroleum.\ntravel as proposed by the Senate instead of $1,700,000 as proposed by\nThe Senate provided no funds for war reserve stocks, but provided\nthe House.\n$88,000,000 in the form of a direct appropriation to protect cash bal-\nARMY STOCK FUND, 1976\nances of the Defense stock fund. The conferees agreed to provide\n$88,000,000 as recommended by the Senate.\nAmendment No. 40: Appropriates $20,000,000 instead of $94,000,000\nas proposed by the House. The Senate denied this request.\nNATIONAL BOARD FOR THE PROMOTION OF RIFLE PRACTICE, ARMY, 1976\nFor fiscal year 1976, the Defense Department requested $476,800,000\nfor procurement of war reserve material to increase the stockpile of\nAmendment No. 45: Appropriates $233,000 as proposed by the\nsecondary items and bulk petroleum. No funds were requested in the\nSenate.\ntransition period. The House provided the amount requested. The Sen-\nThe conferees agreed to provide the full amount requested in the\nate denied the request, since a majority of the war reserve items are\nbudget, $233,000, for the National Board for the Promotion of Rifle\nreadily available from commercial sources, and additional petroleum\nPractice, Army, the same amount as in the Senate bill. The House\nprocurement is not warranted in view of existing stockpiles and the\nhad denied this request.\nease of diverting civilian fuel supplies in wartime or in case of a na-\nIn addition to restoring funds for Board operations, Senate language\ntional emergency.\nalso provided for the issue of $280,000 of ammunition without charge\nto this appropriation. The conferees agreed to modify the language\n46\n47\nSO that the ammunition is to be provided from funds made available\nTexas, the St. Louis Army Ammunition Plant, St. Louis, Missouri, or\nelsewhere in this Act.\nany other GOCO facility until approval is received from the Appro-\npriations and Armed Services Committees of the House and Senate.\nTITLE IV-PROCUREMENT\nThe text of the bill language agreed to by the conferees follows:\nMISSILE PROCUREMENT, ARMY, 1976\nProvided, That none of the funds provided in this Act may\nbe obligated for construction or modernization of Govern-\nAmendment No. 46: Appropriates $422,600,000 as proposed by the\nment-owned contractor-operated Army Ammunition Plants\nSenate instead of $385,100,000 as proposed by the House.\nfor the production of 105mm artillery projectile metal parts\nThe conferees agreed to provide $37,500,000 for 52 Chaparral mis-\nuntil a new study is made of such requirements by the De-\nsile launchers as proposed by the Senate. The House had denied the\npartment of the Army; the Secretary of the Army certifies to\nfunds requested for the launchers.\nCongress that such obligations are essential to national de-\nfense; and until approval is received from the Appropriations\nMISSILE PROCUREMENT, ARMY, 197T\nand Armed Services Committees of the House and the Sen-\nate, $637,200,000.\nAmendment No. 47: Appropriates $42,600,000 as proposed by the\nSenate instead of $41,600,000 as proposed by the House.\nPROCUREMENT OF AMMUNITION, ARMY, 197T\nThe conferees agreed to provide $1,000,000 for support of the fiscal\nyear 1976 Chaparral missile launcher procurement as proposed by the\nAmendment No. 50: Appropriates $252,800,000 as proposed by the\nSenate. The House had denied the funds for that purpose.\nSenate instead of $164,100,000 as proposed by the House.\nThe conferees agreed to provide $88,700,000 for a 105mm artillery\nPROCUREMENT OF WEAPONS AND TRACKED COMBAT VEHICLES, ARMY, 1976\nprojectile metal parts facility. The limitation on the fiscal year 1976\nfunds for this facility also applies to the funds provided for the\nAmendment No. 48: Appropriates $881,400,000 as proposed by the\ntransition quarter.\nHouse instead of $918,700,000 as proposed by the Senate.\nThe conferees agreed to the House reduction of $37,300,000 and 475\nOTHER PROCUREMENT, ARMY, 1976\nM113A1 armored personnel carriers. The conference agreement pro-\nvides $66,300,000 for 845 armored personnel carriers instead of the\nAmendment No. 51: Appropriates $912,300,000 instead of $898,-\n$103,600,000 budgeted for 1,320 such vehicles.\n400,000 as proposed by the House and $930,500,000 as proposed by\nAmendment No. 49: Reported in technical disagreement. The man-\nthe Senate.\nagers on the part of the House will offer a motion to recede and concur\nThe conference agreement includes $5,500,000 for 400 AN/PSN-6\nin the Senate amendment appropriating $637,200,000 with an amend-\nLORAN back-packed locator units; $3,200,000 for 825 AN/TVS-5\nment that prohibits the use of funds in this Act for the construction\ncrew-served weapon night vision sights; and $3,200,000 for 870 AN/\nor modernization of Government-owned, contractor-operated (GOCO)\nPVS-4 individual night vision sights as proposed by the Senate.\nArmy ammunition plants for the production of 105mm artillery pro-\nThe House had denied funds for all three equipments.\njectile metal parts until a new study is made of such requirements by\nThe House had recommended a general reduction of $31,000,000 in\nthe Army; the Secretary of the Army certifies to Congress that such\ncommunications equipment and the Senate restored $10,000,000 of the\nobligations are essential to national defense; and until approval is\nHouse reduction. The conferees agreed to a general reduction of\nreceived from the House and Senate Appropriations and Armed\n$29,000,000.\nServices Committees. The managers on the part of the Senate will\nThe conferees agreed to the House reduction of $10,200,000 in\nmove to concur in the amendment of the House to the amendment\nintelligence.\nof the Senate.\nWEAPONS PROCUREMENT, NAVY, 1976\nThe Army budgeted $21,700,000 in fiscal year 1976 and $88,700,000\nin the transition quarter to initiate construction of a 105mm artillery\nAmendment No. 52: Appropriates $1,172,600,000 instead of $1,155,-\nprojectile metal parts plant at the Lone Star Army Ammunition Plant\n100,000 as proposed by the House and $1,190,100,000 as proposed by\nin Texarkana, Texas. The House denied the funds and the Senate\nthe Senate.\nrestored the House reduction. The bill language will require a new\nThe House denied $35,000,000 of the $120,300,000 budgeted for the\nArmy study of the requirements, a certification as to the essentiality\nUGM-96A Trident I (C-4) missile. The Senate restored the House\nof those requirements, and approval of the Army decision by the House\nreduction. The conference agreement provides $102,800,000 for the\nand Senate Appropriations and Armed Services Committees. The lan-\nTrident I missile, a reduction of $17,500,000.\nguage in effect precludes the use of any funds in this Act for the\nAmendment No. 53: Reported in technical disagreement. The Senate\nestablishment of 105mm artillery projectile metal parts production\nversion of the bill contained language limiting the funding available\ncapability at the Lone Star Army Ammunition Plant, Texarkana,\nfor the AGM-53A Condor missile program to $10,000,000 until the\nSecretary of Defense determines and advises Congress that the Condor\n49\n48\nversion, Navy, 1975/1979\" to the fiscal year 1976 AD destroyer tender\nmissile system has successfully completed testing and can be released\nprogram.\nfor production. The House bill contained no such limitation.\nAmendment No. 61: Appropriates $239,400,000 for two AO fleet oil-\nThe Managers on the part of the House will offer a motion to recede\ners as proposed by the Senate instead of $212,100,000 as proposed by\nand concur in the Senate amendment with an amendment which would\nthe House. The Senate included $27,300,000 above the budget to fund\nincrease the limitation to $15,000,000, rather than the $10,000,000\nknown cost increases in the construction of these two AO fleet oilers.\nAmendment No. 62 Appropriates $36,200,000 for outfitting as pro-\nproposed by the Senate.\nThe managers on the part of the Senate will move to concur in the\nposed by the Senate instead of $25,400,000 as proposed by the House.\namendment of the House to the amendment of the Senate.\nAmendment No. 63 Appropriates $932,400,000 for cost growth as\nThe total amount made available in the bill by both Houses for 205\nproposed by the Senate instead of $826,300,000 as proposed by the\nCondor missiles is $85,600,000. The text of the amendment follows:\nHouse.\nAmendment No. 64: Appropriates $3,853,000,000 in total for the\nof which no more than $15,000,000 shall be available for the\nfiscal year 1976 Shipbuilding and Conversion, Navy program, as pro-\nCondor missile program until the Secretary of Defense deter-\nposed by the Senate instead of $3,832,700,000 as proposed by the\nmines and advises the Congress that the Condor missile sys-\nHouse.\ntem has successfully completed testing and can be released\nAmendment No. 65 The conferees agreed to Senate language trans-\nfor production,\nferring a total of $75,000,000 of prior year balances to the fiscal year\n1976 Shipbuilding and Conversion, Navy program, instead of $84,-\nWEAPONS PROCUREMENT, NAVY, 197T\n500,000 as proposed by the House. The conference agreement recogn-\nAmendment No. 54: Appropriates $321,700,000 instead of $314,-\nizes the Senate deletion by Amendment No. 60 of $9,500,000 trans-\n200,000 as proposed by the House and $329,200,000 as proposed by\nferred by the House to the AD destroyer tender program.\nthe Senate.\nThe House denied $15,000,000 of the $99,200,000 budgeted for the\nOTHER PROCUREMENT, NAVY, 1976\nUGM-96A Trident I (C-4) missile. The Senate restored the House\nAmendment No. 66 Appropriates $1,829,700,000 instead of $1,872,-\nreduction. The conference agreement provides $91,700,000 for the\n700,000 as proposed by the Senate and $1,810,100,000 as proposed by\nTrident missile during the transition quarter, a reduction of $7,500,000\nthe House.\nfrom the request.\nThe conference agreement includes $73,700,000 for communications\nAmendment No. 55 The conferees agreed to delete the Senate langu-\nequipment, instead of $68,700,000 as proposed by the House. The Sen-\nage prohibiting the use of the $10,400,000 appropriated to buy 38 addi-\nate version of the bill had provided $96,800,000, the budgeted amount.\ntional Condor missiles until the Secretary of Defense determines and\nThe conferees agreed to provide $4,800,000 to buy 2,000 deep passive\nadvises the Congress that the Condor missile system has successfully\nsonobuoys as proposed by the Senate. The House had deleted all the\ncompleted testing and can be released for production. The Senate\nfunds for these sonobuoys.\nreceded. The language was considered unnecessary because the re-\nThe conference agreement provides $29,900,000 for the Harpoon\nquired testing should be completed prior to July 1, 1976, when the\nmissile system as proposed by the Senate. The House had deleted\ntransition quarter begins.\n$3,800,000 from the request for the encapsulated Harpoon missile\nsystem.\nSHIPBUILDING AND CONVERSION, NAVY, 1976\nThe conferees agreed to a reduction of $19,900,000 in intelligence\nactivities instead of a reduction of $25,900,000 as proposed by the\nAmendment No 56 Appropriates $641,300,000 for a Trident ballis-\nHouse. The Senate version of the bill restored all of the House\ntic missile submarine, as proposed by the Senate, instead of $602,600,-\nreduction.\n000 as proposed by the House. The Senate increased the amount\nOTHER PROCUREMENT, NAVY, 197T\nbudgeted for the Trident submarine by $38,700,000 to fund known cost\nincreases in the proposed construction of the submarine.\nAmendment No. 67 Appropriates $464,500,000 instead of $460,100,-\nAmendment No. 57 The conferees agreed to change the language\n000 as proposed by the House and $469,900,000 as proposed by the\nto reflect one AD destroyer tender as proposed by the Senate instead\nSenate.\nof two AD destroyer tenders as proposed by the House.\nThe conferees agreed to a reduction of $5,400,000 in intelligence\nAmendment No. 58: The conferees agreed to language changing the\nactivities instead of a reduction of $9,800,000 as proposed by the House.\nword tenders to tender as proposed by the Senate.\nThe Senate version of the bill restored all of the House reduction.\nAmendment No. 59 Appropriates $201,900,000 for one AD destroyer\ntender as proposed by the Senate instead of $364,500,000 for two AD\nPROCUREMENT, MARINE CORPS, 1976\ndestroyer tenders as proposed by the House.\nAmendment No. 60: The conferees agreed to the Senate deletion of\nAmendment No. 68 Appropriates $281,000,000 as proposed by the\nHouse language transferring $9,500,000 from \"Shipbuilding and Con-\nSenate instead of $275,900,000 as proposed by the House.\n50\n51\nThe conferees agreed to restore the House reduction of $5,100,000\nfor the AN/UGC-74 teletypewritter as proposed by the Senate.\naircraft. Obligation of funds for the B-1 program in fiscal year 1977\nunder a continuing resolution must be strictly limited to a rate not\nAIRCRAFT PROCUREMENT, AIR FORCE, 1976\nmore quarter. than the amount provided for the fiscal year 197T transition\nAmendment No. 69: Appropriates $3,933,700,000 as proposed by\nThe conference agreement includes $291,400,000 for the F/TF-15\nthe Senate instead of $3,933,200,000 as proposed by the House.\naircraft as proposed by the Senate instead of $319,500,000 as proposed\nThe conferees agreed to provide $64,000,000 in advance procurement\nfunding for the B-1 bomber as proposed by the House. The Senate\nthe E-3A AWACS aircraft as proposed by the Senate.\nby the House, and $30,000,000 in advance procurement funding for\nhad deleted the amount.\nThe conferees agreed to $177,400,000 for aircraft spares and repair\nThe conferees are in agreement that provision of the B-1 advance\nparts instead of $179,300,000 as proposed by the House and $175,500,000\nprocurement funds implies no commitment on the part of the Congress\nas proposed by the Senate. The agreement includes $35,900,000 for\nto production of B-1 aircraft. Obligation of funds for the B-1 program\nF/TF-15 aircraft spares and repair parts instead of $36,600,000 as\nin fiscal year 1977 under a continuing resolution must be strictly limited\nproposed by the House and $34,000,000 as proposed by the Senate.\nto a rate not more than the amount provided for fiscal year 1976.\nForeign Military Sales, as proposed by the Senate.\nThe conferees agreed to a reduction of $1,200,000 for pilot training,\nThe conference agreement includes $1,378,300,000 for the production\nof 108 F/TF-15 aircraft as proposed by the House. The Senate had\nThe conference agreement also includes a general reduction of\nproposed $1,316,200,000 for the production of 96 such aircraft.\n$9,600,000 in intelligence activities as proposed by the House. The Sen-\nThe conferees agreed to provide $251,200,000 to fully fund only\nate had restored the House reduction.\nfour E-3A Airborne Warning and Control System (AWACS) air-\ncraft. The House had provided $260,000,000 for two AWACS aircraft\nMISSILE PROCUREMENT, AIR FORCE, 1976\nwhile the Senate had proposed $335,500,000 for six such aircraft.\nLanguage has been provided in the bill that reads as follows:\nAmendment No. 71: Appropriates $1,723,900,000 instead of $1,694,-\n\"$3,933,700,000, of which $251,200,000 shall be available to fully fund\nonly four E-3A Airborne Warning and Control System (AWACS)\nthe Senate.\n600,000 as proposed by the House and $1,739,500,000 as proposed by\naircraft\".\nThe conferees agreed to a reduction of $39,100,000 in intelligence\nThe conference agreement includes $15,000,000 for AWACS advance\nactivities, instead of a reduction of $68,400,000 as proposed by the\nprocurement funding.\nHouse and a reduction of $23,500,000 as proposed by the Senate.\nThe conferees agreed to provide $11,800,000 for sixteen C-12\n(CX-X) aircraft as proposed by the Senate instead of $10,300,000\nMISSILE PROCUREMENT, AIR FORCE, 197T\nfor fourteen such aircraft as proposed by the House.\nThe conferees agreed to provide $799,500,000 for spares and repair\nAmendment No. 72: Appropriates $233,000,000 instead of $232,000,-\nparts as proposed by the House instead of $805,300,000 as proposed\n000 Senate. as proposed by the House and $245,900,000 as proposed by the\nby the Senate. The conference agreement includes $151,900,000 for\nF/TF-15 spares as proposed by the House instead of $141,900,000 as\nThe conferees agreed to a reduction of $19,200,000 in intelligence\nproposed by the Senate, and $10,000,000 for AWACS initial spares as\nactivities instead of a reduction of $20,200,000 as proposed by the\nproposed by the House instead of $30,000,000 as proposed by the Senate.\nHouse and a reduction of $6,300,000 as proposed by the Senate.\nIncluded in the conference agreement is a reduction of $4,200,000\nfor pilot training, Foreign Military Sales, as proposed by the Senate.\nOTHER PROCUREMENT, AIR FORCE, 1976\nThe conferees agreed to a reduction of $31,800,000 for intelligence\nAmendment No. 73: Appropriates $2,046,400,000 instead of $2,010,-\nactivities as proposed by the House and a reduction of $3,000,000 in\nOther Production Charges as proposed by the Senate.\n400,000 as proposed by the House and $2,133,800,000 as proposed by\nthe Senate.\nThe conferees agreed to provide $18,700,000 for air traffic control\nAIRCRAFT PROCUREMENT, AIR FORCE, 197T\nand landing systems as proposed by the House instead of $58,700,000 as\nAmendment No. 70: Appropriates $818,400,000 as proposed by the\nproposed by the Senate. The conference agreement includes deletion of\nHouse instead of $803,100,000 as proposed by the Senate.\n$40,000,000 to buy 11 AN/TPN-19 radars as proposed by the House.\nThe conferees agreed to provide $23,000,000 in advance procurement\nThe conference agreement provided $2,800,000 for the System to\nfunding for the B-1 bomber as proposed by the House. The Senate had\nAutomate Logistics as proposed by the Senate. The House had deleted\nthe funds.\ndeleted the funds.\nAs in the case of the fiscal year 1976 funds, the conferees are in\nThe conferees agreed to provide $478,600,000 for communications\nagreement that provision of the B-1 advance procurement funds im-\nequipment instead of $475,600,000 as proposed by the House and $490,-\n600,000 as proposed by the Senate.\nplies no commitment on the part of the Congress to production of B-1\n52\n53\nThe conferees also agreed to a reduction of $64,300,000 in intelligence\nOverobligation of Army Procurement Appropriations\nactivities instead of a reduction of $94,500,000 as proposed by the\nHouse and a reduction of $28,900,000 as proposed by the Senate.\nThe Congress has recently been advised by the Army that four pro-\ncurement appropriations are now overexpended, and payments from\nMISSILE PROCUREMENT, AIR FORCE, 197T\nthese appropriations were suspended on November 11, 1975. The Army\nreported the basic cause of the problems to be poor accounting controls\nAmendment No. 74: Appropriates $353,000,000 instead of $345,700,-\nover the customer order program. The conferees are geratly concerned\n000 as proposed by the House and $358,000,000 as proposed by the\nabout the Army's inability to maintain adequate records and controls\nSenate.\nover funds for which the Army has statutory accounting responsibility.\nThe conference agreement reduces intelligence activities by $12,100,-\nIt therefore directs that a complete and full report of all violations of\n000 instead of a reduction of $19,400,000 as proposed by the House and\nthe Anti-Deficiency Act be made as soon as possible and the corrective\na reduction of $7,100,000 as proposed by the Senate.\nactions be taken to re-establish required records and controls. The\nSecretary of Defense is directed to monitor and assure that the correc-\nPROCUREMENT, DEFENSE AGENCIES, 1976\ntive actions taken by the Army are adequate and timely.\nAmendment No. 75 Reported in technical disagreement. The man-\nagers on the part of the House will offer a motion to appropriate $205,-\nTITLE V-RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST, AND\n600,000 instead of $203,100,000 as proposed by the House and $120,100,-\nEVALUATION\n000 as proposed by the Senate. The managers on the part of the Senate\nwill move to concur in the amendment of the House to the amendment\nRESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST, AND EVALUATION, ARMY, 1976\nof the Senate.\nThe conferees agreed to increase intelligence activities a net total of\nAmendment No. 77 Appropriates $1,948,823,000 instead of $1,922,-\n$84,400,000. The House had proposed an increase of $81,900,000 and\n833,000 as proposed by the House and $1,995,596,000 as proposed by\nthe Senate.\nthe Senate had proposed a decrease of $1,100,000. The conference agree-\nment includes $2,000,000 for a high priority special communications\nThe conference agreement includes $67,250,000 for the Defense\nResearch Sciences program as proposed by the House instead of $69,-\nproject not considered by the House.\n250,000 as proposed by the Senate.\nThe conferees agreed on the appropriation of $3,840,000 for the Ad-\nPROCUREMENT, DEFENSE AGENCIES, 197T\nvanced Forward Area Air Defense System as proposed by the House\nAmendment No. 76: Appropriates $39,600,000 as proposed by the\ninstead of $9,940,000 as proposed by the Senate.\nHouse instead of $20,900,000 as proposed by the Senate.\nThe conference agreement appropriates $4,000,000 for the Heliborne\nThe conferees agreed to increase intelligence activities by $18,700,-\nmissile-Hellfire program instead of $3,000,000 as proposed by the\n000 as proposed by the House. The Senate had deleted the increase\nHouse and $4,500,000 as proposed by the Senate.\nproposed by the House.\nThe conference agreement includes $2,800,000 for the non-nuclear\nwarhead program as proposed by the Senate instead of no funds as\nREPORT LANGUAGE\nproposed by the House. The funds provided will enable the Army to\nliquidate existing obligations.\nThe conferees agreed to House report language on the following\nThe conferees agreed on the appropriation of $54,965,000 for the\nitems:\nShort Range Air Defense Missile System instead of $44,965,000 as\nFlight simulators;\nproposed by the House and $64,965,000 as proposed by the Senate.\nShipbuilding claims;\nThe conference agreement appropriates $77,827,000 for the Kwa-\nRIM-67A Standard II ER Missile;\njalein Missile Range as proposed by the House instead of $80,000,000\nPHM Patrol Hydrofoil Missile Ships;\nas proposed by the Senate.\nArmy Tank program;\nThe conferees agreed upon the appropriation of $5,339,000 for the\nNavy gunfire support;\nWeapons and Ammunition program as proposed by the House instead\nTest and evaluation of commercial equipment;\nof $7,339,000 as proposed by the Senate. Development of the XM-762\nA-6E aircraft production.\n8-inch projectile, is to be terminated.\nThe conferees agreed to Senate report language on the following\nThe conference agreement appropriates $51,760,000 for the XM-1\nitems:\nTank program as proposed by the Senate instead of $43,760,000 as\nWorldwide Military Command and Control System;\nproposed by the House.\nCivil Reserve Airlift Fleet;\nThe conference agreement includes $5,460,000 for the Manpower\nBid and Proposal/Independent Research and Development\nand Human Resources Technology program as proposed by the Sen-\nCosts.\nate instead of $3,640,000 as proposed by the House.\n54\n55\nThe conference agreement includes $7,110,000 for the Manpower\nThe Managers are in agreement on the appropriation of $115,135,000\nand Human Resources Development program as proposed by the Sen-\nfor the Defense Research Sciences Program as proposed by the House\nate instead of $4,740,000 as proposed by the House.\ninstead of $117,067,000 as proposed by the Senate.\nThe conferees agreed upon a general reduction of $6,800,000 in com-\nThe conference agreement includes $2,000,000 for the F-401 engine\nmunications systems as proposed by the House instead of no reduction\nprogram as proposed by the Senate instead of no funds as proposed by\nas proposed by the Senate.\nthe House.\nThe conferees agreed upon a general reduction of $17,200,000 in\nThe conferees agreed on the appropriation of $1,750,000 for the Air-\nintelligence activities as proposed by the House instead of no reduction\ncraft Survivability/Vulnerability program instead of $1,500,000 as\nas proposed by the Senate.\nproposed by the House and $2,033,000 as proposed by the Senate.\nThe conference agreement includes $20,150,000 for the SSBN Se-\nRESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST, AND EVALUATION, ARMY 197T\ncurity program instead of $18,800,000 as proposed by the House and\n$21,500,000 as proposed by the Senate.\nAmendment No. 78: Appropriates $504,452,000 instead of $464,-\nThe conferees agreed on the appropriation of $15,000,000 for the\n774,000 as proposed by the House and $512,451,000 as proposed by the\nClose-in Weapon System as proposed by the Senate instead of no funds\nSenate.\nas proposed by the House.\nThe conference agreement includes $16,800,000 for the Defense Re-\nThe conference agreement provides $725,500,000 for the Trident\nsearch Sciences program as proposed by the House instead of $18,419,-\nmissile system as proposed by the Senate instead of $686,900,000 as\n000 as proposed by the Senate.\nproposed by the House. This continues the maneuvering Re-entry\nThe conferees agreed on the appropriation of $525,000 for the Ad-\nVehicle (MARV) program.\nvanced Forward Area Air Defense System as proposed by the House\nThe conferees agreed to the appropriation of $38,000,000 for the\ninstead of $2,025,000 as proposed by the Senate.\nSurface Effects Ship as proposed by the Senate instead of $20,110,000\nThe conference agreement appropriates $40,000,000 for the SAM-D\nas proposed by the House.\nMissile System as proposed by the Senate instead of $25,400,000 as\nThe conference agreement includes $6,000,000 for the Advanced\nproposed by the House.\nDesign Submarine Nuclear Propulsion Plant instead of $9,975,000 as\nThe conferees agreed on the appropriation of $11,510,000 for the\nproposed by the Senate and no funds as proposed by the House.\nShort Range Air Defense Missile System instead of $10,000,000 as\nThe conferees agreed to the appropriation of $1,000,000 for the\nproposed by the House and $13,020,000 as proposed by the Senate.\nNaval Inshore Warfare Craft Program as proposed by the Senate in-\nThe conferees agreed upon the appropriation of $1,795,000 for the\nstead of no funds as proposed by the House. The funds provided will\nWeapons and Ammunition program as proposed by the House in-\nenable the Navy to liquidate outstanding obligations.\nstead of $2,665,000 as proposed by the Senate. Development of the\nThe conferees agreed to the appropriation of $1,800,000 for the Ad-\nXM-762 8-inch projectile is to be terminated.\nvanced Marine Corps Weapon Systems program as proposed by the\nThe conference agreement appropriates $38,953,000 for the XM-1\nHouse instead of $2,000,000 as proposed by the Senate. The funds\nTank program as proposed by the Senate instead of $5,953,000 as pro-\ndenied were requested for the purpose of defining a new surface-to-air\nposed by the House.\nmissile system to replace the Improved Hawk system. The Marine\nThe conference agreement includes $1,371,000 for the Manpower\nCorps should use Army developed air defense systems rather than de-\nand Human Resources Technology program as proposed by the Senate\nvelop additional new weapons.\ninstead of $914,000 as proposed by the House.\nThe conference agreement includes $13,770,000 for the Materials\nThe conference agreement includes $1,833,000 for the Manpower\nTechnology program instead of $12,520,000 as proposed by the House\nand Human Resources Development program as proposed by the Sen-\nand $15,020,000 as proposed by the Senate.\nate instead of $1,222,000 as proposed by the House.\nThe conferees agreed to the appropriation of $8,469,000 for the\nThe conferees agreed upon a general reduction of $10,500,000 as\nproposed by the Senate instead of no reduction as proposed by the\nHuman Resources program as proposed by the Senate instead of $5,-\n469,000 as proposed by the House.\nHouse.\nThe conferees agreed upon a general reduction of $2,500,000 in intel-\nThe conferees agreed to the appropriation of $3.254,000 for the Man-\npower Effectiveness program as proposed by the Senate instead of $2,-\nligence activities as proposed by the House instead of no reduction as\n254,000 as proposed by the House.\nproposed by the Senate.\nThe conferees agreed upon a general reduction of $9,000,000 in com-\nmunciations systems as proposed by the House instead of no reduction\nRESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST, AND EVALUATION, NAVY, 1976\nas proposed by the Senate.\nAmendment No. 79: Appropriates $3,238,390,000 instead of $3,146,\nThe conferees agreed upon a general reduction of $31,800,000 in in-\n050,000 as proposed by the House and $3,265,950,000 as proposed by\ntelligence activities instead of a $40,300,000 reduction as proposed by\nthe Senate.\nthe House and a $18,730,000 reduction as proposed by the Senate.\n57\n56\nThe managers are in agreement on the appropriation of $78,240,000\nThe conferees agreed upon a general reduction of $3,500,000 in the\nfor the Defense Research Sciences program as proposed by the House\nfunds for Navy Federal Contract Research Centers instead of a\ninstead of $81,800,000 as proposed by the Senate.\n$7,000,000 reduction as proposed by the Senate and no reduction as\nThe conference agreement includes $5,630,000 for the Advanced\nproposed by the House.\nAerial Target Technology program as proposed by the Senate instead\nof $2,530,000 as proposed by the House.\nRESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST, AND EVALUATION, NAVY, 197T\nThe conferees agreed on the appropriation of $597,200,000 for the\nAmendment No. 80 Appropriates $818,722,000 instead of $801,419,-\nB-1 bomber as proposed by the Senate instead of $642,000,000 as pro-\nposed by the House.\n000 as proposed by the House and $824,899,000 as proposed by the\nThe conference agreement appropriates $216,050,000 for the Air\nSenate.\nThe Managers are in agreement on the appropriation of $28,783,000\nCombat Fighter (F-16) program instead of $221,050,000 as proposed\nby the House and $146,050,000 as proposed by the Senate.\nfor the Defense Research Sciences Program as proposed by the House\nThe conferees agreed on the appropriation of $38,000,000 for the\ninstead of $30,081,000 as proposed by the Senate.\nThe conference agreement includes $1,045,000 for the Airborne\nAdvanced ICBM Technology program as proposed by the House in-\nstead of $40,100,000 as proposed by the Senate.\nMine Countermeasures program as proposed by the House instead of\nThe conferees agreed on the appropriation of $51,000,000 for the\n$1,145,000 as proposed by the Senate.\nAir Launched Cruise Missile as proposed by the Senate instead of no\nThe conferees agreed on the appropriation of $1,248,000 for the Air-\nfunds as proposed by the House.\ncraft Survivability/Vulnerability program instead of $400,000 as pro-\nThe conferees agreed on the appropriation of $21,920,000 for the\nposed by the House and $2,096,000 as proposed by the Senate.\nClose Air Support Weapon System as proposed by the House instead\nThe conference agreement includes $5,345,000 for the SSBN Secur-\nity program instead of $4,500,000 as proposed by the House and $6,190,-\nof $24,000,000 as proposed by the Senate. The Air Force may con-\ntinue development of the imaging infrared seeker.\n000 as proposed by the Senate.\nThe conference agreement includes $5,961,000 for the Human Re-\nThe conference agreement provides $165,510,000 for the TRIDENT\nmissile system as proposed by the Senate instead of $165,100,000 as\nsources program as proposed by the Senate instead of $3,961,000 as\nproposed by the House.\nproposed by the House.\nThe conferees agreed upon a general reduction of $15,000,000 in\nThe conferees agreed to the appropriation of $17,000,000 for the\ncommunications systems as proposed by the House instead of no reduc-\nSurface Effects as proposed by the Senate instead of $8,400,000 as\ntion as proposed by the Senate.\nproposed by the House.\nThe conferees agreed upon a general reduction of $29,900,000 in in-\nThe conference agreement includes $2,000,000 for the Advanced\ntelligence activities instead of a $54,100,000 reduction as proposed\nDesign Submarine Nuclear Propulsion Plant instead of $2,886,000 as\nby the House and a $5,000,000 reduction as proposed by the Senate.\nproposed by the Senate and no funds as proposed by the House.\nThe conferees agreed upon a general reduction of $7,500,000 in the\nThe conferees agreed to the appropriation of $296,000 for the Ad-\nfunds for Air Force Federal Contract Research Centers instead of a\nvanced Marine Corps Weapon System program as proposed by the\n$15,000,000 reduction as proposed by the Senate and no reduction as\nHouse instead of $396,000 as proposed by the Senate. The funds denied\nproposed by the House.\nwere requested for the purpose of defining a new surface-to-air missile\nThe conferees agreed upon a general reduction of $23,000,000 to be\nsystem to replace the Improved Hawk system. The Marine Corps\napplied by the Secretary of Defense. No general reduction of this\nshould use Army developed air defense systems rather than develop\nnature was proposed by either the House or Senate.\nadditional new weapons.\nThe conferees agreed to the appropriation of $2,222,000 for the\nRESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST, AND EVALUATION, AIR FORCE, 197T\nHuman Resources program as proposed by the Senate instead of\n$1,422,000 as proposed by the House.\nAmendment No. 82: Appropriates $901,014,000 instead of $900,-\nThe conferees agreed upon a general reduction of $7,100,000 in\nintelligence activities instead of a $11,900,000 reduction as proposed\nHouse. 014,000 as proposed by the Senate and $906,946,000 as proposed by the\nby the House and a $4,000,000 reduction as proposed by the Senate.\nThe managers are in agreement on the appropriation of $19,560,000\nThe conferees agreed upon a general reduction of $1,000,000 in the\nfor the Defense Research Sciences program as proposed by the House\nfunds for Navy Federal Contract Research Centers instead of a\ninstead of $20,500,000 as proposed by the Senate.\n$2,000,000 reduction as proposed by the Senate and no reduction as\nThe conference agreement includes $1,980,000 for the Advanced\nproposed by the House.\nAerial Target Technology program as proposed by the Senate instead\nof $880,000 as proposed by the House.\nRESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST, AND EVALUATION, AIR FORCE, 1976\nThe conferees agreed to an appropriation of $129,000,000 for the\nB-1 bomber as proposed by the Senate instead of $158,000,000 as\nAmendment No. 81 Appropriates $3,591,266,000 as proposed by the\nproposed by the House.\nHouse instead of $3,584,406,000 as proposed by the Senate.\n58\n59\nThe conference agreement appropriates $69,704,000 for the Air\nThe conferees agreed to an increase of $2,100,000 for intelligence\nCombat Fighter (F-16) program as proposed by the House instead\nactivities instead of an increase of $2,300,000 as proposed by the\nof $40,704,000 as proposed by the Senate.\nHouse and a reduction of $5,500,000 as proposed by the Senate.\nThe conferees agreed on the appropriation of $1,000,000 for A-10\nThe conferees agreed upon a general reduction of $250,000 in the\naircraft as proposed by the House instead of no funds as proposed\nfunds for Federal Contract Research Centers instead of a $500,000\nby the Senate.\ngeneral reduction as proposed by the Senate and no general reduction\nThe conference agreement includes $35,114,000 for the Airborne\nas proposed by the House.\nWarning and Control System (AWACS) instead of $33,674,000 as\nproposed by the House and $54,474,000 as proposed by the Senate.\nOTHER MATTERS RELATED TO AMENDMENT 77 THROUGH 84\nThe conferees agreed on the appropriation of $12,900,000 for the\nAdvanced ICBM Technology program as proposed by the House\nThe Senate report required that $15,000,000 be allocated to each of\ninstead of $14,300,000 as proposed by the Senate.\nthe component elements of the Army Site Defense program, to include\nThe conferees agreed on the appropriation of $13,000,000 for the\ninterceptor missile development. The House had no similar language.\nAir Launched Cruise Missile as proposed by the Senate instead of\nThe Senate agreed to recede.\nno funds as proposed by the House.\nThe managers agreed that the general reductions made to the Fed-\nThe conference agreement includes $2,056,000 for the Human Re-\neral Contract Research Centers are made without prejudice to particu-\nsources program as proposed by the Senate instead of $1,028,000 as\nlar organizations. While it applies to all Federal Contract Research\nproposed by the House.\nCenters (FCRC's), the managers are particularly concerned about\nThe conferees agreed upon a general reduction of $10,800,000 in\nthe \"think tanks\". In the study of FCRC's being prepared for the Con-\nintelligence activities instead of a $20,800,000 reduction as proposed\ngress, the Director of Defense Research and Engineering is directed to\nby the House and no reduction by the Senate.\ngive particular attention to this class of FCRC's and to the need, if\nThe conferees agreed upon a general reduction of $3,500,000 in the\nany, for their continued retention.\nfunds for Air Force Federal Contract Research Centers instead of\nThe Senate managers agreed with the House report language direct-\na $7,000,000 reduction as proposed by the Senate and no reduction\ning that none of the funds appropriated for Ship Development (Ad-\nas proposed by the House.\nvanced) be used for designing the Advanced Amphibious Landing\nCraft.\nRESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST, AND EVALUATION, DEFENSE AGENCIES, 1976\nThe managers agreed that development effort on future blocks or\nimprovement phases of the Advanced Airborne Command Post should\nAmendment No. 83: Reported in technical disagreement. The man-\nbe delayed until the basic communications, command and control sys-\nagers on the part of the House will offer a motion to recede and concur\ntem for the Command Post has been developed. The Air Force, how-\nin the Senate amendment with an amendment appropriating $604,400,-\never, may use appropriated funds for the Advanced Airborne Com-\n000 instead of $599,100,000 as proposed by the House and $557,200,000\nmand Post to liquidate any obligations incurred under the continuing\nas proposed by the Senate. The managers on the part of the Senate\nresolution.\nwill move to concur in the amendment of the House to the amendment\nThe House managers agreed with the Senate report language re-\nof the Senate.\nquiring that $40,000,000 of the reduction in Defense Research, De-\nThe conferees agreed to an increase of $24,700,000 for intelligence\nvelopment, Test and Evaluation appropriations be applied to in-house\nactivities instead of an increase of $26,400,000 as proposed by the\nlaboratories.\nHouse and a general reduction of $13,500,000 as proposed by the Senate.\nAmendments Nos. 85 and 86 Section 707-Provides a limitation on\nThe conferees agreed upon a general reduction of $1,000,000 in the\nthe Overseas Dependents Education program of $211,391,000 in fiscal\nfunds for Federal Contract Research Centers instead of a $2,000,000\nyear 1976 instead of $206,791,000 as proposed by the House and $214,-\nreduction as proposed by the Senate and no general reduction as\n766,000 as proposed by the Senate and provides a limitation of $50,018,-\nproposed by the House.\n000 in the transition quarter instead of $47,618,000 as proposed by the\nThe conferees agreed to the appropriation of an additional $8,000,-\nHouse and $51,268,000 as proposed by the Senate.\n000 for communications activities. The additional funds are for a\nThe conferees agreed to adjust the limitation in accordance with\nspecial high priority project.\ntheir agreement on funds provided for Overseas Dependents Educa-\ntion in the appropriation \"Operation and Maintenance, Defense\nRESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST, AND EVALUATION, DEFENSE AGENCIES, 197T\nAgencies\" (Amendment No. 27).\nAmendment No. 84 Appropriates $146,550,000 instead of $147,000,-\nAmendments Nos. 87 and 88: Section 723-inserts House language\n\"including stainless steel flatware\" in Section 723. This section, which\n000 as proposed by the House and $138,700,000 as proposed by the\nis known as the \"Buy American\" provision, lists a number of items\nSenate.\nwhich must be procured by the Department of Defense within the\n60\n61\nUnited States. The provision has prohibited overseas procurement of\nspecialty metals for several years. Some uncertainty existed as to\nAmendment No. 98: Section 751-Reported in technical disagree-\nwhether or not stainless steel flatware was included in the term \"spe-\nment. This section relates to the restriction on the use of appropriated\ncialty metals.\" The inclusion of the words in the provision will remove\nfunds for the payment of claims under the Civilian Health and Medi-\nany uncertainty.\ncal Program of the Uniformed Services (CHAMPUS). The House\nAmendment No. 89: Section 723-The conferees agreed to delete a\nhad included in this section a prohibition against the payment for\nprovision proposed by the Senate which would have permitted the pay-\nthe services of pastoral counselors, family and child counselors, and\nment of a price differential on contracts made for the purpose of re-\nmarital counselors. The Senate deleted this restriction. The conferees\nlieving economic dislocations except when the Secretary of Defense\nagreed to reinstate the House prohibition with an amendment provid-\nhas specifically determined that sufficient price competition exists to\ning that such payments can be made only when it is certified that\ninsure a reasonable price to the government.\nthese services are not available on the militarv base to which the mem-\nAmendment No. 90: Section 732-As proposed by the Senate, the\nber is assigned, or when the recipient resides within 40 miles of a\nconferees agreed to increase to $75,000 the limitation on funds in the\nmilitary medical facility which certifies that these services are not\navailable.\nAct that is available for acquisition of new facilities, or alternation,\nexpansion, extension. or addition of existing facilities, in accordance\nThe House had also included in this section a prohibition against\nwith Department of Defense Directive 7040.2. dated January 18, 1961.\nthe payment by CHAMPUS for perceptual or visual training. The\nThe House had proposed a limitation of $50,000.\ndeletion. Senate deleted this prohibition. The conferees agreed to the Senate\nAmendment No. 91: Section 745-The Senate receded to the House\nlanguage which provides a total of 396 enlisted aides. The Senate lan-\nThe Senate also modified the House language bv prohibiting pay-\nguage had reduced the number to 250. The House language was in con-\nments for anv other service or supply not psvchologically necessary\nformance with that approved in the fiscal year 1976 Defense Authori-\nto diagnose and treat an illness as diagnosed by a dentist. or clinical\nzation Act.\npsvchologist. The conferees agreed to the Senate amendment.\nAmendment No. 92: Section 747-The Senate receded to the House\nThe managers on the part of the House will offer a motion to recede\nand agreed to the language as contained in the House bill which will\nand concur in the Senate amendment with an amendment, as discussed\npermit the payment of a monetary allowance to personnel who, under\nabove. The amended language agreed to by the conferees follows:\nregulations prescribed by the Secretary of the military department\nSec. 751. None of the funds contained in this Act available\nconcerned, participate in a program in which his baggage and house-\nfor the Civilian Health and Medical Program of the Uni-\nhold effects are moved by privately owned or rental vehicle. The con-\nformed Services under the provisions of section 1079(a) of\nferees are in agreement that this provision of law would not preclude\ntitle 10. United States Code, shall be available for (a) services\nthe military services from contracting directly with a rental company\nof pastoral counselors, or family and child counselors, or\nfor the vehicle and other items which the serviceman needs to move\nmarital counselors, except when these services are certified as\nhis household goods, while also permitting an allowance to the service-\nnot being available on the military base to which the member\nman, in effect, for his time and labor. Thus, this permanent provision\nis assigned, or when the recipient resides within 40 miles of\nwould permit the continuation of programs like the existing Navy pro-\na military medical facility which certifies that these services\ngram, plus a payment to the serviceman, to ease the transition. The\nare not available: (b) special education, except when pro-\nconferees, however, believe that it would be m st desirable for the\nvided as secondarv to the active psvchiatric treatment on an\nDepartment of Defense to develop a system whereby servicemen would\ninstitutional inpatient basis; (c) therapy or counseling for\nreceive an allowance which would permit them to accomplish the\nsexual dvsfunctions or sexual inadequacies: (d) treatment\nentire transaction themselves.\nof obesity when obesitv is the sole or major condition treated;\nAmendments Nos. 93 and 94: Restore House section numbers.\n(e) reconstructive surgerv justified solelv on psychiatric\nAmendment No. 95: Section 749-The conferees agreed to a pro-\nneeds including, but not limited to, mammarv augmenta-\nvision proposed by the Senate that increases the maximum amount\ntion. face lifts. and sex gender changes: or (f) anv other\nof the Standard Level User Charges that the Department may reim-\nservice or supply which is not medically or psychologically\nburse the General Services Administration to 90 per centum, instead\nnecessary to diagnose and treat a mental or phvsical illness,\nof 85 per centum as proposed by the House.\ninjury, or bodilv malfunction as diagnosed by a physician,\nAmendment No. 96: Restores House section number.\ndentist, or a clinical psychologist.\nAmendment No. 97 Section 750-The conferees agreed to a 40-mile\nradius, instead of the 50-mile radius proposed by the House and the\nThe managers on the part of the Senate will move to concur in the\n30-mile radius proposed by the Senate, for the issuance of certificates\namendment of the House to the amendment of the Senate.\nof non-availability under the Civilian Health and Medical Program\nAmendments Nos. 99 and 100 Section 752-Restore House limita-\ntion stricken bv the Senate and later restored by Senate Floor amend-\nof the Uniformed Services (CHAMPUS).\nment. The matter was in conference only because of a technical prob-\n62\n63\nlem, not because of a substantive difference in the House and Senate\nConference with comparisons to the fiscal year 1975 amount, the 1976\nbills. The provision limits the expenditure of funds for Army am-\nand transition period budget estimates, and the House and Senate bills\nmunition plants to areas where existing plants are being closed, placed\nfor 1976 and the transition period follow:\nin layaway, or at which production has been curtailed.\nAmendment No. 101 Section 753-Reported in technical disagree-\nNew budget (obligational) authority, fiscal year 1975\nTransfer from other accounts, fiscal year 1975\n$80, 439, 035, 000\nment. The Managers on the part of the House will offer a motion to\n648,694,000\ninsert Senate language which would enable South Vietnamese refugees\nTotal funding available, 1975\n84, 087, 729, 000\nto be employed by the Government of the United States. The motion\namends the Senate language to change the section number. The man-\nBudget estimates of new (obligational) authority (as\namended), fiscal year 1976\nagers on the part of the Senate will move to concur in the amendment\nTransition period\n97, 857, 849, 000\n23, 117, 645, 000\nof the House to the amendment of the Senate.\nThe language is as follows:\nTotal budget estimates, 1976 and transition period\n120, 975, 494, 000\nSEC. 753. Unless otherwise specified and during the cur-\nHouse bill, new (obligational) authority, fiscal year 1976\nrent fiscal year, and the period July 1, 1976, through Septem-\nTransfer from other accounts\n90, 219, 045, 000\nTransition period\n108,800,000\nber 30, 1976, no part of any appropriation contained in this\n21,674,571,000\nor any other Act shall be used to pay the compensation of any\nTotal funding available, 1976 and transition period\n112,002,416,000\nofficer or employee of the Government of the United States\n(including any agency the majority of the stock of which is\nSenate bill, new (obligational) authority, fiscal year 1976\nTransfer from other accounts\n90, 721, 789, 000\nowned by the Government of the United States) whose post\nTransition period\n99,300,000\nof duty is in continental United States unless such person (1)\n21,849,816,000\nis a citizen of the United States, (2) is a person in the service\nTotal funding available, 1976 and transition period\n112, 670, 905, 000\nof the United States on the date of enactment of this Act,\nwho, being eligible for citizenship, has filed a declaration of\nConference 1976 agreement, new (obligational) authority, fiscal year\nintention to become a citizen of the United States prior to\nTransfer from other accounts\n90, 466, 961, 000\nsuch date and is actually residing in the United States, (3)\nTransition period\n99,300,000\n21, 860, 723, 000\nis a person who owes allegiance to the United States, (4) is\nan alien from Cuba, Poland, or the Baltic countries lawfully\nTotal funding available, 1976 and transition period\n112, 426, 984, 000\nadmitted to the United States for permanent residence, or\nConference agreement compared with\n(5) South Vietnamese refugees paroled into the United States\nNew budget (obligational) authority, fiscal year 1975\n+7, 027, 926, 000\nbetween January 1, 1975, and the date of enactment of this\nTransfer from other accounts\n-549, 394, 000\nAct: Provided, That, for the purpose of this section, an affi-\nTotal funding available, 1975\ndavit signed by any such person shall be considered prima\n+6, 478, 532, 000\nfacie evidence that the requirements of this section with\nBudget estimates of new (obligational) authority (as\nrespect to his status have been complied with: Provided\namended) fiscal year 1976\n-7, 390, 888, 000\nTransfer from other accounts\nfurther, That any person making a false affidavit shall be\n+99, 300, 000\nTransition period\nguilty of a felony, and, upon conviction, shall be fined not\n256, 922, 000\nmore than $4,000 or imprisoned for not more than one year,\nTotal funding available, 1976 and transition period\n548, 510, 000\nor both: Provided further, That the above penal-clause shall\nbe in addition to, and not in substitution for, any other pro-\nHouse bill, new (obligational) authority, fiscal year 1976\n+247, 916, 000\nTransfer from other accounts\nvision of existing law: Provided further, That any payment\n-9,500,000\nTransition period\n+186, 152, 000\nmade to any officer or employee contrary to the provisions of\nthis section shall be recoverable in action by the Federal Gov-\nTotal funding available, 1976 and transition period\n+424,568,000\nernment. This section shall not apply to citizens of the Repub-\nSenate bill, new (obligational) authority, fiscal year 1976\nlic of the Philippines or to nationals of those countries allied\n-254,828,000\nTransfer from other accounts\nwith the United States in the current defense effort, or to\nTransition period\n+10, 907,\ntemporary employment of translators, or to temporary em-\nployment in the field service (not to exceed sixty days) as a\nTotal funding available, 1976 and transition period\n-243, 921, 000\nresult of emergencies.\nBULK MILK DISPENSERS\nCONFERENCE TOTAL-WITH COMPARISONS\nThe Senate report directed the Department of Defense to discon-\ntinue the purchase of bulk milk dispensers and continue the leasing\nThe total new budget (obligational) authority for the fiscal year\nprogram. The House did not address this item. The conferees agreed\n1976 and the transition period recommended by the Committee of\n64\nthat the Department of Defense should use the most economical and\nappropriate approach to the issue of purchase or lease of bulk milk\ndispensers.\nGEORGE MAHON,\nROBERT L. F. SIKES,\nDANIEL J. FLOOD,\nJOSEPH P. ADDABBO,\n(except as to amendments\nNos. 49, 50, 69, 79, and 81).\nJOHN J. McFall,\nJOHN J. FLYNT, Jr.,\nBILL CHAPPELL,\nBILL D. BURLISON,\nJACK EDWARDS,\nJ.K. ROBINSON,\nJACK KEMP,\nE. A. CEDERBERG,\nManagers on the Part of the House.\nJOHN L. McCLELLAN,\nJOHN C. STENNIS,\nJOHN O. PASTORE,\nWARREN G. MAGNUSON,\nGALE W. McGEE,\nJOSEPH M. MONTOYA,\nDANIEL K. INOUYE,\nSTUART SYMINGTON,\nMILTON R. YOUNG,\nROMAN L. HRUSKA,\nCLIFFORD P. CASE,\nHIRAM L. FONG,\nTED STEVENS,\nRICHARD S. SCHWEIKER,\nManagers on the Part of the Senate."
}