Mr. Chairman and Members of the Committee, on behalf of the men and women of the U.S. Army—Active, Guard, and Reserve—soldiers and civilians, we thank you for the opportunity to appear before you to discuss land force modernization. It is our privilege to represent the Army leadership and, more importantly, America’s soldiers. It is also our privilege to appear before this Committee with our fellow warfighters from the U.S. Marine Corps (USMC). Land forces are central to the success of joint operations. The Army fully supports all efforts to realize greater levels of jointness, and we believe joint experimentation and increased integration of our common developmental efforts are central to that process.

 We are committed to preserving the competitive edge that our soldiers so decisively demonstrated on the battlefields of Southwest Asia seven years ago, bringing that conflict to a close with a lightning fast, 100-hour air-land campaign. A significant component of maintaining that edge is the continuous modernization of our forces with the best equipment our Nation can provide. Modern equipment, when harmonized with the other five imperatives--quality people (soldiers and Department of the Army civilians), sound doctrine, competent leaders, realistic training, and an appropriate mix of forces and capabilities--will enable the Army to provide the full spectrum of capabilities required to implement the National Military Strategy. Our current well-trained, well-equipped, and ready force was made possible with the leadership and support of this Committee. While the Army has been a careful steward of the resources provided, you have strongly supported our programs and helped guide them to fruition.

 During the force drawdown, we accepted risk in our modernization program to maintain near-term readiness, endstrength, and quality of life programs. When supplemental funding for the Gulf War is excluded, Fiscal Year 1998 (FY98) was the 13^th consecutive year of declining Army resources. During that time, Army procurement declined nearly 73 percent. The decline in available funding has caused the Army to maintain procurement programs at minimum sustaining rates rather than more efficient economic rates. The FY99 budget reverses the decline of the past. We are proposing an increase in our procurement account. In FY99, our Research, Development and Acquisition (RDA) budget totals $13 billion--$8.2 billion in procurement and $4.8 billion in Research, Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E). This request includes $675 million for Army National Guard (ARNG) and $165.7 million for the U.S. Army Reserve (USAR), a 33 percent increase from FY98.

 The Army was recognized last year in the reports of the Quadrennial Defense Review (QDR) and the National Defense Panel (NDP) for having a vision of the future, and we have an investment strategy to meet that vision. The Army’s vision is in step with Joint Vision 2010 (JV 2010) as is reflected within Army Vision 2010 (AV 2010) and supports both QDR and NDP recommendations. To attain this vision, the Army has embarked on a methodology of experimentation to gain insights which guide senior leadership decisions for modernization and digitization of the force. We have seen the value of experimentation over the course of the past several years and, in particular, during FY97 and FY98 with the conduct of the Task Force XXI Advanced Warfighting Experiment (AWE) and the Division XXI AWE (DAWE). Experimentation has permitted the Army to make decisions accelerating the pace of modernization and digitization in those cases where we have had compelling experimental success. Experimentation also has served as a vehicle for interacting with our sister Services to develop doctrine and materiel that promotes interoperability.

 With this foundation of past experimentation, we are now ready to embark on a broad front of experimentation, Joint Experimentation, as the mechanism for advancing from Joint Interoperability towards Joint Interdependence as foreseen within JV 2010. The Army is currently in the midst of defining a broad campaign for experimentation, including Joint Experimentation, to attain these goals. This emerging Army Experimentation Campaign Plan is being developed in coordination with the emerging experimentation planning of our sister Services. Most notable areas of cooperation include the U.S. Navy’s (USN) Extending the Littoral Battlespace Advanced Concept Technology Demonstration (ACTD), the USMC’s Urban Warrior and Capable Warrior experiments, and the U.S. Air Force’s (USAF) Air Expeditionary Forces Experiments. Although experimentation carries with it requests for additional resources, the investment in Joint Experimentation offers significant potential for efficiencies across the Army and the entire Department of Defense (DOD) while increasing the total force capabilities.

• A values-based organization
• An integral part of the Joint Team
• Equipped with the most modern weapons and equipment the country can provide
• Able to respond to our Nation’s needs
• Changing to meet the challenges of today and tomorrow . . . and the 21^st Century.

 VALUES

 MODERNIZATION STRATEGY AND GOALS

 The Army is preparing for the future right now through the Force XXI process. The initial product of this process will be Army XXI, a versatile, product-improved Army with the capabilities we will need early in the next century, capitalizing on digital technology to optimize the flow of information and enhance situational awareness. At the same time we are working on fielding Army XXI, we are looking far into the future to design AAN. Our investments now in Science and Technology (S&T) are critical to ensuring that the technologies and capabilities to forge the AAN will be available when needed.

 The centerpiece of the Force XXI process has been a series of AWEs designed to test new systems and operational concepts. The 4^th Infantry Division (4ID) at Fort Hood, Texas, is the Experimental Force (EXFOR). In the last year, as previously mentioned, we conducted two pivotal experiments. Using digitally enhanced weapon systems, the EXFOR completed the Task Force XXI AWE at the National Training Center in Fort Irwin, California, and the DAWE at Fort Hood. These experiments have provided a range of insights into future force design. They validated the importance of "spiral development," synchronizing the evolution of new systems with organizational, training, leader, soldier, and doctrinal developments. And, they represented a true partnership among government program managers, contractors, testers, doctrine writers, and most importantly—soldiers. In the words of Peter Hellman, President and Chief of Operations at TRW, one of the contractors involved in the Force XXI programs, "Spiral development brings all of the parties together, from user to developer to industry." The key to success, according to Mr. Hellman, is getting the systems into the hands of soldiers. "We need to have the technology in front of the soldiers and they need to feel comfortable with it," he said. Soldiers agree. Private First Class Heather Clayton, an equipment tester for the Electronic Proving Grounds at White Sands, New Mexico, reflected on the speed of development and stated, "We had a few problems with (the equipment) at first, but they get fixed right away." The U.S. Army Training and Doctrine Command (TRADOC) Analysis Center’s DAWE Initial Insights Report (IIR) sums it well by stating, "The spiral development of the DAWE embraced simultaneous major changes across the (Doctrine, Training, Leader Development, Organizations, Materiel, and Soldiers) DTLOMS and enabled in a matter of months (vice years) the 4ID to reorganize and modernize…." The Central Test Support Facility (CTSF) allowed us to develop the technology, evolve the tactics, and develop the training simultaneously--a truly integrated approach to "spiral development," with immediate feedback from users to developers to continuously improve both materiel and training.

 Responding to Congressional direction, the Army has created a new Program Element for the Force XXI Initiatives Program and resourced it at $100 million a year in the Future Years Defense Plan. As you know, the Warfighting Rapid Acquisition Program (WRAP) was established in 1996 to accelerate fielding of systems and technologies that emerge successfully from AWEs, Battle

 Labs, Advanced Technology Demonstrations, or ACTDs. One of the initial successes of the WRAP program is the Advanced Precision Air Drop System (APADS). APADS combines an advanced parafoil, Global Positioning System (GPS) guidance, and an on-board processor to permit stand-off air drop of critical supplies and equipment with highly accurate delivery to a pre-designated location. The USMC used initial quantities of APADS procured by the Army’s WRAP program for their own experimentation to support their acquisition decision process. Candidates for the WRAP program are selected based on urgency of need, technical maturity, affordability, and effectiveness. In order to promote program stability, candidates receive Force XXI Initiatives funding for the first two years, which allows time to build them into the overall budget.

  Last year, the Army selected 11 candidates, which were subsequently approved by Congress, for acquisition under the WRAP program. These candidates will provide new technologies and capabilities to the field much sooner in the following areas: digitized mortar fire control; light force replacement for field artillery lasing teams; new tracking technologies for supplies and equipment; digital command and control hardware; and additional evaluation for appliqué and the "Tactical Internet," our version of the commercial Internet.

 Both readiness and modernization result from long-term, cumulative efforts. It takes time and resources to build a trained and ready force with the technological edge necessary for decisive victory. Our modernization strategy focuses on ensuring that our soldiers remain well-equipped now and in the future. We have five major goals:

• Field a digitized and networked Army.
• Maintain combat overmatch.
• Recapitalize the Army.
• Fully integrate the Active and Reserve Components.
• Focus Science and Technology efforts on leap-ahead technologies required for the Army After Next.

 Digitization is an integration process which cuts across the entire modernization strategy. It is virtually impossible to separate digitization from modernization. Digitization involves the use of modern communications capabilities and computers to enable commanders, planners, and shooters to rapidly acquire, share, and employ information across the battlefield. The process involves upgrading or modifying some of the Army’s current systems, adding to or "appliquéing" a capability to others; and ensuring that all future systems have information systems built in as an integral part of the system. The Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) invented the Internet; and now, the Army wants to provide our soldiers with the same information technology capabilities that exist in the private sector.

 Digitization provides shared situational awareness, which translates to a clear and accurate, common, relevant picture of the battlespace for leaders at all levels and a reduction in the potential for fratricide. Situational awareness answers three fundamental battlefield questions: Where am I? Where are my friends? Where is the enemy? The sharing of timely information enabled by digitization improves significantly the ability of commanders and leaders to quickly make decisions, synchronize forces and fires, and increase the operational tempo.

 Networking—The "Backbone" Systems

  The key information requirements at operational and tactical levels include maneuver, fire support, air defense, intelligence, and logistic data. All require communications equipment that permits the timely delivery of crucial information to commanders. The "Tactical Internet" currently has the following backbone systems which are basic to forming and developing a more advanced digital network for operational use: the Single Channel Ground Airborne Radio System-System Improvement Program; the Very High Speed Integrated Circuitry-Enhanced Position Location Reporting System; and the Integrated System Controller. As the Army experiments with and develops capabilities oriented on information superiority, it is employing its Battle Labs to work in concert with the Joint Battle Center and the Battle Labs of our sister Services. The Army’s Battle Command Battle Labs work within the Joint Battle Center’s Federated Battle Lab Consortium to conduct operational assessments and to develop joint experimentation with emerging Command, Control, Communications, and Computers, Intelligence, Surveillance, and Reconnaissance (C4ISR) systems to ensure interoperability.

 Two critically important programs to this effort are the Warfighter Information Network (WIN) and the Army Battle Command System (ABCS).

 The WIN architecture strategy is an integrated Command, Control, Communications, and Computers (C4) network that is comprised of commercially-based, high technology information and communications systems. WIN is designed to provide increases in security, capacity, and speed of information distribution throughout the battlespace in order to gain information dominance. It will maximize information services for the warfighter and support the power projection force. WIN incorporates leap-ahead switching and transmission technology to support video teleconferencing, mushrooming data requirements, split based operations, interactive multi-media, imagery, and an increase in mobility and flexibility.

 WIN-Terrestrial (WIN-T) will be the enabling tactical terrestrial signal infrastructure for the digitized Army, and will provide simultaneous voice, data, imagery, and video communication services at all levels of security. It will replace current equipment with a commercial standard-based information network. It will maximize secure information services for the warfighter and support the power projection force of the 21^st Century from sustaining base to foxhole.

 If the sustainment bases are our start points for rapid deployment, then, like the battlefield, these sustainment bases must be digitized as well. Power Projection C4 Infrastructure (PPC4I) represents the installation or sustainment base portion of WIN which supports power projection and split based operations. PPC4I is our main initiative to digitize the installation. It provides the connectivity to support activities as well as the combat forces in their power projection base. PPC4I is a program that combines four existing initiatives. The components of an installation's PPC4I telecommunications infrastructure are the telephone switch (MTMP), the telephone/data cable plant (OSCAR), the backbone data network (CUITN), and gateway to external networks (ADRP). PPC4I will synchronize the upgrade of all four infrastructure components to reduce the cost and disruption at each installation. PPC4I is funded by Program Managers (PMs), Installations, and Major Commands to build specific infrastructure which will exchange voice/data over the common user communications.

  ABCS is essential to our future warfighting force. ABCS provides the interoperability among battlefield disciplines that enables situational awareness. ABCS is broken down into the following five battlefield operating systems: Field Artillery, Maneuver, Air Defense, Intelligence, and Combat Service Support.

In Field Artillery, the Advanced Field Artillery Tactical Data System (AFATDS) provides integrated, automated support for planning, coordinating and controlling all fire support assets and for executing counterfire, interdiction, and suppression of enemy targets for close and deep operations. AFATDS uses the results of its target value analysis to establish target priorities and select the best weapon system from field artillery (cannons and rockets), mortars, naval gunfire, Air Force, Navy, and Army attack helicopters, and offensive electronic warfare. It is designed to be fully interoperable with the other ABCS Battlefield Functional Areas as well as with the fire support capabilities of the Marine Corps, Navy, and Air Force.

 In Maneuver, the Maneuver Control System (MCS) provides Army tactical commanders and their staffs (corps through battalion) automated, on-line, near real time systems for planning, coordinating, and controlling tactical operations. MCS performed extremely well in the Division AWE. It is the key element for maneuver command and control.

 In Air Defense, the Forward Area Air Defense, Command, Control and Intelligence (FAAD C2I) system provides a real time common air picture to counter low altitude air threats including rotary wing and unmanned aerial vehicles; air defense command, control, and airspace situational awareness to reduce fratricide within division, brigade, and battalion areas; and horizontal integration and joint interoperability with ABCS and Short Range Air Defense (SHORAD).

 In Intelligence, the All Source Analysis System (ASAS) is the Intelligence Electronic Warfare (IEW) sub-element of ABCS and provides combat leaders the asset management capability and the all-source intelligence needed to visualize the battlespace and conduct the land battle more effectively. The Intelligence Fusion Project Management Office is upgrading existing ASAS communications systems to state-of-the-art hardware and software. This upgrade will be completed by December 31, 1999. Currently, ASAS is providing intelligence fusion support to the forward-deployed forces in Bosnia.

In Combat Service Support, the Combat Service Support Control System (CSSCS) is an automated Command and Control (C2) system supporting the CSS component. It provides the commander a critical logistical C2 capability for the Army’s Force XXI by automating the current manual processes of force level planning and decision making for the CSS commanders and staffs.

 Protecting Information

 Also, we must protect our frequency spectrum. A modern, digitized, networked Army is increasingly dependent on assured access to the frequency spectrum. Today’s combat systems—sensors, communications, and shooters—require the unimpeded flow of information using the radio frequency spectrum. Army digitization requires more data and higher transmission speeds which mean more demand for the spectrum. Selling critical frequency spectrum to commercial interests or reallocating it to other non-military uses constrains military forces that are becoming more dependent on this valuable resource to operate. Through digitization, increasing amounts of information must be exchanged on the battlefield as more platforms are linked in the network. The faster pace of warfare increases the need to update information more often. Finally, the need to move more quickly than the enemy requires more wireless devices on the battlefield. More information moving faster demands more frequency spectrum; we cannot repeal the laws of physics. At a minimum, we ask for a moratorium on frequency spectrum sales or reallocation pending a thorough assessment of impact on military capability and national security.

 Maintain Combat Overmatch

The Army is making improvements to current systems to ensure that combat overmatch is maintained as threat capabilities continue to modernize. Our improvements are tailored to those capabilities that truly provide overmatch against potential adversaries. Attaining information dominance, like combat overmatch, is an investment priority.

 Longbow Apache, the AH-64D heavy attack helicopter, is an example of maintaining combat overmatch. Longbow Apache will enhance domination of the maneuver battle by giving the ground commander a versatile, rapidly employable, long-range aerial weapon system capable of massed, rapid, fire-and-forget Hellfire engagements against a wide-range of fixed and moving targets.

 One of our key information dominance systems is the RAH-66 Comanche armed reconnaissance helicopter. It is our number one aviation program and only one of two new developments for the future. Comanche will lead us into AAN. It will be the quarterback of the digitized battlefield. Comanche will provide the 21^st Century warfighter with superior information processing, stealth, and mission flexibility. More importantly, it will fill the Army’s number one battlefield deficiency—armed reconnaissance—with a self-deployable, versatile, day/night, lethal, and supportable weapon system. Comanche, a technology carrier, will give our soldiers the information advantage in the Information Age.

 Crusader is the Army’s next generation, fully digitized, self-propelled howitzer and artillery re-supply vehicle designed to support Army XXI and AAN. Crusader will be a world-class weapon system without equal. It employs fully automated ammunition handling, transfer, and loading with digital fire control and situational awareness to reduce the crew by one-third while increasing the rate of fire by a factor of three. Crusader’s ability to sustain this increased rate-of-fire combines with improved accuracy and a 25 percent increase in range to make it radically more lethal than any other existing or developmental howitzer (domestic or foreign). The Crusader system is the Army’s highest priority ground combat modernization program. It provides three times the delivered firepower with the same lift required for a Paladin unit and uses only six soldiers versus nine soldiers. It revolutionizes Fire Support and is key in shaping the battlefield to allow decisive maneuver.

 Javelin is another example of our programs to maintain combat overmatch. It provides our soldiers with a man-portable, highly lethal system against conventional or reactive armor threats. Javelin features fire-and-forget technology with a range in excess of 2,000 meters in adverse weather, day or

night, and weighs less than 50 pounds. It has been fielded to all Ranger battalions and five of nine battalions in the 82^nd Airborne. Javelin is on track and being well received by soldiers and commanders in the field.

 Sentinel, the Army’s next generation tactical air defense radar, is another example of maintaining combat overmatch. It provides the digital air picture of the battlefield to forward area air defense (FAAD) weapon systems. It automatically detects, tracks, classifies, identifies, and reports targets such as cruise missiles, unmanned aerial vehicles, and rotary and fixed winged aircraft to our air defense weapon systems using the FAAD Command and Control Intelligence (C2I) interfaces.

 Other systems currently in development that will ensure that America’s Army maintains combat overmatch well into the next century include the Army Tactical Missile System-BAT (ATACMS-BAT) program and the Land Warrior program. The Tactical Unmanned Aerial Vehicle (TUAV) is another key information dominance system.

 The ability to engage targets at long-range, laterally and at depth is critical. Deep artillery fires disrupt and destroy threat forces and long-range weapons before they can influence the battle. The key component of the Army deep attack capability is the ATACMS missile with BAT brilliant anti-armor submunitions. ATACMS provides the ground commander with an advanced, non-nuclear family of long-range missiles and munitions to attack maneuver, command and control, air defense assets, key logistic facilities, multiple rocket launchers, and surface-to-surface missile transporter erector launchers. ATACMS-BAT provides long-range, precision fires with brilliant munitions to shape the battlespace by attacking high payoff targets.

 The Land Warrior program, a part of Soldier Systems, integrates advancing technologies into a combat effective system for soldiers. This program includes the modular weapon system with thermal weapons sight, infrared aiming light, digital compass, video camera and close combat optic, and many other enhancements to protective clothing and individual equipment. It will provide the dismounted infantry soldier with first time ever combat overmatch

capabilities in the areas of lethality, survivability, mobility, command and control, and sustainment. Land Warrior will link the individual soldier into the Army’s digitized battlefield network.

 The TUAV system will provide the tactical battlefield commander with a dedicated capability to conduct 24-hour real time, low altitude, close-range surveillance of the battlefield. This capability will allow brigade/regimental commanders to provide accurate information to battalion and company level maneuver elements day or night. The TUAV system will be small and easily transportable while being interoperable with other higher echelon unmanned aerial vehicles through a common Tactical Control Station. The initial sensor capability of TUAV will consist of electro-optic and infrared cameras with sufficient accuracy to support targeting for indirect fire support.

 In addition to these key systems, the Army continues to advance its concepts of future warfighting through the AAN Process and our Army Experimentation Campaign Planning. While Force XXI experiments to date have focused on attaining situational awareness and mental agility for Army XXI forces of the 2010 timeframe, these advanced concepts and future experimentation will add the dimension of physical agility and enhanced mental agility for future Army forces. Experimentation will include examination of an entirely new set of capabilities which provide for significantly greater lethality, survivability, strategic, operational, and tactical mobility. One key challenge within this work is to significantly reduce the time required to deploy land forces that are significantly more lethal and survivable than today’s Army’s light forces.

 Other Key Programs

 The Army strongly supports the current treaty-compliant joint program to develop and test a fixed, land-based National Missile Defense (NMD) system that will provide the option for an initial capability in 2003, if directed and funded in 2000. Our nation has always been vulnerable to a long-range ballistic missile attack. We must prepare now to defend ourselves against such a potential in the 21^st Century. NMD is our insurance policy. This program is highly evolutionary and flexible to allow us to respond to a strategic missile threat as it emerges.

 Through the Chemical Demilitarization Program, we are proceeding with the destruction of the chemical munitions stockpile at Johnston Atoll Chemical Agent Disposal System and the Tooele (Utah) Chemical Agent Disposal Facility. We also continue construction-related activities for the Anniston (Alabama), Umatilla (Oregon), and Pine Bluff (Arkansas), disposal facilities; award systems contracts and initiate final designs for neutralization pilot facilities at Aberdeen Proving Ground (Maryland), and Newport (Indiana); continue environmental permitting activities for the disposal facilities at Pueblo (Colorado), and Blue Grass (Kentucky), and continue Chemical Stockpile Emergency Preparedness Project activities. The Army’s number one priority in the Chemical Demilitarization Program is maximum protection for the environment, the general public, and the workforce involved in the destruction effort.

 DOD’s Chemical Biological Defense Program, a joint program, provides development and procurement of systems to enhance the ability of forces to deter and defend against Chemical Biological (CB) agents during regional contingencies. The probability of our armed forces encountering CB agents during worldwide conflicts remains high. Increased emphasis is being placed on countering the threat posed by terrorist use of weapons of mass destruction to impede our military operations. An effective defense will reduce the probability of a CB attack and enable U.S. forces to survive, continue operations, and win decisively.

 Historically, fratricide has been the cause of 10 to 20 percent of all battle causalities. The Army made a firm decision following Operation Desert Storm to attack the fratricide problem and remains committed to that goal. The Army’s operational concept for combat identification relies on situational awareness and target identification working in concert. The Task Force XXI AWE results indicated that situational awareness, in its current form, is not sufficient to prevent fratricide by itself. Consequently, the Army will procure sufficient quantities of the Battlefield Combat Identification System (BCIS) to equip the Digitized Division, and intends to make a decision this spring on the procurement of sufficient quantities of BCIS to equip the Digitized Corps. The BCIS program is a model of acquisition streamlining, taking advantage of best commercial practices to shorten acquisition timelines and reduce system cost.

 The Future Scout and Cavalry System (FSCS) is a cooperative program with the United Kingdom to design and build a ground system with advanced technologies in sensors, armor, mobility, and signature management to provide our warfighters with overwhelming ground scout capabilities. It is envisioned that FSCS will complement other surveillance and reconnaissance assets such as unmanned aerial vehicles and aerial scouts. The Army envisions FSCS will replace the High Mobility Multipurpose Wheeled Vehicle (HMMWV) in Cavalry and Scout units at the Battalion and Brigade level and the Bradley in Divisional Cavalry Squadrons and Cavalry Regiments. It will be our first new development to support AAN.

 A Statement of Intent signed in October 1996 shifted focus from the development of national programs toward development of a cooperative U.S./U.K. scout vehicle program. The users of both nations have harmonized requirements, and both nations have agreed to share cost on a 50/50 basis for the Advanced Technology Demonstrator (ATD) and, when implemented, the Engineering and Manufacturing Development phase. A Memorandum of Understanding for the ATD has been signed by the U.S. and is in the U.K. for signature. A Request for Proposal for the ATD will be released shortly thereafter, and a contract award is expected next August.

 The Army fully supports the Follow-On To TOW (FOTT) program. Platforms now equipped with TOW (Tube-Launched, Optically-Tracked, Wire-Guided) missiles are out-ranged by existing threat anti-tank guided missiles. The FOTT missile, the next generation heavy anti-armor missile for the Army’s light and mechanized infantry forces, will significantly improve the infantry’s warfighting capabilities through increased range, lethality, and survivability. The FOTT missile will be capable of defeating the most formidable tank on the battlefield at ranges greater than 4,000 meters, and will be operationally effective in the presence of enemy countermeasures, including existing and emerging active protective systems (APS).

 Recapitalize the Army

 By recapitalizing worn or dated equipment, the Army maintains the usability and effectiveness of present systems rather than investing in entirely new systems. The Army achieves recapitalization through extended life service programs, preplanned product improvements, depot rebuild, limited replacement, or technology insertion. The Army’s 2-1/2 ton truck, 5-ton truck, and High-Mobility Multi-Purpose Wheeled Vehicle (HMMWV) Extended Service Programs extend the service of these aging fleet assets into the next century. Likewise, the Improved Cargo Helicopter (ICH) program represents a modification to an existing system, the CH-47D heavy lift cargo helicopter. The ICH, the Army’s only heavy lift aircraft, will sustain the aging fleet and bridge the gap until the development of a follow-on replacement aircraft. The Family of Medium Tactical Wheeled Vehicles (FMTV) and 3,000 gallon per hour Reverse Osmosis Water Purification Unit (ROWPU) programs are examples of new procurements that replace systems that have passed the point of economic sustainment. The Army leads efforts in this arena for both itself and the USMC. Inserting technology into current equipment, such as installing GPS technologies in the Palletized Load System, allows for extended use of these systems as well.

 Fully Integrate the Active and Reserve Components

 The RC has been extensively modernized over the last few years. From FY92 to FY98, the RC received, or will receive, more than $21.5 billion of new or cascaded equipment. Recent RC modernization efforts include:

• Upgrading all ARNG tank battalions to the M1/M1A1 Abrams tank;
• Equipping 10 ARNG Field Artillery units with the Multiple Launch Rocket System;
• Fully fielding all 15 enhanced Separate Brigades with M2/M3 Bradley Fighting Vehicles;
• Attaining nine fully operational RC Apache battalions;
• Modernizing 15 RC Aviation battalions with the UH-60 helicopter; and
• Equipping 10 USAR transport and supply companies with modernized Heavy Equipment Transporter Systems (HETS).

  The Army Experimentation Campaign Plan will address modernization and digitization issues for the RC working in concert with Active Component formations. RC Units participated last year in both the Task Force XXI AWE and the DAWE.

 We complete planned fielding of the Paladin self-propelled howitzer to the ARNG in FY01. In addition, conversion of up to 12 ARNG combat brigades to combat support and combat service support will also require modernization resources. The Total Army is committed to completing this conversion by 2009.

 Other important initiatives include the Total Army Distance Learning Program (TADLP) which will provide standard automation and supporting infrastructure to train the Army’s Active, Guard, and Reserve Components, as well as Army civilians to a single Army standard. It is a highly effective means to deliver training and education to deployed forces. We will use multiple means and technologies to deliver standardized individual, collective, and self-development training to soldiers and units at their home station, a cost-effective way to enhance institutional and individual training and improve readiness. Potential TADLP tools include computer-based instruction, video teletraining, and other technologies as well as remote instructors, peer instruction/support, and on-line subject matter experts. The National Guard’s Distributive Training Technology (DTT) project complements the Army Distance Learning initiatives by providing additional classrooms and access in communities not currently addressed in the Army Distance Learning Plan.

 The Reserve Component Automation System (RCAS) provides the Army with the capability to more effectively administer, manage, and mobilize Army Guard and Reserve forces. Existing information management systems in the ARNG and USAR are not integrated, are limited in capability and functionality, and require excessive time and manpower to operate and maintain. RCAS will support daily operational, training, and administrative tasks at all Guard and Reserve echelons, and provide timely and more accurate information to plan and support mobilization. Fully deployed, RCAS will link more than 10,500 Guard and Reserve units at more than 4,000 sites located in all 50 states, the District of Columbia, Guam, Puerto Rice, the Virgin Islands, Europe, and the Pacific Rim.

 RCAS was instrumental in mobilizing the Guard and Reserve in support of the ice storm relief operations in the Northeastern United States last January. In Maine, nearly 2,000 ARNG soldiers were issued orders in record time (four days versus 30 or more days) and were paid for their service in record time (seven days versus 30 days). In New York, the 10^th Mountain Division (Light Infantry) at Fort Drum worked hard with the National Guard to provide power generation, debris removal from roads, traffic control, transportation, shelter, and security. In addition, the Army Reserve provided a Reserve Center in Elizabethtown for receiving, storing, and issuing emergency supplies and equipment for the Niagara-Mohawk Power Company. It was a total Army effort. Lastly, RCAS was used by the Federal Emergency Management Agency for disaster relief operations in Guam last year after a devastating typhoon knocked out other communications systems.

 Army Science and Technology Strategy

  The Army S&T vision is to:

• Provide timely demonstrations of affordable technology/weapon system concepts that enable decisive overmatch with minimum casualties, force projection with full spectrum capability and requirements definition/prioritization through experimentation.
• Provide a world-class network of Army focused government and private S&T capabilities that can maintain a smart buyer capability.
• Reduce cost through the early retirement of risk in materiel development programs and support for acquisition reform.

  Our S&T budget request in FY99 totals $1195.6 million. In keeping with the Army’s mid-and far-term objectives, balanced with a need to upgrade existing essential systems, more than 59 percent of the S&T budget is targeted towards basic and applied research. The remaining funds are targeted towards advanced technology development dedicated to the specific demonstrations endorsed by the Army user community as essential to understand the way ahead. Our S&T program has three components. Basic Research (6.1) expands our knowledge in areas relevant to land warfare and identifies technology opportunities. The Applied Research (6.2) program develops technology and evaluates technical feasibility for increased warfighting capability. The Advanced Technology Development (6.3) program demonstrates technologies to speed the transition of matured technology into the system-specific Program Definition and Risk Reduction (PDRR) (6.4) program, directly into Engineering and Manufacturing Development (6.5), or to rapid prototyping.

  The Army’s long-term vision is evolving through a process being managed by TRADOC. The AAN office, under the Deputy Chief of Staff for Doctrine, is conducting broad studies of future warfare for the period around the year 2025, for the purpose of framing the issues vital to the development of the Army. The vision generated from these studies will be integrated into TRADOC combat development programs. Throughout this process, the S&T community is serving a vital support role. To better appreciate the role of the S&T community in the emerging AAN vision, it is important to understand the four major azimuths the AAN studies are exploring and the process for integrating the results into the evolving AAN vision.

 The first azimuth under investigation involves the identification of probable geopolitical realities for the period around 2025. The purpose of this study is to establish likely threats and missions and to link these to the Army’s future warfighting strategies and systems to ensure that the Army will be able to fulfill its future National Command Authority responsibilities. The second azimuth is a study of the future military art necessary to ensure that the Army has unquestionable overmatch capability against the full spectrum of potential threats. The third azimuth is the evaluation of evolving technologies and systems concepts, along with the planning of the R&D investments necessary to support the evolving military art and ensure unquestionable overmatch capabilities for the future Army. And, the fourth azimuth is the exploration of approaches necessary for our forces to operate effectively at the limit of human cognitive capability.

 We have developed an AAN process that incorporates input and activities from multiple sources on an annual basis. Through this process, a strong S&T investment strategy in support of AAN has begun to evolve. Given the timeframe of AAN, the 6.1 and 6.2 accounts (basic and applied research) are the most relevant. Although practically all the ongoing 6.1 and 6.2 investment has been found to be relevant to a broad definition of AAN, closely coordinated efforts with TRADOC are underway to realign the 6.1 and 6.2 accounts to obtain increased focus on those technologies where progress is most needed to enable AAN concepts of operations. Specifically, the goal of this effort is to increase the 6.1 AAN–oriented Strategic Research Objectives (SROs) investment from 15 to 30 percent and to increase that portion of the 6.2 accounts focused specifically on AAN priorities.

 A new 6.2 AAN Science and Technology Objective (STO) enhancement program has been included in the FY99 budget to encourage new 6.2 STOs to focus on AAN issues. To achieve this objective, an AAN short list of high priority enabling technology thrusts has been prepared and coordinated with TRADOC through the Army Science and Technology Working Group (ASTWG) process. These include major improvements in air and ground systems as well as improved soldier performance.

Several independent assessments of S&T opportunities in support of AAN have also been initiated. Through the National Research Council Board on Army Science and Technology, a study on logistics demand has been initiated to identify those 6.1 and 6.2 efforts that would enable system concepts and greatly reduce logistics demand in the timeframe of AAN.

 This summer the Army will hold a technology seminar game. Unlike other wargames, the focus will be on new and emerging technologies, not operational concepts. Industry and academia will participate in the wargame as full partners with the Army. The seminar results will help the Army and industry identify the future technologies of interest, and focus our research and technology development efforts for AAN. The Army will also be able to show a direct link between the desired capabilities of AAN and the direction of the defense industrial base.

  An important part of the basic research investment strategy is to provide a sharper focus for certain research activities by establishing a number of SROs in selected multidisciplinary areas, providing a foundation for revolutionary technologies considered to offer significant and comprehensive benefits for AAN. SROs are high profile, long-range scientific areas of strong military relevance and high potential payoff. Army-specific SROs are being developed to support AAN in areas such as Biomimetics, Nanoscience, Smart Structures, Broad Band, Communications, Intelligent Systems, and Compact Power Sources.

ACTDs are sponsored by DOD to assess the operational utility of near-term, readily fieldable solutions that respond to military needs validated by the Joint Requirements Oversight Council. ACTDs are designed to provide residuals that are left behind with an operational unit for a two-year extended user evaluation period after a field demonstration. The result is a decision whether or not to proceed with acquisition based on the results of the assessment and, ultimately, on prioritization by the Army. The Army is an active participant in the program and a strong supporter of ACTDs. ACTDs are developed as joint endeavors. We manage seven ACTDs that continue in FY99.

  Key among the ACTDs are the Rapid Force Projection Initiative (RFPI) ACTD, the Military Operations Urban Terrain (MOUT) ACTD, and the Theater Precision Strike Operations (TPSO) ACTD. The RFPI ACTD is being conducted with USMC involvement, including incorporation of the USMC Forward Observer/Forward Air Controller digital equipment. RFPI ACTD will demonstrate enhanced lethality systems for the light contingency forces including the Enhanced Fiber Optic Guided Missile (EFOGM), the High Mobility Rocket System (HIMARS), and the Digitized Towed Howitzer.

  The MOUT ACTD addresses 32 requirements for operations by soldiers and Marines in urban terrain. These requirements were developed in concert by the Army’s Dismounted Battlespace Battle Lab and the Marine Corps Warfighting Lab. Technologies to be experimented with during this ACTD have been divided out by agreement between the Army and the Marine Corps and will be integrated into the ACTD. The culminating event of this ACTD will involve an Army battalion with a Marine company attached conducting operations at the Joint Readiness Training Center (JRTC) in Fort Polk, Louisiana. This ACTD is also forming the basis of the Joint Contingency Light Forces AWE which is currently being defined as part of the emerging Army Experimentation Campaign Plan. This AWE is intended as a Joint Army-USMC experiment.

  The TPSO ACTD will focus on the integration of Joint C4ISR capabilities to identify critical perishable targets, to identify an enemy’s main attack, and to identify the critical pieces within the enemy’s main attack. TPSO ACTD will permit commanders to apply the appropriate joint fires in response to critical targets. The Army’s Joint Precision Strike Demonstration Office leads this effort with participation by USN, USAF, and USMC.

  Advanced Technology Demonstrations (ATDs) are a category of technology demonstration characterized by operator/user involvement; testing in an operational environment; finite schedule; cost objective performance baselines, and defined, TRADOC approved, exit criteria. ATDs seek to demonstrate the potential for enhanced military operational capability, cost effectiveness, and affordability. In FY99, 16 existing ATDs will be ongoing.

The Army laboratories and Research, Development, and Engineering Centers (RDECs) are key organizations responsible for technical leadership, scientific advancement, and support for the acquisition process. Working at a diversified set of physical resources, ranging from solid-state physics laboratories to outdoor experimental ranges, RDEC personnel conduct research, develop technology, act as "smart buyers," and provide systems engineering support to fielded systems for the Total Army.

  The Army has initiated two personnel demonstrations at the Missile and Aviation RDECs designed to retain a highly motivated, technically competent workforce, essential to the success of the Army S&T strategy in a rapidly changing environment. Three more are being initiated at the Army Research Laboratory, the Waterways Experiment Station, and the Medical Research and Materiel Command. Further S&T Laboratory personnel demonstrations at the Army’s remaining labs and R&D centers are planned for FY99 and FY00. In addition, the Army continues to pursue initiatives for reducing and consolidating infrastructure. While Vision 21 is currently on-hold pending further DOD initiatives for overall Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC) reductions, the Army is participating in non-BRAC initiatives to streamline the laboratory infrastructure, while responding fully to the needs of the warfighter.

 ARMY-USMC JOINT EFFORTS

 The USMC maintains liaison officers (LNOs) at several TRADOC installations whose functions include liaison for the USMC with Army Battle Labs. USMC LNOs are located at Fort Benning, Georgia, and the Dismounted Battlespace Battle Lab (DBBL), Fort Sill, Oklahoma, and the Depth and Simultaneous Attack Battle Lab (DSABL), Fort Leavenworth, Kansas, and the Battle Command Battle Lab (BCBL) (Leavenworth), Fort Gordon, Georgia, and the BCBL (Gordon), Fort Huachuca, Arizona, and the BCBL (Huachuca), Fort Leonard Wood, Missouri, and the Maneuver Support Battle Lab (MSBL), and Fort Lee, Virginia, and the Combat Service Support Battle Lab (CSSBL).

  The Army’s Deputy Director of the Dismounted Battlespace Battle Lab serves on the Advisory Board for the USN/USMC ELB ACTD which encompasses the USMC Urban Warrior and Capable Warrior experiments.

Likewise, the MCWL’s Director serves on the Advisory Board for the Army-led MOUT ACTD.

  The Joint Battle Center (JBC) in Suffolk, Virginia, leads the Federated Battle Lab (FBL), a consortium of all Services’ Battle Labs focused on C4ISR, including the MCWL and several Army Battle Labs. The FBL conducts experimentation and operational assessments to promote joint and service interoperability with C4ISR systems.

  TRADOC’s Battle Lab Integration, Technology, and Concepts Directorate convened the first All Services Battle Lab Meeting at Hurlburt Field, Florida, last January. Representatives from all 18 Service Battle Labs met to exchange information, determine opportunities to leverage efforts, develop joint experimentation, develop habitual relationships, and examine federations of selected service battle labs in the areas of logistics, unmanned aerial vehicles, and space. These federations would include relevant Army Battle Labs and the MCWL, in addition to the USN’s Maritime Battle Lab and the six USAF Battle Labs.

  Cooperative development programs exist between the Army and USMC in several areas including Light Weight Cannon, Non-Lethal Weapons, and linkages between the Army’s Soldier Enhancement Program and the USMC’s Marine Enhancement Program.

 As previously discussed, the Army and the USMC are involved in several areas of joint experimentation including MOUT ACTD, RFPI ACTD, and the USN’s ELB ACTD.

  MOUT ACTD focuses on 32 joint Army and Marine user requirements generated by the Army’s Dismounted Battlespace Battle Lab (DBBL) and the MCWL. MOUT ACTD consists of squad, platoon, company, and battalion level experiments conducted in progressive manner from FY98 through FY00. Requirements being addressed are specific to Military Operations in Urban Terrain and include engagement (lethal and non-lethal), mobility, protection, and C4I. The DBBL and the MCWL work in close coordination to develop and manage this ACTD. This effort also leverages efforts from DARPA’s Small Unit Operations. This ACTD will culminate in a demonstration with a battalion from the XVIII Airborne Corps with an attached Marine Company from II Marine Expeditionary Force to be conducted at the JRTC.

  Non-Lethal Weapons (NLW) are being developed in concert with the USMC as the executive agent. This effort will provide operational commanders with a readily accessible tool box to conduct operations across the spectrum of conflict.

 The Theater Precision Strike Operations (TPSO) ACTD will involve all of the Services. The centerpiece of TPSO is an Enhanced Deep Operations Coordination Cell (EDOCC) which will integrate the Global Command and Control System (GCCS) with our GCCS-Army, the USAF’s Theater Battle Management Control System, the USN’s Joint Maritime Command Information System, and the USMC’s Tactical Combat Operation System.

  Currently under definition, the Joint Communications Infrastructure Synchronization (JCIS) Experiment being developed by the BCBL (Gordon) will be conducted in conjunction with the Joint Battle Center and C4ISR Battle Labs of all Services. This effort will focus on joint interoperability capabilities for Asynchronous Transfer Mode (ATM) services, voice, and data.

  The GCCS Common Operational Picture (COP) is being led for the Army by the BCBL (Gordon). The Battle Lab will establish experiments with Joint Battle Center and C4ISR Battle Labs of all the Services, including the MCWL. Objectives of the experiment include tracking of friendly forces by ground tracking systems for joint application.

  The Army’s Air Maneuver Battle Lab is conducting an experiment called Intrepid Vanguard with USAF and USMC participation. The experiment focuses on manned and unmanned ground and airborne systems’ control for reconnaissance missions.

  Within the training arena, the USMC’s Marine Air Ground Task Force (MAGTF) Staff Training Program has been modeled after the Army’s Battle Command Training Program (BCTP). The Army and USMC have established a Memorandum of Understanding in which officers are being exchanged as active instructors and observer/controllers between the two programs.

 Competitive Sourcing. Efficiencies within our operation enable us to reinvest savings—in some cases substantial savings—in modernization and other high priority needs. Competitive sourcing and privatization offer the prospect of lowering costs and improving performance across a wide-range of support activities. Since 1979, the Army has completed 468 cost competitions covering more than 25,000 positions. The results are as follows: in-house operations won 240 competitions and contractors 228; efficiency improvement efforts to develop Most Efficient Organizations (MEOs) in preparation for competition reduced in-house staff by more than 5,000 positions; of the 25,000 positions competed, nearly two-thirds (13,000 civilians and 2,900 military) were converted to contract; and, regardless of who won the competition, total operating costs were reduced on average by 28 percent.

 Life-cycle Management and Cost Reduction. A major focus of the Army is to reduce the life-cycle sustainment costs of new and existing systems. Savings in this area are key to increasing our modernization account and accelerating Army efforts to digitize the force. O&S costs can comprise up to 70 percent of a system's total life cycle cost. Therefore, we must continually seek innovative methods to reduce these costs now to avoid significant budget and readiness costs in the future. On new systems, we must pay attention to life cycle costs early in design. Back-end sustainment costs need to receive more up-front design attention. In other words, each technology effort must "buy its way onto our programs" in terms of reducing life cycle costs and program risks. However, given our limited rate of introducing new systems to replace those already in the field, we cannot wait for new weapon systems development to address the growing costs to operate and support existing systems. Our reforms include creating proper incentives to insert new low cost technologies in fielded systems to improve their reliability, maintainability, and sustainability.

 Paperless Contracting. The Army is moving aggressively to establish a paperless contracting process from requirements generation to solicitation to award to contract closeout by or before January 1, 2000. An Army Paperless Contracting Integrated Process Team established last November is developing a comprehensive plan for process implementation at the Army and Major Command level and below. The current objective is to replace a redundant, paperwork intensive system with a master plan to eliminate all paper transactions and thereby use our resources—acquisition professionals and dollars—much more efficiently. In the long-term, we will establish an Army Project Office to execute the approved master plan. We intend to leverage the capabilities of the Standard Procurement System (SPS), identify and fill "gaps" within the current process, and, where necessary, redefine or reengineer the process.

 Simulation Based Acquisition. Through Simulation Based Acquisition (SBA), the Army is using modeling and simulation (M&S) to reduce acquisition costs, total ownership costs, and time to initial operating capability, while increasing the military utility and quality of a fielded systems throughout its lifecycle. SBA capitalizes on the experiences of industry in using M&S to conduct design and engineering, testing, and manufacturing during the development of a new system. SBA for the Army takes this concept even further by using M&S to increase efficiency and effectiveness in concept exploration, logistics support, and training.

 The RAH-66 Comanche armed reconnaissance helicopter program has used M&S extensively and has proven that it saves time and money. For example, it took 38 draftsmen more than six months to produce drawings for the CH-53S helicopter outside contours, while the same effort for Comanche took one engineer one month. The Crusader field artillery system is another Army flagship program that is leveraging heavily off M&S. Crusader uses M&S for many functions, but more specifically Combat and Engineering Development. Through the System Integration Facility (SIF), PM Crusader can develop and test software, electronic components, and models in a common test environment. Additionally, and most importantly, SIF will facilitate the interchange of models between elements to support the Crusader development process.

 Credit Cards. On another front, America’s Army is the greatest user of the International Merchant Purchase Authorization Card (IMPAC) (credit card) in the Federal Government. In FY96, the Army was the first Federal agency to exceed one million credit card transactions for purchases valued at $2,500 or less. We broke that record with 2.4 million transactions in FY97. The dollar value of just over $1 billion ($1.092B) for the Army transactions last year shattered all previous records for the Federal Government. Recognizing success, the Army was asked to represent the entire DOD in the source selection for the new purchase card contract. In December 1997, the Deputy Secretary of

 Defense asked the Army to lead a Joint Program Management Office that will be responsible for bringing use of the card for the entire DOD up to the 90 percent level by January 1, 2000.

 Single Process Initiative. The Single Process Initiative (SPI), a means to eliminate costly multiple processes within contractor facilities, is working well for America’s Army. The Army is now performing or negotiating SPI contract modifications with 55 contractors, 35 of who are among the top 200 Defense contractors. This SPI activity is the result of contractors proposing 622 acquisition process changes since December 1995. Of the 622 proposals, the Army has accepted 350 and is continuing discussion on an additional 181. After initiating a technical review, and finding the original process improvement was not substantiated, contractors have withdrawn 91 proposals.

 Modernization Through Spares. Modernization Through Spares (MTS) means no longer buying spare parts based on outdated specifications and technical data packages, but rather on performance specifications to take advantage of newer designs and manufacturing technologies. With this approach, we enhance the performance and reliability of our weapon systems while using our resources more efficiently. For example, the track life of the Abrams tank increased from an early life expectancy of 1,200 miles to about 2,000 miles. The Abrams Program Office is now examining track life improvements that would provide a track life of 5,000 miles, thereby further reducing O&S costs. The plan is to develop a competitive performance specification for the M1 Follow on Vehicle (FOV) Track System that addresses the durability and performance aspects of the track, roadwheels, sprockets, hubs, support rollers, and idlers as a system. The goal of the specification is to define system operational requirements in performance terms for the competitive procurement of the track system without adverse impact on automotive performance.

  Prime Vendor Support Pilot Programs. As fielded systems age, the cost of ownership escalates. The more money we spend on support, the less money is available for modernization and other high priority needs. The Prime Vendor Support (PVS) initiative enjoys support because it holds the potential for significant savings to reinvest in modernization. PVS is an innovative way to reduce overall O&S costs, improve the availability of spare parts, and maintain weapon system readiness rates. The initiative would allow the prime contractor of an Army weapon system to assume complete responsibility for its overall performance in the field.

 The Army is currently evaluating a proposal submitted jointly by the Boeing Company and the Lockheed Martin Corporation to implement a PVS arrangement for the Apache. This proposal would transfer responsibility for complete wholesale support to a single accountable corporate entity which would eliminate the need for government personnel and facilities to manage and store spare parts. While the benefits seem to outweigh the risks, the proposal is under careful review.

  A second initiative is the M109 Family of Vehicles (FOV) Fleet Management (FM) Pilot Program. The M109 FOV consists of the M109A2/A3, M109A4/A5, and M109A6 Paladin 155mm self-propelled howitzers, as well as the M992A0/A1/A2 Field Artillery Ammunition Support Vehicles (FAASV). Through this pilot program, the Army seeks to validate significant performance improvements and cost savings through contractor logistics life cycle support. A competitively selected, industrial- based Fleet Manager would provide logistics management, maintenance, and modernization of the fleet through spares, and system technical support.

 The Acting Secretary of the Army and Army Acquisition Executive has articulated six measures the Army will use in making a final decision on PVS proposals. The criteria are:

• First, we must ensure that any new approach results in no degradation of readiness.
• Second, that it works in both peace and war.
• Third, that it meets applicable statutory requirements.
• Fourth, that it truly provides significant cost savings.
• Fifth, that it guarantees a competitive industrial base and vendor base will remain for the future.
• Sixth, and perhaps most important, that any new approach is politically sustainable.

 CONCLUSION

Today’s modernization is tomorrow’s readiness. We are working to achieve a leaner, more efficient Army where more money is spent on soldiers and modernization and less on overhead. FY99 marks the first year of significant growth in Army modernization after more than a decade of decline. Additional resources are required to realize Army modernization objectives and achieve the full-spectrum dominance of JV 2010.

 We are at the dawn of a new era. Through our Force XXI process, we are moving to create, shape, test, and field a force prepared to meet the impending challenges of the next century. Central to our effort is the soldier—America’s sons and daughters in uniform.

 America’s Army is well-equipped today, but that equipment is aging and requires increased maintenance. Our modernization program is focused on ensuring our forces remain well-equipped in the years ahead. Our commitment to America’s men and women in uniform is steadfast. Soldiers on the ground are our nation’s strongest signal of resolve and the ultimate express of American will. This has not changed in the 20^th Century, and it will not change in the 21^st Century. America’s security and its continued role in maintaining world stability cannot be guaranteed without a first-rate, modern Army.