text: 7 l.!. . In spite of the obvious difficulties in obtaining relevant information about Lveraqe-length-of-service rates, the Panel feels that the reporting instrument 3hould still contain a request for such information, ?5. Concerning the Italian proposal that unit costs also should be reported, it .s the Panel's opinion that although such information srould be valuable, to *equest it would raise complex new issues going beyond the present scope 09 the oeporting instrument. Ordnance and ammunition (row 2.1.8) (a) Respondentsv comments 5. Indonesia stated that its figures under this suhitem only reflected :rpenditures for the procurements of ammunition. Sweden did the same thing and Zdedthat it had not found the definition of ordnance quite clear. (b) Panel's assessment 7 . The ambiguity surrounding the terms "Ordnance" contained in subitem 2.1.8 ~3 the two preceding subitems, "Artiller,y" and "Other ground forte weapons", tould be clarified. Thc Panel's solution is to omit "Ordnance" from 2.1.8 and to mame subitem 2.1.7 "Other ordnance and ground forte lreapons". -22- Construction (ro77 2.2) (a) Respondents' comments 78. Belgium, Italv and the Netherlands, all of whom presented detailed information under other reGe categories, did not, however, rcport any figures under the subitems of "Construction". JYorway noted that expenditures for military assistance under "Construction" were those in connexion Vith North Atlantic Treaty Organization (r\rnTO) infrastructure programmes, and that they were zincluded only in the aggregate for "Construction" since it had not been considered feasible to split up those expenditures into different resource costs. The United States noted that Marine Corps construction was included in Navy construction, and also stated that for separate ana distinct projects, particularly major procurement and construction projects, budget authority provided ful1 funding, that is, the entire cost to complete the project regardless of the expected time of completion. On the other hand, seven of the other respondents reported figures under the 
analysis: The text appears to be discussing the reporting of military expenditures, specifically focusing on the categorization and definition of certain military-related items. The language used is technical and specialized, indicating that the text is related to defense or military matters. The discussion of budget authority, procurement, and construction projects also suggests a focus on economic or financial aspects.